Cosmology

Winter Term 2015

Bjrn Malte Schfer

University of Heidelberg
Centre for Astronomy
Tutor: Robert Reischke

Sheet 2
Newtonian gravity and the Friedmann equations
Introduction
In exercise 1.1 we used a Newtonian approach to derive the Friedmann equations which we called energy and acceleration
equation. We introduced the cosmological principle and investigated isotropic and homogeneous spacetimes. Indeed if we
would do everything in a fully relativistic treatment, i.e. using Einsteins field equations and insert the energy-momentum
tensor of an ideal fluid for comoving observers, we would end up with nearly the same result
 2
a
8G
Kc2 c2
=
2 +
a
3
a
3


a
4G
3p
c2
=
+ 2 +
.
a
3
c
3

(1)

Here is the cosmological constant and K is indeed the spatial curvature. Recall that K occurred just as an integration
constant in the Newtonian case. Both equations describe now the evolution of an isotropic and homogeneous spacetime filled
with different kinds of matter described by the density and pressure p as well as a cosmological constant. The first equation
arises from the 0 0 component of the Einstein equation, while the second equation is due to the space-space components. We
will eliminate the acceleration equation in the second exercise on this sheet by assuming different types of matter with different
appearing in the first equation is called the Hubble function H(t). As
equations of state (cf. exercise 1.1). The quantity a/a
we are free to choose initial conditions for a we choose a such that is equal to unity today. Thus if we measure the content
of the universe today the Friedmann equations tell us how the universe evolved and will evolve. As the Hubble constant H0 ,
which is the Hubble function evaluated today, is measured to be larger than zero, the universe is expanding, accordingly a < 1
in the past.

Questions (6 additional points)

We have a valid theory of gravitiy connecting spacetime geometry and matter content. Why did we do so much effort to
construct a line element for isotropic and homogeneous spacetimes? Or phrased differently: Why do we not just insert
everything we have in the universe (in terms of an energy-momentum tensor) into the field equations and solve for the
metric?
If we observe distant galaxies, does time pass slower in those galaxies?
In order to verify Hubbles law one has to measure the distance to galaxy or stars. Is this possible with typical astronomical
distance indicators like the trigonometric parallax?
Why do we have different distance definitions in cosmology?
On sheet 1 we used the first law of thermodynamics which turns out to be true even in a fully relativistic cosmological
model. This means that we have energy conservation in Robertson-Walker spacetimes. Is this always true in General
Relativity and if not, why is it in cosmology?

2.1 Action principle with Newton (10 points + 3 additional)

Let us consider some classical field = (~x) in flat space which is static and thus not a function of time. We define the action
S via the Lagrange density L:
Z
S=

d3 xL(, ),

with (f)i i f. The action principle is S = 0 with respect to all field and field derivative configurations.

(2)

a) Find the Euler-Lagrange equations by varying the action.

b) Find a Lagrange density such that the equation of motion of becomes the Poisson equation
= 4G,

(3)

with i i being the Laplace operator. Can we have a solution for a constant density = 0 ? What is the condition
on the asymptotic behaviour of to have field values falling

of sufficiently fast at infinity? Hint: The Laplace operator

f
in spherical polar coordinates is given by f = r12 r
r2 r
.
c) Introduce a coupling constant into the Lagrange density L such that the equation of motion reads
( + 2 ) = 4G.

(4)

Show that this equation is solved by a Yukawa-like potential (r) = exp (r)
for = 0 and find a solution for = 0 .
r
Indeed this modification was introduced by Einstein to demonstrate the meaning of boundary terms for Newtonian world
models and how to carry this reasoning into General Relativity.
d) The spherical symmetric Poisson equation in N dimensions reads
2 N 1
+
= 4G.
r2
r r

(5)

(r) = ArN1 + Br(N2)

(6)

Use the ansatz

and show that = 0 implies A = 0. What happens if N 2?
e) Additional: Do you know a similar reasoning in General Relativity for N 2? Hint: The Riemann tensor has
independent components in N dimensions. Especially for N = 2 it is given by
Rijkl =

1
(gik gjl gil gjk ).
2

N2 (N2 1)
12

(7)

2.2 Friedmann equations and Big Bang (13 points )

We start from both Friedmann equations and introduce a quantity which we call the critical density crit defined as
crit (t) :=

3H2 (t)
3H20
, crit (ttoday )
.
8G
8G

(8)

Using this and the results of the evolution of the different matter species from exercise 1.1 both equations can be merged such
that we end up with one equation describing the dynamics of Friedmann models. This result can then be used together with
observations to conclude that a Big Bang (i.e. a = 0 at some finite time in the past) was inevitable.
a) Give an interpretation of the critical density. Hint: Have a look at the first Friedmann equation
b) Show that both Friedmann equations can be combined to yield the adiabatic equation
d(a3 c2 ) + pd(a3 ) = 0,

(9)

which is equivalent to Eq. (3) on sheet 1.

c) We now define dimensionless density parameters
i (t) =

i (t)
,
crit (t)

(10)

with values i0 today. The label i stands for radiation (r), non-relativistic matter (m). Use this definitions to show that
the first Friedmann equation can be written as
H2 (t) = H20 (r0 a4 + m0 a3 + K a2 + 0 ),
2

(11)

c
with = 3H(t)
2 and K := 1 r0 m0 0 . Note that radiation corresponds to an equation of state w = 1/3,
while non-relativistic matter has w = 0 and the has w = 1.

d) Now assume that we have a universe filled with radiation, non-relativistic matter and a cosmological constants. Show
that 0 must satisfy
1
1 + r0 (a2
1) + m0 (a 1)
0 =
,
(12)
1 a2
if there would be some 0 < a < 1 with a = 0.
e) Show that 0 must further obey the inequality
0

2r0 + m0 a
2a4

(13)

if the extremum of a is to be a minimum. This just means that 0 is constrained by Eq. (12) and (13) in models
avoiding a Big Bang.
f) Combine Eq. (12) and (13) to show that
r0 (1

a2 )2


+ m0 a

1 3 2
a + a3
2 2

a4 .

(14)

g) Convince yourself that both terms on the left-hand side of (14) are positive. Use the relation between scale factor and
redshift (a = (1 + z)1 ) to derive the separate constraints
m0

2
z2 (z + 3)

and

r0

1
.
z2 (z + 2)2

(15)

Conclude from the existence of objects (quasars) with redshifts z > 6 and the fact that the visible matter density contributes m0 0.05 that a Big Bang was inevitable.