- Forums
- Astronomy and Cosmology
- Cosmology
- I
- Thread starterTheMercury79
- Start date
- Tags
- CosmolgyHubbleRelationScaleScale factorSpace expansion
- #1
TheMercury79
- 24
- 5
- TL;DR Summary
- Comparing sizes now and then
Imagine a Universe where the Hubble parameter is truly a constant, in both space and time.
How much smaller would such a Universe be 14 billion years ago compared to today?
Using the Hubble parameter in terms of scale factor: ##H(t) = \frac{\dot{a}}{a}## leads to
the differential equation: $$\frac{da}{dt}=a~H(t)$$
Solivng for the scale factor yields an exponential growth relation:$$a(t) = a(0)e^{Ht}$$
(##H(t) = H## since H is constant in this Universe and so it's not necessary to use the Hubble parameter
as a function of time)
If we use ##H = 70 kms^-1Mpc^-1##, current time ##t=14\times10^9~y## and initial time 14 Gy ago is ##t_0=0##, then$$\\$$
##Ht = 70~kms^{-1}~Mpc^{-1} * \frac{1}{3.09\times10^{19}}~Mpc~km^{-1} * (3600 * 24 *365.25 * 14\times10^9)~s##
This makes ##Ht## roughly equal to 1 and ##a(14)\approx a(0)e^1##
Therefore $$a(14)\approx 2.72a(0)$$
This, however, seems like a really small number, indicating the Universe was about one third of its current size
14 billion years ago for a "Constant Hubble Universe"
Also a value of 70 for the Hubble parameter corresponds to a Hubble time of 14 billion years. And if H(t) is constant then 14 billion years ago would have the same Hubble time of 14 billion years, it can't be one third of the current size and have the same Hubble time, shouldn't this Hubble time be zero 14 billion years ago?
Something(s) doesn't add upp in my approach and I'm trying to think of where I'm off
Space news on Phys.org
- #2
Arman777
- 2,163
- 191
Well I think your beginning is wrong. You should derive the scale factor ##a(t)## from the Friedmann Equations. Not by using only $$H = \dot{a} / a$$.
From my knowledge, the only close thing that does look like your solution is universe with lambda only which has a scale factor of
$$a(t) = e^{H_0t}$$ however here $$H_0 = \sqrt{\frac{8 \pi G ε_Λ} {3c^2}} = \sqrt{Λ/3}$$
(Also called de Sitter universe)
- #3
timmdeeg
Gold Member
- 1,525
- 324
TheMercury79 said:
Imagine a Universe where the Hubble parameter is truly a constant, in both space and time.
##H = const## means that the universe is expanding exponentially. It's the case if the Cosmological Constant ##\Lambda > 0## and the matter density ##\rho = 0##, which is expected for the very far future of our universe.
- #4
TheMercury79
I feel kinda stupid now, The Friedmann equations is in the next chapter. I was under the impression this should be solved with contents of the current chapter. But I see now I've read the curriculum wrong.
I have a full time job and taking this course on the side is really stressful. I just knew I was totally off on this.
Tnx for answers.EDIT: Actually I see now I haven't read the curriculum wrong. It's just not very clear, one place says this and that chapter, another place it says only this chapter. Huh
Last edited:
Similar threads
IThe Hubble constant − constant in what way?
- Replies
- 18
- Views
- 2K
IHubble parameter in terms of the scale factor
- Replies
- 22
- Views
- 3K
IIs There Evidence to Suggest Our Universe is Anisotropic?
- Replies
- 8
- Views
- 3K
IGaia parallaxes might reduce tension for Hubble constant
- Replies
- 14
- Views
- 4K
IHubble's law and conservation of energy
3
- Replies
- 85
- Views
- 9K
BDoes Hubble's Law imply that galaxies are accelerating away
- Replies
- 5
- Views
- 2K
Velocity of receding galaxies. Hubble <-> scale factor
- Replies
- 5
- Views
- 2K
The scale factor in flat FRW model
2
- Replies
- 53
- Views
- 6K
IScale factor from Friedmann's equations
- Replies
- 7
- Views
- 3K
INew H0LiCOW result: Hubble constant is 73.3 +1.7-1.8 km/(s*Mpc)
- Replies
- 29
- Views
- 7K
- Forums
- Astronomy and Cosmology
- Cosmology