Understanding Friedmann Equations Equation of State: Step-by-Step Walkthrough

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the equation of state derived from the Friedmann equations, particularly the relationship between density (ρ) and the scale factor (R) in cosmology. The user initially struggles with the integration process and the resulting proportionality, questioning the transition from ρ = e^-3(R/R0)ρ0 to ρ = ρ0(R0/R)^3. Clarifications are provided regarding logarithmic properties and the correct formulation of the equation, emphasizing that the equation should include both pressure and density terms. The user acknowledges their misunderstanding and thanks another participant for the clarification. The conversation highlights the importance of mathematical rigor in cosmological equations.
parsifal
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
I've got some difficulties trying to understand the equation of state derived from Friedmann equations. I'd greatly appreciate it if someone walked me through this.

Now if the equation of state is stated as:
\Large \dot{\rho}+(3\rho +p)\frac{\dot{R}}{R}=0 \ \ |p=\omega \rho

Then (in the case of pressure being zero):
\Rightarrow \rho \propto R^{-3} \Rightarrow \rho = \rho _0 (\frac{R_0}{R})^3
I suspect the latter to be correct as it's not a result of my own logic :biggrin:

Now what I do not understand is the proportionality. If the equation of state is integrated I get something like this (set p=0):
\Large \dot{\rho}+(3\rho)\frac{\dot{R}}{R}=0<br /> \Rightarrow \dot{\rho}=-3\rho\frac{\dot{R}}{R} \Rightarrow<br /> \frac{1}{\rho}\dot{\rho}=-3\frac{\dot{R}}{R} \Rightarrow<br /> \frac{1}{\rho}\frac{d\rho}{dt}=-3\frac{1}{R}\frac{dR}{dt}\ \|\cdot dt
\Rightarrow<br /> \int _{\rho _0}^\rho \frac{1}{\rho}d\rho}=-3\int _{R_0}^R \frac{1}{R}dR \Rightarrow<br /> ln(\rho)-ln(\rho _0)=-3(ln(R)-ln(R_0)) \Rightarrow<br /> ln \frac{\rho}{\rho _0}=-3ln\frac{R}{R_0}\Rightarrow<br /> \frac{\rho}{\rho _0}=e^-3\frac{R}{R_0} \Rightarrow<br /> \rho=e^-3\frac{R}{R_0}\rho _0

Now is there some part to the theory that causes the equation to flip so that
\rho =e^-3\frac{R}{R_0}\rho _0 \Rightarrow \rho = \rho _0 (\frac{R_0}{R})^3
or don't I just get the mathematics right?

Or have I done something wrong right in the beginning deriving the equation of state?

Edit:
Of course, how could I not see it... forgetting that a log x = log xa.

Kurdt already told me that here, but then his message disappeared.

Well thanks to Kurdt anyway!
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
Simply the laws of logarithms:

a\log(b) = \log(b^a)

and noting

(\frac{a}{b})^{-3} = (\frac{b}{a})^3

There is also no exponential function involved since:

e^{(\ln x)}=x

EDIT: I'd deleted the original post because I thought I'd misread your original post but I had not.
 
Last edited:
parsifal said:
Now if the equation of state is stated as:
\Large \dot{\rho}+(3\rho +p)\frac{\dot{R}}{R}=0 \ \ |p=\omega \rho
Just as a side note, the correct equation is:

\Large \dot{\rho}+3\frac{\dot{R}}{R}(\rho +p)=0

It follows from \nabla_{\mu}T^{\mu}_0 = 0.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
Back
Top