Why is the non-zero value of spatial curvature +/- 1?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sunrah
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Curvature Value
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the value of the spatial curvature parameter \( k \) in the context of Friedmann's equations in cosmology. Participants explore the implications of \( k \) being equal to \( \pm 1 \) when space is not flat, examining the relationship between curvature, scale factor, and the geometry of the universe.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the transition from Newtonian to relativistic Friedmann's equation involves a substitution that suggests spatial curvature vanishes when space is flat, questioning why \( |k| = 1 \) when space is not flat.
  • Another participant states that \( |k| = 1 \) is a convention, linking it to the scale factor being the radius of curvature.
  • A request for further resources highlights a desire for justification of these conventions, as introductory texts do not provide sufficient explanation.
  • A participant provides a link to Wikipedia, suggesting it contains relevant explanations about the choices for scale factor and curvature parameter.
  • There is a repeated inquiry about the relationship between the radius of curvature and the scale factor, indicating confusion about this connection.
  • One participant explains that if the universe is modeled as a sphere, increasing distances between objects scales the radius of curvature accordingly.
  • Another participant challenges this by stating that the explanation only applies to a finite universe, referencing Einstein's preference for finite models due to issues with infinities in field equations.
  • A later reply clarifies that the radius of curvature is actually a function of the curvature constant \( \Omega_k \), relating it to the total density of the universe and describing how it behaves under different curvature conditions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of the curvature parameter \( k \) and its implications, with no consensus reached on the underlying reasons for its values or the relationship to the scale factor.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the definitions and implications of curvature and scale factor, with some assumptions about the nature of the universe remaining unresolved.

sunrah
Messages
191
Reaction score
22
Going from the Newtonian to relativistic version of Friedmann's equation we use the substitution
[itex]kc^{2} = -\frac{2U}{x^{2}}[/itex]

The derivation considers the equation of motion of a particle with classic Newtonian dynamics. I can sought of see that if space is flat the radius of curvature will be infinite, so spatial curvature will vanish, but why exactly is |k| = 1 when space is not flat ?

Also I'm guessing that k is actually a ratio of something over that things absolute value, e.g.
[itex]k = \frac{thing}{\|thing\|}[/itex], because why else would it be +/- 1 or 0?
 
Space news on Phys.org
sunrah said:
but why exactly is |k| = 1 when space is not flat ?
It's purely a convention. By this convention, when [itex]k = \pm 1[/itex], the scale factor is the radius of curvature.

An alternative convention is to set the scale factor equal to 1 today. With this convention, the curvature parameter can take on any value, and is proportional to the inverse of the radius of curvature squared.
 
Thanks, do you know where I can learn more about his? The introductory cosmology books just state this without justifying it and that bugs me.
 
So the radius of curvature is a function of the scale factor, but why? That's what I'd like to know. It isn't obvious to me. Thanks
 
sunrah said:
So the radius of curvature is a function of the scale factor, but why? That's what I'd like to know. It isn't obvious to me. Thanks
If the universe is described by a sphere, then the radius of curvature is the radius of the sphere. If you increase the distances between every two objects by a factor of two, you increase the radius of the sphere by a factor of two, and therefore increase the radius of curvature by a factor of two.
 
That only works for a finite universe. But, then again, Einstein strongly favored that option having realized his field equations are not well behaved in the presence of infinities.
 
sunrah said:
So the radius of curvature is a function of the scale factor, but why?
Actually, it is a function of the curvature constant [itex]\Omega_k= 1-\Omega_{total}[/itex]. The scale factor is just what it says, something to scale the effect of all the Omegas to earlier times. For a small positive curvature (i.e. a small negative curvature constant, unfortunately, due to legacy) the radius of spatial curvature is [itex]R_k \approx R_{Hubble}/\sqrt{\Omega_{total} - 1}[/itex]. For spatially flat it blows up to infinity and for a spatially open universe it comes out as an imaginary number.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K