Article View: sci.physics
Article #930Re: Hubble constant?
From: Emory F. Bunn
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 1992 22:31
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 1992 22:31
46 lines
2527 bytes
2527 bytes
In article <1992Aug8.072223.11413@nuscc.nus.sg> scip1061@nuscc.nus.sg (Marc Paul Jozef) writes: > > I saw some people suggesting that the existence of >matter in the universe would cause the expansion-rate >to slow down _because of mutual gravitational attraction_ > >Of course, if one reads `gravitational attraction' as >an interpretation of the mathematical solutions of >Einstein's global scale equations (where the stress- >energy tensor is idealized as that of an ideal fluid), >then the assertion is correct, albeit somewhat >meaningless (just giving _names- ). > >If one however reads this `mutual gravitational attraction' >in an intuitive `Newtonian' sense, then the assertion >is false, of course: the supposed homogeneity of the >universe implies namely precisely that the mutual attraction >is zero (in one point, the net contribution of gravitation >of other points is zero due to isotropy). This argument, while extremely appealing, is not necessarily right. If you try to compute the Newtonian gravitational field at a point in an infinite space filled with matter of uniform density, you have to do an integral which diverges. If the integral converged, then it would have to converge to zero as you say, because of isotropy. But since it diverges, it's probably better to say that Newtonian gravity doesn't make a definite prediction at all about this situation. Lest you think I'm splitting hairs here, let me give you an argument which "proves" that an infinite uniform-density space _can't_ have zero Newtonian gravitational field everywhere. Remember Poisson's equation: Newton's law of gravity implies that Laplacian of Phi = 4 Pi G rho where Phi is the gravitational potential and rho is the density field. If there were no gravitational field anywhere, then Phi would be constant everywhere. But then its Laplacian would be zero, and that's not a solution to Poisson's equation. The point is just that Newtonian gravity is not well-equipped to handle this case. It's a good thing that Einstein came along. -Ted
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<161hvlINN9jv@agate.berkeley.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!agate!physics2!tedReferences:
<1992Aug5.132244.28938@galois.mit.edu> <1992Aug8.072223.11413@nuscc.nus.sg>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!agate!physics2!ted From: ted@physics2 (Emory F. Bunn) Newsgroups: sci.physics Subject: Re: Hubble constant? Date: 8 Aug 1992 22:31:17 GMT Organization: /etc/organization Lines: 48 Message-ID: <161hvlINN9jv@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <1992Aug5.132244.28938@galois.mit.edu> <1992Aug8.072223.11413@nuscc.nus.sg> NNTP-Posting-Host: physics2.berkeley.edu