Time since hot big bang - relativistic species

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the time since the hot big bang in a radiation-dominated universe for temperatures greater than 1MeV. The Friedmann equation is utilized to relate the Hubble parameter to the energy density of relativistic species in thermal equilibrium. The initial attempt at integration leads to an expression for time that incorrectly includes a logarithmic term, complicating the derivation. A revised approach using the relationship between temperature and scale factor simplifies the integration, ultimately yielding the desired form of the time equation. The final expression aligns with the expected result, confirming the relationship between temperature and time since the big bang.
BOAS
Messages
546
Reaction score
19

Homework Statement



According to the standard assumptions, there are three species of (massless) neutrinos. In the temperature range of 1MeV < T < 100MeV, the density of the universe is believed to have been dominated by the black-body radiation of photons, electron-positron pairs, and three neutrinos all of which were in thermal equilibrium.

1. Neglecting any change in the degrees of freedom at T > 100MeV, show using the Friedmann equation for a flat radiation-dominated universe ##H^2 = \frac{8\pi G}{3} \rho_R## that for temperatures T > 1MeV the time since the start of the hot big bang is given by ##t(T) = (\frac{A}{g_∗})^{1/2} \frac{M_P}{T^2}## where ##M_P## is the reduced Planck mass, and A is a constant that you should give explicitly.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
I have found an expression for ##t(T)## but have a factor of ##ln(a)## spoiling my constant ##A## and I don't know how I can get rid of it.

Starting with the Friedmann equation:

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

I know that the energy density for several relativistic species in thermal equilibrium is given by ##\rho_R = \sum_i \rho_i = \frac{\pi^2}{30} g_* T^4_{\gamma}##, where ##g_*## is the effective degrees of freedom.

Substituting this into the Friedmann equation yields

##H^2 = \frac{8\pi G}{3} \frac{\pi^2}{30} g_* T^4_{\gamma}##

I take the square root and use the definition of the Hubble parameter

##\frac{da}{dt} \frac{1}{a} = \sqrt{\frac{8\pi G}{3} \frac{g_*}{30}} \pi T_{\gamma}^2##

Simply integrating this causes the following problem

##t = \frac{ln(a)}{\pi T^2_{\gamma}} \sqrt{\frac{3}{8 \pi G} \frac{30}{g_*}}##

which we can write as

##t = ln(a) \sqrt{\frac{90}{\hbar c g_* \pi^2}} \frac{M_P}{T^2_{\gamma}}##

However, I can't write that in the form I'm asked to, since ln(a) is not a constant.

I think I have made an error by integrating the equation in the way that I did, but I don't know how to go about this.

Thank you for any help you can give!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I have a solution, but it depends on the photons obeying ##T = T_0(1 + z)##

I say that ##da = d(1+z)^{-1} = d(T_0 / T) = - T_0 T^{-2} dT##

then ##da/a = -T^{-1} dT##

substituting this into my expression ##\frac{da}{dt} \frac{1}{a} = \sqrt{\frac{8\pi G}{3} \frac{g_*}{30}} \pi T_{\gamma}^2##,

I find that ##t(T) = \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{\frac{90}{\hbar c \pi^2 g_*}} \frac{M_P}{T^2}##
 
At first, I derived that: $$\nabla \frac 1{\mu}=-\frac 1{{\mu}^3}\left((1-\beta^2)+\frac{\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot\vec R}c\right)\vec R$$ (dot means differentiation with respect to ##t'##). I assume this result is true because it gives valid result for magnetic field. To find electric field one should also derive partial derivative of ##\vec A## with respect to ##t##. I've used chain rule, substituted ##\vec A## and used derivative of product formula. $$\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t}=\frac...
Thread 'Conducting Sphere and Dipole Problem'
Hi, I'm stuck at this question, please help. Attempt to the Conducting Sphere and Dipole Problem (a) Electric Field and Potential at O due to Induced Charges $$V_O = 0$$ This potential is the sum of the potentials due to the real charges (##+q, -q##) and the induced charges on the sphere. $$V_O = V_{\text{real}} + V_{\text{induced}} = 0$$ - Electric Field at O, ##\vec{E}_O##: Since point O is inside a conductor in electrostatic equilibrium, the electric field there must be zero...