How Does Temperature Affect Particle Density and Expansion in the Universe?

AI Thread Summary
Temperature significantly influences particle density and expansion in the universe, with specific relationships established for different mass conditions. For temperatures greater than mass (T > m), the number density of particles is proportional to T^3, derived from the scale factor's relationship to temperature. Conversely, for mass greater than temperature (m > T), the density can be expressed as n proportional to T^(3/2) multiplied by an exponential decay factor. The discussion raises questions about the assumptions made regarding particle production and destruction, particularly in the context of the early universe. Overall, the complexities of these relationships highlight the dynamic nature of particle interactions as the universe expands.
Arman777
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
2,163
Reaction score
191
For ##m>T## we can write
$$n\propto T^{3/2}\exp[{-(m-\mu)/T}].\tag{2}$$

For ##T>m## we can write ##n\propto T^{3}## where ##n## is number density of particles with mass m. We can derive this relationship by using ##n\propto a^{-3}## and we also know that ##a\propto T^{-1}##.

Is there a similar derivation for the first equation by using ##n\propto a^{-3}##
 
Last edited:
Science news on Phys.org
Can you elaborate?
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
I edited my post
 
I'm guessing the question is about particle densities in the early universe? Then a is the scale factor.
Arman777 said:
For ##T>m## we can write ##n\propto T^{-3}## where ##n## is number density of particles with mass m. We can derive this relationship by using ##n\propto a^{-3}## and we also know that ##a\propto T^{-1}##.
Shouldn't this be ##n\propto T^{3}##? ##n\propto a^{-3}## assumes no particles can be produced or destroyed. Is that really an assumption you want to make - and if you do so, why don't you make it for m>T?
 
mfb said:
I'm guessing the question is about particle densities in the early universe? Then a is the scale factor.Shouldn't this be ##n\propto T^{3}##? ##n\propto a^{-3}## assumes no particles can be produced or destroyed. Is that really an assumption you want to make - and if you do so, why don't you make it for m>T?
If ##n\propto a^{-3}## assumes no pair production then we cannot say that at ##m>T##, since at that time there are pair-production, So we cannot derive it by using ##n\propto a^{-3}##.
 
I was watching a Khan Academy video on entropy called: Reconciling thermodynamic and state definitions of entropy. So in the video it says: Let's say I have a container. And in that container, I have gas particles and they're bouncing around like gas particles tend to do, creating some pressure on the container of a certain volume. And let's say I have n particles. Now, each of these particles could be in x different states. Now, if each of them can be in x different states, how many total...
Thread 'Why work is PdV and not (P+dP)dV in an isothermal process?'
Let's say we have a cylinder of volume V1 with a frictionless movable piston and some gas trapped inside with pressure P1 and temperature T1. On top of the piston lay some small pebbles that add weight and essentially create the pressure P1. Also the system is inside a reservoir of water that keeps its temperature constant at T1. The system is in equilibrium at V1, P1, T1. Now let's say i put another very small pebble on top of the piston (0,00001kg) and after some seconds the system...
Back
Top