
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
>
> > > In particular, if the contribution from velocity is
> > > zero, the contribution from space-time curvature obviously dominates
> > > at any scale. This is what happens in the example of hovering
> > > observers in Schwarzschild space-time. And this is also what happens
> > > for an Omega=1 FRW model. The proof of the latter assertion is
> > > simple: Write down the metric for the Omega=1 FRW model
> > >
> > > ds^2 = -c^2dt^2 + a^2(t)[dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2] (1)
> > >
> > > (with the correct form for a(t) inserted). The tangent space-time
> > > of some event with coordinates (t_1, x_1,y_1,z_1) has the flat
> > > metric
> > >
> > > ds^2 = -c^2dt^2 + a^2(t_1)[dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2] . (2)
> > >
> > > The comoving observers move orthogonally to the t=constant
> > > hypersurfaces, and with a trivial rescaling of the spatial
> > > coordinates in eq. (2) we see that this is equivalent to world
> > > lines x(t)= const., y(t)=const., z(t)=const. in Minkowski
> > > space-time equipped with Cartesian space coordinates.
>
This discussion seems to have come to an end without any
agreement of how to properly interpret small redshifts in an
Omega = 1 FRW model. Thus, to round off and to back up
my former arguments, I will post the counterpart to the
above calculation for an Omega < 1 model.
Start with the line element d{\sigma}^2 for hyperbolic
3-space with unit "radius". Using a standard "angular"
radial coordinate {\chi}, we then have
d{\sigma}^2 = d{\chi}^2 + sinh^2{\chi} [d{\theta}^2 + sin^2{\theta}
d{\phi}^2]. (1)
Now the metric for an Omega < 1 model takes the form
ds^2 = -c^2dt^2 + a^2(t) d{\sigma}^2 . (2)
We don't need to specify a(t), but note that a(t) is increasing
monotonously and that {\dot a}(t) < c for t > 0. Furthermore,
at epoch t_1 we can define another quantity t_2 by
a(t_1) = {\dot a}(t_1)(t_1 + t_2). (3)
Now I claim that the metric of the tangent space-time at some event at
epoch t_1 may be written in the form
ds^2_m = -{\dot a}^2(t_1)dt^2 + {\dot a}^2(t_1)(t + t_2)^2 d{\sigma}^2. (4)
Proof: Make a change of time coordinate by defining
t' {\equiv} c^{-1}{\dot a}(t_1) [t + t_2]. (5)
Inserting (5) into (4) we may then easily show that (4) takes the form
ds^2_m = -c^2dt'^2 + c^2 t'^2 d{\sigma}^2 , (6)
which is the metric of the flat Milne model, as asserted.
The spatial curvature scalar P(t_1) in space-time matches its counterpart
P_m(t_1) in the tangent space-time at epoch t_1:
P_m(t_1) = -6(ct'_1)^{-2} =-6a^{-2}(t_1) = P(t_1). (7)
Similarly the Hubble parameters H(t_1) and H_m(t_1) match at
epoch t_1 (left as an exercise for the reader).
Now define new coordinates r, {\bar t} by
r {\equiv} ct'sinh{\chi}, {\bar t} {\equiv} t'cosh{\chi}, (8)
expressed in which (6) takes its standard form
ds^2_m = -c^2d{\bar t}^2 + dr^2 + r^2 [d{\theta}^2 + sin^2{\theta}
d{\phi}^2]. (9)
For purely radial motion equations (5) and (8) yield
r(t) = {\dot a}(t_1) (t + t_2) sinh{\chi}(t), (10)
and since {\chi}(t) = {\chi}(t_1)= const. along the world lines of the comoving
observers, we see that there is an element of expansion present
in the tangent space-time. Thus the comoving observers move outwards
with velocity
V_m = {\dot r}(t) = {\dot a}(t_1) sinh{\chi} (t_1) = H(t_1) r(t_1), (11)
so at least in a neighbourhood of the origin it is meaningful to interpret
V as coming from motion in flat space-time.
Now what happens when Omega --> 1? This limit is found by letting
t_1 --> {\infty}. To have a neighbourhood of constant size r(t_1) we see from
(10) that we must let {\chi} --> 0 when t _1 --> {\infty}. But from (11) we
then see that V_m --> 0 in the neighbourhood, indicating that size of the
region
where V_m dominates over the contribution to V from curvature, shrinks
to zero in the limit Omega --> 1.
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |