In cosmology empty space has an energy density $\rho_{\Lambda}$ of

$$\rho_{\Lambda}=\rho_c \cdot \Omega_{\Lambda}\cdot c^2$$

with $\Omega_{\Lambda}$ beeing the dark energy fraction ($0.683$ according to Planck 2013) and $\rho_c$ beeing todays critical density defined by

$$\rho_c=3 H_0^2/8/\pi/G$$

where $H_0=2.176\cdot 10^{-18}\, \text{s}^{-1}$ is the Hubble constant, and $G=6.674\cdot 10^{-11}\, \text{m}^3\,\text{kg}^{-1}\,\text{s}^{-2}$ Newtons constant. This is in units of $\text{Joule}/\text{m}^3$ or $\text{Pascal}$

$$\rho_{\Lambda}=5.2\cdot 10^{-10} \, \text{kg}\, \text{m}^{-1}\, \text{s}^{-2}$$

Now the universe is expanding, and since the volume increases, so does energy. The rate at which space expands is as mentioned above $2.176\cdot10^{-18}\, \text{m}/\text{m}/\text{s}$ which means that every meter grows by $2.176\cdot10^{-18}$ meters every second.

So one cubic meter, $1\, \text{m}^3$, every second gives birth to

$$\Delta{V} = V_2-V_1=6.528\cdot 10^{-18} \, \text{m}^3$$

Where the volume $V_1$ = $r^3$ with $r=1\, \text{m}$, and $V_2=r\cdot(1+H_0\cdot \Delta{t})$ with $\Delta{t}=1\, \text{s}$

When we multiply the new born volume $\Delta{V}$ with the dark energy density $\rho_{\Lambda}$ and divide it by $\Delta{t}$, we get in units of power, $\text{kg}\,\text{m}^2\,\text{s}^{-3}$, the value of

$$3.394\cdot 10^{-27} \, \text{Watt}$$

Is my interpretation that every cubic meter generates a power of $3.394\cdot 10^{-27} \, \text{Watt}$ correct, or is there a flaw in my considerations?

  • $\begingroup$ $\rho_\Lambda$ and $\rho_c$ can't both have units of energy density if you are multiplying one by $c^2$ to get the other... and $\rho_c$ apparently has units of energy density according to your equations... so $\rho_\Lambda$, which you call an energy density, looks like it is not an energy density. $\endgroup$ – hft Mar 3 '15 at 6:54
  • $\begingroup$ @hft: Energy and mass are equivalent. So the factor of $c^2$ is just Einsteins $e=m\cdot c^2$. $\rho_{c}$ is the critical density in $kg/m^3$, while dark energy has units of $Joule/m^3$. In relativity this is equivalent by a factor of $c^2$ $\endgroup$ – Yukterez Mar 3 '15 at 6:59
  • $\begingroup$ your rho_c has units of kg/(ms^2), which is already an energy density. Not mass density. So you are not saying E=mc^2, you are saying E=Ec^2 $\endgroup$ – hft Mar 3 '15 at 7:01
  • $\begingroup$ @hft: s1.postimg.org/3sxkj2kbj/Unbenannt.png $\endgroup$ – Yukterez Mar 3 '15 at 7:04
  • $\begingroup$ So, you changed the "c" in the first equation with units of "kg/(ms^2)" to a Lamda. Sure, that is fine now. $\endgroup$ – hft Mar 3 '15 at 7:05

is there a flaw in my considerations?

For one thing, the universe is not just empty space.

But, anyways... yeah, if you have a volume of constant energy density and you increase that volume while keeping the energy density constant then... yeah, you increase the energy. It's true.

  • $\begingroup$ >> For one thing, the universe is not just empty space. << Tell me more [: $\endgroup$ – Yukterez Mar 3 '15 at 7:05
  • $\begingroup$ If the universe expands at the rate you gave and if the energy density remains constant. Then, yes, there is an energy production rate in Watts. So? $\endgroup$ – hft Mar 3 '15 at 7:07
  • $\begingroup$ Nothing "so". That was the question. $\endgroup$ – Yukterez Mar 3 '15 at 7:08
  • $\begingroup$ So, mark it as answered if it's answered. $\endgroup$ – hft Mar 3 '15 at 7:58

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.