1: % Cosmology calculator write-up

2: 

3: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}

4: 

5: \shortauthors{Wright}

6: 

7: \shorttitle{Cosmology Calculator}

8: 

9: % my own definitions are here:

10: \newcommand{\iMAP}         {{\sl WMAP}}

11: \newcommand{\dg}           {\mbox{$^{\circ}$}}

12: \newcommand{\lsim}         {\mbox{$_<\atop^{\sim}$}}

13: \newcommand{\gsim}         {\mbox{$_>\atop^{\sim}$}}

14: \newcommand{\percm}        {\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-1}$}}

15: \newcommand{\percmsq}      {\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-2}$}}

16: \newcommand{\percmcub}     {\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}}

17: \newcommand{\lt}           {\mbox{$<$}}

18: \newcommand{\gt}           {\mbox{$>$}}

19: \newcommand{\kms}          {\mbox{${\rm ~km~s^{-1}}$}}

20: \newcommand{\Lsun}         {\mbox{{\rm L_\odot}}}

21: \newcommand{\etal}         {{\it et al.}}

22: \newcommand{\vs}           {{\it vs.}}

23: \newcommand{\be}           {\begin{equation}}

24: \newcommand{\ee}           {\end{equation}}

25: \newcommand{\bea}           {\begin{eqnarray}}

26: \newcommand{\eea}           {\end{eqnarray}}

27: 

28: \slugcomment{Draft: 6 Oct 2006}

29: 

30: \begin{document}

31: 

32: \title{A Cosmology Calculator for the World Wide Web}

33: 

34: \author{

35: E.\ L.\ Wright\altaffilmark{1},

36: }

37: 

38: \altaffiltext{1}{UCLA Astronomy, PO Box 951547, Los Angeles CA 90095-1547, USA}

39: 

40: \email{wright@astro.ucla.edu}

41: 

42: \begin{abstract}

43: A cosmology calculator that computes times and distances as a function of

44: redshift for user-defined cosmological parameters is available at

45: http://www.astro.ucla.edu/$\sim$wright/CosmoCalc.html.

46: This note gives the formulae used by the cosmology calculator and discusses

47: some of its implementation.

48: A version of the calculator that allows one to specify the equation of

49: state parameter $w$ and $w^\prime$ is at ACC.html, and a version for

50: converting the light travel times usually given in the popular press into

51: redshifts is at DlttCalc.html.

52: \end{abstract}

53: 

54: \keywords{cosmology: miscellaneous -- methods: miscellaneous}

55: 

56: \section{INTRODUCTION}\label{intro}

57: 

58: There are many definitions of distances in cosmology, and it is often

59: frustrating to calculate the kind of distance needed for a given

60: situation.  In particular, press releases (Clavin, 2006) 

61: very often use the {\em light

62: travel time distance}, $D_{ltt} = c(t_\circ-t_{em})$, even though this

63: distance has very many undesirable characteristics.  I wrote the

64: cosmology calculator in order to be able to calculate $D_{ltt}$ along

65: with the observable angular and luminosity distances $D_A$ and $D_L$.

66: It also computes the proper radial distance which is the only distance

67: that is compatible with the common definition of distance for moving

68: objects:  the spatial separation at a common time.  The common time

69: used is now, or $t_\circ$.  This it is called $D_{now}$ below.

70: $D_{now}$, also known as the comoving radial distance, is not measurable from

71: a single position, but it can in principle be measured by a family of

72: comoving observers.  It is the one distance that satisfies the Hubble

73: Law exactly: $dD/dt = H(t)D$ without any corrections.  Other distances

74: are defined using quantities taken from more than one time and

75: generally only satisfy the Hubble Law to first order.

76: 

77: \section{EQUATIONS \label{sec:obs}}

78: 

79: The following results have been given many times before.

80: Hogg (1999) gives equations equivalent to the ones in this paper.

81: But for completeness in documenting the cosmology calculator

82: the equations are spelled out below.

83: 

84: The metric is given by

85: \be

86: ds^2 = c^2dt^2 - a(t)^2 R_\circ^2 (d\psi^2 + S^2(\psi)[d\theta^2+

87: 	\sin^2\theta d\phi^2])

88: \ee

89: where $S(x)$ is $\sinh(x)$ if $\Omega_{tot} < 1$ and $\sin(x)$ for

90: $\Omega_{tot} > 1$.  The radius of curvature is given by

91: $R_\circ = (c/H_\circ)/\sqrt{|1-\Omega_{tot}|}$

92: since I use the normalization that $a = 1$ at the current time so

93: the redshift is given by $1+z = 1/a$.

94: The past light cone is given by $c dt = a(t) R_\circ d\psi$ so

95: the comoving radial distance is

96: \be

97: D_{now}  =  R_\circ \psi = \int \frac{c dt}{a}

98: = \int_{1/(1+z)}^1 \frac{c da}{a\dot{a}}

99: \ee

100: and of course the light travel time distance is given by

101: \be

102: D_{ltt} = \int c dt = \int_{1/(1+z)}^1 \frac{c da}{\dot{a}}

103: = c(t_\circ - t(z))

104: \ee

105: The exact dynamics of the Universe can be captured using the

106: the energy equation from the Newtonian approximation to

107: cosmology, which gives

108: \be

109: \frac{\dot{a}^2}{2} - \frac{G M(<a)}{a} = \mbox{const}.

110: \ee

111: GR modifies the acceleration equation by including the pressure

112: as a source of gravity, but this just cancels the variation of

113: the enclosed mass $M(<a)$ caused by the pressure, so the energy

114: equation is exact.

115: So we can write $\dot{a}$ as $H_\circ \sqrt{X}$ with

116: \be

117: X(a) = \Omega_m/a + \Omega_r/a^2 + \Omega_v a^2 + (1-\Omega_{tot})

118: \approx 1 + 2q_\circ z + \ldots

119: \ee

120: where $q_\circ$ is the deceleration parameter.

121: Let us define a quantity $Z$ that is the comoving distance divided by

122: the Hubble radius $c/H_\circ$.  Then

123: \be

124: Z = \int_{1/(1+z)}^1 \frac{da}{a\sqrt{X}} = \int_0^z \frac{dz}{(1+z)\sqrt{X}}

125: \approx z - z^2(1+q_\circ)/2 + \ldots

126: \ee

127: To first order this agrees with the redshift, so $Z = z+ \ldots$

128: % X \approx 1 + z*(Omega_m + 2*Omega_r - 2*Omega_v) 

129: This definition gives

130: $D_{now} = (cZ/H_\circ)$ and

131: $D_{ltt} = (c/H_\circ) \int_{1/(1+z)}^1 da/\sqrt{X}$.

132: Then the angular size distance, which is defined as $D_A = R/\theta$

133: where $R$ is the transverse proper length of an object that subtends

134: an angle $\theta$ on the sky, is given by:

135: \bea

136: D_A & = & \frac{c}{H_\circ}

137: \frac{S(\sqrt{|1-\Omega_{tot}|}Z)}{(1+z)\sqrt{|1-\Omega_{tot}|}}

138: \nonumber \\

139: & = & \frac{D_{now}}{(1+z)}

140: \left(1 + \frac{1}{6} (1-\Omega_{tot}) Z^2 + \frac{1}{120} 

141: (1-\Omega_{tot})^2 Z^4 + \ldots \right)

142: \eea

143: We can define 

144: a function $J(x)$ given by

145: \be

146: J(x) =  \cases{

147: \sin(\sqrt{-x})/\sqrt{-x}, & $x < 0$;\cr

148: \sinh(\sqrt{x})/\sqrt{x}, & $x > 0$;\cr

149: 1 + x/6 + x^2/120 + \ldots + x^n/(2n+1)! + \ldots, & $x \approx 0$.\cr

150: }

151: \ee

152: Then

153: \bea

154: D_{ltt} & = & \frac{c}{H_\circ} \int_{1/(1+z)}^1 \frac{da}{\sqrt{X}}

155: \nonumber \\

156: D_{now} & = & \frac{c}{H_\circ} \int_{1/(1+z)}^1 \frac{da}{a\sqrt{X}} = 

157: \frac{cZ}{H_\circ}

158: \nonumber \\

159: D_A & = & D_{now} \frac{J([1-\Omega_{tot}]Z^2)}{1+z}

160: \nonumber \\

161: D_L & = & (1+z)^2 D_A

162: \eea

163: Note that the luminosity distance $D_L$ is defined to make the inverse

164: square law work perfectly for bolometric fluxes, so that 

165: $F_{bol} = L/(4\pi D_L^2)$ for an object of luminosity $L$.

166: 

167: The enclosed volume calculation requires the integral of

168: either $\sin^2\psi d\psi$ or $\sinh^2\psi d\psi$.  The

169: closed case becomes

170: \be

171: V(<z) = 4\pi R_\circ^3 \int_0^\psi \frac{1-\cos 2\psi^\prime}{2} d\psi^\prime

172: = R_\circ^3 \left(\frac{\psi}{2}- \frac{\sin 2\psi}{4} \right)

173: \ee

174: Note that $\psi = \sqrt{|1-\Omega_{tot}|}Z(z)$.  The open case gives

175: \be

176: V(<z) = 4\pi R_\circ^3 \left(\frac{\sinh 2\psi}{4} - \frac{\psi}{2}\right)

177: \ee

178: The ratio of $V(<z)$ to the Euclidean formula $(4\pi/3)(R_\circ \psi)^3$ is

179: given by

180: \bea

181: \frac{V(<z)}{(4\pi/3)(R_\circ \psi)^3} & = &

182: 1+\sum_{n=1}\frac{6\times4^n}{(2n+3)!}[(1-\Omega_{tot})Z(z)^2]^n

183: \nonumber \\

184: & = & 1 +\frac{1}{5}[(1-\Omega_{tot})Z(z)^2]

185: +\frac{2}{105}[(1-\Omega_{tot})Z(z)^2]^2 + \ldots

186: \eea

187: in both the open and closed cases.

188: 

189: \section{IMPLEMENTATION\label{sec:analysis}}

190: 

191: The cosmology calculator is implemented as a Web page 

192: (CosmoCalc.html) that has

193: a large number of Javascript definitions in the header,

194: followed by immediately executed Javascript that writes a

195: frameset to the current document.  The frameset calls 

196: for the input form (CCform.html) and the output page

197: (CCout.html).  If Javascript is not enabled, or if there

198: is an error in the Javascript, then the body of CosmoCalc.html

199: is displayed.  This body is just an error message saying that

200: Javascript must be enabled.

201: 

202: I have received several requests for the code used in the cosmology

203: calculator.  But since the code is in Javascript, it is in the HTML

204: files in ASCII form.  

205: It is easy to save the page source to get the code, and it

206: is easy to modify the code using any text editor.  If your modifications

207: introduce an error, then you will see the error message saying that

208: Javascript must be enabled.  This only means that you must find the error

209: in your modified CosmoCalc.html.  I have had to do this dozens of times,

210: so don't be discouraged.

211: 

212: Even if you do not intend to modify the code, downloading the three

213: HTML files will let you run the calculator locally when not connected

214: to the Internet.

215: 

216: The numerical evaluation of the integrals for $Z$ and $t$ is done using

217: the mid-point rule with 1000 panels.  While this is not a very efficient

218: use of CPU time, it was very easy to code.  And with Javascript, the CPU

219: time is consumed on the user's computer instead of the server.

220: The functions being integrated go smoothly to zero as $a$ goes to zero

221: as long as $\Omega_r > 0$.

222: 

223: Another hidden aspect of the cosmology calculator is that it

224: automatically sets the radiation density $\Omega_r h^2$ to the

225: value appropriate for $T_\circ = 2.72528$\,K and three massless

226: neutrino species, $\Omega_r h^2 = 4.165 \times10^{-5}$.  Here $h

227: = H_\circ/100\;\mbox{km/sec/Mpc}$, and this factor includes a small

228: ($< 1\%$) boost in the neutrino density due to a slight transfer to

229: $e^+e^-$ annihilation energy into neutrinos (Hannestad \& Madsen, 1995).  

230: So if you want to verify some

231: simple cases, like the empty Universe, you should use a large value of

232: the Hubble constant which reduces the relative importance of this

233: radiation term.  For example, the open button with $H_\circ = 97.78$

234: and $\Omega_M = 0$ gives an age of the Universe of 9.934 Gyr which is

235: 0.7\% from the expected 10 Gyr.

236: But using $H_\circ = 977.8$ gives an age of 999 Myr which

237: is only 0.1\% from the expected 1\,Gyr.

238: 

239: For very early times, the age of the Universe is adjusted to allow

240: for the existence of $e^+,e^-$, $\mu^+,\mu^-$, etc. using the

241: $g_*$ and $g_{*S}$ for the standard model of particle physics given

242: by Kolb \& Turner (1990).

243: 

244: \section{Light travel time inversion}

245: 

246: A slightly modified version of the cosmology calculator is at\\

247: http://www.astro.ucla.edu/$~\sim$wright/DlttCalc.html.\\

248: The input form asks for the light travel time in Gyr instead of redshift.

249: The redshift is found by evaluating the integral for light travel time

250: in steps of $-0.001$ in $a$ starting from $a=1$

251: until the input value is exceeded, and then

252: interpolating to get $a$ and thus $z$.  Once $z$ is known the calculations

253: proceed as in CosmoCalc.html.

254: 

255: \section{MORE OPTIONS\label{sec:discussion}}

256: 

257: Since the cosmology calculator was first written, there have been two

258: developments that change the kinds of models that people want to run.

259: I have created a new version of the cosmology calculator with more

260: options and placed it in\\

261: http://www.astro.ucla.edu/$\sim$wright/ACC.html\\

262: One development is the discovery of neutrino oscillations, indicating

263: that the assumption of massless neutrinos is not correct.  The neutrino

264: temperature is $(4/11)^{1/3} T_\circ = 1.95$\,K, and a typical momentum

265: for a thermal neutrino is $\approx 3 kT/c$.  This corresponds to the rest

266: energy of a neutrino with $mc^2 \approx 0.0005$\,eV.  Since the neutrinos

267: thermalized while still relativistic, their distribution is that of a

268: relativistic Fermi-Dirac particle, so the neutrino density is given by

269: \bea

270: \rho_\nu & = & 4\pi g_s h^{-3}

271: \sum_{e,\mu,\tau}

272: \left(\int \sqrt{m_\nu^2 + p^2/c^2} \; \frac{p^2 dp}{\exp(pc/kT_\nu)+1}\right)

273: \nonumber \\

274: & = & 4\pi g_s \left(\frac{kT_\nu}{hc}\right)^3 \sum_{e,\mu,\tau}

275: \left(\int \sqrt{m_\nu^2 +(x kT_\nu)^2/c^4}\;\frac{x^2 dx}{\exp(x)+1}\right)

276: \eea

277: The number of spin states for a neutrino is one, but to allow for 

278: anti-neutrinos one should use $g_s = 2$.  

279: 

280: The integral over neutrino momentum has to be evaluated for each step of

281: the integration over $a$ so it needs to be done efficiently, even when the

282: work is done on the user's computer.  In the low temperature limit when

283: $kT_\nu << m_\nu c^2$ the integral over $x$ evaluates to $m_\nu

284: (3/4)\zeta(3)\Gamma(3)$, while in the high temperature limit $kT_\nu >> m_\nu

285: c^2$ the integral evaluates to $(k T_\nu/c^2)(7/8)\zeta(4)\Gamma(4)$.

286: Both limits can be evaluated correctly by approximating the integral

287: using 

288: \be 

289: \int \sqrt{m_\nu^2 + x^2(kT_\nu)^2/c^4}\;\frac{x^2

290: dx}{\exp(x)+1} \approx m_\nu (3/4)\zeta(3)\Gamma(3) \sqrt{1+(x_1

291: kT_\nu/m_\nu c^2)^2} 

292: \ee 

293: with the single integration knot at $x_1 =

294: [(7/8)\zeta(4)\Gamma(4)]/[(3/4)\zeta(3)\Gamma(3)] = 3.151$.  This

295: approximation has a maximum error of $< 3\%$.  But a better

296: approximation is 

297: \be 

298: \int \sqrt{m_\nu^2 + x^2(kT_\nu)^2/c^4}\;\frac{x^2 dx}{\exp(x)+1} 

299: = m_\nu (3/4)\zeta(3)\Gamma(3) f(x_1 kT_\nu/m_\nu c^2)

300: \ee 

301: with 

302: \be 

303: f(y) \approx (1+y^\beta)^{1/\beta} 

304: \ee 

305: and $\beta = 1.842$ which

306: has a maximum error $< 0.3\%$.  The mass at which neutrinos are

307: semi-relativistic at the current epoch is 

308: \be 

309: m_{rel}c^2 = x_1 kT_\nu = 0.000531(T_\circ/2.72528\;\mbox{K})\;\mbox{eV}

310: \label{eq:mrel}

311: \ee 

312: The final result is that the effective neutrino

313: density can be written as 

314: \be 

315: \Omega_\nu(z) h^2 = \left(\frac{T_\circ}{2.72528\;\mbox{K}}\right)^3

316: \frac{\sum_{e,\mu,\tau} m_\nu f(m_{rel}(1+z)/m_\nu)}

317: {93.14\;\mbox{eV}/c^2} 

318: \ee

319: The normalization of 93.14~eV is from Mangano \etal\ (2005) and is 1.05\%

320: higher than the nominal due to residual coupling of annihilation energy

321: to the neutrinos.  In the relativistic limit the density is 1.53\% higher.

322: Increasing $T_\nu$ by 0.48\% over the nominal $(4/11)^{1/3}T_\circ$ when

323: computing $m_{rel}$ allows for the relativistic limit, and this boost is

324: included in Eq(\ref{eq:mrel}).

325: 

326: This $\Omega_\nu(z)$ is just a function of $z$ which gives $\Omega_\nu$

327: at $z=0$ and should not be confused with the actual $\Omega_\nu$ at $z$'s

328: other than zero.

329: In ACC.html the neutrino density at $z=0$ is

330: subtracted from the input $\Omega_M$ giving separate $\Omega_{CM} =

331: \Omega_M - \Omega_\nu(z=0)$ for the CDM and baryons,

332: and $\Omega_\nu$ for the neutrinos.

333: Of course the neutrinos are not included in the radiation so

334: $\Omega_r h^2 = 2.778 \times 10^{-5} (T_\circ/2.72528)^4$.

335: 

336: For a hierarchical neutrino mass pattern, with masses $\approx 0.001,

337: \;0.009\;\&\; 0.049$~eV, the change in distances introduced by

338: neutrino masses is negligible.  At redshifts up to 5 in the

339: WMAP concordance flat $\Lambda$CDM

340: cosmology with $\Omega_M = 0.27$ and $H_\circ = 71$, the

341: changes are less than 0.01\%.   This mass pattern is the default

342: when ACC.html is loaded.  But even the more massive nearly

343: degenerate neutrino mass patterns such as $\approx 0.33,\;

344: 0.33\;\&\; 0.33$~eV have a minimal effect on the

345: distances and times.

346: 

347: \begin{figure}[t]

348: \plotone{CC-fig1.ps}

349: \caption{The 4 distance measures $D_A$, $D_{ltt}$, $D_{now}$

350: and $D_L$ from bottom to top plotted against a fifth distance measure:

351: the redshift $z$, for 3 different cosmological

352: models:  an open CDM model, a flat $\Lambda$CDM model, and a closed CDM model.

353: The center and right panels are consistent with the CMB angular power spectrum,

354: while the left and center panels are consistent with large scale structure.

355: Only the center panel is consistent with supernova data.\label{fig:Dsvsz}}

356: \end{figure}

357: 

358: The second change in the paradigm is the introduction of the equation

359: of state $w(z) = P/\rho c^2$ as a parameter in the model.  I have

360: implemented $w(z)$ as $w = w_\circ+2w^\prime(1-a)$ following Linder

361: (2003) who added the factor of ``2'' normalization

362: to the simple form used by Chevallier \& Polarski (2001).

363: This functional form behaves well at high redshift and it

364: allows an analytic solution for the dark energy density as a function

365: of $z$.  This solution is

366: % d(ln\rho)/d\ln(a) = -3(1+w) = -3-3*w_o -6*w'(1-a) = -(3+3*w_o+6*w')-6*w'*a

367: % d\ln\rho = [-(3+3*w_o+6*w')/a -6*w']*da

368: % \rho = \rho_o * a^{-(3+3*w_o+6*w'))*exp(-6*w'*(1-a))

369: \be

370: \rho_{DE} = \rho_{DE,\circ} \; a^{-(3+3w_\circ+6w^\prime)} \; 

371: \exp(-6w^\prime[1-a])

372: \ee

373: The defaults are $w = -1$ and $w^\prime = 0$ and in that case

374: ACC.html reduces to the CosmoCalc.html case.

375: 

376: Unlike the neutrino masses, changes in $w$ have substantial effects on

377: distances and ages.  Changing $w$ to $-0.7$ instead of the default $-1$

378: changes the age of the Universe by 6\% and the luminosity distance at $z=1$

379: by 7\% when $\Omega_M = 0.27$, $\Omega_{DE} = 0.73$, and $H_\circ = 71$

380: are left unchanged.

381: But for $w=-0.7$ the model consistent with both supernovae (Riess \etal\

382: 2004 gold+silver) and the CMB (Page \etal\ 2003 peak positions)

383: changes to an open model with $\Omega_M = 0.19$, $\Omega_{DE} = 0.74$ and

384: $H_\circ = 84$, and this gives an age change of 17\% and a luminosity distance

385: change of 21\% at $z=1$.  However, if $\Omega_M$ and $\Omega_{DE}$ are allowed

386: to vary as free parameters, the observable supernova signal in $D_L$ is reduced 

387: to only 0.3\% (Wright 2005). 

388: 

389: Finally ACC.html allows one to input $T_\circ$, allowing for easier tests

390: of simple cases.

391: 

392: With these changes, the $X$ function is

393: \be

394: X(a) = (\Omega_{CM}+\Omega_\nu(z))/a + \Omega_{r}/a^2

395:         + \Omega_{DE}\;a^{-(1+3w_\circ+6w^\prime)}\;\exp(-6w^\prime[1-a])

396:         + (1-\Omega_{tot})

397: \ee

398: The rest of the calculation of distances is unchanged.

399: 

400: \section{CONCLUSION\label{sec:conclusion}}

401: 

402: These cosmology calculators are suitable for interactive use, providing fairly

403: quick answers for single cases.  Users who wish to use the code for large scale 

404: calculations should translate it into a compiled language and change the

405: quadrature formula.  In particular, if fitting to datasets with redshifts and

406: distance, the data should be sorted by redshift and the distance integrals

407: evaluated for all objects in a single pass through the sorted data.  Plotting 

408: figures is an obvious case where redshifts are computed in order: 

409: Figure \ref{fig:Dsvsz} shows the distance

410: measures discussed in this paper as a function of $z$ for 3 different 

411: models.  The formulae presented here were translated into Postscript 

412: for this figure, resulting in a 4 kB file.

413: 

414: \acknowledgements

415: 

416: \thebibliography

417: 

418: \bibitem{chevallier/polarksi;2001} Chevallier, M. \& Polarski, D. 2001,

419: Int. J. Mod. Phys., D10, 213.

420: 

421: \bibitem{clavin;2006}

422: Clavin, W. 2006, JPL press release,\\ 

423: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/jpl/news/spitzerf-20060321.html

424: 

425: \bibitem{hannestad/madsen;1995}

426: Hannestad, S. \& Madsen, J. 1995, PRD, 52, 1764-1769.

427: 

428: \bibitem{hogg;1999} Hogg, D. 1999, astro-ph/9905116v4

429: 

430: \bibitem{kolb/turner;1990} Kolb, E. \& Turner, M. 1990,

431: ``The Early Universe'', (Addison Wesley)

432: 

433: \bibitem{linder;2003} Linder, E. 2003, PRL, 90, 091301

434: 

435: \bibitem{mangano/etal;2005} Mangano, G., Miele, G., Pastor, S., Pinto, T., 

436: Pisanti, O. \& Serpico, P. 2005, Nucl.Phys. B, 729, 221-234. % hep-ph/0506164

437: 

438: \bibitem{page/etal;2003}

439: Page, L. \etal, 2003, ApJS, 148, 233. % astro-ph/0302220

440: 

441: \bibitem{riess/etal;2004}

442: Riess, A. \etal., 2004, \apj,  607, 665-687. % astro-ph/0402512

443: 

444: \bibitem{wright;2005}

445: Wright, E. 2005, New Astronomy Reviews, 49, 407.

446: 

447: \end{document}

448: