Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,082 questions , 2,232 unanswered
5,353 answers , 22,789 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
820 active unimported users
More ...

  Why does dark energy produce positive space-time curvature?

+ 8 like - 0 dislike
2471 views

My understanding is that dark energy, or equivalently a positive cosmological constant, is accelerating the expansion of the universe and I have read that this gives empty space-time positive curvature, ie de Sitter geometry. I also understand that parallel geodesics converge when curvature is positive and diverge when it is negative. I would expect accelerating expansion of space to make parallel space-time geodesics diverge and thus make curvature negative. Is there a nice visual explanation why dark energy actually produces positive curvature?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-05-25 06:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user Daniel Mahler
asked Feb 3, 2014 in Astronomy by Daniel Mahler (255 points) [ no revision ]

2 Answers

+ 5 like - 0 dislike

A positive cosmological constant leads to positive scalar curvature by definition. Just trace over the Einstein equation and you end up with $$ R = 4\Lambda - 8\pi T $$ which is just $$ R = 4\Lambda > 0 $$ in vacuum.

The implicit, but more interesting questions are probably the following ones:

Why can we interpret the cosmological constant as dark energy?

Modelling matter as a fluid in equilibrium, ie $$ T_{\mu\nu} = (\rho + p) u_\mu u_\nu + p g_{\mu\nu} $$ the Einstein equation reads $$ R_{\mu\nu} - \frac 12 R g_{\mu\nu} = 8\pi (\rho + p) u_\mu u_\nu + (8\pi p - \Lambda) g_{\mu\nu} $$ Now, if we want to fold the $\Lambda$ term into the matter terms, we require $$ \rho_\Lambda + p_\Lambda = 0 \\ 8\pi p_\Lambda = -\Lambda $$ which is $$ \rho_\Lambda = -p_\Lambda = \frac\Lambda{8\pi} $$ a positive energy density with negative pressure.

Take note that this pressure is not directly responsible for any acceleration or deceleration of the cosmological expansion: It is uniform across space and stays constant in time, and lacking a gradient, does not induce any forces. Its effect is purely gravitational in nature - after all, this is just the cosmological constant in disguise.

Does positive spacetime curvature actually lead to parallel geodesics converging?

Not necessarily due to the Lorentzian signature of the metric. Take 1+1 de Sitter space, which can be realized as a hyperboloid in Minkowski space and would look like this (picture taken from Wikimedia Commons):

alt="hyperboloid">

We get geodesics from the intersections of planes through the origin of the ambient Minkowski space with the hyperboloid, and time-like ones from those which are angled less than 45° towards the time axis.

The vertical lines thus correspond to time-like geodesics and clearly do not converge.

This is where slicing into space-like hypersurfaces comes in: In FLRW cosmology, there's a preferred slicing where the galactic fluid is homogeneous. In de Sitter space, there's no matter and thus no preferred slicing, but we can nevertheless use it to illustrate various features of the cosmological standard model.

The horizontal circles, which we obtain by intersecting a parallel family of planes in the ambient space with the hyperboloid, correspond to a spatially closed universe. Choosing appropriate coordinates yields the metric $$ ds^2 = -dt^2 + \alpha^2\cosh^2\left(\frac t\alpha\right)d\Omega^2 $$ where $d\Omega$ is the metric of the Euclidean sphere and $\alpha=\sqrt{3/\Lambda}$.

By tilting our planes, we can also create flat slicings with corresponding metric $$ ds^2 = -dt^2 + e^{2t/\alpha}dy^2 $$ and open slicings with metric $$ ds^2 = -dt^2 + \alpha^2\sinh^2\left(\frac t\alpha\right)dH^2 $$ where $dH$ is the metric of the Euclidean hyperbolic space.

While the light-like geodesics shown above - corresponding to particles at rest in case of the closed slicing - diverge, the spatial curvature will determine what happens to particles in parallel motion through space. However, this is not something that can be shown in our picture of a 1+1 spacetime.

How does this result in an accelerated expansion of the universe?

Looking at the spatial part of the metrics, all three slicings ultimately lead to an exponential expansion of space, which, in case of a de Sitter universe, is just a matter of geometry. In the closed case however, accelerated expansion happens only after a decelerating collapse to some minimal size determined by the value of the cosmological constant.

In Friedmann models, as long as the cosmological constant dominates over the matter content, we'll eventually approach de Sitter geometry and thus also exponential expansion.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-05-25 06:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user Christoph
answered Feb 8, 2014 by Christoph (210 points) [ no revision ]
Most voted comments show all comments
@DanielMahler: your guess for $u$ is correct, and I added a link to the corresponding Wikipedia page; you're also right that the horizontal circles aren't geodesisc, but we can use them to model a closed universe that's contracting in the lower half and expanding in the upper one

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-05-25 06:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user Christoph
Great. Thanks. One more bit of confusion is the minus sign in $\rho_\Lambda = -p_\Lambda = \frac\Lambda{8\pi}$. This is saying that accelarating expansion is caused by negative pressure, which seems counterintuitive.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-05-25 06:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user Daniel Mahler
@DanielMahler: I added a note about that; see also en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-05-25 06:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user Christoph
@DanielMahler: I just added some missing pieces

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-05-25 06:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user Christoph
Thanks @Christoph. This is a really great answer and an excellent resource for others in the future.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-05-25 06:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user Daniel Mahler
Most recent comments show all comments
Thanks, @Christoph, this is looking great! The second question is the one that was puzzling me. If I read your answer correctly, then the constant time circles on the hyperboloid are not geodesics since they are not formed by planes passing through the origin. Correct?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-05-25 06:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user Daniel Mahler
Also I am not famimilar with the equation $T_{\mu\nu} = (\rho + p) u_\mu u_\nu + p g_{\mu\nu}$. Could you define $\rho$, $p$ and $u$.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-05-25 06:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user Daniel Mahler
+ 2 like - 0 dislike

This is really a comment, but it got a bit long for the comment box. It's a comment because I kept meaning to go off and research this properly but have failed to find the time (and probably never will). So I'll post my initial thoughts, but treat this as suggestions for things to look at rather than a definitive answer.

When you say I also understand that parallel geodesics converge when curvature is positive I bet you have a mental image of a 2-sphere (apologies if I'm libelling you, but this is definitely my immediate mental image of positive curvature). The thing is that the 2-sphere is a Riemannian manifold i.e. the metric is positive definite. By contrast the manifolds we use in relativity are pseudo Riemannian i.e. the metric is not positive definite and indeed has the signature (-+++) or (+---) depending on your preferred convention. This matters because the scalar curvature is:

$$ R = g^{\alpha\beta} R_{\alpha\beta} $$

So the positive scalar curvature of de Sitter space doesn't mean it's like a sphere. It would if the metric is positive definite, but it isn't.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-05-25 06:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user John Rennie
answered Feb 9, 2014 by John Rennie (470 points) [ no revision ]
Yes, my main misunderstanding was that I was not aware that the relationship between scalar curvature & geodesics did not apply to indefinite metrics. I had once seen an explanation of curvature in terms geodesics in a book and thought it was meant to be universal.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-05-25 06:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user Daniel Mahler

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysics$\varnothing$verflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...