|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Galactic Evolution (was: Still lower noise radio astronomy )
In article , Oh No
writes: The cosmological parameters are pretty well tied down by supernova observations, and that should tie q=q(t) down too. Within the context of GR cosmology, knowing q_0 and Omega_0 (or lambda_0, or any two independent cosmological parameters except H_0) completely determines q(t). The only thing is, q is used in a series expansion, which we don't much use any more, and it True. At small redshifts, q is the most important term, so historically this was important. However, it is just Omega/2 - lambda, so is well defined in a much larger context. Practically no modern cosmological test "measures" q in the sense that the gradient of probability in cosmological parameter space is shallowest along lines of constant q, so this is another reason it is not used as often as it once was. However, it does tell one whether or not the universe is accelerating. makes not a lot of sense to use q(t) for any purpose I can think of. What is usually discussed is q0=q(t0), i.e. now. Right, though one might say something like "at a redshift of x, corresponding to a time y years ago, the universe was still decelerating". |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[sci.astro] General (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (2/9) | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | May 3rd 06 12:33 PM |
[sci.astro,sci.astro.seti] Welcome! - read this first | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 9 | February 2nd 06 01:37 AM |
SCIENTIFIC PANEL TO REVIEW ED CONRAD'S BRAIN.... | Ed Conrad | Astronomy Misc | 0 | December 25th 05 02:24 PM |
CORRUPT THEORY 'WINS' ANOTHER ROUND -- Evolution vs. Intelligent Design | Ed Conrad | Astronomy Misc | 2 | December 21st 05 08:55 PM |
[sci.astro] General (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (2/9) | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 6th 05 02:35 AM |