Cosmological Constant: Exploring Two Different Models

In summary, the cosmological constant has been included in cosmological models to explain dark energy and the accelerating expansion of the universe. Einstein initially included it to balance out the gravitational contraction of the universe, but empirical measurements have shown a larger positive value that actually accelerates the expansion. The measurement of the cosmological constant is a calculation based on the current expansion rate and gravitational attraction. If the current expansion rate is assumed to continue, the value of the cosmological constant needed for the universe to eventually stop expanding and contract would be different.
  • #1
LSulayman
42
0
Since the discovery of an accelerating expansion in the late 1990s, the cosmological constant has been included in cosmological models for dark energy.

Einstein included the cosmological constant to make the universe static. Dark energy makes the universe expand accelerating. So in the 2 models the cosmological constant explains 2 different things. How is that possible?
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
The difference between Einstein's cosmological constant and the present one is simply one of magnitude. Einstein chose the cosmological constant to be precisely the right number that he believed would balance out the contracting tendency of a gravitationally dominated universe. When we remove the restriction that the cosmological constant must have that value to make the universe stationary, we can emprically measure what it is and indeed we find a small positive number which is larger than what Einstein had originally postulated (that is, instead of simply balancing the contraction, it actually overpowers the contraction and accelerates the expansion).
 
  • #3
Nabeshin said:
The difference between Einstein's cosmological constant and the present one is simply one of magnitude. Einstein chose the cosmological constant to be precisely the right number that he believed would balance out the contracting tendency of a gravitationally dominated universe. When we remove the restriction that the cosmological constant must have that value to make the universe stationary, we can emprically measure what it is and indeed we find a small positive number which is larger than what Einstein had originally postulated (that is, instead of simply balancing the contraction, it actually overpowers the contraction and accelerates the expansion).

So, when we refer to a "positive" cosmological constant, this means it is greater than Einstein's original value, where a value smaller than Einstein's would be considered negative?

And, this may seem like a novel question, but when we empirically measure the cosmological constant, what is actually measured?Is calculating the cosmological constant, on a basic level, taking the current expansion rate and figuring the gravitational attraction of everything and seeing if the expansion will decelerate with gravity or if it will speed up?And another question, if anyone can answer it. If we assume the current rate of expansion--ignoring the supernova data--what value for the cosmological constant would we need to have the universe eventually stop expanding and contract?
 
Last edited:

FAQ: Cosmological Constant: Exploring Two Different Models

What is the cosmological constant?

The cosmological constant is a term in Einstein's theory of general relativity that represents the energy density of the vacuum of space. It is often denoted by the Greek letter lambda (Λ) and is used to account for the observed expansion of the universe.

How does the cosmological constant affect the universe?

The cosmological constant has a significant impact on the universe's expansion rate. It is responsible for the accelerated expansion of the universe, which was first discovered by astronomer Edwin Hubble in the 1920s. It also affects the overall structure and evolution of the universe.

What are the two different models for the cosmological constant?

The two different models for the cosmological constant are the Lambda-CDM model and the Quintessence model. The Lambda-CDM model is the most widely accepted and is based on the assumption that the cosmological constant is a constant value. The Quintessence model proposes that the value of the cosmological constant changes over time.

How do these two models differ?

These two models differ primarily in their assumptions about the nature of the cosmological constant. The Lambda-CDM model assumes it is a constant value, while the Quintessence model proposes that it changes over time. Additionally, the two models have different implications for the ultimate fate of the universe.

What current evidence supports or challenges these models?

There is strong evidence to support the Lambda-CDM model, including observations of the cosmic microwave background radiation and the large-scale structure of the universe. However, there is still ongoing research and debate about the nature of the cosmological constant, and some evidence may challenge the assumptions of these models.

Similar threads

Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
26
Views
2K
Back
Top