**Evolution of the Universe: the scale factor**

The Universe expands, and its expansion rate is given by the Hubble parameter (not constant in general!)

**Remark (I):** The Hubble “parameter” is “constant” at the present value (or a given time/cosmological age), i.e., .

**Remark (II):** The Hubble time defines a Hubble length about , and it defines the time scale of the Universe and its expasion “rate”.

The critical density of matter is a vital quantity as well:

We can also define the density parameters

This quantity represents the amount of substance for certain particle species. The total composition of the Universe is the total density, or equivalently, the sum over all particle species of the density parameters, that is:

There is a nice correspondence between the sign of the curvature and that of . Using the Friedmann’s equation

then we have

Thus, we observe that

1st. if and only if (iff) , i.e., iff the Universe is spatially closed (spherical/elliptical geometry).

2nd. if and only if (iff) , i.e., iff the Universe is spatially “flat” (euclidean geometry).

3rd. if and only if (iff) , i.e., iff the Universe is spatially “open” (hyperbolic geometry).

In the early Universe, the curvature term is negligible (as far as we know). The reason is as follows:

as goes to zero. MD means matter dominated Universe, and RD means radiation dominated Universe. Then, the Friedmann’s equation at the early time is given by

Furthermore, the evolution of the curvature term

is given by

and thus

The spatial curvature will be given by

and the curvature radius will be

We have arrived at the interesting result that in the early Universe, it was nearly “critical”. The Universe close to the critical density is very flat!

By the other hand, supposing that , we can integrate the Friedmann’s equation easily:

Then, we obtain

We can make an analogy of this equation to certain simple equation from “newtonian Mechanics”:

Therefore, if we identify terms, we get that the density parameters work as “potential”, with

and the total energy is equal to zero (a “machian” behaviour indeed!). In addition to this equation, we also get

The age of the Universe can be easily calculated (symbolically and algebraically):

with

This equation can be evaluated for some general and special cases. If we write for a single component, then

if

Moreover, 3 common cases arise:

1)** Matter dominated Universe (MD)**:

2) **Radiation dominated Universe (RD)**:

3) **Vacuum dominated Universe (VD)**: ( for the cosmological constant, vacuum energy or dark energy).

**THE MATTER CONTENT OF THE UNIVERSE**

We can find out how much energy is contributed by the different compoents of the Universe, i.e., by the different density parameters.

**Case 1. Photons.**

The CMB temperature gives us “photons” with

The associated energy density is given by the Planck law of the blackbody, that is

and

or equivalently

**Case 2. Baryons.**

There are four established ways of measuring the baryon density:

i) Baryons in galaxies:

ii) Baryons through the spectra fo distant quasars:

iii) CMB anisotropies:

iv) Big Bag Nucleosynthesis:

Note that these results are “globally” compatible!

**Case 3. (Dark) Matter/Dust.**

The mass-to-light ratio from galactic rotation curves are “flat” after some cut-off is passed. It also works for clusters and other bigger structures. This M/L ratio provides a value about . Moreover, the galaxy power spectrum is sensitive to . It also gives . By the other hand, the cosmic velocity field of galaxies allows us to derive as well. Finally, the CMB anisotropies give us the puzzling values:

We are forced to accept that either our cosmological and gravitational theory is a bluff or it is flawed or the main component of “matter” is not of baryonic nature, it does not radiate electromagnetic radiation AND that the Standard Model of Particle Physics has no particle candidate (matter field) to fit into that non-baryonic dark matter. However, it could be partially formed by neutrinos, but we already know that it can NOT be fully formed by neutrinos (hot dark matter). What is dark matter? We don’t know. Some candidates from beyond standard model physics: axion, new (likely massive or sterile) neutrinos, supersymmetric particles (the lightest supersymmetric particle LSP is known to be stable: the gravitino, the zino, the neutralino,…), ELKO particles, continuous spin particles, unparticles, preons, new massive gauge bosons, or something even stranger than all this and we have not thought yet! Of course, you could modify gravity at large scales to erase the need of dark matter, but it seems it is not easy at all to guess a working Modified Gravitational theory or Modified Newtonian(Einsteinian) dynmanics that avoids the need for dark matter. MOND’s, MOG’s or similar ideas are an interesting idea, but it is not thought to be the “optimal” solution at current time. Maybe gravitons and quantum gravity could be in the air of the dark issues? We don’t know…

**Case 4. Neutrinos.**

They are NOT observed, but we understand them their physics, at least in the Standard Model and the electroweak sector. We also know they suffer “oscillations”/flavor oscillations (as kaons). The (cosmic) neutrino temperature can be determined and related to the CMB temperature. The idea is simple: the neutrino decoupling in the early Universe implied an electron-positron annihilation! And thus, the (density) entropy dump to the photons, but not to neutrinos. It causes a difference between the neutrino and photon temperature “today”. Please, note than we are talking about “relic” neutrinos and photons from the Big Bang! The (density) entropy before annihilation was:

After the annihilation, we get

Therefore, equating

and

and then

or equivalently

In fact, the neutrino energy density can be given in two different ways, depending if it is “massless” or “massive”. For massless neutrinos (or equivalently “relativistic” massless matter particles):

**I) Massless neutrinos:**

**2) Massive neutrinos**:

**Case 5. The dark energy/Cosmological constant/Vacuum energy.**

The budget of the Universe provides (from cosmological and astrophysical measurements) the shocking result

with

Then, there is some missin smooth, unclustered energy-matter “form”/”species”. It is the “dark energy”/vacuum energy/cosmological cosntant! It can be understood as a “special” pressure term in the Einstein’s equations, but one with NEGATIVE pressure! Evidence for this observation comes from luminosity-distance-redshift measurements from SNae, clusters, and the CMB spectrum! The cosmological constant/vacuum energy/dark energy dominates the Universe today, since, it seems, we live in a (positively!) accelerated Universe!!!!! What can dark energy be? It can not be a “normal” matter field. Like the Dark Matter field, we believe that (excepting perhaps the scalar Higgs field/s) the SM has no candidate to explain the Dark Energy. What field could dark matter be? Perhaps an scalar field or something totally new and “unknown” yet.

In short, we are INTO a DARKLY, darkly, UNIVERSE! Darkness is NOT coming, darkness has arrived and, if nothing changes, it will turn our local Universe even darker and darker!

See you in the next cosmological post!

Current average ratings.