B Einstein's Cosmological Constant: Push or Pull?

Cycklops
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Was watching some documentaries and got confused about something.

People say that Einstein unintentionally predicted that the universe was expanding, and that he inserted the cosmological constant to represent a force pulling it back in. But other sources seem to imply that the universe was supposed to be collapsing under gravity, and he inserted the cosmological constant to represent a force pushing it out (which is what it seems to represent today).

So which is it? The idea of the cosmological constant being a force pushing against gravity makes the most sense, but that seems to contradict the normal claim that Einstein was the first to find that the universe should be expanding.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Cycklops said:
People say that Einstein unintentionally predicted that the universe was expanding, and that he inserted the cosmological constant to represent a force pulling it back in.
What people? Please provide references.

The prediction of GR was that the universe could not be static, which was the reason for introducing the cosmological constant. Had it not been introduced, then a direct consequence would be that the universe either expands or contracts (or is just in the transition between the two).
 
Orodruin said:
What people? Please provide references.
One example is this interview with Ed Copeland...

At 0:10, he says "Einstein was really quite resistant to the idea that the universe is expanding, and he worked very hard to stop it."
He then refers to the universe "evolving" instead, but at 10:40 he says "for this to work, for him to stop the universe from expanding..."


The prediction of GR was that the universe could not be static, which was the reason for introducing the cosmological constant. Had it not been introduced, then a direct consequence would be that the universe either expands or contracts (or is just in the transition between the two).
That makes some sense, which would imply then that people are just giving Einstein credit for predicting that the universe would be evolving, and some people use the term "expand" when in actuality the cosmological constant was either something that stopped contraction or something that could stop either one depending on how you define it?
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top