Friedmann Equation Analysis, expansion of the universe?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the Friedmann equations and their implications for the expansion of the universe. Participants explore the mathematical interpretations of the equations, particularly focusing on the conditions under which the universe may expand or contract, as well as the implications of positive and negative values in the equations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the interpretation of a negative right-hand side in Friedmann's equation, suggesting it implies an imaginary rate of change for the scaling term.
  • Another participant clarifies that the negative right-hand side of the second Friedmann equation indicates deceleration of the universe's expansion, but does not alone determine if the expansion will eventually stop or reverse.
  • A participant notes that understanding the signs of both the acceleration and the rate of change is crucial, raising concerns about the implications of a concave down function.
  • It is mentioned that it is possible for the acceleration to be negative while the rate of change remains positive, indicating ongoing expansion.
  • Evidence is cited that supports the current positive rate of expansion in the universe, along with historical context that suggests the acceleration of expansion has changed over time.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of the implications of negative values in the Friedmann equations. While there is agreement on the current expansion of the universe, the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of the equations for future expansion or contraction.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the need for additional information to fully understand the implications of the Friedmann equations, particularly regarding the signs of the acceleration and rate of change. There is also a recognition that interpretations may depend on the specific context of the equations being discussed.

SmcWill
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Friedmann's Eq can be viewed here https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March08/Frieman/Equations/paper1x.gif
What I don't get is that all the texts/analyses of Friedmann's equation say that if the right hand side is negative it means that the universe will expand reach a critical point and then contract. But if the right hand side is negative doesn't it mean that a dot, the rate of change of the scaling term, is imaginary? Also I don't understand how this squared term can be negative, or even how we can analyze something from it being negative. Thank you!
 
Space news on Phys.org
SmcWill said:
if the right hand side is negative doesn't it mean that a dot, the rate of change of the scaling term, is imaginary?

They mean the RHS of the second Friedmann equation, the one with ##\ddot{a} / a## on the LHS.

Also, you may be misunderstanding the sources you're looking at (links to them would be helpful). The RHS of the second Friedmann equation being negative means the expansion of the universe is decelerating; but that alone doesn't tell you whether the expansion will eventually stop and then turn into contraction. You need more information to determine that.
 
I understand that if that equation is negative then the acceleration of the scale constant is concave down. But then doesn't that mean that we must know the sign of a double dot and a dot? For example it tells us that a(t) is concave down. but what if it were a function like this http://www.biology.arizona.edu/biomath/tutorials/functions/images/function_concave_down.gif (the left graph), and is there any evidence that it isn't this way? Also, thank you for your reply that cleared a lot of confusion up.
 
SmcWill said:
doesn't that mean that we must know the sign of a double dot and a dot?

No. It is perfectly possible for ##\ddot{a}## to be negative but ##\dot{a}## positive.

SmcWill said:
is there any evidence that it isn't this way?

We know that ##\dot{a}## is positive in our universe now. That's what "the universe is expanding" means, and we have lots of evidence that the universe is expanding.

In our actual universe now, ##\ddot{a}## is also positive. That is what is meant by "the expansion of the universe is accelerating". But that has only been the case for the last few billion years; before that, ##\ddot{a}## was negative, but ##\dot{a}## was still positive (the universe was still expanding--and it has been since the Big Bang).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 134 ·
5
Replies
134
Views
12K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K