- #36
RogerWaters
- 19
- 2
Thanks for clearing this up. I’m reading ‘heart of darkness’ by Ostriker and Mitton which is in between popular science and actual physics, but closer to popular science - it is a fantastic historical account of the development of LCDM model of cosmology, but the chapter on dark energy is a bit of a dog’s breakfast and suddenly looses readability. Part if this is a sudden shift from focusing on expansion vs contraction critical density to the conditions needed for flatness.PeterDonis said:If the only stress-energy in the universe is matter (##p = 0##) or radiation (##p = \rho / 3##), then the two concepts of "critical density" (expansion vs. collapse and zero spatial curvature) coincide. But in the presence of stress-energy with the equation of state of a cosmological constant (##p = - \rho##), they don't. What cosmologists call the "critical density" for our best current model of the universe, which includes a positive cosmological constant, is the "flatness" one, although many cosmologists are not clear about that and will refer to the "expansion vs. collapse" definition without clarifying that that definition doesn't really apply to our actual best current model of the universe. (Believe it or not, Wikipedia actually gets this right in its "critical density" article.)
Last edited: