Difference between revisions of "Problems of the Hot Universe (the Big Bang Model)"

From Universe in Problems
Jump to: navigation, search
(Problem 11)
(Problem 17)
 
(20 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 15: Line 15:
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
=== Problem 1 ===
 
=== Problem 1 ===
Determine the size of the Universe at Planck temperature (the problem of the size of the Universe).
+
Determine the size of the Universe at the Planck temperature (the problem of the size of the Universe).
 
<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
     <p style="text-align: left;">At adiabatic expansion $aT \approx const$ and thus $a_{Pl} T_{Pl}  \approx a_0 T_0 $. Then it follows that at Planck temperature $T_{Pl} \sim 10^{32} K$ the region which the presently observed Universe ($ a_0  \sim 10^{28} \mbox{\it cm}$, $T_0  \sim 1K $) originated from had the size of order of $10^{ - 4} \mbox{\it cm}$, which is $29$ orders of magnitude greater than the Planck length. What is the reason of such discrepancy?
+
     <p style="text-align: left;">At adiabatic expansion $aT \approx const$ and thus $a_{Pl} T_{Pl}  \approx a_0 T_0 $. Then it follows that at Planck temperature $T_{Pl} \sim 10^{32} K$ the region which the observable Universe ($ a_0  \sim 10^{28} \mbox{cm}$, $T_0  \sim 1K $) originated from had the size of order of $10^{ - 4} \mbox{cm}$, which is $29$ orders of magnitude greater than the Planck length. What is the reason of such discrepancy?
 
</p>
 
</p>
 
   </div>
 
   </div>
Line 30: Line 30:
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_5"></div>
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_5"></div>
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 +
 
=== Problem 2 ===
 
=== Problem 2 ===
Determine the number of causally disconnected regions at the redshift $z$, represented in our causal volume today.
+
Determine the number of causally disconnected regions at redshift $z$, represented in our causal volume today.
 
<!--<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
<!--<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
Line 45: Line 46:
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_6"></div>
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_6"></div>
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 +
 
=== Problem 3 ===
 
=== Problem 3 ===
 
What is the expected angular scale of CMB isotropy (the horizon problem)?
 
What is the expected angular scale of CMB isotropy (the horizon problem)?
Line 67: Line 69:
 
     <p style="text-align: left;">The maximum size of the region where the causality relations can be established is the particle horizon:
 
     <p style="text-align: left;">The maximum size of the region where the causality relations can be established is the particle horizon:
 
$$
 
$$
L_p (t) = a(t)\int_0^t {\frac{{dt'}}{{a(t')}}}.
+
L_p (t) = a(t)\int_0^t {\frac{dt'}{a(t')}}.
 
$$
 
$$
At the radiation-dominated era $a(t) \sim t^{1/2} $ and $L_p (t) = 2t$. For $t \to 0$ the particle horizon $L_p (t)$ shrinks faster than the scale factor $a(t)$. Therefore at any moment of time in the past one can find regions of size $L_p,$ which are causally disconnected. It contradicts to well-established (with accuracy $10^{ - 5} $) isotropy of CMB. This contradiction is the essence of the horizon problem.</p>
+
At the radiation-dominated era $a(t) \sim t^{1/2} $ and $L_p (t) = 2t$. When $t \to 0$ the particle horizon $L_p (t)$ shrinks faster than the scale factor $a(t)$. Therefore for any two comoving points there is a time in the past when they are out of casual contact yet. It contradicts the well-established (with accuracy $10^{ - 5} $) isotropy of CMB. This discrepancy is the essence of the horizon problem.</p>
 
   </div>
 
   </div>
 
</div></div>
 
</div></div>
 
 
  
 
== The Flatness Problem ==
 
== The Flatness Problem ==
Line 86: Line 86:
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
     <p style="text-align: left;">It is well known that the total energy density in the Universe is very close to the critical one: $\Omega  \approx 1$. This condition is satisfied at least with $2\%$ accuracy. The problem of flatness of the Universe lies in the fact that the density of early Universe had to be incredibly close to the critical one in order to provide such correspondence at present. To convince oneself in this fact use the first Friedman equation in the form
+
     <p style="text-align: left;">It is well known that the total energy density in the Universe is very close to the critical one: $\Omega  \approx 1$. This condition is satisfied with at least $2\%$ accuracy. The problem of flatness of the Universe lies in the fact that the density of early Universe had to be incredibly close to the critical one in order to provide such correspondence at present. To convince oneself in this fact use the first Friedman equation in the form
 
$$
 
$$
\Omega  - 1 = \frac{k}{{\dot a^2 }}.
+
\Omega  - 1 = \frac{k}{\dot a^2 }.
 
$$
 
$$
  
Line 96: Line 96:
 
\Omega  - 1 \sim ka \sim kt^{2/3}.
 
\Omega  - 1 \sim ka \sim kt^{2/3}.
 
\end{equation}
 
\end{equation}
Under assumption that the matter-domination era endured from the time of equality between densities of matter and radiation $t_{eq}  \approx 50\,000$ years to present time $t_0  \approx 1.4 \times 10^{10}$ years, then it follows from (\ref{prob_of_mod_2_sol_1}) that
+
Under assumption that the matter-domination era lasted from the time of equality between densities of matter and radiation $t_{eq}  \approx 50\,000$ years to present time $t_0  \approx 1.4 \times 10^{10}$ years, it follows from (\ref{prob_of_mod_2_sol_1}) that
 
\begin{equation}
 
\begin{equation}
 
\label{prob_of_mod_2_sol_2}
 
\label{prob_of_mod_2_sol_2}
\frac{{\Omega \left( {t_{eq} } \right) - 1}}{{\Omega \left( {t_0 } \right) - 1}} = \frac{{a\left( {t_{eq} } \right)}}{{a\left( {t_0 } \right)}} = \left( {\frac{{t_{eq} }}{{t_0 }}} \right)^{2/3}  = \left( {\frac{{50\,000}}{{1.4 \times 10^{10} }}} \right)^{2/3}  \approx 2 \times 10^{ - 4}.
+
\frac{\Omega \left( {t_{eq} } \right) - 1}{\Omega \left( {t_0 } \right) - 1} = \frac{a\left( {t_{eq} } \right)}{a\left( {t_0 } \right)} = \left( {\frac{t_{eq} }{t_0 }} \right)^{2/3}  = \left( {\frac{50\,000}{1.4 \times 10^{10}}} \right)^{2/3}  \approx 2 \times 10^{ - 4}.
 
\end{equation}
 
\end{equation}
 
If at present $\Omega \left( {t_0 } \right) - 1$ is less than $\Delta$, then it follows from (\ref{prob_of_mod_2_sol_2}) that at $t = t_{eq} $ after the Big Bang $\Omega  - 1$ was less than $2\Delta  \times 10^{ - 4}$.
 
If at present $\Omega \left( {t_0 } \right) - 1$ is less than $\Delta$, then it follows from (\ref{prob_of_mod_2_sol_2}) that at $t = t_{eq} $ after the Big Bang $\Omega  - 1$ was less than $2\Delta  \times 10^{ - 4}$.
Line 110: Line 110:
 
$$
 
$$
 
\begin{array}{l}
 
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{{\Omega \left( {t_{Pl} } \right) - 1}}{{\Omega \left( {t_0 } \right) - 1}} = \left( {\frac{{a\left( {t_{Pl} } \right)}}{{a\left( {t_{eq} } \right)}}} \right)^2 \frac{{a\left( {t_{eq} } \right)}}{{a\left( {t_0 } \right)}} = \frac{{t_{Pl} }}{{t_{eq} }}\left( {\frac{{t_{mr} }}{{t_0 }}} \right)^{2/3}  \approx 10^{ -60}, \\
+
\displaystyle\frac{\Omega \left( {t_{Pl} } \right) - 1}{\Omega \left( {t_0 } \right) - 1} = \left( {\frac{a\left( {t_{Pl} } \right)}{a\left( {t_{eq} } \right)}} \right)^2 \frac{a\left( {t_{eq} } \right)}{a\left( {t_0 } \right)}=\frac{t_{Pl}}{t_{eq}} \left( {\frac{t_{mr}}{t_0 }} \right)^{2/3}  \approx 10^{ -60}, \\
 
\\
 
\\
 
\displaystyle\Omega \left( {t_{Pl} } \right) - 1 \approx \Delta  \times 10^{ - 60}. \\
 
\displaystyle\Omega \left( {t_{Pl} } \right) - 1 \approx \Delta  \times 10^{ - 60}. \\
 
\end{array}
 
\end{array}
 
$$
 
$$
It means that if the present value of relative density $\Omega $ is close to unity with accuracy of few per cent, than at Planck time it could not differ from unity more than on $10^{ - 60} $.
+
It means that if the present value of relative density $\Omega $ is close to unity with accuracy of a few percent, than at Planck time it could not differ from unity more than by $10^{ - 60} $.
  
It should be stressed that the flatness problem does not imply a contradiction between theory and observations, it rather concerns about the reason why Nature chose such a ''strange'' initial condition.</p>
+
It should be stressed that the flatness problem does not imply a contradiction between theory and observations, it rather concerns the reason why Nature chose such a ''strange'' initial condition.</p>
 
   </div>
 
   </div>
 
</div></div>
 
</div></div>
Line 126: Line 126:
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_3"></div>
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_3"></div>
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 +
 
=== Problem 6 ===
 
=== Problem 6 ===
 
Show that both in the radiation--dominated and matter--dominated epochs the combination $a^2 H^2$ is a decreasing function of time. Relate this result to the problem of flatness of the Universe.
 
Show that both in the radiation--dominated and matter--dominated epochs the combination $a^2 H^2$ is a decreasing function of time. Relate this result to the problem of flatness of the Universe.
Line 150: Line 151:
 
   </div>
 
   </div>
 
</div>--></div>
 
</div>--></div>
 +
  
  
Line 165: Line 167:
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
     <p style="text-align: left;">Entropy density in present Universe by order of magnitude equals to photon number density $\left( n_{\gamma }\sim 400\ \mbox{ \it cm}^{-3} \right)$ and therefore
+
     <p style="text-align: left;">Entropy density in the present Universe by order of magnitude equals to photon number density $\left( n_{\gamma }\sim 400\ \mbox{ cm}^{-3} \right)$ and therefore is
 
\[S\sim n_{\gamma }R_{0}^{3}\sim 10^{88}.\]
 
\[S\sim n_{\gamma }R_{0}^{3}\sim 10^{88}.\]
Let us now calculate the entropy in early Universe. As specific entropy is $s\sim n_{\gamma }\sim T^3,$ then inside the horizon
+
Let us now calculate the entropy of the early Universe. As specific entropy is $s\sim n_{\gamma }\sim T^3,$ then inside the horizon
 
\[S\sim R_{H}^{3}{{T}^{3}}\sim {{H}^{-3}}{{T}^{3}}.\]
 
\[S\sim R_{H}^{3}{{T}^{3}}\sim {{H}^{-3}}{{T}^{3}}.\]
 
As was shown above, in the early Universe $H\sim T^2/M_{Pl}$  and therefore
 
As was shown above, in the early Universe $H\sim T^2/M_{Pl}$  and therefore
Line 173: Line 175:
 
Thus at Planck epoch inside the horizon one has $T\sim {{M}_{Pl}}$ and
 
Thus at Planck epoch inside the horizon one has $T\sim {{M}_{Pl}}$ and
 
\[S\sim 1.\]
 
\[S\sim 1.\]
It means that early Universe consisted of ${{10}^{88}}$ independent, causally disconnected regions! The Big Bang model lacks a mechanism which could transform such a Universe into the presently observed one (with isotropy on level of $10^{-5}$).</p>
+
It means that early Universe consisted of ${{10}^{88}}$ independent, causally disconnected regions! The Big Bang model lacks a mechanism which could transform such a Universe into the presently observed one (with isotropy on the level of $10^{-5}$).</p>
 
   </div>
 
   </div>
 
</div></div>
 
</div></div>
Line 183: Line 185:
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_18"></div>
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_18"></div>
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 +
 
=== Problem 9 ===
 
=== Problem 9 ===
 
Show that the standard model of Big Bang must include the huge dimensionless parameter--the initial entropy of the Universe--as an initial condition.
 
Show that the standard model of Big Bang must include the huge dimensionless parameter--the initial entropy of the Universe--as an initial condition.
Line 188: Line 191:
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
     <p style="text-align: left;">It was shown in Chapter 6 that current value of entropy of the Universe equals to $S \sim 10^{88} $. If the total entropy is conserved during the expansion of the Universe (recall that entropy conservation is embedded into the Friedman equations: $\dot \rho  + 3H\left( {\rho  + p} \right)= 0$ $ \to \;dE + pdV = 0$), then the Universe had to have such huge value of entropy already at the very moment of birth.</p>
+
     <p style="text-align: left;">It was shown in Problem 8 that current value of the entropy of the observable Universe equals to $S \sim 10^{88} $. If the total entropy is conserved during the expansion of the Universe (recall that entropy conservation is embedded into the Friedman equations: $\dot \rho  + 3H\left( {\rho  + p} \right)= 0$ $ \to \;dE + pdV = 0$), then the Universe had to have such huge value of entropy already at the very moment of birth.</p>
 
   </div>
 
   </div>
 
</div></div>
 
</div></div>
 
 
  
 
==The Primary Inhomogeneities Problem==
 
==The Primary Inhomogeneities Problem==
Line 201: Line 202:
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
=== Problem 10 ===
 
=== Problem 10 ===
Show that any mechanism of generation of the primary inhomogeneities generation in the Big Bang model violates the causality principle.
+
Show that any mechanism of generation of the primary inhomogeneities in the Big Bang model violates the causality principle.
 
<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
 
     <p style="text-align: left;">The wavelength $\lambda _p $ corresponding to a given perturbation grows as any other length scale according to the law $\lambda _p  \propto a$. The Hubble radius is
 
     <p style="text-align: left;">The wavelength $\lambda _p $ corresponding to a given perturbation grows as any other length scale according to the law $\lambda _p  \propto a$. The Hubble radius is
$$R_H  = H^{ - 1}  = \left( {\frac{{\dot a}}
+
$$R_H  = H^{ - 1}  = \left( {\frac{\dot a}{a}} \right)^{ - 1}.
{a}} \right)^{ - 1}.
+
 
$$
 
$$
 
If $a(t) \propto t^q $, then  $R_H  \propto a^{1/q} $. Therefore
 
If $a(t) \propto t^q $, then  $R_H  \propto a^{1/q} $. Therefore
 
$$
 
$$
\left( {\frac{{\lambda _p }}
+
\left( {\frac{\lambda _p }{R_H }} \right) \propto a^{(q-1)/ q}.
{{R_H }}} \right) \propto a^{(q-1)/ q}.
+
 
$$
 
$$
 
For radiation $(q = 1/2)$, as well as for matter $(q = 2/3)$, one has $q < 1$, thus we come to the conclusion that the primary fluctuations had to be correlated on scales considerably larger than the Hubble radius. Therefore any mechanism of primary inhomogeneities generation in the Big Bang model comes to contradiction with the causality principle. Indeed, if the inhomogeneities generation would occur according to the causal mechanism then the corresponding length scales must evidently lie within the Hubble sphere, i.e. $\lambda _p  < R_H $. However for example for $q = 1/2$ (as for radiation) one obtains
 
For radiation $(q = 1/2)$, as well as for matter $(q = 2/3)$, one has $q < 1$, thus we come to the conclusion that the primary fluctuations had to be correlated on scales considerably larger than the Hubble radius. Therefore any mechanism of primary inhomogeneities generation in the Big Bang model comes to contradiction with the causality principle. Indeed, if the inhomogeneities generation would occur according to the causal mechanism then the corresponding length scales must evidently lie within the Hubble sphere, i.e. $\lambda _p  < R_H $. However for example for $q = 1/2$ (as for radiation) one obtains
 
$$
 
$$
{\frac{{\lambda _p }}
+
{\frac{\lambda _p }{R_H }} \propto a^{ - 1}
{{R_H }}} \propto a^{ - 1}
+
 
$$
 
$$
and the above cited condition is deliberately violated for small $a$.</p>
+
and thшы condition is obviously violated for small $a$.</p>
 
   </div>
 
   </div>
 
</div></div>
 
</div></div>
Line 229: Line 227:
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_X+1"></div>
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_X+1"></div>
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 +
 
=== Problem 11 ===
 
=== Problem 11 ===
 
How should the early Universe evolve in order to make the characteristic size $\lambda_p$ of primary perturbations decrease faster than the Hubble radius $l_H$, if one moves backward in time?
 
How should the early Universe evolve in order to make the characteristic size $\lambda_p$ of primary perturbations decrease faster than the Hubble radius $l_H$, if one moves backward in time?
Line 241: Line 240:
 
$\lambda _p  \propto a$  and  $$R_H  = H^{ - 1}  = \frac{a}{\dot a},$$
 
$\lambda _p  \propto a$  and  $$R_H  = H^{ - 1}  = \frac{a}{\dot a},$$
 
one can see that this condition is equivalent to the requirement
 
one can see that this condition is equivalent to the requirement
$$-\ddot{a}< 0,$$ i.e. expansion of early Universe had to be accelerated. In other words the early Universe had to pass the accelerated (inflationary) expansion phase if generation of primary perturbations (fluctuations) corresponds to any physical mechanism.</p>
+
$$-\ddot{a}< 0,$$ i.e. expansion of early Universe had to be accelerated. In other words the early Universe had to pass the accelerated (inflationary) expansion phase for the generation of primary perturbations (fluctuations) to correspond to any physical mechanism.</p>
 
   </div>
 
   </div>
 
</div></div>
 
</div></div>
Line 253: Line 252:
  
 
=== Problem 12 ===
 
=== Problem 12 ===
Suppose that in some initial moment the homogeneity scale in our Universe was greater than the causality scale. Show that in the gravitation--dominated Universe this scale relation will be preserved in all future times.
+
Suppose at some initial moment the homogeneity scale in our Universe was greater than the causality scale. Show that in the gravitation--dominated Universe this scale relation is preserved at future.
 
<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
Line 281: Line 280:
  
 
=== Problem 13 ===
 
=== Problem 13 ===
If the presently observed CMB was strictly homogeneous, then in what number of causally independent regions would constant temperature be maintained at Planck time?
+
If the presently observed CMB was strictly homogeneous, then in what number of causally disconnected regions would constant temperature be maintained at Planck time?
 
<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
Line 297: Line 296:
 
\frac{l_i }{l_{caus} } \sim \frac{10^{17}} {10^{-43}} 10^{ - 32}  \sim 10^{28}.
 
\frac{l_i }{l_{caus} } \sim \frac{10^{17}} {10^{-43}} 10^{ - 32}  \sim 10^{28}.
 
$$
 
$$
Therefore in order to reproduce the presently observed homogeneity of CMB the condition $\delta \rho /\rho  \sim 10^{ - 5} $ must be satisfied in $10^{84}$ causally disconnected regions at Planck time.</p>
+
Therefore in order to reproduce the presently observed homogeneity of CMB the condition $\delta \rho /\rho  \sim 10^{ - 5} $ must be satisfied in $10^{84}$ causally disconnected regions at the Planck time.</p>
 
   </div>
 
   </div>
 
</div></div>
 
</div></div>
Line 309: Line 308:
  
 
=== Problem 14 ===
 
=== Problem 14 ===
Suppose an initial homogeneous matter distribution in the Universe is given. The initial velocities must obey Hubble law (otherwise the initially homogeneous matter distribution will be quickly destroyed). What should the accuracy of the initial velocity field homogeneity be in order to preserve the homogeneous matter distribution until present time?
+
Suppose there be some initial homogeneous matter distribution of the Universe. The initial velocities must obey Hubble law (otherwise the initially homogeneous matter distribution will be quickly destroyed). What should the accuracy of the initial velocity field homogeneity be in order to preserve the homogeneous matter distribution until the present?
 
<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
     <p style="text-align: left;">Consider spherically symmetric distribution of matter. As total energy is conserved then
+
     <p style="text-align: left;">Consider spherically symmetric distribution of matter. As total energy is conserved,
 
$$
 
$$
 
\begin{array}{l}
 
\begin{array}{l}
Line 323: Line 322:
 
As $E_0^K  \sim \left| {E_0^P } \right|$ and
 
As $E_0^K  \sim \left| {E_0^P } \right|$ and
 
$$
 
$$
\left( {\frac{\dot a_0 }{\dot a_i }} \right)^2  \le 10^{ - 28}
+
\left( {\frac{\dot a_0 }{\dot a_i }} \right)^2  \le 10^{ - 28},
 
$$
 
$$
(see the previous problem), then
+
(see the previous problem)
 
$$
 
$$
 
\frac{E^{tot} }{E_i^K } \le 10^{ - 56}.
 
\frac{E^{tot} }{E_i^K } \le 10^{ - 56}.
 
$$
 
$$
The obtained inequality means that velocities of initial Hubble flow should be tuned so that the huge negative potential energy of matter could compensate the huge positive kinetic energy. A tiny deviation of order $10^{ - 54} \% $ in initial velocity distribution would dramatically change history of the Universe.</p>
+
The obtained inequality means that velocities of initial Hubble flow should be tuned so that the huge negative potential energy of matter could compensate the huge positive kinetic energy. A tiny deviation of the order of $10^{ - 54} \% $ in the initial velocity distribution would dramatically change the history of the Universe.</p>
 
   </div>
 
   </div>
 
</div></div>
 
</div></div>
Line 341: Line 340:
  
 
=== Problem 15 ===
 
=== Problem 15 ===
Estimate the present density of relict monopoles in the framework of the model of the Hot Universe.
+
Estimate the present density of relic monopoles in the framework of the model of the Hot Universe.
 
<!--<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
<!--<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
Line 355: Line 354:
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_19"></div>
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_19"></div>
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 +
 
=== Problem 16 ===
 
=== Problem 16 ===
The cyclic model of the Universe is interesting because it avoids the intrinsic problem of the Big Bang model--the ''initial singularity'' problem. However, as it often happens, avoiding old problems, the model produces new ones. Try to determine the main problems of the cyclic model of the Universe.
+
The cyclic model of the Universe is interesting because it avoids the intrinsic problem of the Big Bang model--the ''initial singularity'' problem. However, as it often happens, by avoiding old problems, the model produces new ones. Try to determine the main problems of the cyclic model of the Universe.
 
<!--<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
<!--<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
Line 370: Line 370:
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_20"></div>
 
<div id="prob_of_mod_20"></div>
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 +
 
=== Problem 17 ===
 
=== Problem 17 ===
In the Big Bang model the Universe is homogeneous and isotropic. In this model the momentum of a particle decreases as $p(t) \propto a(t)^{ - 1} $ as the Universe expands. At first sight it seems that due to homogeneity of the Universe the translational invariance must ensure the conservation of the momentum. Explain this seeming contradiction.
+
In the Big Bang model the Universe is homogeneous and isotropic. In this model the momentum of a particle decreases as $p(t) \propto a(t)^{ - 1} $ as the Universe expands. At first sight it seems that due to homogeneity of the Universe the translational invariance must ensure conservation of the momentum. Explain this seeming contradiction.
 
<!--<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
<!--<div class="NavFrame collapsed">
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>

Latest revision as of 11:34, 8 July 2013


Although inflation is remarkably successful as a phenomenological model for
the dynamics of the very early universe, a detailed understanding of the physical
origin of the inflationary expansion has remained elusive.
D. Baumann, L. McAllister.


The Horizon Problem

Problem 1

Determine the size of the Universe at the Planck temperature (the problem of the size of the Universe).



Problem 2

Determine the number of causally disconnected regions at redshift $z$, represented in our causal volume today.



Problem 3

What is the expected angular scale of CMB isotropy (the horizon problem)?



Problem 4

Show that in the radiation-dominated Universe there are causally disconnected regions at any moment in the past.

The Flatness Problem

Problem 5

If at present time the deviation of density from the critical one is $\Delta$, then what was the deviation at $t\sim t_{Pl}$ (the problem of the flatness of the Universe)?



Problem 6

Show that both in the radiation--dominated and matter--dominated epochs the combination $a^2 H^2$ is a decreasing function of time. Relate this result to the problem of flatness of the Universe.




Problem 7

Show that both in the radiation--dominated and matter--dominated cases $x=0$ is an unstable fixed point for the quantity \[x\equiv\frac{\Omega-1}{\Omega}.\]



The Entropy Problem

Problem 8

Formulate the horizon problem in terms of the entropy of the Universe.



Problem 9

Show that the standard model of Big Bang must include the huge dimensionless parameter--the initial entropy of the Universe--as an initial condition.

The Primary Inhomogeneities Problem

Problem 10

Show that any mechanism of generation of the primary inhomogeneities in the Big Bang model violates the causality principle.



Problem 11

How should the early Universe evolve in order to make the characteristic size $\lambda_p$ of primary perturbations decrease faster than the Hubble radius $l_H$, if one moves backward in time?



Problem 12

Suppose at some initial moment the homogeneity scale in our Universe was greater than the causality scale. Show that in the gravitation--dominated Universe this scale relation is preserved at future.



Problem 13

If the presently observed CMB was strictly homogeneous, then in what number of causally disconnected regions would constant temperature be maintained at Planck time?



Problem 14

Suppose there be some initial homogeneous matter distribution of the Universe. The initial velocities must obey Hubble law (otherwise the initially homogeneous matter distribution will be quickly destroyed). What should the accuracy of the initial velocity field homogeneity be in order to preserve the homogeneous matter distribution until the present?



Problem 15

Estimate the present density of relic monopoles in the framework of the model of the Hot Universe.



Problem 16

The cyclic model of the Universe is interesting because it avoids the intrinsic problem of the Big Bang model--the initial singularity problem. However, as it often happens, by avoiding old problems, the model produces new ones. Try to determine the main problems of the cyclic model of the Universe.



Problem 17

In the Big Bang model the Universe is homogeneous and isotropic. In this model the momentum of a particle decreases as $p(t) \propto a(t)^{ - 1} $ as the Universe expands. At first sight it seems that due to homogeneity of the Universe the translational invariance must ensure conservation of the momentum. Explain this seeming contradiction.