Inhomogeneous and anisotropic dust models

In summary, the Lemaitre-Tolman-Bondi cosmological models describe spherically symmetric universes with isotropic but inhomogeneous space. The LTB line element is derived by imposing spherical symmetry on the metric and using the rotational isometry of the metric at the origin. R(t,r) in the line element represents the mean mass density of concentric shells in the universe. The metric can also be derived by imposing Einstein's equations for an isotropic pressureless dust with Ttt = ρ(r,t). If the observer is not located at the center, the coordinates will change but the line element will remain the same, defined by F(r,t) and R(r,t).
  • #1
hellfire
Science Advisor
1,051
1
The cosmological models of Lemaitre-Tolman-Bondi describe spherically symmetric universes with isotropic but inhomogeneous space, i.e. there are concentric shells with different mean mass densities. The LTB line element is:

[tex]ds^2 = -dt^2 + \frac{(R'(t, r))^2}{1+2E(r) r^2}dr^2 + R^2(t, r)d\Omega^2[/tex]

R' denotes derivate of R wrt r. I had two questions. First, how can this metric be derived? (e.g. it would be nice to have similar arguments as used to derive the homogeneous and isotropic FRW metric). Second, how would the metric look like if the observer is not located at the centre of the spheres but at a slight distance of it (leading to anisotropy)?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
First, how can this metric be derived? (e.g. it would be nice to have similar arguments as used to derive the homogeneous and isotropic FRW metric)
I don't know anything about this solution, but it seems to me that the authors derived the metric by imposing spherical symmetry on the metric:

[tex] ds^2=-f(r,t)dt^2+h(r,t)dr^2+r^2(d\theta^2+\sin^2 \theta d\phi^2)[/tex]

The unknown functions were probably derived by imposing that the universe was spatially isotropic at the origin (through the rotational isometry of the metric at that point).

What is [itex]R(t,r)[/itex]?

Second, how would the metric look like if the observer is not located at the centre of the spheres but at a slight distance of it (leading to anisotropy)?
An universe which can be called isotropic need not be isotropic at every point (which would mean that it was homogeneous, as well).
My guess is that metric should remain the same, otherwise it wouldn't be much of a metric.
 
  • #3
Thank you for your answer.

Berislav said:
I don't know anything about this solution, but it seems to me that the authors derived the metric by imposing spherical symmetry on the metric:

[tex] ds^2=-f(r,t)dt^2+h(r,t)dr^2+r^2(d\theta^2+\sin^2 \theta d\phi^2)[/tex]

The unknown functions were probably derived by imposing that the universe was spatially isotropic at the origin (through the rotational isometry of the metric at that point). [/tex]
I will think about this, but at first sight I am not able to figure out how to get the LTB line element from the expression you wrote above.

Berislav said:
What is [itex]R(t,r)[/itex]?
I guess this is something similar to the scale factor in the FRW metric.

Berislav said:
An universe which can be called isotropic need not be isotropic at every point (which would mean that it was homogeneous, as well).
My guess is that metric should remain the same, otherwise it wouldn't be much of a metric.
You are right; the metric tensor would be the same. I mean, how would the line element look like in the coordinates of such an observer? (As there would be no spherical symmetry).
 
  • #4
I will think about this, but at first sight I am not able to figure out how to get the LTB line element from the expression you wrote above.
The rotational isometry of the metric at the origin, together with the stress-energy for those concetric shells should provide the necessary constraints to derive the metric exactly. This is easier said than done.

I guess this is something similar to the scale factor in the FRW metric.
In my opinion the solutions aren't complete without the expression for [itex]R(t,r)[/itex]. This function should differ drastically from the scale factor in FRW cosmologies, since it must express the non-homgeneous nature of the space-time

You are right; the metric tensor would be the same. I mean, how would the line element look like in the coordinates of such an observer? (As there would be no spherical symmetry).
When I read your post I assumed that by line element you meant the notation used to represent the metric:

[tex]ds^2= \sum_{\mu, \nu} g_{\mu \nu}dx^\mu dx^\nu[/tex]

This will not change, unless you change the coordinate basis.
 
  • #5
Altough I have not derived it yet, I think I can imagine now how to do it. Starting from the metric you wrote, scale t such that [tex]\inline g_{tt} = -1[/tex]:

[tex] ds^2= - dt^2 + F(r,t)dr^2+ R(r, t)^2 d\Omega^2[/tex]

Then, imposing Einstein’s equations for an isotropic pressureless dust with [tex]\inline T_{tt} = \rho(r, t)[/tex], should lead to the correct values of F and R. Actually, this is the same procedure used to fix the coefficients in the Schwarzschild metric, but I had wrongly expected that it can be derived making use of geometrical considerations only, as it is done with the FRW metric. (May be this was already clear to you).

Berislav said:
When I read your post I assumed that by line element you meant the notation used to represent the metric:

[tex]ds^2= \sum_{\mu, \nu} g_{\mu \nu}dx^\mu dx^\nu[/tex]

This will not change, unless you change the coordinate basis.
An observer which is not located at the center will make use of a different coordinate system (isotropy is not longer valid), therefore it will change.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Then, imposing Einstein’s equations for an isotropic pressureless dust with LaTeX graphic is being generated. Reload this page in a moment., should lead to the correct values of F and R.

Yes, I believe that that would be sufficient to derive the metric.

I had wrongly expected that it can be derived making use of geometrical considerations only, as it is done with the FRW metric. (May be this was already clear to you).

It was clear to me that a dust-filled cosmology can not be solved without the stress-energy tensor, if that's what you mean. Also note that the scale factor in FRW cosmology was defined through the use of Einstein field equations.

An observer which is not located at the center will make use of a different coordinate system (isotropy is not longer valid), therefore it will change.

It is still unclear to me what you mean. Any difference in the line element between the two points will be defined by [itex]F(r,t)[/itex] and [itex]R(r,t)[/itex]. If you want to change the coordinates you can to that simply if you can express a mapping between the old and new coordinates.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Berislav said:
It is still unclear to me what you mean. Any difference in the line element between the two points will be defined by [itex]F(r,t)[/itex] and [itex]R(r,t)[/itex]. If you want to change the coordinates you can to that simply if you can express a mapping between the old and new coordinates.
I thought (intuitively) that the loss of isotropy would give a different form to that expression, but what you write seams correct. I will think about it. Thanks again.
 

1. What is the difference between inhomogeneous and anisotropic dust models?

Inhomogeneous dust models refer to cosmological models that take into account variations in the distribution of dust throughout the universe. Anisotropic dust models, on the other hand, take into account the anisotropic nature of dust, meaning that dust particles may have different properties depending on their orientation.

2. Why are inhomogeneous and anisotropic dust models important in cosmology?

These models are important in cosmology because they provide a more realistic representation of the universe. The distribution of dust and its properties can have significant impacts on the evolution and dynamics of the universe, and these models help us better understand these effects.

3. How are inhomogeneous and anisotropic dust models used in research?

These models are used in research to study various cosmological phenomena, such as the formation and evolution of galaxies, the large-scale structure of the universe, and the cosmic microwave background radiation. They can also be used to test different theories and make predictions about the universe.

4. What are some limitations of inhomogeneous and anisotropic dust models?

One limitation is that these models can be quite complex and require a lot of computational power to simulate. Additionally, the assumptions and parameters used in these models may not accurately reflect the true nature of dust in the universe, leading to potential inaccuracies in the results.

5. How do inhomogeneous and anisotropic dust models contribute to our understanding of dark matter and dark energy?

These models are valuable tools in studying the effects of dark matter and dark energy on the evolution of the universe. By incorporating inhomogeneities and anisotropies, scientists can better understand how these elusive components of the universe contribute to its overall structure and dynamics.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
3
Views
78
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
56
Views
4K
Back
Top