Paper detail

Expanding universe with nonlinear gravitational waves

We test the validity of Isaacson's formula which states that high frequency and low amplitude gravitational waves behave as a radiation fluid on average. For this purpose, we numerically construct a solution of the vacuum Einstein equations which contains nonlinear standing gravitational waves. The solution is constructed in a cubic box with periodic boundary conditions. The time evolution is solved in a gauge in which the trace of the extrinsic curvature $K$ of the time slice becomes spatially uniform. Then, the Hubble expansion rate $H$ is defined by $H=-K/3$ and compared with the effective scale factor $L$ defined by the proper volume, area and length of the cubic box. We find that, even when the wave length of the gravitational waves is comparable to the Hubble scale, the deviation from Isaacson's formula $H\propto L^{-2}$ is at most 3\% without taking a temporal average and is below 0.1\% with a temporal average.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.