Is the Friedmann Paradox Solved by the Concordance Model?

  • Thread starter Thread starter meteor
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Friedmann Paradox
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the Friedmann Paradox and its relationship to the concordance model in cosmology. Participants clarify that the Friedmann equation can be simplified by setting k=0, leading to a focus on the energy density, rho. There is confusion regarding the distinction between mass density (rho) and energy density (rho_crit), with emphasis on the need to use c^2 for conversion between the two. It is noted that rho encompasses all forms of energy, negating the necessity for a lambda term in the equation. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the importance of consistent units in cosmological equations to resolve the paradox.
meteor
Messages
937
Reaction score
0
Please show me how to solve this paradox
cos the Friedmann equation is:
<br /> H^{2}= \frac{8*pi*G*rho}{3}-\frac{k*c^{2}}{R^{2}}<br />
but the concordance model says that k=0, so we can eliminate the last term of the equation
then we isolate rho, the density of energy:
<br /> rho=\frac{3*H^{2}}{8*pi*G}<br />
but however, the formula for the critical energy density is
<br /> rho_{crit}=\frac{3*H^2*c^2}{8*pi*G}<br />
but the concordance model says that rho=rhocrit
but you see that the 2 formulae are not equal, there's an extra c2 in the formula for rhocrit

I can't figure where is the mistake
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
rho is mass density. rho_crit is energy density (as you wrote it). Mass and energy have different units, and you use c^2 to convert between them.

Most people like to use units such that c=1, and then energy and mass are interchangable. This convention is so common that books are sometimes careless about distinguishing the two.
 
Last edited:
please, take a look to this thread
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=2864
Here's jeff, and I think that he is a knowledgeable person, and says that rho includes all kinds of energy, not only mass

It's not rhocrit but rho, which does in fact - as marcus pointed out - include all forms of energy so there's no need for the lamda term (review the derivation of the FRW equation)
 
Last edited:
meteor said:
please, take a look to this thread
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=2864
Here's jeff, and I think that he is a knowledgeable person, and says that rho includes all kinds of energy, not only mass

That's true. I was being a little sloppy myself. rho includes everything, but the way you wrote it, it has units of mass/volume, whereas rho_crit has units of energy/volume. Wherever you're quoting rho_crit from has a slightly different form for Friedmann's equation than you do, so their answer is different by c^2. This is just a convention. You can choose either mass units or energy units for rho as long as H works out as 1/time in the end.
 
use the conversion c^2=m/e
 
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Asteroid, Data - 1.2% risk of an impact on December 22, 2032. The estimated diameter is 55 m and an impact would likely release an energy of 8 megatons of TNT equivalent, although these numbers have a large uncertainty - it could also be 1 or 100 megatons. Currently the object has level 3 on the Torino scale, the second-highest ever (after Apophis) and only the third object to exceed level 1. Most likely it will miss, and if it hits then most likely it'll hit an ocean and be harmless, but...
Back
Top