"TImescape" models

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter pervect
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around "Timescape" cosmological models and their potential implications for cosmological theories, particularly in comparison to the Lambda-CDM model. Participants explore the foundational aspects of these models, their relation to general relativity, and the challenges in understanding their implications and applications.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express interest in the "Timescape" models mentioned in a paper, questioning their basis in standard general relativity or alternative frameworks.
  • One participant highlights a statement from David Wiltshire's lecture notes, suggesting that general relativity is well tested only for isolated systems, which another participant challenges by arguing that neutron stars provide significant tests of GR predictions.
  • Links to lecture notes and slides by David Wiltshire are shared as resources for understanding the "Timescape" models.
  • There is a sentiment that the approach of the discussed papers may not be satisfactory, with one participant expressing a preference for more focused summaries over extensive discussions of concepts like Mach's principle.
  • Concerns are raised about the relevance of the "Timescape" models to the dark matter problem, particularly in relation to galactic rotation curves.
  • Participants reflect on previous discussions related to models without dark energy, indicating ongoing interest in the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity or implications of the "Timescape" models. There are competing views regarding the applicability of general relativity in different contexts and the relevance of these models to current cosmological challenges.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note limitations in the understanding of the "Timescape" models, including the need for clearer numerical predictions and the potential disconnect between theoretical models and observable phenomena.

pervect
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Messages
10,448
Reaction score
1,611
Some popular news articles mention https://academic.oup.com/mnrasl/article/537/1/L55/7926647?login=false, "Supernovae evidence for foundational change to cosmological models" as suggesting that "Timescape" cosmological models may be superior to the Lambda-CDM model. My question relates to what is being tested, the so-called "Timescape model", which I've never heard of before. The popular news reporting and description of them is predictably pretty awful as one might expect, though the part about them being only statistically homogeneous (as opposed to the standard FLRW models) did come through.

Does anyone have any idea of what the "Timescape" models referred to in this paper are about? For starters, are they based on standard GR, or something else? Peer-reviewed but introductory references would be most desired, but I'll take what I can get, if I get anything.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
Physics news on Phys.org
pervect said:
Does anyone have any idea of what the "Timescape" models referred to in this paper are about? For starters, are they based on standard GR, or something else? Peer-reviewed but introductory references would be most desired, but I'll take what I can get, if I get anything.
Try these lecture notes by David Wiltshire, in particular starting with section 4:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.3787
And here are slides from a talk based on the above notes:
https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/server/api/core/bitstreams/91239324-879f-439a-8ccf-f00a2cb419b6/content
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby, Ibix and PeroK
renormalize said:
these lecture notes by David Wiltshire
I see a very odd statement at the start of section 2.1 of this paper:

"General relativity is only well tested for isolated systems – such as the solar system or binary pulsars – for which ##T^\mu{}_\nu = 0##."

This is basically saying that only vacuum solutions centered on isolated masses are well tested. I don't think this is true. For the solar system, it's true that the isolated bodies whose interiors have nonzero stress-energy--the Sun and planets--also have negligible GR corrections to Newtonian gravity in their interiors. But that's not true of pulsars: those are neutron stars, and GR corrections are significant in the structure of neutron stars, and pulsar observations allow us to test GR predictions about neutron star structure, as well as GR predictions about changes in orbital parameters due to gravitational wave emission (which is what "binary pulsars" refers to).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: javisot
I started this thread on this topic earlier this year, which you may find interesting.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: renormalize
phyzguy said:
I started this thread on this topic earlier this year, which you may find interesting.

Thanks - I did find the thread interesting. The previous papers had too much distracting wordage on things I found irrelevant, like Mach's principle for my taste.

Your summary seems a lot more intelligible with much more focus. Or perhaps it was just that it was simple enough for me to understand. I still don't know how one might get actual numbers on the effect, and I probably won't get that far, sadly.

I would expect that it's the largest structures that would be important, and the galactic voids are arguably very large structures.

I don't think this approach will do much about the dark matter problem, though. That shows up at the galactic scale with galactic rotation curves.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
11K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K