1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 1

1 A mathematical description of the universe

The broad aim of cosmology is to build a mathematical model that describes the observed properties
of the universe. Furthermore, any model must change to accommodate the growing number of
observations performed upon the universe. The aim of this course is to describe the development
of a mathematical model of the universe: its contents and evolution. We begin by considering the
basic principles and observations that form the cornerstone of any cosmological model.

1.1 Observed properties of the universe

1. The night sky is dark. Is the universe therefore bounded in space or bounded in time?

2. General relativity describes accurately gravity on Solar System scales.

3. The local universe is expanding uniformly and isotropically according to Hubble’s law. We
assume that peculiar velocities can be described local gravitational effects.

4. The Hubble time, H−1, the ages of the oldest stars, and the radioactive dating of terrestrial
elements all approximately agree, i.e. of the order of a few billion years in each case.

5. The observed universe is isotropic on very large scales.

6. We observe a nearly isotropic background of microwave radiation with a blackbody spectrum

of temperature T = 2.73 K. This is the cosmic microwave background (CMB).

7. The observed abundance of H, He and Li (and their isotopes) agree with the predictions of
nucleosynthetic reactions occurring within the early universe.

8. The present day universe is structured (galaxies, clusters and superclusters) - note that this
point does not contradict point (5) above.

9. Dynamical, X-ray and lensing studies imply that most of the matter in the universe is dark.

10. The CMB displays temperature fluctuations of order (∆T/T )rms ~10−5 on scales of order
one degree.

11. Observations of supernovae type Ia (SNe Ia) and the CMB indicate that the universe is
spatially flat (see later) and is expanding at an accelerating rate (see much later). Note that
though many observational tests agree with SNe Ia + CMB results, the SNe Ia + CMB results
are the simplest and best understood.
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 2

1.2 Basic principles

1. The observed universe is isotropic.

2. The cosmological principle (an extension of the Copernican principle) assumes that we occupy
no special place in the universe.

3. The combination of observed isotropy with the cosmological principle implies that the universe
is homogeneous.

1.3 General relativity and the line element (basic version)

Measuring distance and time in the universe represents a fundamental cosmological challenge. With
the advent of Special Relativity (SR) in 1905 and General Relativity (GR) in 1915, time and space
no longer remained independent quantities. General relativity explains gravity as a consequence
of the changing geometry, or spacetime, of the universe. Geometry is itself related to the local
properties of matter and energy.
This leads to the famous statement, ‘curved space tells matter how to move, matter tells
space how to curve’.
GR describes the geometry of the universe as a four dimensional spacetime in terms of the Ricci
curvature tensor Rµν, the curvature scalar R and the metric tensor gµν. These terms are related to
the local distribution of matter and energy via the Einstein Field Equation (EFQ),
1
Rµν − gµν R = −8π GT µν , (1)
2
where Tµν is the stress–energy tensor (i.e. matter and energy) and G is Newton’s constant in
relativistic (c = 1) units. We ignore the possible effect of Λ at present.
The most basic geometrical operation is to measure the distance between nearby points via the
line element, e.g. Pythagoras’s theorem. Within the spacetime defined by the Riemann tensor, the
line element, ds, describing the infinitesimal distance between two nearby points is

ds2 = gµν dxµ dxν. (2)

Depending upon the exact definition of gµν, the diagonal elements are g00, g11, g22, g33 = +1,−1, −1, −
1 for
Euclidean or flat space (Index 1 refers to time and indices 2, 3 and 4 refer to space). Non–diagonal
elements are zero in this case.
One of the early goals of theoretical cosmology was to develop a spacetime metric or line element that
would satisfy the aforementioned cosmological principle, i.e. homogeneity and isotropy. Robertson
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 3

and Walker (1935) demonstrated that in any homogeneous and isotropic cosmological model based
upon Riemannian geometry, the most general line element is
#
ds = c2 dt2 — a(t) " dr2 2 + r 2 (dθ2 + sin2
2
2 1 − kr θ dφ2) , (3)

where a(t) is freely chosen and k is a constant.

As we shall see later, k is related to the radius of curvature of the pseudo–surface defined by dt =
0. In addition, a(t) will be seen to describe the time evolution of the physical scale of the universe.
Its form results from the insertion of the components of the metric tensor into the EFQ to obtain
the Friedmann equation (or, as we shall obtain it, via a Newtonian analogue employing test
particles in a locally flat universe). As a(t) is used to describe the time evolution of the size of the
universe, the spatial coordinates r, θ and φ are considered as fixed, or co–moving, coordinates.

1.3.1 Understanding the curvature constant

What are the effects of curvature upon geometry? Consider a 2D surface that forms the surface of
3D sphere (Figure 1). The curvature of a 3D sphere of radius R is defined as K≡ 1/R2. If one
proceeds a short distance D from a point of origin and describes a circle about this point, what is
the circumference thus traced?

Figure 1: The geometry of a two dimensional surface considered embedded within a three dimen-
sional space.

The measured circumference Cmeas = 2πR sin θ and θ = D/R. Rearranging this yields

Cmeas = 2πR sin(D/R). (4)

1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 4

Taking a Taylor expansion in sin(D/R), one obtains

" 3 #
D 1 D D
5
Cmeas = 2πR − + ,
R 6 R R or
! O

Cmeas = 2πD 1 D2 KD2 !

1− = 2πD 1 — . (5)
6 R2 6

So the geometry measured on the two dimensional surface is modified by a term depending upon the
inverse square of the effective radius of curvature. The circumference of a circle drawn on a surface
of positive curvature is less than the circumference expected based upon Euclidean geometry (with
the opposite being true for a surface of negative curvature). As the radius of curvature tends to
infinity (i.e. flat space), the properties of a circle drawn upon the surface revert to the Euclidean
case.

1.3.2 Determining the line element of a curved space

A fundamental operation in geometry is to measure the distance between two closely separated
points P1 and P2. The expression for this distance is referred to as the line element. The line
element for a flat, two dimensional surface may be written using Polar coordinates r and φ as

(dl)2 = (dr)2 + (r dφ)2, (6)

as shown in Figure 2a. For an example of a line element describing a curved 2D surface we again

Figure 2: The line element of a curved two dimensional surface.

consider the surface of a sphere of radius R (Figure 2b). Here K = 1/R2 and the distance between
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 5

points P1 and P2 is now

(dl)2 = (dD)2 + (r dφ)2

= (R dθ)2 + (r dφ)2. (7)

We have r = R sin θ and dr = R cos θ dθ, therefore

dr R dr dr
R dθ = =√ =q (8)
cos θ R2 − r 2 1 − r2/R2
and  2
dr
(dl)2 = q 
+ (r dφ)2
1 − r /R
2 2
!2
dr 2
= √ + (r dφ) . (9)
1 − Kr 2

The extension to a three dimensional space is straightforward

!2
dr
(dl)2 = √ + (r dθ)2 + (r sin θ dφ)2, (10)
1 − Kr2

where r now measures the radial distance from the origin.

1.3.3 A relativistic line element

Our geometric model of the universe requires a relativistic line element describing a four dimen-
sional spacetime of general curvature. We measure distance now as the “proper distance” between
neighbouring events. We denote the time component of the proper distance to be c dt and the line
element is written as
2
2 !√
dr
(ds) = (c dt) − 2
— (r2 — 2
(r sin θ
1 − Kr 2
dθ) dφ) . (11)

We note that the physical separation (dl)2 = −(ds)2 for dt = 0.

We would further like to label stationary objects within this spacetime using a fixed or co-moving
coordinate and to describe the varying scale of the spacetime via a dimensionless relative scale
factor a(t), i.e.
r(t) = a(t) ω. (12)
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 6

However, as the expansion of the universe will affect all of its geometric properties, including cur-
vature, we define the time dependent curvature in terms of a time independent curvature constant,
i.e.
k
K(t) ≡ 2 . (13)
a (t)
Substituting for r and K in Equation 11 we obtain

2 2
 !2 
2
(ds) = (c — a (t) √ dω + (ω
2 2
+ (ω sin θ dφ)  , (14)
dt)  1 − kω2 dθ)

which is the Robertson-Walker line element presented in Equation 3 (note the slight change in
variable representation).
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 7

1.4 A historical interlude

1912: Spectroscopic observations lead Vesto Slipher to obtain an apparent velocity of +300 kms−1
for M31. By 1924 he had painstakingly obtained apparent velocities for 41 objects. Of these,
31 were negative, i.e. receding.

1920: The Shapley–Curtis debate. Shapley argued correctly that the sky distribution of globular
clusters indicated that the Sun was located far from the centre of the Galaxy. However, he
incorrectly believed (using an erroneous result from van Maanen) that the spiral nebulae
displayed observable rotational proper motions and were thus located within the (albeit
very large) Galaxy. Curtis argued that the spiral nebulae were extra-galactic, mainly by
assuming that novae observed in the nebulae were similar to novae observed in our galaxy
and then following distance dimming arguments. However, he mistrusted Shapley’s
Cepheid-based distance to the globular clusters and favoured a smaller, Kapteyn Galaxy
(based upon star counts) with the Sun close to the centre.
1925: Using Cepheid variable stars Hubble demonstrates that M31 and M33 lie at 285 kpc from
the Galaxy and that NGC 6822 lies at > 214 kpc (note that these distance estimates were
much too low due to a problem with Cepheid brightness calibration). All appear to be
extragalactic, isolated systems.

1929: Using Cepheids to calibrate a secondary distance indicator (the brightest star in a galaxy),
Hubble extended his distance–recession velocity sample and reported the relation v = H d
where H ≈ 500 kms−1 Mpc−1 (the value for H is so high compared to the modern value due
to the aforementioned problem with Cepheid calibration – if d is biased low, H will be biased
high).

1.5 An examination of Hubble’s law using the RW line element

Hubble found that v = H d. Milne examined this apparent expansion in terms of a universe
consisting of a mesh of interlocking triangles. Consider three neighbouring galaxies located at the
vertices of a particular triangle (Figure 3). This particular universe is homogeneous and is isotropic
on large scales. If this universe is expanding uniformly then at some later time these galaxies will
have expanded to form a new triangle similar to the first but with all distances scaled by some
factor,
l(t) = a(t) l0. (15)
Would an observer studying the recession velocities of galaxies within the homogeneous, isotropic
and uniformly expanding universe discover Hubble’s law? Differentiating l(t) one obtains
dl da(t)
= l0 = da(t) l(t)
dt dt dt a(t)
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 8

Figure 3: Milne’s model of uniform expansion.

v = dl
l(t)
H(t) = a˙
=
dt (16)
a
a˙
a
A similar result is obtained working straight from the RW line element: one notes that kr2 =
a2r2/R2 and assumes thatqthe quantity ar/R 1. The radial proper distance is related to the
metric distance by dl(t) = −(ds) ≈ a(t) dr. The velocity of the object is then
2

dl a˙ a˙
v= ≈ a˙ r = l ⇒ H(t) = . (17)
dt a a
The assumption of ar/R 1 simply tells us that Hubble’s law is only valid on scales much less than
the global curvature constant. The conclusion from Milne’s analysis and the analysis of the RW line
element is that the apparent recession of galaxies with us located at the origin is naturally explained
as a universal expansion of all test particles (galaxies) within a homogeneous and isotropic universe.
The geometric model of the universe receives its first ‘tick’.

1.6 The Friedmann equation

The Friedmann equation describes the time variation of the scale factor a(t)1. It can be derived
by substituting the metric terms described by the RW line element into the EFQ. However, we
will investigate a version of the Friedmann equation using a Newtonian analogue and Birkhoff’s
theorem. Consider a universe with coordinate distances defined by the RW line element. The
universe is populated with galaxies with a space density ρ and pressure P = 0 (i.e. the galaxies do
not interact with each other).
1
To simplify the discussion of the scale factor and its history we (and others) set a(t0) = 1 with a(t) taking a
value relative to the current epoch.
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 9

Consider a spherical volume of the universe of radius l and mass M . We further consider the
dynamical behaviour of a test particle (a single galaxy if you like) of mass m located on the surface
of this spherical shell. Birkhoff’s theorem states that the mass within the sphere will act upon
the test particle as if the entire mass M were concentrated at the centre of the sphere. From the
Newtonian equation of motion of the test particle we therefore obtain
d 2l GMm
m =− . (18)
dt2 l2
Multiplying the equation by l˙ generates
d l˙ 2 GM
d = . (19)
l
dt 2 dt
Integrating yields
l˙2 GM
= E, (20)
−l
2
where the integration constant has units of energy. Note: this equation may be interpreted as a
basic energy relation of the form, Kinetic + Potential = Total. The RW line element indicates that
l(t) = l0 a(t), where l0 is independent of time and a(t) is the time–varying, universal scale factor.
Therefore, we may write
!
l˙ 2 G 4πl3ρ(t)
= E
− l 3
2
a˙ 2 4πGρ(t)a2(t) E
— = l02 ,
2 3
2 8πG 2E
a˙ — 3 ρ(t) a2(t) = . (21)
l02
The result is one form of Friedmann’s equation and it has three general solutions:
E < 0 : The potential term is proportional to 1/a(t) and always dominates (see Equation 20). Hence
a(t) cannot increase without limit, instead it must reach some maximum value (at which point
a¨ < 0) and decrease.
E = 0 : a(t) increases throughout time, tending toward (but never reaching) an asymptotic maxi-
mum scale as t → ∞. The critical density value corresponding to this case is
3
2 3H2(t)
ρc(t) = a˙ = . (22)
8πG 8πG
a
The current value of the Hubble parameter is H0 = H(t0) = 70 ± 7 kms−1 Mpc−1 and the
corresponding value of the critical density is ρc,0 = (9.2 ± 1.8) × 10−27 kg m−3 = (1.4 ±
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 10

0.3) × 1011 M⊙ Mpc−3. Current estimates of the space density of galaxies are of order 1.4 ×
10−2 Mpc−3. If one assumes that the mass of a typical galaxy is 1011M⊙, then one concludes
that visible galaxies contribute about 1% of the value of ρc,0.

E > 0 : a(t) increases monotonically for all time. The universe expands forever.

These three cases are shown in Figure 4. Returning to the form of Friedmann’s equation, one may

Figure 4: The evolution of the scale factor in Friedmann universes.

redefine the constant of integration to be

2E
= —kc2. (23)
l02
Re-writing the Friedmann equation yields

2
a˙ 8πG kc2
a — ρ(t) = − . (24)
3 a2
Note that this form of the equation was that obtained by Friedmann (and re–discovered by Lemaitre)
by inserting the corresponding elements of the metric tensor applicable to the RW line element into
the EFQ. The parameter k takes one of three values

E < 0 ⇒ k = +1
E=0 ⇒ k=0
E > 0 ⇒ k = −1. (25)
 1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 11

We have now obtained the complete link between the time dependence of the universal scale factor
a(t) and the curvature constant k first encountered in the RW line element. Proceeding further,
one may redefine the Friedmann equation in terms of a new dimensionless density parameter
ρ(t)
Ω(t) = . (26)
ρc(t)
If we divide the Friedmann equation (Equation 24) by H(t)2 and use the above identity, we obtain
kc2
1 − Ω(t) = − 2 2 , or
Ha
kc2
= Ω(t) − 1. (27)
H2a2
This expression has the following consequences

k = +1 ⇒ Ω(t) > 1
k = 0 ⇒ Ω(t) = 1 for all times,
k = −1 ⇒ Ω(t) < 1 (28)

where

Ω(t) > 1 ⇒ a closed universe,

Ω(t) = 1 ⇒ a spatially flat universe,
Ω(t) < 1 ⇒ an open or hyperbolic universe. (29)

Therefore, the total matter/energy content of the universe determines the overall spatial geometry,
the time variation of a(t) and the ultimate fate of the universe2 Importantly, these equations indicate
that the universe has a well–defined characteristic matter density that marks the limit of each of
the above cases. Therefore, the determination of the total matter content of the universe became
an immediate challenge for early observational cosmologists. However, to determine this critical
density, one requires H(t) or H0 – the present day value of the Hubble parameter.

1.6.1 Alternative forms of the Friedmann equation

The form of the Friedmann equation given in Equation 24 may be modified to take account of the
fact that the universe contains more than matter in the form of stars, gas and dust (which we might
label ρm). The universe contains relativistic particles (photons and neutrinos) that contribute an
Given the time variation of Ω(t), one question that vexed cosmologists in the past was, “If Ω 0 is not equal to 1,
2

why should it be anywhere close to 1 at the present epoch?”. If Ω /= 1, why do we appear to be living in a special
epoch?
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 12

energy density urel to the universal mass-energy budget. The effective matter density of relativistic
particles is ρrel = urel/c2. In addition, observations of SNe Ia indicate that the expansion of the
universe is accelerating. One explanation of this effect may be the presence of a “Cosmological
Constant” referred to as Λ. Although these considerations will be described in later chapters, we
note here the modified form of the Friedmann equation required to incorporate these effects into
our model of the universe:
2
a˙ 8πG 1 2 kc2
— [ρm(t) + ρrel(t)] − Λc =− 2 . (30)
a 3 3 a
1.7 The Fluid and Acceleration equations
At present we have one equation – the Friedmann equation – and two unknowns, a(t) and ρ(t).
The Friedmann equation can be thought of as an expression of Newtonian energy conservation for
a test mass in an expanding/contracting universe. Another approach is to consider a
thermodynamic expression of energy conservation. From the first law of thermodynamics we
have

dQ = dE + PdV, (31)

where dQ is the heat flow into or out of a region, dE is the change in internal energy, P is the
pressure and dV is the change in volume of the region. In a homogeneous universe we must have
dQ = 0, i.e. no bulk flow of heat. Processes for which dQ = 0 are known as adiabatic. Therefore,
applying the first law of thermodynamics to an expanding universe, we may write

E˙ + P V˙
= 0. (32)

We return to our previous example of an expanding spherical region of the universe where the
physical radius l(t) = l0 a(t). The volume of this region is
4π 3 3
V (t) = l a (t), (33)
0
3
and the rate of change of volume is
4π a˙
V˙ = l3 (3a2 a˙ ) = V 3 . (34)
3 0 a
The internal energy of the sphere is

E(t) = V (t)ρ(t)c2, (35)

and the rate of change of the internal energy of the sphere is

a˙
E˙ = V ρ˙c2 + V˙ ρc2 = V ρ˙c2 + 3ρc2 a . (36)
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 13

Therefore, combining equations 32, 34 and 36 we can re-write the first law of thermodynamics in
the expanding region of the universe as
a˙ a˙
V ρ˙c2 + 3 ρc2 + 3 P = 0, or
a a
dρ a˙ 2
+ 3 (ρ + P/c ) = 0. (37)
dt a
This is the Fluid equation and is the second key equation describing the expansion of the universe.
Combining the Friedmann and Fluid equations generates the Acceleration equation providing
the rate of change of universal expansion. Multiplying the Friedmann equation by a2 generates
8πG
a˙ 2 = ρ a2— kc2. (38)
3
Taking the time derivative of this equation we have
8πG
2a˙ a¨ = (ρ˙a2 + 2ρa˙a). (39)
3
Dividing by 2a˙ a
!
gives a¨ 4πG dρ a
= + 2ρ . (40)
a 3 dt
Substituting the Fluid equation into this term yields
a˙
a¨ 4πG 3P
a =− 3 ρ + c2 . (41)

We see that a universe consisting of material with a positive energy density, i.e. ρc2 > 0, has the
effect of slowing down the expansion with time. Universal components such as baryons and photons
each exert positive pressure (the result of either random kinetic motion or radiation pressure). The
effect of such pressure terms is also to slow down expansion. However, should a universal component
contribute a negative pressure such than P < —ρc2/3, the net effect will be to increase the rate of
expansion with time. Dark energy (see Lecture 8) is an example of such a universal component.

1.8 The equation of state

At present we have two independent equations (Friedmann and Fluid) and one dependent
equation (Acceleration) to describe the evolution of the universe. However, we now have three
unknowns: a(t), ρ(t) and P (t). The equation of state describing a particular component of the
universe describes the relationship between pressure and density, i.e.

P = P (ρ) = wρc2, (42)

1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 14

for dilute cosmological “gases”, i.e. a gas of matter or photon particles. Consider a low density
gas of non-relativistic massive particles – such as galaxies. Non-relativistic means that the random
motions of the particles are small compared to the speed of light. Such a gas obeys the perfect gas
law ρ
P = kT, (43)
µ
where µ is the mean mass of the particles. For a non-relativistic gas, the temperature T is related
to the root mean square thermal velocity ⟨v2⟩ by

3kT = µ⟨v2⟩. (44)

Therefore, comparing Equation 42 to Equation 43 we see that

2 2
⟨v ⟩ ⟨v ⟩
P = wρc = 2
ρ⇒w= 1. (45)
3 3c2
Therefore, a gas of non-relativistic massive particles effectively exerts zero pressure.

1.9 H0 and the age of the universe

In an expanding universe with low deceleration/acceleration, the quantity H−1 approximately de-
fines the time taken for the distance between any two galaxies to double. A more definite relation-
ship between the value of the scale factor and time may be obtained from the Friedmann and Fluid
equation. Note: in the following discussion, H0 = H(t0), where t0 indicates the current epoch.
The Einstein–de Sitter universe (EdS): In 1932 Einstein and de Sitter postulated that, in the
absence of secure observations to the contrary, the simplest assumptions governing the behaviour
of the Friedmann equation should be adopted, i.e. Λ = k = P = 0. Note that these
assumptions refer specifically to a universe containing a non-interacting gas of galaxies. At the
time when the EdS universe was suggested a radiation dominated universe had not been considered.
EdS therefore describes a spatially flat universe containing only matter, i.e. ΩM = 1. Under
these assumptions, the Fluid equation states that ρ ∝ a−3, i.e.
dρ a˙
+ 3 (ρ + P/c2)
= 0 dt
a
dρ a˙
= −3 ρ
dt a
dρ 3 da
= − dt
ρ a dt
ln ρ = −3 ln a + C
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 15

ρ ∝ a−3 or

3
ρ a0
ρ0 = a . (46)

Note that this equation is really only telling us that the matter component of the universe is
conserved. One may then re-write the Friedmann equation in the form
8
a a˙ 2 = πGρ a3
3

a a˙ 2 = constant

a1/2 da = A dt

2
a3/2 = A t + C (C = 0 as a → 0 as t → 0)
3

or a ∝ t2/3. (47)

The assumption that the constant of integration is zero seems innocuous. However, it gave
Lemaitre considerable trouble. With early estimates of the Hubble parameter biased high, this in
turn implied a troublingly low value for the age of the universe when compared to the estimated
ages of the stars. Lemaitre attempted to reconcile these two opposing age estimates by setting C
> 0 and thus allowing the universe to exist in a static state for some arbitrary period of time prior
to expanding. With hindsight this appears to be (and indeed is) a fudge – but one which at the
time was forced upon Lemaitre by observations.
Note that H = a˙ /a, therefore
H(t) = a˙ /a = (2/3t−1/3)/t2/3, (48)
which can be rearranged as
2 1
t0 = . (49)
3 H0
A further case considers an open universe (ρ ρc), Λ = 0 scenario, i.e.

2
a˙ kc2
a = 0−
a2

a˙ 2 = A (50)
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 16

√
which leads to a = A t or, in terms of H one may write

H = a˙ /a = 1/t

t0 ' 1/H0. (51)

This is the Hubble time – the maximum time elapsed since a = 0 for a Λ = 0 universe. Note that
the actual age of the universe in this case is a little bit less than 1/H0. The degree of inaccuracy in
using a tangent to the current expansion curve will lie in the extent of the deviation of ρ from
zero. Therefore, consideration of the Friedmann and Fluid equations for several basic models
generates a characteristic age of the universe in terms of H0.

1.10 Orientation and additional reading

1. Read Ryden Chapter 6 for a discussion of how Λ /= 0 affects the analysis presented in this
lecture. General, Λ /= 0 models will be discussed in more detail later in the course.

2. The evolution of observational tests of the pre-recombination universe will be discussed in

Lectures 3 (CMB) and 4 (BBN).

3. The fact that a(t) is increasing with time implies that it was smaller in the past. We therefore
expect the pressure term (radiation from CMB and neutrinos together with random matter
velocities) to have been more important in the past – see Lectures 3 and 4.
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 17

1.11 Asides
1.11.1 The nature of redshift within the cosmological model
Redshift was originally defined in purely observational terms. However, cosmological redshift
arises naturally from a consideration of the RW line element. Consider the light path of a photon
travelling through the universe along a radial path (radial null geodesic), i.e. ds2 = dθ = dφ = 0,
" #
2 2
c dt dr2
2
= a (t) . (52)
1 − kr2
For a light pulse emitted at te and observed at to by an observer at a distance re, one may write
∫ ∫
to c dt re
= √ ≡ f (r ). (53)
dr a(t) 1 − kr2
te 0 e

Note, that f (re) is a fixed (or comoving) distance. If one has a good enough understanding of a(t)
and k one can determine the relation between distance and time in the universe. However, one
may consider a second pulse of light emitted and observed at te + ∆te and to + ∆to respectively, i.e.
∫ ∫
to+∆toc dt c dt to
te+∆te a(t)− te a(t)
= 0
c ∆to c ∆te
− = 0
a(to) a(te)
c ∆t o
c ∆te = a (t o ) (54)
a(te)
However, c ∆t = λ, and the above analysis is related to the (observationally defined) redshift by

λo − λe = λo − 1 = a(to) − 1. (55)
z=
λe λe a(te)

This expression is normally written as 1 + z = a0/ae. Cosmological redshift describes the relative
expansion of the universal scale factor between the epochs of emission and observation 3. Note:
the observed redshift of an astrophysical source is often a combination of cosmological redshift
and other physical effects, e.g. gravitational redshift, the Sachs–Wolfe effect and peculiar
velocities. Peculiar velocities take alter the redshift via czobs = czcosmo + vpec(1 + zcosmo) and will
discussed further in Lecture 2.
3
Though redshift may also be defined via SR as arising from the recession velocity associated with the Hubble
flow, SR is only valid in locally flat reference frames and describes the case where (effectively) gµν = constant.
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 18

1.11.2 Co–moving coordinates

Co–moving coordinates expand with universe. Another way of saying this is that they are fixed
with respect to the Hubble flow. Co–moving coordinates are used to compare physical quantities
derived from the metric (distance, volume, etc.) at any given epoch, to the present day
(considered to be the reference epoch). For example, employing the RW line element one may
express the physical distance between two galaxies (say) as s = a(t) d where s is the physical
distance and d is the co–moving distance. If no peculiar motions exist, d is constant and
s0 = a(t0) d and se = a(te) d

s0 se
a(t0) = a(t )
e

s0 = se a(t )
a(te) = s e (1 + z). (56)
0

Therefore, if two galaxies at z = 1 are observed to be separated by a physical distance of 1 Mpc,

the co–moving separation is 2 Mpc. The same principle is applied to volumes. This definition
of co–moving coordinates designed to provide a common epoch for comparing observations. The
current definition of co–moving coordinates is much simpler than the ‘official’ relativity definition.

1.11.3 The cosmological horizon

The cosmological horizon may be defined as the maximum distance a photon could travel within
the lifetime of the universe. It is a convenient definition of the largest region of the universe that
could exist in causal contact at any particular epoch. The horizon is defined by considering a radial
null geodesic within the RW line element, i.e.

c dt = a(t) dr
√
1 − kr2
∫ ∫
t0 c dt rH
=
dr √ , (57)
0 a(t) 1 − kr 0 2

Where t0 indicates the current age of the universe and rH is the horizon distance. For an EdS
universe with k = 0 we may write
∫ t0 c dt
rH =
0
a(t)
∫ t0 c dt t02/3
=
0 a0 t2/3

= 3 c t 0. (58)
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 19

Consideration of the cosmological horizon at the current epoch provides one method to answer
Olbers’ paradox, or “why is the night sky dark?”. The universe may well be infinite in space,
but it is finite in time. The combination of a finite age of the universe with a finite speed of light
ensures that we can only observe photons from a finite region of the universe.
However, computation of the cosmological horizon gives rise to the horizon problem. When we
look at the universe at the cosmological horizon, it is isotropic, i.e. large scale structure and CMB
temperatures are statistically identical even though separated by 180◦ on the sky. However, these
two regions, though in casual contact with us, are themselves causally isolated. How could the
CMB and LSS have developed in exactly the same manner? The answer to the horizon problem
is provided by cosmic inflation that postulates that the universe underwent a rapid phase of
expansion at early times. Regions in the early universe were originally in causal contact and were
subsequently inflated to scales much larger than the horizon during the inflationary epoch.
1 A MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSE 20

1.12 Summary of Lecture 1

1. Our mathematical model of the universe is based upon GR which postulates that space
exists as a four dimensional spacetime defined by a global curvature constant.

2. Universal spacetime is assumed to be isotropic and homogeneous. The most general line ele-
ment describing an isotropic and homogeneous spacetime is the RW line element (also referred
to as a metric). The line element describes the infinitesimal distance between neighbouring
coordinates.

3. The universal scale factor a(t) of the RW line element evolves with time. The relationship
between scale factor and time depends upon the universal mass density, pressure and presence
of a Λ–term. The general form of the Friedmann equation indicates that the universe may
be expanding or contracting. We shall see during our investigation of Λ that deriving a static
universe is difficult.

4. The Hubble relation indicates that the universe is currently expanding. For the simple case
of the EdS universe, the overall geometry (curvature) of the universe, and its eventual fate,
are determined by the total matter density and the current value of the Hubble parameter.

5. Therefore, coordinated observational tests (total matter, oldest age, current expansion rate)
may constrain parameter values that define the cosmological model.

Note that such observations do not tell us whether the cosmological model as we have designed
it is correct (though it is clearly a good approximation to reality), simply which cosmological
model values our universe resembles.