Does the Hubble Parameter Go to Zero as the Universe Expands Forever?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter palmer eldtrich
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hubble
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of the Hubble parameter as the universe expands indefinitely. Participants explore the implications of averaging expansion rates over infinite time and the conditions under which the Hubble parameter may approach zero, considering various cosmological models and parameters.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the claim that an expanding cosmology can have a zero average expansion due to averaging over infinite time, suggesting it lacks coherence.
  • Others propose that in an Einstein–de Sitter universe, the scale factor's time dependence could lead to a limit where the ratio of scale factor to time approaches zero, but clarify this does not represent an average expansion rate.
  • It is noted that achieving perfect flatness in the universe is essentially impossible, which complicates the discussion of average expansion rates.
  • Participants discuss the average expansion rate expressed as H = 1/t, which approaches zero as time goes to infinity, but this is contingent on not considering t=0.
  • Some argue that introducing a cosmological constant or positive curvature significantly alters the behavior of the Hubble parameter, suggesting that it may not go to zero under those conditions.
  • There is a mention of historical assumptions regarding the cosmological constant and its implications for the Hubble parameter, indicating a shift in understanding post-1998.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the Hubble parameter approaches zero as the universe expands forever. While some support the idea under specific conditions, others highlight that the presence of a cosmological constant or curvature alters this outcome, indicating unresolved disagreement.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the universe's flatness and the implications of various cosmological parameters, which remain unresolved and could affect the conclusions drawn regarding the Hubble parameter.

palmer eldtrich
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
I recently came across this claim:
"On the other hand, in certain cases even an expanding cosmology may have 0 average expansion, due to the fact that we are averaging over an infinite amount of time. "
Is this correct? can someone explain how averaging over infinity time leads to zero ?
http://www.wall.org/~aron/blog/did-the-universe-begin-iii-bgv-theorem/
 
Space news on Phys.org
I get that when you divide by inifnity you get zero, but would the volume of space also be infinity?
 
"On the other hand, in certain cases even an expanding cosmology may have 0 average expansion, due to the fact that we are averaging over an infinite amount of time."

I'm pretty sure this statement is utterly incoherent. You're right to be confused. It just doesn't make sense.
 
palmer eldtrich said:
"On the other hand, in certain cases even an expanding cosmology may have 0 average expansion, due to the fact that we are averaging over an infinite amount of time."

Maybe it means something like this:

In an Einstein–de Sitter universe the scale factor has the time dependence

[itex]a = a_0 \cdot \sqrt[3]{{\frac{{8 \cdot \pi \cdot G \cdot \rho _0 \cdot t^2 }}{3}}}[/itex]

That results in

[itex]\mathop {\lim }\limits_{t \to \infty } \frac{a}{t} = 0[/itex]
 
DrStupid said:
Maybe it means something like this:

In an Einstein–de Sitter universe the scale factor has the time dependence

[itex]a = a_0 \cdot \sqrt[3]{{\frac{{8 \cdot \pi \cdot G \cdot \rho _0 \cdot t^2 }}{3}}}[/itex]

That results in

[itex]\mathop {\lim }\limits_{t \to \infty } \frac{a}{t} = 0[/itex]
That's not an average of the expansion rate, however.

Also, this requires perfect flatness, which is essentially impossible.
 
Chalnoth said:
Also, this requires perfect flatness, which is essentially impossible.

The average of the corresponding expansion rate

[itex]H = \frac{1}{t}[/itex]

is

[itex]\mathop {\lim }\limits_{t \to \infty } \frac{{\int\limits_{t_0 }^t {H \cdot dt} }}{{t - t_0 }} = 0[/itex]
 
DrStupid said:
The average of the corresponding expansion rate

[itex]H = \frac{1}{t}[/itex]

is

[itex]\mathop {\lim }\limits_{t \to \infty } \frac{{\int\limits_{t_0 }^t {H \cdot dt} }}{{t - t_0 }} = 0[/itex]
Fair enough, provided you don't consider t=0 (which, I suppose, is pretty reasonable). But still, put any cosmological constant or positive curvature into this equation and it changes dramatically.
 
Chalnoth said:
But still, put any cosmological constant or positive curvature into this equation and it changes dramatically.

That's correct, but it doesn't contradict the statement that "in certain cases even an expanding cosmology may have 0 average expansion".
 
Still not a helpful statement, though. A universe that expands forever also has an average matter/radiation density of zero. So in effect the reason this occurs is because you're averaging over an infinity of time where the universe is empty.
 
  • #10
So assuming the universe expands forever then, would you be correct to say that the HUbble parameter does go to zero?
 
  • #11
palmer eldtrich said:
So assuming the universe expands forever then, would you be correct to say that the HUbble parameter does go to zero?

That's what the Friedmann equation says will happen in the spatial flat case, with zero curvature constant Lambda

Until 1998 it was generally assumed that Lambda was zero and so it was commonly thought H would go to zero as the density thinned out.
After 1998, it was generally accepted that Lambda was a small positive spacetime curvature implying a leveling out of H at some asymptotic growth rate H like 1/173 of a percent per million years.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 134 ·
5
Replies
134
Views
12K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
  • · Replies 72 ·
3
Replies
72
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K