CosmoCoffee

 FAQ   Search  SmartFeed   Memberlist    Register Profile   Log in Arxiv New Filter | Bookmarks & clubs | Arxiv ref/author:

 [1003.4531] Manifestly Covariant Gauge-invariant Cosmological Perturbation Theory
 Authors: P. G. Miedema, W. A. van Leeuwen Abstract: It is shown that a first-order cosmological perturbation theory for the open, flat and closed Friedmann-Lemaitre-Robertson-Walker universes admits one, and only one, gauge-invariant variable which describes the perturbation to the energy density and which becomes equal to the usual Newtonian energy density in the non-relativistic limit. The same holds true for the perturbation to the particle number density. Using these two new variables, a new manifestly gauge-invariant cosmological perturbation theory has been developed. Density perturbations evolve diabatically. Perturbations in the total energy density are gravitationally coupled to perturbations in the particle number density, irrespective of the nature of the particles. There is, in first-order, no back-reaction of perturbations to the global expansion of the universe. Small-scale perturbations in the radiation-dominated era oscillate with an increasing amplitude, whereas in older, less precise treatments, oscillating perturbations are found with a decreasing amplitude. This is a completely new and, obviously, important result, since it makes it possible to explain and understand the formation of massive stars after decoupling of matter and radiation. [PDF] [PS] [BibTex] [Bookmark]

Author Message
Anze Slosar

Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 205
Affiliation: Brookhaven National Laboratory

Savvas Nesseris

Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 68
Affiliation: UAM/IFT

 Posted: March 30 2010 Hi Anze, Actually, I am a bit confused myself as well. I only had a quick look at the paper, but my attention fell on eqs (56) and (57) that describe the evolution of perturbations of the energy density δ in the "new" case and the standard case respectively. There is clearly a huge difference in these two eqs and (if I understood it correctly - see Section I.B) the reason they give is that the pressure should depend both on the number n and the energy density ε, ie p = p(n,ε), as they claim the perturbations actually do not evolve adiabatically. They explain why they believe this is so in a previous paper 0805.0421, see text near eq. (193)/page 30. Their result is that only in the non-relativist limit do the perturbations evolve adiabatically. I might have missed or misunderstood something, but this is what I got after having a quick look. I can't say I am really convinced but I might have a closer look. Cheers, Savvas PS By the way, the previous paper 0805.0421, doesn't seem to be published anywhere yet. I'm not sure about what this means.
rishi khatri

Joined: 23 Dec 2009
Posts: 6
Affiliation: Tata Institute of Fundamental Research

 Posted: March 31 2010 My understanding is that adiabaticity is an initial condition. I guess from a cursory look, assuming the math is correct, what they are effectively doing is evolving a mixture of curvature and entropy perturbations ...
Pieter Miedema

Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 2

 Posted: April 01 2010 Hi Anze, Rishi and Savas, Thank you for your comments on my article. The fact that density perturbations do evolve diabatically follows from $p=p(n, \varepsilon)$, thermodynamics (23) and the background Einstein equations (5). The difference between (56) and (57) is that the general solution of the standard equation (57) contains the gauge function ψ. Consequently, the standard equation (57) has no physical meaning. The general solution of (56) is gauge-invariant, and $\delta_\varepsilon$ is the real, physical density contrast, as has been shown in Section IX on the non-relativistic limit. Note that in the large-scale limit, (56) yields the two well-known solutions proportional to t2 / 3 and t − 5 / 3: see references below (45). Regards, Pieter
Pieter Miedema

Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 2

 Posted: May 30 2010 Hi Anze, Rishi and Savvas, I have just uploaded a new version. It will appear on arXiv June, 1. I have added equations (26) and (27) for a better explanation why density perturbations in an expanding universe evolve diabatically. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Cheers, Pieter
 Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First
 All times are GMT + 5 Hours Page 1 of 1

 Jump to: Select a forum Arxiv paper discussion----------------arXiv papers Topic discussion----------------Early UniverseCosmological ModelCosmological Observations  Projects and Resources----------------Computers and softwareTeaching, Papers and PresentationsResearch projectsiCosmo Coming up----------------Job vacanciesConferences and meetings Management----------------CosmoCoffee
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum