Rewriting Friedmann Eq. with Conformal Time & Density Params

Tomishiyo
Messages
17
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Rewrite Friedmann equation using conformal time and density parameters \Omega_m and \Omega_r. Is there a relation between the two? How many parameters define the problem?


Homework Equations


Friedmann equation
\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)^2=\frac{8\pi G}{3c^2}\left(\frac{\epsilon_{0m}}{a^3}+\frac{ε_{0r}}{a^4}\right)

Conformal time definition
dt=a(\eta) d\eta

Density parameter:
\Omega\equiv \frac{ε(t_0)}{ε_c(t_0)}=\frac{3c^2}{8\pi G}H_0^2

The Attempt at a Solution


First part is rather simple: just a matter of changing the variable in Friedmann Equation, noting that:

\frac{d}{dt}=\frac{d\eta}{dt}\frac{d}{d\eta}=\frac{1}{a}\frac{d}{d\eta}
so Friedmann Equations turn out to be:
\left(\frac{da}{d\eta}\right)^2=\frac{8\pi G}{3c^2}(aε_{m0}+ε_{r0})
or in terms of the density parameter:
\left(\frac{da}{d\eta}\right)^2=H_0^2(a\Omega_m+Ω_r).

My trouble starts now. So, normally the densities parameters are constrained due to scale factor normalization, that is to say, they must obey the constrain equation 1=\Omega_m+\Omega_r. That relation should hold regardless of the coordinate system I choose to write Friedmann equation, but I cannot see the connection, unless I postulate that there must exist a \eta_0 such that a(\eta_0)=1, and later find its relation to physical time (and I can only find that once I know a(\eta), i.e, when I solve Friedmann equation). But that does not seem to me as a correct assumption, for the next exercise on my list ask me to make precisely this assumption, indicating that there must exist another way of constraining the parameters. I think, thus, that there must exist a constrain between the density parameters that does not involve normalization of scale factor, but I can't think about anything to solve that. Can anyone help me out?

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Tomishiyo said:
\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)^2=\frac{8\pi G}{3c^2}\left(\frac{\epsilon_{0m}}{a^3}+\frac{ε_{0r}}{a^4}\right)

You're already assuming that a_0=1 when you write the Friedmann equation this way. The equation is really

\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)^2=\frac{8\pi G}{3c^2}\epsilon,

where \epsilon is the energy density (usually people use \rho, but I will keep your notation). For a specific equation of state p=w \epsilon, we'll find

\frac{\epsilon}{\epsilon_0} = \left( \frac{a}{a_0} \right)^{-3(1+w)}.

Obviously the factors of a_0 have been set to one in your version of the formula.

You can solve the problem by defining a density parameter \Omega(t) = \epsilon(t)/\epsilon_c(t) instead of the way that you've defined it (only at t=t_0). Rewrite the Friedmann equation in terms of these and you'll get what you were expecting without extra scale factors.
 


fzero said:
You're already assuming that a_0=1 when you write the Friedmann equation this way.

First, thank you by your time!

Well, I used the equation that the problem statement have gave me. I agree with you that this assumption is implicit in the equation, but then can I take for granted that the densities will add up to one due to this assumption?
 


Tomishiyo said:
First, thank you by your time!

Well, I used the equation that the problem statement have gave me. I agree with you that this assumption is implicit in the equation, but then can I take for granted that the densities will add up to one due to this assumption?

The density parameters will add up to one because the Friedmann equation you've written is for a flat universe. This is really the definition of "critical" in the critical density. It is the value of the total density such that the universe is flat.
 


Ok, thank you very much. I think I've done it :)
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top