1: \documentclass{gfl}
2: %\usepackage{epsf}
3: \usepackage{epsfig}
4: %\usepackage{amsmath}
5: \usepackage{natbib}
6:
7: \newcommand{\ltaraw}{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}
8: \newcommand{\lta}{\lower.5ex\hbox{\ltaraw}}
9: \newcommand{\gtaraw}{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$}
10: \newcommand{\gta}{\lower.5ex\hbox{\gtaraw}}
11:
12: \newcommand{\rref}{}
13:
14: %internal short cuts
15:
16: \loadboldmathitalic \title[Conformal Confusion]{Coordinate Confusion in
17: Conformal Cosmology\footnotemark[1]} \author[Lewis et al.]{ Geraint F.
18: Lewis$^{1}$, Matthew J. Francis$^1$, Luke A. Barnes$^{2,1}$
19: \& J. Berian James$^{3,1}$\\
20: $^{1}$Institute of Astronomy, School of Physics, A28,
21: University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia\\
22: $^2$Institute of Astronomy, Madingley Rd, Cambridge, UK\\
23: $^3$Institute for Astronomy, Royal Observatory, Edinburgh EH9 3HJ, UK\\
24: } \date{\today}
25: \begin{document}
26: \maketitle
27: \label{firstpage}
28: \begin{abstract}
29: A straight-forward interpretation of standard
30: Friedmann-Lemaitre-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) cosmologies is that objects
31: move apart due to the expansion of space, and that sufficiently
32: distant galaxies must be receding at velocities exceeding the speed of
33: light. Recently, however, it has been suggested that a simple
34: transformation into conformal coordinates can remove superluminal
35: recession velocities, and hence the concept of the expansion of space
36: should be abandoned. This work demonstrates that such conformal
37: transformations do not eliminate superluminal recession velocities for
38: open or flat matter-only FRLW cosmologies, and all possess
39: superluminal expansion. Hence, the attack on the concept of the
40: expansion of space based on this is poorly founded. This work
41: concludes by emphasizing that the expansion of space is perfectly
42: valid in the general relativistic framework, however, asking the
43: question of whether space {\it really} expands is a futile exercise.
44: \end{abstract}
45: \begin{keywords}
46: cosmology: theory
47: \end{keywords}
48:
49: \long\def\symbolfootnote[#1]#2{\begingroup%
50: \def\thefootnote{\fnsymbol{footnote}}\footnotetext[#1]{#2}\endgroup}
51:
52: \def\newblock{\hskip .11em plus .33em minus .07em}
53: %Section heading
54: \section{Introduction} \label{intro} \symbolfootnote[1]{Research
55: undertaken as part of the Commonwealth Cosmology Initiative (CCI:
56: www.thecci.org), an international collaboration supported by the
57: Australian Research Council}
58:
59:
60: While it is almost a century since \citet{1929PNAS...15..168H}
61: identified the expansion of the Universe, debate is still ongoing to
62: what this expansion physically means. The mathematics of cosmology are
63: set within the framework of general relativity and textbooks typically
64: describe the expansion of the universe as an expansion of space itself.
65: However, while the concept of expanding space has recently been under
66: fire \citep{2004Obs...124..174W,Peacockweb}, it is clear what has been
67: attacked is a particular picture of space expanding like a fluid and
68: carrying galaxies along with it; \citet{barnes2006} and \citet{Francis}
69: have demonstrated that it is correct to talk about the expansion of
70: space, as long as one clearly understands what the mathematics of
71: general relativity is telling us.
72:
73: However, some recent attacks on the picture of expanding space have been
74: more forceful \citep[e.g.][]{2005PASA...22..287C,2006astro.ph.10590C},
75: with a typical line of criticism invoking a comparison between an
76: explosion of massless particles in static, flat spacetime (Milne model)
77: and empty FLRW universes. In a recent paper,
78: \citet{2006astro.ph..1171C} examines the nature of FLRW cosmologies in
79: conformal coordinates, concluding that superluminal separation of
80: objects can be removed through a simple change of coordinates, and hence
81: that superluminal expansion is illusionary; this is in contrast to
82: \citet{2004PASA...21...97D}, who point out that such superluminal
83: expansion is a generic feature general relativistic cosmologies. The
84: goal of this short contribution is to clear up some of the confusion
85: surrounding the concept of expanding space and conformal
86: transformations, showing that superluminal expansion does not
87: necessarily vanish in conformal coordinates. Furthermore, the concept of
88: expanding space is reasserted as a valid description of the universe,
89: although discussion on whether space {\it really} expands is seen to be
90: futile.
91:
92: \begin{figure}
93: \centerline{ \psfig{figure=fig1.ps,angle=270,width=3.in}}
94: \caption[]{An open universe in conformal coordinates. The thick, solid
95: lines denote the path of light rays in conformal coordinates, whereas
96: the dashed and solid lines represent the paths of fundamental observers.
97: The entire (infinite) open universe is contained within the outermost
98: light cone. The dotted hyperbola represents the big-bang.
99: \label{fig1}}
100: \end{figure}
101:
102:
103: \section{General Relativistic Cosmologies}\label{gr}
104:
105: \subsection{FLRW Universes}\label{universe}
106: The starting point for a standard, general relativistic model of the
107: cosmos begins with the assumption of homogeneity and isotropy. With
108: this, the spacetime of the universe can be described by a FLRW metric
109: with invariant interval of the form
110: \begin{equation}
111: ds^2 = dt^2 - a^2(t)\left[ dx^2 +R_0^2 S^2_k(x/R_0) (d\theta^2
112: + \sin^2\theta\ d\phi^2) \right]
113: \label{flrw}
114: \end{equation}
115: where $S_k(x) = \sin\ x, x, \sinh\ x$ for spatial curvatures of $k=+1$
116: (closed), $k=0$ (flat) and $k=-1$ (open) respectively, with the
117: curvature given by $R_0^{-2}$; note, throughout $c=1$. Also, $a(t)$ is
118: the scale factor, whose evolution depends upon the relative mix of
119: energy density in the Universe. It is clear from this form of the
120: metric given by Equation~\ref{flrw} that for a fixed coordinate time
121: $t$, the physical separation of objects depends on the size of the scale
122: factor $a(t)$, and the increase of $a(t)$ with $t$ results in the
123: increasing separation of objects; this is typically taken to be the
124: expansion of the Universe.
125:
126:
127:
128: \subsection{Velocities in Expanding Universes}\label{velocities}
129:
130: In order to understand superluminal recession, we must first be very
131: clear about how we are defining recession velocity in an expanding
132: universe. A fundamental definition of distance in general relativity is
133: the proper distance, defined as the spatial separation between two
134: points along a hypersurface of constant time. Given the form of the
135: FLRW metric (Equation \ref{flrw}), the radial distance from the origin
136: to a coordinate $x$ along a hypersurface of constant $t$ is;
137: \begin{equation}
138: D_{p}(t) = a(t)\ x
139: \end{equation}
140: Taking the derivative with respect to coordinate time [which is
141: synchronous for all comoving observers (fixed $x$) and is equivalent to
142: their proper time $\tau$] we obtain what we will refer to as the proper
143: velocity
144: \begin{equation}
145: v_{p} \equiv \frac{dD_p}{d\tau}= \frac{dD_{p}}{dt} = \frac{da}{dt}x +
146: a\frac{dx}{dt}
147: \end{equation}
148: For comoving observers with $dx/dt=0$ this becomes the well known
149: distance-velocity law. However, universes which are open or flat are
150: spatially infinite and the above metric predicts that sufficiently
151: distant objects will separate at velocities exceeding the speed of
152: light; this issue has introduced a lot of confusion and discussion into
153: the nature of the expansion~\citep{2004PASA...21...97D}.
154:
155: The coordinate velocity can also be defined as
156: \begin{equation}
157: v_{c} = \frac{dx}{dt}
158: \end{equation}
159: For the FLRW metric, comoving observers have coordinate velocities of
160: zero, and peculiar velocities $adx/dt$ must be less than unity, to be
161: consistent with special relativity \citep[see][]{Francis}. It follows
162: that all radial coordinate velocities in the FLRW metric will be
163: subluminal. This reflects a feature of the coordinate system; what is
164: important however is not how arbitrarily defined coordinates change with
165: respect to one another but how the proper distance between any two
166: points changes with respect to the proper time of observers.
167:
168: \begin{figure*}
169: \centerline{ \psfig{figure=fig2.ps,angle=270,width=6.0in}}
170: \caption[]{The proper distance to several comoving observers in several
171: open, matter only universes (solid curves). The dashed line at $45^\circ$
172: represents the speed of light. The dotted lines represent the recession
173: paths of the fundamental observers integrated over the conformal
174: coordinates without considering the conformal factor outside the metric.
175: \label{fig2}}
176: \end{figure*}
177:
178: \subsection{Conformal Transformations}\label{conformal}
179: Conformal transformations are important in understanding the causal
180: structure of spacetime \citep{1973lsss.book.....H}. A conformal
181: transformation maps from one set of coordinates to another while
182: preserving angles and infinitesimal shape, and two spacetimes
183: represented by metrics $g'$ and $g$ are conformally equivalent just if
184: \begin{equation}
185: g'({\bf x}) = \Omega({\bf x})^2\ g({\bf x})
186: \label{conform}
187: \end{equation}
188: where $\Omega({\bf x})$ is a scalar function~\footnote{More precisely,
189: two metrics are conformally equivalent if they possess the same Weyl
190: tensor.} This function can be interpreted as a scalar field that
191: influences perfect rulers and clocks to distort one spacetime into the
192: other. A metric that is conformally equivalent to the Minkowski metric
193: is labeled `conformally flat'.
194:
195: An examination of the FLRW metric (Equation~\ref{flrw}) reveals that it
196: is conformally flat\footnote{ For flat spacetime, the Weyl tensor
197: vanishes identically. This can be simply shown to be true for FLRW
198: spacetime using a symbol mathematics package such as grtensor ({\tt
199: http://grtensor.phy.queensu.ca}).} and hence can be written in the
200: form
201: \begin{equation}
202: ds^2 = \Omega^2({\bf x})\ ds^2_{\mathrm{flat}}
203: \label{toflat}
204: \end{equation}
205: where $ds_{flat}$ represents the spacetime of special relativity. The
206: precise form of $\Omega({\bf x})$ changes depending on whether flat,
207: closed or open cosmologies are considered. This spacetime mapping from
208: the FLRW metric to the Minkowski metric, also subsumes null geodesics
209: (the motion of photons, which satisfy $ds=0$), i.e. the distorted
210: lightcones seen in cosmological coordinates can be drawn onto the
211: classical lightcones of special relativity \citep[see Figure 1
212: in][]{2004PASA...21...97D}.
213:
214: Typically, conformal representations of FLRW universes consider only the
215: radial motion of photons and neglect the angular components of the metric.
216: With such a transformation, fundamental, or comoving, observers (with fixed
217: $x$, $\theta$ and $\phi$ in Equation~\ref{flrw}) move on straight, vertical
218: lines on an $R$-$T$ representation of flat spacetime, while photons move at
219: $45^\circ$ {\rref (the coordinate transformation from open FLRW coordinates to
220: conformal coordinates for an open universe is discussed in detail in
221: Section~\ref{open})}. Such an approach has proved to be very powerful in
222: understanding cosmic causality and the nature of fundamental horizons in the
223: Universe~\citep{1956MNRAS.116..662R,1988CQGra...5..207E}, However, it is
224: important to note that the consideration of purely radial paths results in a
225: representation which is not fully conformal; the mathematical transformation
226: of the full FLRW metric into conformally flat coordinates was tackled by
227: \citet{is}. An important result from their study is that in fully conformal
228: coordinates, fundamental observers (comoving observers in FLRW metrics) no
229: longer travel along straight, vertical paths; this is examined in more
230: detail in the next section.
231:
232: \subsection{An Open Universe}\label{open}
233: \citet{2006astro.ph..1171C} considers the question of the conformal
234: representation of the FLRW metric, focusing, as a specific example, on
235: an open universe. Starting with the FLRW metric (Equation~\ref{flrw}),
236: he shows that the adoption of a change in coordinates
237: \begin{eqnarray}
238: R & = & A e^\eta\sinh\chi \\ \nonumber
239: T & = & A e^\eta\cosh\chi
240: \label{conf}
241: \end{eqnarray}
242: where $\eta$ is the conformal time, defined such that $dt=R_0ad\eta$,
243: and $\chi = x / R_0$, then the FLRW metric can be written as
244: \begin{equation}
245: ds^2 = \frac{ R_0^2\ a^2(\eta)}{T^2 - R^2} \left[ dT^2 - dR^2 -
246: R^2\left( d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\phi^2 \right)\right] \nonumber
247: \end{equation}
248: which is just
249: \begin{equation}
250: ds^2 = \frac{ R_0^2\ a^2(\eta)}{T^2 - R^2}\ ds^2_{flat}
251: \label{incoords}
252: \end{equation}
253: Hence, lightcones plotted in $R$-$T$ coordinates will be the classical
254: light curves of special relativity (see Figure~\ref{fig1}. \citet{is}
255: demonstrate that the motion of fundamental observers in the FLRW metric
256: ($\chi$=constant) are still mapped onto straight lines in $R$-$T$
257: coordinates and with this choice of coordinate transformations,
258: \citet{2006astro.ph..1171C} demonstrates that such lines posses a slope
259: of
260: \begin{equation}
261: \beta = \frac{dR}{dT} = \frac{R}{T} = \tanh\chi
262: \label{velocity}
263: \end{equation}
264: Hence, the fundamental observers have a constant velocity across the
265: $R$-$T$ plane given by $\beta$, where $\beta\rightarrow1$ as
266: $\chi\rightarrow\infty$. This is taken to be evidence that the
267: coordinate velocity is always less than the speed of light, so that the
268: relative motion of the fundamental observers is always subluminal, no
269: matter their separation. In this manner, it appears that superluminal
270: motion can be removed through a coordinate transformation.
271:
272: \section{Interpretation}\label{interpretation}
273:
274: How are we to interpret this conclusion? Has superluminal expansion,
275: and hence the expansion of space, been refuted? The argument against
276: superluminal recession boils down to the finding, through conformal
277: transformations, that the coordinate velocity is subluminal in conformal
278: coordinates. However, as was shown in Section \ref{velocities}, all
279: FLRW universes---even in the original coordinates---posses coordinate
280: velocities that are subluminal. Of greater importance is the mapping of
281: proper velocity to conformal coordinates. Since spacetime has been
282: sliced up differently, the surfaces of constant coordinate time---over
283: which proper distance is measured---have been altered. The critical
284: concern is therefore how this new proper distance changes relative to
285: the new time coordinate. This was not addressed in
286: \citet{2006astro.ph..1171C}.
287:
288: \begin{figure*}
289: \centerline{ \psfig{figure=fig3.ps,angle=270,width=6.in}}
290: \caption[]{The left-hand panel presents the proper velocity in open
291: matter-only FLRW universes, for a range of conformal times $\eta$; clearly, at
292: early times, the universe possess superluminal contraction and then
293: expansion. The right-hand panel presents the relationship between
294: the conformal time and the cosmic time of the standard FLRW universe
295: for a range of present day values of the matter density.
296: \label{fig3}}
297: \end{figure*}
298:
299: To answer this, it is useful to examine the picture of the example open
300: universe in $R$-$T$ coordinates (Figure~\ref{fig1}). As FLRW universes
301: are conformally flat, light cones in this picture are at $45^\circ$. As
302: seen in the coordinate transformation given in Equation~\ref{conf}, all
303: fundamental observers (constant $\chi$) sit on straight lines
304: originating at the origin; note that the entire (infinite) universe is
305: contained within the outer lightcone. It might be tempting to consider
306: the point at $(R,T) = (0,0)$ as the FLRW Big Bang, but in fact this
307: `point' ($\eta=0$) is mapped to a hyperbola in the plane, from which the
308: paths of fundamental observers extend, paths behind this curve have no
309: physical equivalent in the FLRW universe.
310:
311: What do we mean when we say the Universe is expanding? It does not mean
312: that coordinates are changing in some particular fashion, as even in
313: standard FLRW universe, objects maintain spatial coordinate separation
314: (i.e.\ the fundamental or comoving spatial coordinates are separate). In
315: fact, universal expansion should be interpreted as an increase in the
316: physical separation of objects with cosmic time i.e.\ a galaxy at $B$ is
317: moving away from $A$ at so many metres per second, with time being
318: measured by $A$'s clock, and distance being the proper distance.
319:
320: \citet{2006astro.ph..1171C} notes that for a spatially flat FLRW
321: universe, the conformal representation is
322: \begin{equation}
323: ds^2 = a^2(\eta)(d\eta^2 - d\chi^2 - \chi^2 \left( d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta
324: d\phi^2 \right) ),
325: \end{equation}
326: so that the distance to a galaxy at comoving coordinate $\chi=X$ from a
327: fundamental observer at $\chi=0$ is taken along a hypersurface of
328: constant cosmological time ($d\eta=0$) and is
329: \begin{equation}
330: D_p(\eta) = \int \sqrt{ -ds^2 } = a(\eta)\int_0^X d\chi = a(\eta) X
331: \end{equation}
332: whereas the proper time, $\tau$ as measured by the fundamental observer at
333: the origin {\rref is related to the coordinate time $t$ and conformal time
334: $\eta$ via}
335: \begin{equation}
336: d\tau = dt = a(\eta) d\eta.
337: \end{equation}
338: {\rref The rate of change of the proper distance to a comoving observer at
339: $\chi=X$ in terms of the proper time
340: as measured at the origin is}
341: \begin{equation}
342: \frac{dD_p}{d\tau} = \frac{1}{a}\frac{da}{dt} (a X)
343: \end{equation}
344: {\rref For a flat universe, the radial coordinate $X$ is unbound and}
345: hence, even in this conformal representation, superluminal expansion remains a
346: feature.
347:
348: What about the conformal representation of the open universe considered
349: by \citet{2006astro.ph..1171C}? As this is a coordinate transformation
350: from the FLRW universes, the distance is a line integral
351: \begin{equation}
352: D_p(\eta) = \int \sqrt{ -ds^2 } = R_0 a(\eta)\int \frac{\sqrt{dR^2
353: -dT^2}}{\sqrt{T^2-R^2}},
354: \end{equation}
355: with the condition that the path be restricted to a hyperbola in the
356: $R$-$T$ plane ($\eta$=constant), so that $T^2 - R^2 = A^2e^{2\eta}
357: \equiv k^2$. From this obtains the relation $dT = (R/T)dR$; the
358: integration proceeds from the origin along to a point $R(\chi)=R_\chi$:
359: \begin{equation}
360: \frac{D_p(\eta)}{a(\eta)R_0} = \int_0^{R_\chi} \frac{dR}{T} = \int^{R_\chi}_0 \frac{dR}{\sqrt{ k^2 + R^2 }} =
361: \mathrm{asinh}\left(\frac{R_\chi}{k}\right) = \chi
362: \end{equation}
363: This physical separation---even in this conformal representation---is
364: that expected from the standard FLRW analysis.
365:
366: But of course, one of the joys of relativity is the ability to slice and
367: dice spacetime differently for differing observers, and we can instead
368: calculate the distance along the spatial hypersurfaces defined by
369: constant $T$ in the conformal representation; this is the approach
370: adopted by \citet{2006astro.ph..1171C}. Does this remove superluminal
371: expansion? Remembering that in an open, matter-only universe,
372: \begin{equation}
373: t(\eta) = \frac{\Omega_0}{2(1-\Omega_0)^{\frac{3}{2}}}
374: \left(\sinh\ \eta - \eta\right),
375: \nonumber
376: \end{equation}
377: \begin{equation}
378: a(\eta) = \frac{\Omega_0}{2(1-\Omega_0)}\left(\cosh\ \eta - 1\right),
379: \label{cosmo}
380: \end{equation}
381: where $\Omega_0$ is the present day normalized matter density
382: \citep[see][]{2005gere.book.....H}. Hence, the distance along the
383: hypersurface is (taking $A=1$ for convenience)
384: \begin{eqnarray}
385: D_p(T) & = & \frac{R_0 \Omega_0}{2(1-\Omega_0)} \int_0^R \frac{
386: \cosh( ln( \sqrt{T^2-R'^2} )) - 1}{\sqrt{T^2-R'^2}} dR' \\ \nonumber
387: & = & \frac{R_0 \Omega_0}{4(1-\Omega_0)} \left[ R - 2 \mathrm{atan}\left( \sinh\chi\right) + \frac{\chi}{T}\right].
388: \end{eqnarray}
389: Figure~\ref{fig2} presents this proper distance as a function of the proper
390: time experienced by an observer at $R=0$ for three fiducial universes with
391: $\Omega_0 = 0.01, 0.5$ and $0.99$. In each, the solid {\rref lines represent}
392: the proper distance, while the dashed {\rref lines} at $45^\circ$ {\rref
393: represent} the speed of light. The dotted {\rref lines} represent the
394: distance in terms of the conformal coordinates while neglecting the conformal
395: factor outside the metric (i.e.\ over Minkowski spacetime).
396:
397: For the low density case, the conformal factor tends to unity and the
398: spacetime becomes that of special relativity. Hence, the proper distance
399: increases as expected in this representation; the paths are subluminal
400: and match those calculated in the $R$-$T$ coordinates. However, as we
401: increase the mass density of the universe, it is seen that the increase
402: of the proper distance with proper time deviates from Minkowski
403: spacetime, in places being superluminal. This is very apparent in the
404: case where $\Omega_0=0.99$ where the majority of paths are receding
405: superluminally.
406:
407: It is interesting to examine the properties of this proper velocity for
408: constant $T$ slices in a little more detail. {\rref Noting that the proper
409: time $\tau$ for an observer the origin is related to the conformal
410: coordinate time $T$ via}
411: \begin{equation}
412: d\tau = \frac{R_0 a(\eta)}{T} dT
413: \end{equation}
414: it is straight forward to
415: show that
416: \begin{equation}
417: \frac{dD_p}{d\tau} =
418: \frac{dT}{d\tau}\frac{dD_P}{dT} =
419: \left[ e^\eta\ \tanh\ \chi -
420: \frac{\chi}{e^\eta}\right]\frac{1}{\left( e^\eta + e^{-\eta}
421: -2\right)}
422: \end{equation}
423: {\rref where $\eta$ is the conformal time ticked off at the origin and is
424: related to the proper time at the origin via $d\tau=R_0 a d\eta$}.
425: Importantly, the form of the curve is independent of $\Omega_0$ and hence is
426: valid for all open ($0<\Omega_0<1$) FLRW universes. The left-hand panel of
427: Figure~\ref{fig3} presents this function for several values of $\chi$; as
428: $\eta\rightarrow\infty$, $dD_p/d\tau\rightarrow\ \tanh\ \chi$, the coordinate
429: velocity, but it is clear from this figure that at early times, the coordinate
430: velocity is negative and superluminal, becoming subluminal before becoming
431: positive and superluminal again; this is true for all values of $\chi$.
432:
433: The remaining issue is the relation between the FLRW conformal time $\eta$ and
434: the cosmological time $t$; this is given by Equation~\ref{cosmo} and is
435: presented in the right-hand panel of Figure~\ref{fig3}. As expected from
436: Figure~\ref{fig2}, in the $\Omega_0=0.01$ universe, the conformal time
437: approaches 5 in a fraction of a Hubble time (i.e. $t<1$) and hence the
438: superluminal motion occurred in the very early universe and is not apparent
439: given the resolution of Figure~\ref{fig2}. However, for the {\rref
440: $\Omega_0=0.99$} universe, this conformal time of $\eta\sim5$ is not
441: approached until after several hundred Hubble times and the superluminal
442: expansion is apparent over cosmic history. However, in the distant universe,
443: this superluminal motion will be lost as the proper velocity tends to the
444: coordinate velocity. Note, that as $\Omega_0\rightarrow 0$, the excessive
445: superluminal motion is pushed back to earlier epochs of cosmic time $t$ until
446: $\Omega_0=0$, the expansion is that of empty, special relativistic universe,
447: with the same proper and coordinate velocity.
448:
449: \section{Conclusions}\label{conclusions}
450: In short, a recent interpretation of the nature of the expansion of the
451: universe in conformal coordinates concludes that superluminal expansion,
452: a staple of FLRW universes, is nothing but a coordinate effect of
453: general relativity and it can be removed through a simple coordinate
454: transformation. This paper has examined this claim and has found this
455: conclusion to be erroneous and objects in the universe can still
456: physically separate at superluminal velocities, even in conformal
457: coordinates. It should be noted that the incorrect interpretation of
458: conformal coordinates is not new; \citet{1998ApJ...508..129Q} attacked a
459: series of papers which claimed cosmology in conformal coordinates can
460: even remove the need for a big bang
461: \citep{1994ApJ...434..397E,1995MNRAS.277..627E,1997ApJ...479...40E}. As
462: ever, in relativity, one should be careful about the interpretation of
463: coordinates and the definition of distances.
464:
465: In a companion paper, \citet{Francis} discussed a number of issues
466: relating to the recent discussions on the meaning and use of expanding
467: space as a concept in cosmology, and we reiterate the most important of
468: these now. The FLRW metric of the cosmos contains a term, the scale
469: factor, which grows with time in an expanding universe. It is perfectly
470: acceptable to talk of this metric expansion as the expansion of space,
471: but ones intuition must be lead by the mathematical framework of general
472: relativity. If, however, one wishes to adopt the conformal metric with
473: the flat spacetime of special relativity (although a changing conformal
474: factor in front of it), that is equally acceptable. The choice of
475: coordinates is down to personal preference, as both must give the same
476: predictions. From all of this, it should be clear that it is futile to
477: ask the question ``is space {\it really} expanding?''; the standard-FLRW
478: metric and its conformal representation are the same spacetime. No
479: experiment can be formulated to differentiate one personal choice of
480: coordinates from another.
481:
482: \section*{Acknowledgments}
483: The anonymous referee is thanked for their comments on this manuscript. GFL
484: acknowledges support from ARC Discover Project DP0665574. GFL also thanks the
485: possums that fight on his back deck at 4am, waking him up and giving him
486: plenty of time to think before his kids wake up at 6am, and also thanks Bryn
487: and Dylan for reintroducing him to {\it Jason and the Argonauts}.
488:
489: \begin{thebibliography}{DEM}
490: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Barnes et al.}{2006}]{barnes2006}
491: Barnes L., Francis M.~J., James, J.~B. Lewis G.~F. 2006, MNRAS, 373, 382
492:
493: %\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Chodorowski}{2006b}]{2006astro.ph..1171C}
494: %Chodorowski M., 2006b, astro, arXiv:astro-ph/0601171
495:
496: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Chodorowski}{2005}]{2005PASA...22..287C}
497: Chodorowski M.~J., 2005, PASA, 22, 287
498:
499: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Chodorowski}{2006}]{2006astro.ph.10590C}
500: Chodorowski M., 2006, astro, arXiv:astro-ph/0610590
501:
502: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Chodorowski}{2007}]{2006astro.ph..1171C}
503: Chodorowski M.~J., 2007, MNRAS, 378, 239
504:
505: %\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Davis \& Lineweaver}{2001}]{2001AIPC..555..348D}
506: %Davis T.~M., Lineweaver C.~H., 2001, AIPC, 555, 348
507:
508: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Davis \& Lineweaver}{2004}]{2004PASA...21...97D}
509: Davis T.~M., Lineweaver C.~H., 2004, PASA, 21, 97
510:
511: %\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Davis, Lineweaver, \& Webb}{2001}]{2001astro.ph..4349D}
512: %Davis T.~M., Lineweaver C.~H., Webb J.~K., 2001, astro, arXiv:astro-ph/0104349
513:
514: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ellis \& Stoeger}{1988}]{1988CQGra...5..207E}
515: Ellis G.~F.~R., Stoeger W., 1988, CQGra, 5, 207
516:
517: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Endean}{1994}]{1994ApJ...434..397E}
518: Endean G., 1994, ApJ, 434, 3
519:
520: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Endean}{1995}]{1995MNRAS.277..627E}
521: Endean G., 1995, MNRAS, 277, 627
522:
523: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Endean}{1997}]{1997ApJ...479...40E}
524: Endean G., 1997, ApJ, 479, 40
525:
526: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Francis et al.}{2007}]{Francis}
527: Francis M.~J., Barnes, L., James, J.~B. \& Lewis, G.~F., 2007, PASA,
528: {\it Accepted}
529:
530: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Hawking \& Ellis}{1973}]{1973lsss.book.....H}
531: Hawking S.~W., Ellis G.~F.~R., 1973, Cambridge University Press
532:
533: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Hobson, Efstathiou, \&
534: Lasenby}{2005}]{2005gere.book.....H} Hobson M.~P., Efstathiou G.~P.,
535: Lasenby A.~N., 2005, {\it General Relativity}, Cam. Uni. Press
536:
537: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Hubble}{1929}]{1929PNAS...15..168H}
538: Hubble E., 1929, PNAS, 15, 168
539:
540: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Infield \& Schild}{1945}]{is}
541: Infield L. \& Schild A., 1945, Phys. Rev., 68, 250
542:
543: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Peacock}{2006}]{Peacockweb}
544: Peacock, J., 2006, www.roe.ac.uk/$\sim$jap/book/additions.html
545:
546: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Querella}{1998}]{1998ApJ...508..129Q}
547: Querella L., 1998, ApJ, 508, 129
548:
549: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Rindler}{1956}]{1956MNRAS.116..662R}
550: Rindler W., 1956, MNRAS, 116, 662
551:
552: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Tauber}{1967}]{tauber}
553: Tauber, G. E. 1967, J. Math. Phys., 8, 118
554:
555: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Whiting}{2004}]{2004Obs...124..174W}
556: Whiting A.~B., 2004, Obs, 124, 174
557:
558: \end{thebibliography}
559: \end{document}
560:
561:
562:
563:
564: