A Non-minimally coupled inflation — expansion

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the role of the Ricci scalar (R) in the context of non-minimally coupled inflation. It clarifies that R does not measure the expansion of space but rather indicates the curvature of spacetime. The formula presented involves the inflaton field (Φ) and its interaction with the curvature, represented by the coupling constant (ξ). This distinction is crucial for understanding the dynamics of inflationary models in cosmology. Overall, the Ricci scalar is essential for describing spacetime geometry rather than expansion directly.
svenz706
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello,

In the Wikipedia article on "Inflaton" there appears the following formula:
##S=\int d^{4}x \sqrt{-g}[ \frac{1}{2}m^2_{P}R-\frac{1}{2}\partial^\mu\Phi\partial_{ \mu }\Phi-V(\Phi)-\frac{ 1 }{ 2}\xi R \Phi^]##

with
##\xi## representing the strength of the interaction between
R and ##\phi## which respectively relate to the curvature of space and the magnitude of the inflaton field.

Does ##R##, the Ricci scalar, represent a measure of the expansion of space?

https://arxiv.org/abs/1002.2995
 
Space news on Phys.org
No. The Ricci scalar is a measure of the curvature of spacetime.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and gentzen
Abstract The Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) has significantly advanced our ability to study black holes, achieving unprecedented spatial resolution and revealing horizon-scale structures. Notably, these observations feature a distinctive dark shadow—primarily arising from faint jet emissions—surrounded by a bright photon ring. Anticipated upgrades of the EHT promise substantial improvements in dynamic range, enabling deeper exploration of low-background regions, particularly the inner shadow...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
Title: Can something exist without a cause? If the universe has a cause, what caused that cause? Post Content: Many theories suggest that everything must have a cause, but if that's true, then what caused the first cause? Does something need a cause to exist, or is it possible for existence to be uncaused? I’m exploring this from both a scientific and philosophical perspective and would love to hear insights from physics, cosmology, and philosophy. Are there any theories that explain this?
Back
Top