Search

The Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker (FLRW) metric used to describe the cosmic spacetime is based on the cosmological principle, which assumes homogeneity and isotropy throughout the Universe. It also adopts free-fall conditions via the selection of a constant lapse function, g t t = 1 , regardless of whether or not the chosen energy–momentum tensor T α β produces an accelerated expansion. This is sometimes justified by arguing that one may shift the gauge, if necessary, transforming the time d t to a new coordinate d t ′ ≡ g t t d t , thereby re-establishing a unitary value for g t ′ t ′ . Previously, we have demonstrated that this approach is inconsistent with the Friedmann equations derived using comoving coordinates. In this paper, we advance this discussion significantly by using the Local Flatness Theorem in general relativity to prove that g t t in FLRW is inextricably dependent on the expansion dynamics via the expansion factor a (t) , which itself depends on the equation-of-state in T α β . One is therefore not free to choose g t t arbitrarily without ensuring its consistency with the energy–momentum tensor. We prove that the use of FLRW in cosmology is valid only for zero active mass, i.e. ρ + 3 p = 0 , where ρ and p are, respectively, the total energy density and pressure in the cosmic fluid. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The emergence of a highly improbable coincidence in cosmological observations speaks of a remarkably simple cosmic expansion. Compelling evidence now suggests that the Universe's gravitational horizon, coincident with the better known Hubble sphere, has a radius improbably equal to the distance light could have traveled since the Big Bang. The confirmation of this unexpected result would undoubtedly herald the influence of new physics, yet appears to be unavoidable after a recent demonstration that the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metric is valid only for the so-called zero active mass equation of state. As it turns out, a cosmic fluid with this property automatically produces the aforementioned equality, leaving little room for a cosmological constant. The alternative — a dynamical dark energy — would suggest an extension to the Standard Model of particle physics and a serious re-evaluation of the Universe's early history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]