I Follow-up on the Expanding Universe Insight article

cianfa72
Messages
2,824
Reaction score
298
TL;DR Summary
About the form of RW comoving observer worldline in local Minkowski frame at event p.
Hi, reading this Insight raised a doubt regarding the section "Comoving observers in a local Minkowski frame".

Robertson-Walker (RW) comoving observers have constant ##x## in comoving coordinates (to take it simple assume a 1+1 RW spacetime). From the following coordinate transformation into local Minkowski coordinates at event ##p##
$$\begin{align*}\tau &\simeq t + \frac{1}{2}H_0 a_0^2 x^2 = t + \frac{1}{2} a’^2_0 x^2, \\\xi &\simeq a_0 x (1 + H_0 t).\end{align*}$$
a comoving observer at proper distance ##d_0## from ##\xi = 0## at ##\tau=0## (i.e. on the spacelike hypersurface ##\tau=0##) has ##\xi = d_0## coordinate, hence ##x= d_0 / a_0##. Therefore such comoving observer's worldline in comoving coordinates is given by ##x= d_0 / a_0## constant and varying ##t##.

Substituting it into the transformation above yields in ##(\xi, \tau)## local Minkowski coordinates
$$\xi \simeq d_0 (1 + H_0 t)$$
However in the Insight it is given by
$$\xi \simeq d_0 (1 + H_0 \tau)$$
From where the above come from ? Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
They are the same to the ordered considered in the ##\simeq## relation.
 
Orodruin said:
They are the same to the ordered considered in the ##\simeq## relation.
Ah ok, basically for "small" ##x## the term involving ##x^2## in $$\tau \simeq t + \frac{1}{2}H_0 a_0^2 x^2 = t + \frac{1}{2} a’^2_0 x^2$$ can be neglected, hence ##\tau \simeq t##.

It makes sense to pick "small" values for ##x## since the derivation of the transformation from RW coordinates to local Minkowski coordinates at point/event ##p## employs the assumption ##x^{\alpha} = 0## at ##p##.
 
Last edited:
I asked a question here, probably over 15 years ago on entanglement and I appreciated the thoughtful answers I received back then. The intervening years haven't made me any more knowledgeable in physics, so forgive my naïveté ! If a have a piece of paper in an area of high gravity, lets say near a black hole, and I draw a triangle on this paper and 'measure' the angles of the triangle, will they add to 180 degrees? How about if I'm looking at this paper outside of the (reasonable)...
Thread 'Relativity of simultaneity in actuality'
I’m attaching two figures from the book, Basic concepts in relativity and QT, by Resnick and Halliday. They are describing the relativity of simultaneity from a theoretical pov, which I understand. Basically, the lightning strikes at AA’ and BB’ can be deemed simultaneous either in frame S, in which case they will not be simultaneous in frame S’, and vice versa. Only in one of the frames are the two events simultaneous, but not in both, and this claim of simultaneity can be done by either of...
Back
Top