What Is the Rate of Continuous Creation Needed to Maintain Universal Density?

epsilon
Messages
29
Reaction score
1
Thread moved from the technical forums, so no HH Template is shown.
Question:
Estimate the rate of continuous creation required to keep the density of the universe constant at 10-26kg/m3. Express your answer in protons/year/km3.

Attempt:
Assuming a spherical matter-dominated Friedmann universe, we know from solving the fluid equation that ρ ∝ 1/a3 (where ρ is the energy density and a is the scale factor).

I believe the result of the continuous creation is that ∂ρ/∂r = 0 - hence the change in density due to expansion is canceled out by the change in density due to the continuous creation:
∂ρexpansion/∂r = -∂ρcreation/∂r
Thus I am expecting that the continuous creation's energy density will vary as ρcreation ∝ a3.

However I do not know how to progress this any further, such that any advice, suggestions or solutions would be greatly appreciated! Note: I do not know what the correct answer is!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You need to know how the scale parameter ##a## changes with time.
 
And so this is the Hubble parameter then?

H = 1/a × da/dt
 
That seems a reasonable place to go... a lot depends on your coursework to date.
 
  • Like
Likes epsilon
OK thank you! :-)
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top