Report

Equations of Motion in an Expanding Universe Sergei Kopeikin 18-19/04/2013 7-th Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting University of Missisipi, Oxford 1 Expanding Universe = Conformally-flat Manifold 2 = − 2 + 2 = 2 = 2 = , − conformal coordinates ; ≡ [ ] t - proper time of Hubble observers (physical time) − conformal time (mathematically convenient, 18-19/04/2013 7-th Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting University of Missisipi, Oxford unphysical) 2 We are interested in studying the laws of local physics on the conformally-flat manifold. Focus on the (Einstein) equivalence principle. It states that there exists a diffeomorphism = from global, , to local inertial coordinates, = (, ), such that 2 = and Γ =0 and local equations of motion for test particles: 2 =0 2 18-19/04/2013 7-th Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting University of Missisipi, Oxford 3 We simplify theory by sticking to the linearized Hubble approximation in all equations. Local diffeomorphism: 2 () = Special conformal transformation: Ω2 () = Ω = 1 − 2 + 2 2 2 − = Ω Matching: = ; 2 18-19/04/2013 Ω = = 1 + H 7-th Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting University of Missisipi, Oxford 4 Local inertial metric: 2 = − 2 + Local inertial frame: − proper time of static observers i − normal Gaussian coordinates Static observers with fixed move with respect to the Hubble observers which have fixed i , and vice versa = = + 2 18-19/04/2013 = Hubble law proper time of static observers coincides with the cosmic time t 7-th Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting University of Missisipi, Oxford 5 Focus on motion of photons (light). Equations of motion of light in global coordinates: 2 2 =0 We expect in local (Gaussian) coordinates: 2 2 =0 Coordinate transformation: = = However, operationally = . Hence, we conclude = = + 2 + (2 ) But the cosmic and conformal times are related by 2 = ∫ = + + (2 ) 2 18-19/04/2013 7-th Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting University of Missisipi, Oxford 6 We cannot postulate that the affine parameter on light geodesic is the proper time of static observers. It must differ from Conformal transformation: = = = + 2 + (2 ) 2 = ∫ = + + (2 ) 2 = = No contradiction! But the price to pay is that the local inertial metric differs from the optical metric on light cone (Synge, Perlick) 2 = −2 + 2 2 = 18-19/04/2013 − 2 = −2 () 2 + local equations of motion for photons 7-th Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting University of Missisipi, Oxford 7 Radar and laser ranging: solving = 0 Radial geodesics, observer at the origin of the local coordinates = ± ± + outgoing ray, − incoming ray 1 2 = 0 ± + 2 ∗ ( , ) = 0 ± − 0 + ( − 0 )2 2 1 = 0 ± 1 − + (1 − )2 2 1 0 ℓ = 1 − 0 For central observer: ℓ= ; 2 ∗ 18-19/04/2013 7-th Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting University of Missisipi, Oxford 2 =+ 2 8 Doppler Effect (static observers) = − 2 1 = frequency of light 0 (2 ) 0 1 = 1 − 2 2 , 2 0 () = const. () 2 1 = (2 ) (1 ) 18-19/04/2013 1 , 1 blue shift 7-th Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting University of Missisipi, Oxford 9 Do static observers exist in an expanding universe? The answer is affirmative. Scrutiny analysis of electromagnetic and gravitational forces reveals that they are not subject to the Hubble expansion in the linearized Hubble approximation. Atomic and planetary orbits are stable and can be used to materialize the reference frame of static observers. Hence, the local cosmological expansion (in the theoretical model proposed) can be detected, at least, in principle. Pioneer anomaly effect is naturally explained by the property of the conformal invariance of light geodesics as contrasted with time-like geodesics which are not conformally-invariant. 18-19/04/2013 7-th Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting University of Missisipi, Oxford 10 18-19/04/2013 7-th Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting University of Missisipi, Oxford 11