History and geometry of flat universe

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the geometry and historical evolution of the universe, specifically addressing whether the universe has always been flat, the implications of its flatness on the Riemann tensor, and the relationship between flatness, energy density, and accelerated expansion. The conversation includes theoretical considerations and mathematical reasoning related to cosmology.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if the universe is flat, it has always been flat due to a constant geometry determined by k.
  • Others argue that the Riemann tensor is non-zero in a flat expanding universe, and the geometry differs from that of special relativity.
  • A participant notes that Friedmann-Walker-Robertson universes have flat spatial hypersurfaces but curved spacetime, indicating complexity in the geometry.
  • One participant suggests that the universe likely started with significant curvature before inflation drove it to near flatness.
  • Questions are raised about whether the currently accelerating universe can be flat without inflation and whether flatness can be achieved without dark matter.
  • There is a discussion on the relationship between average expansion rate and total energy density, with some participants questioning how dark energy influences this relationship.
  • Confusion arises regarding the implications of the Friedmann equations and how they relate to the curvature constant k.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the universe has always been flat and the implications of flatness on the Riemann tensor. There is no consensus on whether flatness can exist without dark matter or inflation, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the relationship between expansion rate and energy density.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include assumptions about the nature of dark energy and inflation, as well as the dependence on specific definitions of curvature and energy density. The mathematical steps in the Friedmann equations are not fully resolved, leading to confusion among participants.

Ranku
Messages
434
Reaction score
18
1. The present universe is observed to be flat. Was it always flat, before it started its accelerated expansion?

2. Is the Riemann tensor zero for this flat universe? Is its geometry that of special relativity?

I'd appreciate if Marcus or Ich or any other science advisor weighed in on this. Thanks.
 
Space news on Phys.org
If the universe is flat, is has always been flat and always will be. That is because the geometry of the universe is determined by a **constant**, k.

The Riemann tensor is non-zero. According to my calculations...
[tex] R^t_{xtx} = a\dot{\dot{a}}[/tex]
[tex] R^x_{yxy} = (\dot{\dot{a}})^2[/tex]
and all the other values come from symmetry between x<->y<->z.
The geometry is not that of special relativity. In special relativity the metric is diag(-1,1,1,1). In a flat expanding universe the metric is diag(-1,a^2(t),a^2(t),a^2(t)), where a(t) is the scale factor of the universe.
 
For Friedmann-Walker-Robertson universes, space is flat but spacetime is curved.

The Riemann tensor for Friedmann-Walker-Robertson universes is not zero because FRW spactimes are not flat. Three-dimensional spatial hypersurfaces orthogonal to cosmic time (i.e., space) are intrinsically flat, i.e., the Riemann tensor constructed from the spatial metric induced on these hypersurfaces by the spacetime metric is zero.
 
Ranku said:
1. The present universe is observed to be flat. Was it always flat, before it started its accelerated expansion?
This is not expected to be the case. Rather, it is expected that our region of the universe started off with very significant curvature, but as it was dominated by an inflaton field that drove a very rapidly-accelerated expansion, it was driven to be almost perfectly flat in virtually no time.

This happens because the effect of the curvature scales with the expansion as [tex]1/a^2[/tex], but during inflation, the dominant energy density was almost independent of expansion. As the scale factor increased by a factor of [tex]10^{30}[/tex] or more, the spatial curvature was driven to very near zero.

Ranku said:
2. Is the Riemann tensor zero for this flat universe? Is its geometry that of special relativity?

I'd appreciate if Marcus or Ich or any other science advisor weighed in on this. Thanks.
Nicksauce has responded to this point well.
 
Thank you all for the responses. Two more questions.

1. Can the presently accelerating universe be flat without inflation?

2. In a flat universe, omega = 1.
Omega = matter(regular matter + dark matter) + dark energy.
Can we have Omega = 1 without dark matter?
 
Ranku said:
Thank you all for the responses. Two more questions.

1. Can the presently accelerating universe be flat without inflation?
If there happens to be an alternative explanation for our current observations that point to inflation, I suppose it's possible.

Ranku said:
2. In a flat universe, omega = 1.
Omega = matter(regular matter + dark matter) + dark energy.
Can we have Omega = 1 without dark matter?
In principle it's a different issue. The flatness is related to the relationship between the average expansion rate and the total energy density. If the expansion rate is too fast compared to the energy density, then it's open. If it's too slow, then it's closed. If it's "just right", then it's flat.
 
Chalnoth said:
In principle it's a different issue. The flatness is related to the relationship between the average expansion rate and the total energy density. If the expansion rate is too fast compared to the energy density, then it's open. If it's too slow, then it's closed. If it's "just right", then it's flat.

Is not the average expansion rate controlled by the total energy density, since dark energy that is driving the accelerated expansion is part of it?
 
Ranku said:
Is not the average expansion rate controlled by the total energy density, since dark energy that is driving the accelerated expansion is part of it?
Right, so, the first of the Friedmann equations is:

[tex]H^2 = \frac{8\pi G}{3} \rho - \frac{k c^2}{a^2}[/tex]

So basically if [tex]H^2 > \frac{8\pi G}{3} \rho[/tex], [tex]k < 0[/tex]. Likewise, if [tex]H^2 < \frac{8\pi G}{3} \rho[/tex], then [tex]k > 0[/tex].
 
Last edited:
Chalnoth said:
So basically if [tex]H^2 > \frac{8\pi G}{3} \rho[/tex], [tex]k < 0[/tex]. Likewise, if [tex]H^2 > \frac{8\pi G}{3} \rho[/tex], then [tex]k > 0[/tex].

Both the inequalities are same, yet k changes. I'm confused.
 
  • #10
Ranku said:
Both the inequalities are same, yet k changes. I'm confused.
Ack, sorry, typo. Fixed.
 
  • #11
Chalnoth said:
Ack, sorry, typo. Fixed.

Thanks
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K