Solutions of Friedmann Equations

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around finding the scale factor R(t) from the Friedmann Equations for a pressureless universe with k ≠ 0 and Λ = 0. Participants share parametric solutions for closed and open universes but express difficulty in deriving R as an explicit function of time. Suggestions include using parametric equations to plot R versus t, which can be done with basic calculus knowledge. The conversation highlights the challenge of inverting the time expressions and acknowledges that explicit solutions may not be possible. Ultimately, the participants conclude that plotting the parametric equations is a viable approach to visualize the relationship.
petmal
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Hello everybody,

could somebody tell me how to get the scale factor as a function of time [R(t)] from the Friedmann Equations for a simple dust, pressureless universe when k != 0, \Lambda = 0.

Mathematica 5.2 doesn't want to give me any solution and wherever I searched the best thing I got was the parametric solution in terms of \Theta:

\noindent\(\pmb{R[\Theta ]=\alpha (1-\text{Cos}[\Theta ]);}\\
\pmb{t=\beta (\Theta -\text{Sin}[\Theta ]);}\)

for a closed universe and:

\noindent\(\pmb{R[\psi ]=\gamma (\text{Cosh}[\psi ]-1);}\\
\pmb{t=\delta (\text{Sinh}[\psi ]-\psi );}\)

for an open universe.

Where \noindent\(\pmb{\alpha , \beta , \gamma , \delta }\) are some constants...

Everywhere I also found plots of R vs. t for various parameters but without showing the solution for R(t).

I guess I just need to somehow invert expressions for time...

Thanks for help.

Petr
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
I changed a theta to a psi. Is this what you intended?
\noindent\(\pmb{R[\psi ]=\gamma (\text{Cosh}[\psi ]-1);}\\
\pmb{t=\delta (\text{Sinh}[\psi ]-\psi );}\)

for an open universe.

my apologies if this is wrong, or isn't what you meant.

It seems to me that you are asking if someone can express psi analytically as a function of t. Offhand I don't see how to do this.
 
Last edited:
marcus said:
I changed a theta to a psi. Is this what you intended?


my apologies if this is wrong, or isn't what you meant.

It seems to me that you are asking if someone can express psi analytically as a function of t. Offhand I don't see how to do this.

Simply, say, I want to make a plot of evolution of the scale factor R vs. t. Such plots are probably in every book which has something to do with cosmology.

To do this I need R as a function of t, unfortunatelly have no idea how to get it.

When k = 0, it's a simple differential equation solved on a piece of paper in a few moments, but what about k != 0 (open/closed universe)... :shy:

Just to be complete, I am adding the Friedmann Equation I am talking about:

\noindent\(\pmb{\left(\frac{dR[t]}{dt}\right)^2-\frac{8 \pi \rho _0 G}{3 R[t]}=-k c^2}\)

where \rho _0 is the density as measured today...
 
Last edited:
Sometimes parametric equation like the one you have can't be transformed into simple explicit function...
This maybe just the case.
Still you can plot it , shouldn't be very hard.
 
ziad1985 said:
Sometimes parametric equation like the one you have can't be transformed into simple explicit function...
This maybe just the case.

Thanks, you confirmed what I was thinking about.

ziad1985 said:
Still you can plot it , shouldn't be very hard.

I guess this is what I don't know to do so I need R in terms of t... :blushing:
 
on a second look I think you can express t as function of r
You have r as a function of psi, you can write psi=acosh((r+gamma)/Gamma)
and then replace psi in the second equation containing psi and t.
just came trough my mind , try it.
 
Last edited:
ziad1985 said:
on a second look I think you can express t as function of r
You have r as a function of psi, you can write psi=acosh((r+gamma)/Gamma)
and then replace psi in the second equation containing psi and t.
just came trough my mind , try it.


I doubt the result could be solved explicitly for R...

Right now I've got three books in Astrophysics/Cosmology here, every of them provides the parametric solutions (above) and clearly explains how to get the age of the universe from it (expressing parameters in terms of \noindent\(\pmb{\Omega _0}\) and so on)... But none of them explains how they got to graphing R(t) vs t... :mad:
 
petmal said:
... But none of them explains how they got to graphing R(t) vs t...

Graphing parametric equations is something I took in my calculus course in my first year in college...
It shouldn't be that hard, I suppose you can learn how to graph it, by looking into a calculus book...

try this link to draw: http://www.ies.co.jp/math/java/calc/sg_para/sg_para.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ziad1985 said:
Graphing parametric equations is something I took in my calculus course in my first year in college...
It shouldn't be that hard, I suppose you can learn how to graph it, by looking into a calculus book...

try this link to draw: http://www.ies.co.jp/math/java/calc/sg_para/sg_para.html

Thanks a lot, you opened my eyes... For some reason I didn't see the simple solution of plotting it as a parametric equation where x = t[\Theta] and y = R[\Theta]...

I was probably expecting something more complicated...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Back
Top