Hubble's law and expansion question

tortin
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi, I was looking through past exams for one of my courses, and I came across a question I wasn't quite sure how to do, so I was wondering if anyone could give some hints (or possibly the rationale for solution), thanks!

Homework Statement



Observers in three universes A, B, and C measure identical constants. However, universe A is a critical universe (i.e. p = pc (with c being critical density), Universe B is an accelerating universe, and Universe C is close to being an empty universe (i.e. p<<pc or p~0). Rank the ages of the three universes as measured by these observers from largest to smallest, and explain your reasoning.

Homework Equations


None really...

The Attempt at a Solution


I'm not quite sure what you can infer about the age of A if it's a critical universe, because it always stays flat with p = pc. C is probably the oldest universe, since it's emptying out, and I'd guess B is younger than C, since it's accelerating so not yet emptied out.

However, I was also wondering what the relevance of the identical Hubble constants would give in this problem.Thanks for anyone who can give some help / hints!

edit - maybe this should be in advanced physics forum?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you're going to have to solve the Friedman and fluid equations for each case and compare the estimation of the ages you get in terms of the Hubble constant.
 
As Kurdt said, you should start with your basic Friedmann equation and solve to find the dependence of scale factor \dot{R} with time, t.

Hints:

Since the scale factor directly relates to the Hubble constant you can work out the age for each universe using:

H(t) = \frac{\dot{R}}R

For the universe of critical density we then use our critical density relation:

\rho_c = \frac{3 H^2}{8 \pi G}

which applies for a k=0, or a flat, universe.

For an accelerating universe \Lambda, the cosmological constant, is now non zero.

Edit: Shouldn't this be in advanced physics?
 
astrorob said:
As Kurdt said, you should start with your basic Friedmann equation and solve to find the dependence of scale factor \dot{R} with time, t.

Hints:

Since the scale factor directly relates to the Hubble constant you can work out the age for each universe using:

H(t) = \frac{\dot{R}}R

For the universe of critical density we then use our critical density relation:

\rho_c = \frac{3 H^2}{8 \pi G}

which applies for a k=0, or a flat, universe.

For an accelerating universe \Lambda, the cosmological constant, is now non zero.

Edit: Shouldn't this be in advanced physics?

Hmm, so for Universe A (the critical one), we would have:
(removing the constants 8piG/3)

\Omega \propto \frac{\rho}{H(t)^{2}}
However, H(t) = \frac{\dot{R}}R, so we can replace it such that:
\dot{R}^{2}\Omega \propto \rho
\rho \propto \Omega z^{2} (z being redshift)
So for universe A, \Omega is 1, z would be larger than universe B, since \Omega is close to 0, so A is older than B.

for universe C, addition of a cosmological constant would make z larger than A, giving the age as: C>A>B (in order of age)

would that be correct? (but it's assuming different Hubble parameters for each universe..)

I'm trying to do this more intuitively, since it's a first year course (and the Freidmann equation wasn't given on the exam), and although we did cover the equation, it seems a bit unlikely we'd have to calculate anything...

thanks!
 
It depends of course on the class you're doing. I'd check the notes very carefully, but I'd be surprised if for a first year course they hadn't given you some sort of graph depicting the density parameter at various values. You should be able to work out the answer from this. I was perhaps being a bit too zealous when I suggested my original post.
 
To solve this, I first used the units to work out that a= m* a/m, i.e. t=z/λ. This would allow you to determine the time duration within an interval section by section and then add this to the previous ones to obtain the age of the respective layer. However, this would require a constant thickness per year for each interval. However, since this is most likely not the case, my next consideration was that the age must be the integral of a 1/λ(z) function, which I cannot model.
Back
Top