What is the Potential of Quintessence Without Astronomical Units?

In summary: Lagrangian dimension). I think V's dimension is M^4+\alpha.So, even if we don't work in that unit (I mean we do not consider h=c=1), the potential would be V(\phi)= (M^(4+\alpha)) * phi^(-\alpha)
  • #1
shadi_s10
89
0
Dear all,

I am reading some texts about quintessence. As you one of the best textbooks for cosmology is Weinberg's. in page 90 of his book he states that if we consider astronomical units we can see that a good quintessence potential is

V([tex]\phi[/tex])= (M^(4+alpha)) * phi ^(-alpha)

and M has the dimention of mass.

Can anyone tell me if we do not work in that unit (I mean we do not consider h=c=1) what would exactly the potential be?
please help!
I really need to know this...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Take your complete Lagrangian, not just the potential part. The integral of the Lagrangian is the action, which has the same units as [tex]\hbar[/tex]. Then calculate the dimension of [tex]\phi[/tex] from the kinetic term, and from this infer the factors of c and [tex]\hbar[/tex] you need to make the potential the same dimension as the kinetic term. Shouldn't be that hard, I suppose ...

(Caveat: The normalization of [tex]\phi[/tex] is ambigous, but this doesn't matter in the end)
 
  • #3
grey_earl said:
Take your complete Lagrangian, not just the potential part. The integral of the Lagrangian is the action, which has the same units as [tex]\hbar[/tex]. Then calculate the dimension of [tex]\phi[/tex] from the kinetic term, and from this infer the factors of c and [tex]\hbar[/tex] you need to make the potential the same dimension as the kinetic term. Shouldn't be that hard, I suppose ...

(Caveat: The normalization of [tex]\phi[/tex] is ambigous, but this doesn't matter in the end)

Dear friend,
thanks a lot for helping me.
I have tried this method befire but unfortunately there is a problem.
I attached my computations in the file below.
I would appreciate it if you could read it.
Thanks for your help.

shadi
 

Attachments

  • 12 001.jpg
    12 001.jpg
    20.9 KB · Views: 390
  • #4
Note that the equation should be dimensionally correct independent of [tex]\alpha[/tex]. So, from your potential [tex]V(\phi) = M^{4+\alpha} \phi^{-\alpha}[/tex], M must have the same dimensions as [tex]\phi[/tex].
 
  • #5
grey_earl said:
Note that the equation should be dimensionally correct independent of [tex]\alpha[/tex]. So, from your potential [tex]V(\phi) = M^{4+\alpha} \phi^{-\alpha}[/tex], M must have the same dimensions as [tex]\phi[/tex].

I agree that V should be independent of alpha. But if M has the same dimensions as [tex]\phi[/tex] , then the dimension of V would be like \phi^{4}. Why do you say that?
 
  • #6
[tex]\alpha[/tex] can be any number. If your final expression depended on [tex]\alpha[/tex], the dimension of your action would depend on [tex]\alpha[/tex], but this cannot be. Also, you have made a mistake in your first step: I said the dimension of the action is the same as the dimension of [tex]\hbar[/tex], so since the action is the space-time integral of the Lagrangian, the Lagrangian has dimensions of
[tex][\hbar] \mathrm{m}^{-3} \mathrm{s}^{-1}[/tex], which is (since [tex][\hbar] = [energy] \mathrm[/tex]) equal to [tex][energy] \mathrm{m}^{-3}[/tex].

Also, you forgot that there could be a factor containing c and [tex]\hbar[/tex] multiplying the kinetic term. So you should reason as follows:

- M must have the same units as [tex]\phi[/tex], since otherwise the dimension of the action wouldn't be independent of [tex]\alpha[/tex]
- The dimensions of the potential term are therefore dimensions of some unknown function of c and [tex]\hbar[/tex], times the unit of [tex]\phi^4[/tex], so
[V] = (m/s)^a (kg m²/s)^b [φ]⁴ = kg/m/s² (since that's the dimension of the Lagrangian)
- The dimensions of the kinetic term are analogously
[T] = (m/s)^c (kg m²/s)^d (1/m [φ])² = kg/m/s²

Therefore, from the kinetic term we get [φ]² = kg m/s² (s/m)^c (s/kg/m²)^d, and inserting this into the potential term we have
(m/s)^a (kg m²/s)^b kg m³/s² (s/m)^(2c) (s/kg/m²)^(2d) = 1
For the kilograms we get kg^b kg (1/kg)^(2d) = 1, so b+1-2d=0.
For the seconds we get (1/s)^a (1/s)^b 1/s² s^(2c) s^(2d) = 1, so -a-b-2+2c+2d=0.
For the meters we get m^a (m²)^b m³ (1/m)^2c (1/m²)^(2d) = 1, so a+2b-2c-4d=0.
Now you need to solve those three equations. Combining the second and third, I get

b-2d=-1
b-2d=2

This is clearly inconsistent, so unless I made an error in my calculation (which may be), you quintessence potential is either nonsense, or you have to put in an extra factor of [tex]c^\alpha[/tex] or [tex]c^{2\alpha}[/tex] or [tex]\hbar^\alpha[/tex] or the like in your potential to account for the [tex]\alpha[/tex] dependence. Then the dimension of V times this factor should be independent of [tex]\alpha[/tex]. I think you can do the calculation from there on yourself, you may need to try a bit.
 
  • #7
Dear friend,

Thanks for your help.
I agree that V's dimension should be M^4. you're completely right about it.
But take a look at my note .
I don't think V's dimention is exactly L's (the energy).
 

Attachments

  • 1111111 001.jpg
    1111111 001.jpg
    13.6 KB · Views: 394
  • #8
Sorry for the confusion! When I say Lagrangian, I mean Lagrangian density, that's standard parlor in the theoretical physics community.

So in your notation
[tex]S = \int L \mathrm{d}t = \int [ (\partial^\mu \phi) (\partial_\mu \phi) - V ] \sqrt{-g} \mathrm{d}^4 x[/tex].
When I say Lagrangian I then mean only the part inside square brackets, [tex] [ (\partial^\mu \phi) (\partial_\mu \phi) - V ] [/tex], and this doesn't have dimensions of energy. But of course, the space integral of this, what you say - rightly! - is the Lagrangian, has dimensions of energy.
 

Related to What is the Potential of Quintessence Without Astronomical Units?

1. What is Quintessence and why is its freezing potential important in science?

Quintessence is a hypothetical form of dark energy that is believed to be responsible for the accelerated expansion of the universe. Its freezing potential is important in science because it could potentially explain the origins of the universe and help us better understand the nature of dark energy.

2. How is the freezing potential of Quintessence measured?

The freezing potential of Quintessence is typically measured through observational data from astronomical surveys and experiments. Scientists also use mathematical models and simulations to study its properties and behavior.

3. Can Quintessence be frozen at a specific temperature?

No, Quintessence cannot be frozen at a specific temperature like water. It is a form of energy that is spread out throughout the universe and is not affected by temperature in the same way as matter.

4. What are the implications of Quintessence having a freezing potential?

The implications of Quintessence having a freezing potential are still being studied and debated. Some scientists believe that it could lead to a "Big Rip" scenario, where the universe expands at an accelerating rate and eventually tears apart. Others believe it could have a stabilizing effect on the universe's expansion.

5. How does the freezing potential of Quintessence compare to that of other forms of dark energy?

The freezing potential of Quintessence is believed to be much weaker than other forms of dark energy, such as the cosmological constant. This means that Quintessence would have a slower impact on the expansion of the universe and may not be the dominant form of dark energy. However, more research is needed to fully understand the properties and potential of Quintessence.

Back
Top