- #1

- 5,199

- 38

*Galaxy Formation*, and in it, he is talking about the flatness problem, or fine-tuning problem. In it, he shows that if you define a general (i.e. varies with cosmic time and hence with redshift) density parameter [itex] \Omega_m [/itex] for matter by analogy with [itex] \Omega_{m,0} [/itex] (the matter density parameter at the present epoch), it would be defined as follows:

[tex] \Omega_m = \frac{8 \pi G \rho_m}{3H^2} [/tex]

Where H(z) is the Hubble parameter (so that H

_{0}= H(0))

Since H = [itex] \dot{a}/a [/itex], and a = 1/(1+z), we can get directly from the Friedman equation:

[tex] H = H_0 [(1+z)^2(\Omega_{m,0} z +1) - \Omega_{\Lambda ,0}z(z+2)]^{1/2} [/tex]

I've used a slightly non-standard notation of including a zero in the subscript of the dark energy density parameter to explicitly indicate that I'm talking about the value of this parameter at the present epoch. The reason for doing so is that, later on, I'll be talking about the value of this parameter

*not*at the present epoch. Anyway, from this, Longair shows that

[tex] \Omega_m = \frac{\Omega_{m,0}}{\left(\frac{\Omega_{m,0} z + 1}{1+z}\right) - \Omega_{\Lambda ,0} \left(\frac{1}{1+z} - \frac{1}{(1+z)^3}\right)} [/tex]

From this, it can be shown that if [itex] \Omega_m [/itex] had a value that differed even

*slightly*from 1 initially, then the current value [itex] \Omega_{m,0} [/itex] would be drastically different from 1 (it would be either huge or miniscule...small variations initially would cause it to diverge rapidly as z approached 0). Another way of looking at this is that there is a very

*wide*range of value of the parameter [itex] \Omega_{m,0} [/itex] that all basically converge to 1 at high redshifts. It's certainly true for any value between 0 and 1. This is the flatness, or "fine-tuning" problem. Why is the universe seemingly required to have been exceedingly close to flat initially in order to accord with present-day observations?

This result got me thinking. It is shown (elsewhere in the book) that the present condition for flatness is that the

*total*density parameter is 1:

[tex] \Omega_{\textrm{tot},0} = \Omega_{m,0} + \Omega_{\Lambda ,0} =1 [/tex]

We think that this is probably true (e.g. they are ~0.3 and ~0.7, speaking very loosely). But, I was bothered by the fact that if the universe is flat now, then it must always have been flat, suggesting that:

[tex] \Omega_{\textrm{tot}} = \Omega_{m} + \Omega_{\Lambda} =1 [/tex]

is true generally (where these are now functions of z). But I have just shown that [itex] \Omega_m \rightarrow 1 [/itex]

*all by itself*as z approaches infinity! Therefore, the only way that this condition can be satisfied is if [itex] \Omega_{\Lambda} \rightarrow 0 [/itex] as z approaches infinity. Longair makes no mention of this, so I set about to figure out if this was true on my own. I came up with what I thought was a reasonable defnition for the total density parameter (again, by analogy with the existing ones):

[tex] \Omega_{\textrm{tot}} = \frac{8 \pi G \rho_{\textrm{tot}}}{3H^2} [/tex]

[tex] \Omega_{\textrm{tot}} = \frac{8 \pi G (\rho_m + \rho_v)}{3H^2} [/tex]

[tex] \Omega_{\textrm{tot}} = \frac{8 \pi G (\rho_m + \rho_v)}{3H^2} [/tex]

where the 'm' and 'v' stand for 'matter' and 'vacuum energy' respectively:

[tex] \Omega_{\textrm{tot}} = \frac{8 \pi G \rho_m }{3H^2} + \frac{8 \pi G \rho_v }{3H^2} [/tex]

The first term is just the matter density parameter from before, therefore the second term must be the dark energy density parameter:

[tex] \Omega_{\textrm{tot}} = \Omega_m + \frac{8 \pi G \rho_v }{3H^2} [/tex]

[tex] \Rightarrow \frac{8 \pi G \rho_v }{3H^2} \equiv \Omega_{\Lambda} [/tex]

[tex] \Rightarrow \frac{8 \pi G \rho_v }{3H^2} \equiv \Omega_{\Lambda} [/tex]

The question is, does it go to zero in the limit of infinite z? Using the definition of H from before:

[tex] \Omega_{\Lambda} = \frac{8 \pi G \rho_v }{3H_0^2 [(1+z)^2(\Omega_{m,0} z +1) - \Omega_{\Lambda ,0}z(z+2)]} [/tex]

Everything that is not in square brackets is just, by definition, [itex] \Omega_{\Lambda, 0} [/itex]

[tex] \Omega_{\Lambda} = \frac{\Omega_{\Lambda ,0}}{[(1+z)^2(\Omega_{m,0} z +1) - \Omega_{\Lambda ,0}z(z+2)]} [/tex]

Now, the nice thing about this is that IF [itex] \Omega_{m,0} + \Omega_{\Lambda ,0} =1 [/itex], then you can show using a little bit of algebra that the denominator (the part in square brackets) becomes:

[tex] \Omega_{\Lambda} = \frac{\Omega_{\Lambda ,0}}{[\Omega_{m,0}(1+z)^3 +\Omega_{\Lambda ,0}]} [/tex]

I'm confident that that does indeed approach zero as z approaches infinity. My question is simple: have I attempted to reconcile the apparent problem in the proper way, or is my attempt to define a dark energy density parameter that varies with cosmic epoch totally out to lunch?