We shall now move on to the more realistic case of a multi-component
universe consisting of radiation and collisionless dark matter.
(For the moment we are ignoring the baryons, which we will study in
Sec. 6). It is convenient to use y =
a / aeq as independent variable
rather than the time coordinate. The background expansion of the
universe described by the function a(t) can be
equivalently expressed (in terms of the conformal time
) as
![]() |
(70) |
It is also useful to define a critical wave number kc by:
![]() |
(71) |
which essentially sets the comoving scale corresponding to
matter-radiation equality. Note that 2x = kc
and y
kc
in the
radiation dominated phase while y = (1/4)(kc
)2
in the matter dominated phase.
We now manipulate Eqs. (52), (55), (56), (57) governing the growth of perturbations by essentially eliminating the velocity. This leads to the three equations
![]() |
(72) |
![]() |
(73) |
![]() |
(74) |
for the three unknowns ,
m,
R. Given
suitable initial conditions we can solve these equations to determine
the growth of perturbations. The initial conditions need to imposed very
early on when the modes are much bigger than the Hubble radius which
corresponds to the y << 1, k
0 limit. In this
limit, the equations become:
![]() |
(75) |
We will take
(yi,
k) =
i(k)
as given value, to be determined by
the processes that generate the initial perturbations. First equation in
Eq. (75) shows that we can take
R =
-2
i for
yi
0.
Further Eq. (53) shows that adiabaticity is respected
at these scales and we can take
m = (3/4)
R = -(3/2)
i;.
The exact equation Eq. (72) determines
' if
(
,
m,
R) are
given. Finally we use the last two equations to set
'm =
3
',
'R =
4
'.
Thus we take the initial conditions at some y =
yi << 1 to be:
![]() |
(76) |
with 'm(yi, k) =
3
'(yi, k);
'R(yi, k) =
4
'(yi, k).
Given these initial conditions, it is fairly easy to integrate the equations forward in time and the numerical results are shown in Figs 2, 3, 4, 5. (In the figures keq is taken to be aeqHeq.) To understand the nature of the evolution, it is, however, useful to try out a few analytic approximations to Eqs. (72) – (74) which is what we will do now.
4.1 . Evolution for
>>
dH
Let us begin by considering very large wavelength modes corresponding to
the k
0 limit. In this case
adiabaticity is respected and we can set
R
(4/3)
m.
Then Eqs. (72), (73) become
![]() |
(77) |
Differentiating the first equation and using the second to eliminate
m, we get a
second order equation for
. Fortunately, this
equation has an exact solution
![]() |
(78) |
[There is simple way of determining such an exact solution, which we
will describe in Sec. 4.4.]. The initial condition on
R is chosen
such that it goes to
-2
i initially.
The solution shows that, as long as the mode is bigger than the Hubble
radius, the potential changes very little; it is constant initially as
well as in the final matter dominated phase. At late times (y
>> 1) we
see that
(9/10)
i so that
decreases only by a
factor (9/10) during the entire evolution if k
0 is a valid
approximation.
4.2. Evolution for
<<
dH in the radiation dominated phase
When the mode enters Hubble radius in the radiation dominated phase, we
can no longer ignore the pressure terms. The
pressure makes radiation density contrast oscillate and the
gravitational potential, driven by this, also oscillates with a decay in
the overall amplitude. An approximate procedure to describe this phase
is to solve the coupled
R -
system, ignoring
m which is
sub-dominant and then determine
m using the
form of
.
When m is
ignored, the problem reduces to the one solved earlier in Eqs (64), (65)
with w = 1/3 giving
= 3. Since
J3/2
can be expressed in terms of trigonometric functions, the solution given
by Eq. (64) with
= 3, simplifies to
![]() |
(79) |
Note that as y
0, we have
=
i,
' = 0. This solution
shows that once the mode enters the Hubble radius, the potential decays
in an oscillatory manner. For ly >> 1, the potential becomes
-3
i
(ly)-2 cos(ly). In the same limit,
we get from Eq. (65) that
![]() |
(80) |
(This is analogous to Eq. (68) for the radiation dominated case.) This oscillation is seen clearly in Fig 3. and Fig. 4 (left panel). The amplitude of oscillations is accurately captured by Eq. (80) for k = 100keq mode but not for k = keq; this is to be expected since the mode is not entering in the radiation dominated phase.
![]() |
Figure 3. Evolution of
|
Let us next consider matter perturbations during this phase. They grow, driven by the gravitational potential determined above. When y << 1, Eq. (73) becomes:
![]() |
(81) |
The is essentially
determined by radiation and satisfies Eq. (61); using this, we can
rewrite Eq. (81) as
![]() |
(82) |
The general solution to the homogeneous part of Eq. (82) (obtained by ignoring the right hand side) is (c1 + c2 lny); hence the general solution to this equation is
![]() |
(83) |
For y << 1 the growing mode varies as lny and
dominates over the rest; hence we conclude that,
matter, driven by ,
grows logarithmically during the radiation dominated phase for modes
which are inside the Hubble radius.
4.3. Evolution in the matter dominated phase
Finally let us consider the matter dominated phase, in which we can ignore the radiation and concentrate on Eq. (72) and Eq. (73). When y >> 1 these equations become:
![]() |
(84) |
These have a simple solution which we found earlier (see Eq. (69)):
![]() |
(85) |
In this limit, the matter perturbations grow linearly with expansion:
m
y
a. In fact
this is the most dominant growth mode in the linear perturbation
theory.
4.4. An alternative description of matter-radiation system
Before proceeding further, we will describe an alternative procedure for
discussing the perturbations in dark matter and radiation, which has
some advantages. In the formalism we used above, we used
perturbations in the energy density of radiation
(R) and
matter (
m)
as the dependent variables. Instead, we now use perturbations in the
total energy density,
and
the perturbations in the entropy per particle,
as the new dependent
variables. In terms of
R,
m, these
variables are defined as:
![]() |
(86) |
![]() |
(87) |
Given the equations for
R,
m, one can
obtain the corresponding equations for the new variables
(
,
) by
straight forward algebra. It is convenient to express them as two
coupled equations for
and
. After some direct
but a bit tedious algebra, we get:
![]() |
(88) |
![]() |
(89) |
where we have defined
![]() |
(90) |
These equations show that the entropy perturbations and gravitational
potential (which is directly related to total energy density
perturbations) act as sources for each other. The coupling between the
two arises through the right hand sides of Eq. (88) and
Eq. (89). We also see that if we set
= 0 as an initial
condition, this is preserved to
(k4) and
- for long wave length modes - the
evolves independent of
. The
solutions to the coupled equations obtained by numerical integration is
shown in Fig. (2) right panel. The entropy
perturbation
0 till the mode
enters Hubble radius and grows afterwards tracking either
R or
m whichever
is the dominant energy density perturbation. To illustrate the behaviour of
, let us consider the
adiabatic perturbations at large scales with
0, k
0; then the
gravitational potential satisfies the equation:
![]() |
(91) |
which has the two independent solutions:
![]() |
(92) |
both of which diverge as y
0.
We need to combine these two solutions to find the general solution,
keeping in mind that the general solution should be
nonsingular and become a constant (say, unity) as y
0. This fixes
the linear combination uniquely:
![]() |
(93) |
Multiplying by
i we get the
solution that was found earlier (see Eq. (78)).
Given the form of
and
0 we can determine all
other quantities. In particular, we get:
![]() |
(94) |
The corresponding velocity field, which we quote for future reference, is given by:
![]() |
(95) |
We conclude this section by mentioning another useful result related to
Eq. (88). When
0, the equation for
can be re-expressed as
![]() |
(96) |
where we have defined:
![]() |
(97) |
(The i factor arises because of converting a gradient to the k
space; of course, when everything is done correctly, all physical
quantities will be real.) Other equivalent alternative forms for
, which are useful are:
![]() |
(98) |
For modes which are bigger than the Hubble radius, Eq. (96) shows that
is conserved.
When
= constant, we can
integrate Eq. (98) easily to obtain:
![]() |
(99) |
This is the easiest way to obtain the solution in Eq. (78).
The conservation law for
also allows us to understand in a simple manner our previous result that
only deceases by a factor
(9/10) when the mode remains bigger than Hubble radius as we evolve
the equations from y << 1 to y >> 1. Let us
compare the values of
early in the radiation
dominated phase and late in the matter
dominated phase. From the first equation in Eq. (98), [using
'
0 we find that, in
the radiation dominated phase,
(1/2)
i +
i = (3/2)
i; late in
the matter dominated phase,
(2/3)
f +
f = (5/3)
f. Hence the
conservation of
gives
f =
(3/5)(3/2)
i
= (9/10)
i
which was the result obtained earlier. The expression in
Eq. (99) also works at late times in the
dominated or
curvature dominated universe.
One key feature which should be noted in the study of linear
perturbation theory is the different amount of growths for
,
R and
m. The
either changes very
little or decays; the
R grows in
amplitude only by a factor of few. The
physical reason, of course, is that the amplitude is frozen at
super-Hubble scales and the pressure prevents the growth at sub-Hubble
scales. In contrast,
m, which is
pressureless, grows logarithmically in the radiation dominated era and
linearly during the matter dominated era. Since the later phase lasts
for a factor of 104 in expansion, we get a fair amount of
growth in
m.