Universe Expansion: GR vs Hubble Reconciled

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on reconciling General Relativity (GR) predictions with Hubble's law regarding the universe's expansion. It clarifies that while GR allows for various scale factor evolutions, including exponential and linear, the Hubble expansion is specifically exponential when dark energy is the sole component. The conversation highlights the importance of context in interpreting graphs related to cosmic expansion, emphasizing that all curves presented are permissible under GR but may be mislabelled. Ultimately, the discussion concludes that without valid references, further discourse is not feasible.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of General Relativity (GR) principles
  • Familiarity with Hubble's law and its implications
  • Knowledge of cosmic scale factors and their evolution
  • Basic concepts of dark energy in cosmology
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of dark energy on cosmic expansion
  • Study the differences between linear and exponential expansion in cosmology
  • Learn about the Hubble parameter and its role in the universe's evolution
  • Examine the various models of universe expansion under General Relativity
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, cosmologists, and physics students interested in the dynamics of universe expansion and the interplay between General Relativity and observational data.

jeremyfiennes
Messages
323
Reaction score
17
TL;DR
The two seem contractory. How are they reconciled?
The GR predictions for the universe's size are those of fig.a. Whereas the Hubble expansion is exponential, fig.b. How are the two reconciled?

expansioN.JPG
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jeremyfiennes said:
The GR predictions for the universe's size are those of fig.a.
Where are you getting that figure from?

jeremyfiennes said:
the Hubble expansion is exponential
What "Hubble expansion" are you talking about? Where are you getting that figure from?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Hyperfine and Vanadium 50
I don't know. My memory doesn't go back that far. But it us implicit in this one which I found in wikipedia:

universe future.jpg

"Possible velocity vs. redshift functions; patterned after Davis & Lineweave, CC BY-SA 3.0." The 'linear' curve is the Hubble law case.
 
All four curves in the OP are allowed under GR. Without knowing the context, we won't be able to answer why they were labelled like that.
The first graph shows the evolution of the scale factor with time in universes with matter+radiation (although the latter doesn't really show in such simplified representation) depending on the ratio of density vs critical density - these are labelled 'flat' and 'closed'. For the one labelled 'open' to curve upwards like that, the composition must include dark energy. If it were approaching linear expansion instead of exponential, all three would represent the possible futures of the universe as could be encountered in textbooks pre-1990s, before dark energy was seriously considered. As is, the 'open' one is a bit out of place in its company, and mislabelled, but permissible under GR nonetheless.
The graph labelled 'b) Hubble' shows the time evolution of the scale factor in universes where the only component present is dark energy. It's the only case where expansion is exponential. It is also equivalent to the Hubble parameter never changing, so it's what you get from naively assuming that the Hubble constant in the Hubble law is constant in time.
All kinds of scale factor evolutions are permissible under GR - exponential, linear, approaching steady state, contracting. Which one is appropriate depends on what's in the universe.

The graph in post #3 shows a completely different thing. That one's about how Doppler shift works.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and PeterDonis
Thanks.
 
jeremyfiennes said:
I don't know. My memory doesn't go back that far.
Need I point out that this means they are not valid references?

Since we have no valid basis for discussion, this thread is closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K