Journal of Modern Physics, 2024, 15, 193-238

https://www.scirp.org/journal/jmp
ISSN Online: 2153-120X
ISSN Print: 2153-1196

A New Version of the Lambda-CDM

Cosmological Model, with Extensions
and New Calculations

Jan Helm

Department of Electrical Engineering, Technical University Berlin, Berlin, Germany

How to cite this paper: Helm, J. (2024) A Abstract

New Version of the Lambda-CDM Cos-
mological Model, with Extensions and New This article gives a state-of-the-art description of the cosmological Lamb-
Calculations. Journal of Modern Physics, da-CDM model and in addition, presents extensions of the model with new
15, 193-238.
calculations of background and CMB functions. Chapters 1-4 describe the
https://doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2024.152011
background part of the model, i.e. the evolution of scale factor and density
Received: December 5, 2023 according to the Friedmann equations, and its extension, which results in a
Accepted: February 20, 2024 correction of the Hubble parameter, in agreement with new measurements
Published: February 23, 2024
(Cepheids-SNIa and Red-Giants). Based on this improved background calcu-
Copyright © 2024 by author(s) and
lation presented in chapters 5-9 the perturbation part of the model, i.e. the
Scientific Research Publishing Inc. evolution of perturbation and structure according to the perturbed Einstein
This work is licensed under the Creative equations and continuity-Euler equations, and the power spectrum of the
Commons Attribution International
cosmic microwave background (CMB) is calculated with a new own code.
License (CC BY 4.0).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Open Access
Keywords
Lambda-DCM, Friedmann Equations, CMB, Metric Perturbation, Hubble
Parameter

1. Introduction
The Lambda-CDM model is widely accepted as the valid description of universe
on large scales and its evolution history. It is based on General Relativity and
consists of two parts:
- Background part with the ansatz Robertson-Walker (RW) metric, based on
Friedmann equations and equations-of-state for the different component par-
ticles. It describes the evolution of scale factor and density without perturbations,
i.e. without local structure (like galaxies and galaxy groups);
- Perturbation part with the ansatz perturbed RW-metric and locally per-

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 Feb. 23, 2024 193 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

turbed density, velocity, and pressure of the component particles. It describes the
time-evolution and (quasi-random perturbed spatial distribution) of density,
velocity, and pressure, i.e. the actual structure of the universe on inter-galactic
scale.
The parameters of the perturbed model are fitted in chap. 10 with the CMB
spatial spectrum measured by Planck.
We present here in chap. 2-5 the background part with Friedmann equations
and equations-of-state for the components with two notable extensions: explicit
temperature dependence and classical gas as baryon eos. From this follows a new
solution and own calculation in chap. 5, which offers an explanation for the ap-
parent experimental discrepancy concerning the Hubble parameter.
Based on the improved background calculation, we present the perturbation
part in chap. 6-10, with the derivation of the CMB spectrum, and new calcula-
tion of it.

2. Friedmann Equations
In this chapter, we present in concise form the basic equations (Friedmann equ-
ations) and equations of state (eos) for density and pressure with their different
components radiation γ, neutrinos ν , electrons e, protons p, neutrons n (re-
spectively baryons b), cold-dark-matter cdm d. The presentation relies basically
on the four monographies [1] [2] [3] [4], with two notable extensions.
-Temperature
The eos depend explicitly on temperature T, resp. thermal energy Eth = k BT ,
and thermal energy is introduced as a function of time Eth ( t ) , as all other
variables, and has to be calculated.
-Baryon eos
The baryons are modeled as classical gas, and not as dust with zero pressure.
We shall see in the background calculation in chap. 5, that this model increases
the value of the Hubble parameter, which basically solves the Hubble-discrepancy
problem.

2.1. Friedmann Equations and Metric

The metric which fulfills the conditions of space homogeneity and isotropy is the
Robertson-Walker (RW) metric [1] [2] [3] [4]:
 dr 2 
−c 2 dt 2 + a 2 ( t ) 
ds 2 = + r 2 dΩ 2  (1)
 1 − kr RH
2 2

c
with Hubble radius R=
H = 1.37 × 1026 m (Planck value), and scale factor
H0
a (t ) .
The Einstein equations [1] [5] [6] [7] [8] for this metric are the two original
da
Friedmann equations a and b (with a = ) and two derived equations c (acce-
dt
leration eq.) and d (density equation):

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 194 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

 a  k Λ κ 2
2

  + 2 − =ρ c , (2a)
 ac  a 3 3

2a  a 
2
k
+   + 2 − Λ = −κ P , (2b)
ac  ac  a
2

a 1 κ ρ c2 
2
− Λ =− P+  derived from a, b (2c)
ac 3 2 3 

ρ a P 
+ a  2 + ρ  =
0 derived: density equation (2d)
3 c 
with dimensionless variables using Planck-values: Hubble constant
=H 0 67.74 km ⋅ s −1 ⋅ Mpc−1 , normalized Hubble constant h = 0.6774 ,
8πG ρ
Einstein constant κ = 4 , κ c 2 ρcrit ,0 = crH , relative pressure
c RH2
P P
=Pr = = Pκ RH2 , relative cosmological constant Λ1 =ΛRH2 , rela-
c ρcrit ,0 ρ Ecrit ,0
2

ρ
tive density Ω = with critical density today
ρcrit ,0
3
ρ Ecrit ,0 c=
= 2
ρcrit ,0 ,
κ RH2
3H 02
( )
3 5.0m p 3
ρcrit ,0 = = = 0.862 × 10−26 kg ⋅ m −3 = 1.37 × 1026
κ RH c
2 2
8πG RH3
mp
=
13.0 × 1078 =
5.0 nucleon m3
RH3

=ρcrH κ=
c 2 RH2 ρcrit ,0 3
GeV GeV
ρ Ecrit ,0 =
5.0 × 0.963 4.81 3 ,
=
m3 m
c
Hubble radius R=
H = 1.37 × 1026 m
H0
The Friedmann equations can be reformulated dimensionless with x0 = tc ,
da
a' = , ρcrH = 3
dx0

Λ1 1 ρcrH Λ
2 2
 a' k  a' k Ω
  + 2− 2 − Ω =0 , i.e.   + 2 − 12 − 2 =
0
 a  a 3RH 3 RH  a  a 3RH RH
2

k Λ
2
2a ''  a '  P
+   + 2 − 21 + r2 =
0
a a a RH RH
ρr ' a
+ a ' ( Pr + ρ r ) =
0
3
a
rescaled with →a
RH
Λ1 2
( a ') +k− a − ρr a 2 =0 sF1 (3a)
2

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 195 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

1 3a 2  ρ 
a '' a − Λ1a 2 =−  Pr + r  sF2 (3b)
3 2  3 
3
a '' a + 2 ( a ') + 2k − Λ1a 2 + ( Pr − ρr ) a 2 =0 sF3 (3c)
2

2
ρr ' a
+ a ' ( Pr + ρ r ) =
0 sF4 (3d)
3
density eq
with

ρ + ρ rad
2 2
 H  3H 
Ω mr =mat , Ω mr =Ω mr ,0   , Ω Ecrit = ,
ρ Ecrit ,0  H0  κ  c 

Λ c 
2 2
 c 
Ω Λ =   , Ω k =−k   R02 .
3H H
Conformal Friedmann equations
dt
In conformal time η, dη = , with comoving distance in η:
a
t0 η z
dt dz
χ (η ) c= ( )
1
= ∫ a (t ) ∫
c dη , or with redshift =
z − 1 : χ z = c ∫ , follow the
t1 η1 a 0 H ( z)

a
Friedmann conformal dimensionless equations [2] [3] [4] after rescaling →a,
RH
c = 1, conformal Friedmann equations:
kc 2 a 2 Λc 2 a 4 8πG 4
( a ') + = + ρa
2

RH2 3 3

kc 2 a 4πG Λc 2 a 3
a ''+
RH2
=
3c 2
ρ c 2
− 3 P a 3
+
3
( )
and rescaled conformal:

( a ')
2
Λ1a 4 ρcrH Λ1a 2 ρcrH
( a ') + ka 2 = + ρ a 4 scF1 =−k + + ρ a2
2
(4a)
3 3 a2 3 3
ρcrH Λ1a 3
a '' +=
ka ( ρ − 3P ) a 3 + scF2 (4b)
6 3
Friedmann radial equation
It is convenient to reformulate the first Friedmann equation in the form of
velocity-potential equation, which we call here Friedmann radial equation [1] [2]
[3] [4] [9].
We get the Friedmann radial equation
Ks Km Λ 2
( a ) − − − a +k =
2
0 (5)
a2 a 3
a 2
it follows the potential form + V (a) =
−k with c = 1
c2
K K Λ
V (a) =
− 2s − m − a 2
a a 3

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 196 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

with Planck data we have

K s 1.01 × 1048 m 2 , Λ= 1.1 × 10−52 m −2
K m 0.423 × 1026 m , =
=
dimensionless
K m1 =
K m RH =
Ω m,0 =
0.309

K s1 = K s RH2 = Ω rad ,0 = Ωγ ,0 + Ων ,0 = 0.54 × 10−4 + 0.0012 = 0.00125

Λ1 =ΛRH2 =1.1 × 1.37 2 =2.06

from this we get the dimensionless Friedmann radial equation
K s1 K m1 Λ1 2
( a ) − − − a +k =
2
0 (5a)
a2 a 3

2.2. Relative Density and Pressure (Relative to c ρcrit ,0 )

2

In the following, we present the eos for the components radiation γ, neutrinos
ν , electrons e, protons p, neutrons n, cdm d [2] [3] [4] [10] [11].
Relative density & pressure baryons b, CDM c, matter density ρ m,r de-
pendent (Eth independent variable)
K m1
With thermal energy Eth = k BT matter density ρ m, r = , b = baryon, c =
a3
cdm (cold dark matter)
Ωb ,0 Ωc ,0
ρ m,r ( a=) ρb + ρc , ρb ( ρ m,r ) = ρ m,r , ρc ( ρ m,r ) = ρ m,r ,
Ωb ,0 + Ωc ,0 Ωb ,0 + Ωc ,0

we have for the pressure before (1) and after (2) nucleosynthesis
Eth
Pb ,2 ( ρb , Eth ) = ρb , Eth > Ec , ns ideal gas, =
Emp m=
pc
2
0.938 GeV ,
mpc2
ρ He 4nHe ρ He 4nHe
using today’s He-H-ratio YH= = = 0.25 , = = 0.25
, He
ρH nH ρH nH
1 + YH , He 4 E E
=Pb ,1 = ρb th 2 0.85ρb th 2 , Eth < Ec ,ns , Ec ,ns = 100 keV ,
1 + YH , He mpc mpc

with the soft-1-0-step function for state-transition at ns = nucleosynthesis with

transition energy Ec , ns = 100 keV (see chap. 9) we get the pressure
Pb ( ρb , Eth ) =Pb ,2 ( ρb , Eth ) + ( Pb ,1 ( ρb , Eth ) − Pb ,2 ( ρb , Eth ) ) Θ1− 0 ( Eth , Ec , ns , δ 0 Ec , ns ) ,

δ 0 = 0.1 ,
Pc ( ρc , Eth ) = 0 .

Relative density & pressure neutrinos

We have for neutrino density and pressure before (1) and after (2) neutrino
decoupling [12] with threshold energy Ec ,ν = 1 MeV :
E
Ων b nb th2
ρν ,1 ( ρb , Eth ) = c = Ω ρ Eth , n = Ω n
νb b ν νb b
ρcrit ,0 mpc2

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 197 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

Eth
ρν ,2 ( ρb , Eth ) = Ων b ρb , Eth > Ec ,ν , in thermal equilibrium,
mp c2
−3
Ec.v  Ec.v 
ρν ,1 ( ρb , Eth ) = Ων b ρb   , Eth < Ec ,ν decrease with ~ a
−3

m p c 2  Eth 
1
Pν ( ρν ) = ρν , parameters today Ων ,0 ≈ 10−9 , Tν ,0 = 1.95 K ,
3
1.95 K
Eth ,ν 0 =
k BTν ,0 = × 0.026 eV =× 1.69 10−4 eV , it follows
300 K
nν ,0 Ων ,0 m p c 2 10−9 0.938 GeV
Ων ,b = = = = 1.13 × 105 .
nb ,0 Ωb ,0 k BTν ,0 0.049 1.69 × 10−4 eV
Relative density & pressure photons
The Stefan-Boltzmann law gives
J MeV 4πk 4
ρ (T ) = aT 4 , a =
7.56 × 10−16 4.717 3 4 , a = 51.9 3 3B
= (6)
m ⋅K 43
m ⋅K ch
ρ ( Eth ) = aSB Eth4

207.6π a 7.56 × 10−16 1

a= = =
(1.38 × 10 ) J ⋅ m3
SB
h3 c 3 k B4 −23 4 3

2.08 × 10 76
1 1
= = 0.856 × 1020 3 3
( 6.24 × 10 ) 18 3 eV ⋅ m eV ⋅ m
3
3

1 1 GeV 1
aSB =
0.856 × 1020 = 0.856 × 1011 3 =4 0.178 × 1011 ρ Ecrit ,0
eV 3 ⋅ m3 eV 4 m eV
aSB 1
=
aSB 0 = 0.178 × 1011 .
ρ Ecrit ,0 eV 4

Before photon decoupling the photon energy density is

ργ ( Eth ) = aSB 0 Eth4 , Pγ ( ργ ) = ργ

1
3
after photon decoupling at Eth = Ec , dc , Ec , dc = 0.25 eV , Planck zdc = 1090 , it
becomes

a ( tc , dc ) 
4

ργ ( a, Eth ) = aSB  Ec ,dc
 a  ( tc,dc ) z=
 , Eth < Ec , dc , a =
1
+ 1
1
1091
  dc

at e-pair production and above photons lose energy and keep a mean energy
E ≥ me c 2 , Eth ≈ 2me c 2

at p-pair production and above photons lose energy and keep a mean energy
E ≥ m p c 2 , Eth ≈ 2m p c 2 .

Temperature jumps at phase transitions

At recombination Eth = Ec , re , Ec , re = 0.29 eV temperature goes up due to free
electrons forming atoms with baryons,
before recombination:

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 198 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

a ( tc , re )
n = nb + ne = 2nb , nb = ne , Eth = Ec , re
a (t )
( tc,re )
, a= =
1 1
zre + 1 1271
,

zre = 1270 , t=
c , re 1.16 × 1013

after recombination: Saha equation:

ne ne −1 + 1 + 4 f ( Eth )
X e ( Eth=
) = = (7)
ne + nH nb 2 f ( Eth )

n = nb + ne = nb (1 + X e ( Eth ) ) , EH , re = 13.6 eV
32 32
2  Eth   E re  −9  Eth  E 
f ( E=
th ) 4ζ ( 3) η  exp  H ,=  2.26 × 10  2 
exp  H , re .
π  me c 2   Eth   me c   Eth 
The equation for Eth after recombination with EH = EH , re , Em = me c 2 is:
dEth E dX e df dEth dEth  dX e df  E
=
− th20 − EH , re , 1 + EH , re =− th20
da a df d a d a da  df d a  a

with solution Eth , a ( a ) [13] shown in Figure 1.

(1) E=
Eth , a= th ,0 0.000663 eV , Eth ,a ( are= 1 ( zre + 1) =
) 0.2842 eV ≈ Ec,re .
At nucleo-synthesis Eth = Ec , ns , Ec , ns = 100 keV temperature goes up due to
helium synthesis with energy released EHe, ns = 12 MeV , thermal energy beha-
vior is analogously for Ec , re < Eth < EHe, ns , zre = 4 × 108

a ( tc , ns )    E a ( t )  −3 4  E a (t ) 
Eth ≈ Ec , ns 1 + 0.021   exp  − He, ns 
c , ns c , ns

a ( t )    mpc a (t ) 
2  2 Ec , ns a ( tc , ns ) 
     

 Ec , ns a ( tc , ns )   EHe, ns a ( t He, ns )   
−3 4

−  exp  − 
 m p c a ( t He, ns ) 
 2   2 Ec , ns a ( tc , ns )   
 

where the baryon temperature depends on the photon temperature

8 mb ργ
aneσ T (Tγ − Tb ) with a ' =
a' da
Tb ' =
−2 Tb + [14].
a 3 me ρb dη

Figure 1. Temperature after recombination Eth , a ( a ) in eV.

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 199 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

Density electrons
The density of electrons is described by the Peebles equation with the para-
meters
Λ 2 γ + Λα
Cr ( T ) ≡ 8.227 s −1 ,
, Λ 2γ =
Λ 2 γ + Λ α + βα
27 H (T )  3EI 
Λα = , βα = β (T ) exp  ,
128 ζ ( 3) (1 − X e ) ( nb nγ ) ( k BT EI )3  4k BT 
EI = 13.6 eV = hydrogen ionization energy, 1s ionization rate, n1s ≈ (1 − X e ) nb ,
8πc
nb = η nγ , λα = Lyman wavelength,
3EI
32
 me c 2 k BT   E 
=β (T ) σv  2 2 
exp  − I 
 2π c   k BT 

 E 
12
α2  EI 
α (T ) ≈ 9.8   log   I  
( )
2
me c 2  k BT    k BT 

we get the Peebles equation ([4] 3.153) for the hydrogen ionization percentage

Cr (T )   me c k BT
12
dX e
2
  EI 
=
−   (1 − X e ) exp  − 
dz H ( z )(1 + z )   2π 
  k BT 
 (8)
n 2ζ ( 3) 
− α (T ) b ( )
3
k BT X e2 
nγ π2 

where
 1+ z 
H ( z) =Ω m H 0 (1 + z ) 1+ , H 0 ≈ 1.5 × 10−33 eV
32
 1 + zeq 
 
T= (1 + z ) 0.235 eV .
We get for the electron density before (1) and after (2) recombination
Eth
ρe,1 ( ρb , Eth ) = ρb , E < Ec ,ep , E=
c , ep m=
ec
2
511 keV
mp c2

ρcrit ,0
2 2
nb2  E  nb2  Eth 
ne + ≈ 0.17α  th 2  =  2 
1.2 × 10−3 , nb = Ωb ,0
nγ  me c  nγ  me c  mp

0.242 m −3
3 3
nb nb ,0 a0 Eth ,0 nb ,0
= = = = 590 scale-independent
3 3
nγ nγ ,0 a Eth nγ ,0 0.41 × 10−3 m −3
2 2
ne + nb  E   Eth 
follows ≈ 0.17α  th 2  =
 2 
0.708 ,
nb nγ  me c   me c 
 2ne +  Eth + me c 2
ρe,2 ( ρb , =
Eth ) ρb 1 +  2
, E > Ec ,ep
 nb  mpc
due to Saha equation

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 200 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

  1 1 
ρe,0 ( ρb , Eth ) ≈ ρe,1 ( ρb ( tc ,re ) , Ec ,re ) exp  EH ,re  −  
 
  Ec , re Eth  
  1 
= ρb a ( tc , re ) ( ) mm e
exp  EH , re 
 E
−
1
 

p   c , re Eth 
alternatively
me c 2
ne = nb X e ( Eth ) , ρe = ρb X e ( Eth )
mp c2

E < Ec ,re , Ec ,re = 0.29 eV , ρb ( tc ,re , Ec ,re ) = Ωb,0 zre ,

Ωb,0 = ( tc,re )
0.0486 , zre = 1270 , a = =
1 1
zre + 1 1271
.

Fermi pressure electrons

The pressure of electrons is the Fermi pressure PFe of a (spin_1/2) fermion gas
Pe ( ρe , Eth ) = PFe ( ρe , Eth )
1 2
with low- and high-density limits P1 = npF c , P2 = nEF .
5 5

( pF c ) ( ) ( )
2 13
= + me c 2
2
Fermi energy EF , pF c = c 3π2 n

PFe ( ρ , E ) =P2 ( ρ ) + ( P1 ( ρ ) − P2 ( ρ ) ) Θ1−0 ( E, m c ,δ m c )

e
2
0 e
2
(9)

ρcr = ρcrit ,0 c 2 = 0.77 × 10−10 J ⋅ m −3 = 0.484 × 103 MeV ⋅ m −3

ρcrit ,0 c 2 Ωb,0 0.484 × 103 MeV ⋅ m −3 × 0.047

=n p ,0 = = 0.0242 m −3
mp c2 0.938 GeV

c= 1.96 × 10−16 GeV ⋅ m= 1.96 × 10−5 eV ⋅ m

ρcrit ,0 c 2 ρe mp
=ne = n p ,0 = ρe 0.0242 m −3 ρe 39.0 =
× 103 943.8 ρe
me c 2
Ωb ,0 me

ne mp
= = ρe 339055.6 ρe .
n p ,0 Ωb ,0 me

For electrons we get the expressions

1 npF c 1  ne Ωb ,0  pF c 1  m p  pF c 1  m p  201.78 ( ρe )
13

=P1 =  =  ρe =  ρe 
5 ρcrit ,0 5  n p ,0  mpc
2
5  me  m p c 2 5  me  mp c2

( pF c ) ( )
2
+ me c 2
2
2 nEF 1  ne Ωb ,0  EF 1  mp 
=P2 =  =  ρe 
5 ρcrit ,0 5  n p ,0 m
 p c 2
5  me  mpc2

( ) ( ρ ) 33.91
13 13
pF c = c 3π2 ne,0 e

eV ⋅ m ( 3π 0.947 × 10 ) 33.91( ρe )
13
1.96 × 10−5 m −3
13
= 2 3

= 201.78 ( ρe ) eV
13

pF c = 201.78 ( ρe ) eV .
13

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 201 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

State transitions radiation γ, neutrinos ν , electrons e, protons p, neutrons n,

cdm d.
Generally, the density state transition from ρ1 to ρ 2 at transition temper-
ature Tc (transition thermal energy Ec = k BTc ) has the form
ρ ( E ) =ρ 2 + ( ρ1 − ρ 2 ) Θ1−0 ( E , Ec , δ Ec ) ,
1
with soft-0-1-step function Θ0 −1 ( E , Ec , δ Ec ) = ,
E −E
1 + exp  c 
 δ Ec 
 E 
1 + exp  − c 
with soft-1-0-step function Θ1−0 ( E , Ec , δ Ec ) =  δ Ec  ,
 E − Ec 
1 + exp  
 δ Ec 
where δ Ec is the standard deviation of Ec .
δ Ec δ Tc δ T0
We can set approximately = ≈ , where (measured in CMB)
Ec Tc T0
δ T0 ∆Tγ ,0 30 µK
= ≈ 1.1 × 10−5 .
=
T0 Tγ ,0 2.72 K

2.3. Transition Thermal Energies and Eos

-neutrino decoupling Ec ,ν = 1 MeV , tc ,ν = 1s , ρ1c ,ν = ρ1,ν ( tc ,ν ) ,
4
 a 
ρ1,ν ( Eth ) = Eth , ρ 2,ν ( Eth , a ) = ρ1c ,ν   ;
 a ( tc ,ν ) 
 
-e-p-annihilation
7.56 × 10−16 J m 2 ⋅ K 4 ,
Ec ,ep = 0.5 MeV , tc ,ep = 6 s , nγ = aSB Eth4 for all t a =
4πk B4
a = 51.9
c 3 h3
ρ=
1, e (n b )
+ ne + ( tc ,ep ) me , ρ 2,e = nb me with
2 2
n2  E  nb2  Eth 
ne + ≈ b 0.17α  th 2  =  2 
1.2 × 10−3 ;
nγ  me c  nγ  me c 

-photon recombination
Ec ,re = 0.29 eV , tc ,re = 290 ky , ρ=
2 c , re ρ1c , re + nb ( tc ,re ) Ec , re

1  Eth − Ec , re 
ρ1,e = nb me , ρ 2,e = ρ1,e exp  ;
2  Eth 

-photon decoupling
Ec ,γ = 0.25 eV , tc ,γ = 370 ky , ρ1c ,γ = ρ1,γ ( tc ,γ ) ,
4
 a 
ρ1,γ ( Eth ) = Eth , ρ 2,γ ( Eth , a ) = ρ1c ,γ   ;
 a ( t c ,γ ) 
 
-nucleo-synthesis helium

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 202 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

ρ He
Ec ,ns = 100 keV , tc ,ns = 3 min , 4p + + 2e− → He2+ , ratio = 0.25 , eos
ρp
Eth
transition 1 → 2 with ideal gas=
P1 n=
b Eth ρb , t < tc , ns , with ideal gas
mp
Eth
P2 =nb ,1 ( 0.75 + 0.25 4 ) Eth =nb ,1 0.81Eth =0.81ρb , t < tc , ns .
mp

3. Parameters
The simple ΛCDM model is based on seven parameters: physical baryon density
parameter Ωbh2; physical matter density parameter Ωmh2; the age of the universe
t0; scalar spectral index ns; curvature fluctuation amplitude As; and reionization
optical depth τ, dark energy density ΩΛ.
The parameters of the ΛCDM are given in the following table (Table 1).
11 independent parameters: Ωbh2, Ωch2, t0, ns, ∆ 2R , τ, Ωt, w, ∑mν, Neff(ν), As;
7 fixed parameters r, dns/d lnk, H0, Ωb, Ωc, Ωm, ΩΛ;
5 calculated parameters ρcrit, σ8, zdec, tdec, zre;
13 total parameters Ωb, Ωc, t0, ns, As, τ, ΩΛ, w, ∑mν, Neff(ν), r, dns/dk, H0;
derived parameters ρcrit, σ8, zdec, tdec, zre, ωb = Ωbh2, ωm = Ωmh2.

Table 1. Planck Collaboration Cosmological parameters [15].

Description Symbol Value

Physical baryon density parameter Ω bh 2
0.02230 ± 0.00014
Physical dark matter density parameter Ω ch 2 0.1188 ± 0.0010
Independent Age of the universe t0 13.799 ± 0.021 × 109 years
parameters
Scalar spectral index ns 0.9667 ± 0.0040
11
Curvature fluctuation amplitude, k0 = 0.002 Mpc −1
∆ 2
R 2.441 + 0.088 − 0.092 × 10−9
Reionization optical depth τ 0.066 ± 0.012
Total density parameter Ωtot 1
Equation of state of dark energy w −1
Sum of three neutrino masses ∑mν 0.06 eV/c2
Fixed
Effective number of relativistic degrees of freedom Neff 3.046
parameters 7
Scalar amplitude As (2.215 ± 0.13)
Tensor/scalar ratio r 0
Running of spectral index dns/dlnk 0
Hubble constant H0 67.74 ± 0.46 km·s−1·Mpc−1
Baryon density parameter Ωb 0.0486 ± 0.0010
Dark matter density parameter Ωc 0.2589 ± 0.0057
Matter density parameter Ωm 0.3089 ± 0.0062
Calculated Dark energy density parameter ΩΛ 0.6911 ± 0.0062
values 5 Critical density ρcrit (8.62 ± 0.12) × 10−27 kg/m3
Fluctuation amplitude at 8 h−1 Mpc σ8 0.8159 ± 0.0086
Redshift at decoupling z* 1089.90 ± 0.23
Age at decoupling t* 377,700 ± 3200 y
Redshift of reionization (with uniform prior) zre 8.5 + 1.0 − 1.1

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 203 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

The additional parameters of the extended ΛCDM are given in the second ta-
ble (Table 2).
Some specifications
The amplitude As, is determined by the CMB power spectrum
ns −1
k 
( )
∆ 2R k 2 =
As   , k0 ≈ 0.05 Mpc −1 .
 k0 
H0
The relative current Hubble parameter is h = .
100
The fluctuation amplitude is defined by σ 8 = σ ( ρ mat , R ) R =8 h−1 Mpc , where
σ ( ρ mat , R ) = stdev ( ρ mat ) smoothed by distance R ([2]).
Key cosmological events
Key cosmological events calculated from the ΛCDM model with temperature,
energy scale and cosmic time are given below [4] [16] in Table 3.

Table 2. Extended model parameters [15].

Description Symbol Value

Total density parameter Ωtot 1.0023 + 0.0056 − 0.0054

Equation of state of dark energy w −0.980 ± 0.053

Tensor-to-scalar ratio r <0.11, k0 = 0.002 Mpc−1 (2σ)

Running of the spectral index dns/dlnk −0.022 ± 0.020, k0 = 0.002 Mpc−1

Physical neutrino density parameter Ωνh2 <0.0062

Sum of three neutrino masses ∑mν <0.58 eV/c2 (2σ)

Table 3. Key cosmological events ([4], chap. 2).

Event Temperature Energy Time

Inflation ends 1029 K 1016 GeV 10−35 s

CDM decouples, GUT scale 1029 K 1015 GeV 10−36 s

Baryons form 1016 K 1 TeV? 10−12 s

El-weak force 1015 K 100 GeV 10−11 s

Hadrons form 1012 K 150 MeV 10−5 s

Neutrinos decouple 1010 K 1 MeV 1s

Nuclei form 109 K 100 keV 200s

Atoms form 3460 K 0.29 eV 290 ky

Photons decouple 2970 K 0.25 eV 370 ky

First stars 50 K 4 meV 100 My

First galaxies 12 K 1 meV 400 My

Dark energy domination 3.8 K 0.33 meV 9 Gy

Now 2.7 K 0.24 meV 13.8 Gy

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 204 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

4. Inflation
The “naive” so called Hot-Big-Bang model has several aspects, which are in dis-
agreement with cosmological observations.
Hot Big-bang problems
- the observed homogeneity of the present universe (distances > 200 Mly)
should arise from arbitrary initial conditions: horizon problem;
- the observed curvature is small: flatness problem;
- the observed correlation regions in the CMB have supraluminal distance:
superhorizon correlations.
Cosmological inflation
In the approximation that the expansion is exactly exponential, the horizon is
a
static, i.e. H= ≈ const , and we have an inflating universe [17]. This inflating
a
universe can be described by the de-Sitter metric [1] [2] [3] [5]

( )
ds 2 = − 1 − Λr 2 c 2 dt 2 +
1
1 − Λr 2
dr 2 + r 2 dΩ 2 (10a)

For the case of exponential expansion, the equation of state is P = − ρ , with

world radius
 Λ
R ( t ) = R0 exp  ct  (10b)
 3 

The expansion generates an almost-flat and large-scale-homogeneous un-

iverse, as it is observed today.
( Ha ) reaches a minimum at the end of
−1 −1
Furthermore, horizon R= H a=
inflation, and then rises again, this explains superluminal correlations in the
present universe.
Inflation in Ashtekar-Kodama quantum gravity [18]
Inflation takes place between r=
i l p= 1.61 × 10−35 m and Rinf= rgr
= 3.1 × 10−5 m
 Λ −26
with expansion factor finf
= exp  rinf  1.9 × 10 , rinf = 2 × 10 m ,
= 30

 3 
−16
c 1.96 × 10 GeV rinf
E= = = 0.98 × 1010 GeV , t= = 0.66 × 10−34 s ,
2 × 10−26 m
inf inf
rinf c
Rinf = 10−2 m .
Inflation with standard assumptions ([4], chap. 4)
ri = 3 × 10−28 m , tinf = 10−36 s , finf = 1030 , ainf = 10−28 , Rinf = 3 × 102 m ,

 log ( finf ) 
2
 Λ −2
= exp  rinf  , Λ= 3  = 1.4 × 10 m ,
60
finf
 3  rinf 
Λ log ( finf )
=
H = = 6.9 × 1029 m −1 .
3 rinf
Assessment of the inflation factor ([3], chap. 4),
f = end inflation, i = start inflation, eq = matter-radiation-equality, 0 = today,
ER = f = expansion rate

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 205 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

a (t f ) = exp N ,  Tf  1  Teq 
N  log   + log  ,
a ( tin )  Teq
  2  T0 
−4
T f  1016 GeV , Teq  1 eV , T0  10 eV
2
60 3  T0 
N ≥ 60 , ∆t ≥  60   ≈ 10 s .
−37

H (t f ) 8πG ρ ER  Tf 

Inflaton model φ ( t , x ) with GR-action

The action is ([3], chap. 4)
S = ∫ d 4 x − g ( LEH + Lφ )

with the Einstein-Hilbert action of GR

 R − 2Λ 
= ∫   −gd x
4
S EH
2κ 
R − 2Λ
LEH =
2κ
and the inflaton action
 c 
=
Sφ ∫d
4
x − g  g µν ∂ µφ ∂ν φ − V (φ ) 
 2 
c µν
=
Lφ g ∂ µφ ∂ν φ − V (φ )
2
 c 
with energy-momentum Tµν = c∂ µφ ∂ν φ − g µν  g µν ∂ µφ ∂ν φ − V (φ ) 
 2 
φ2  φ2 
=
T00 c + V (φ ) , Ti j =
−δ i j  c − V (φ )  .
2  2 
  φ2 1 2 
For RW-metric the action is =
S x − g  c  − + 2 ( ∇φ )  − V (φ ) 
∫d
4

  2 2 a  
1 dV ( φ )
with eom = Klein-Gordon equation φ + 3H φ + = 0
c dφ
which represents an oscillator with Hubble-friction 3H φ
φ2
ρφ c
and energy density= + V (φ ) ,
2
φ2
and pressure=
Pφ c − V (φ ) (4.50).
2
φ2
c  E pot V (φ ) , we have Pφ ≈ − ρφ
1
V (φ ) , Ekin =
If Ekin ≡ φ2  E pot ≡ =
2 2
i.e. equation-of-state of dark energy Ω Λ generating temporary inflation.
We get the Friedmann equations (radiation-matter density ρ rm added)
κ κ φ2 
H2 = ρE =  c + V (φ ) + ρ rm  (11a)
3 3 2 
κ κ 
− ( ρφ + Pφ − ρ rm − Prm ) =
4
H = −  cφ2 − ρ rm  (11b)
2 2 3 

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 206 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

and the Klein-Gordon equation

1 dV ( φ )
φ + 3H φ + =
0 (11c)
c dφ
lPl 1.62 × 10−35 m ,
We get dimensionless 2 equations in Planck-units =
3 2 φ2
ρ rm
= H − − V (φ )
8π 2
 4 3 φ2   3φ2 H 2 4 
−4π  φ2 −  H 2 −
Friedmann H = − V (φ )   =
−4π  − + V (φ )  .
 3  8 π 2   2 2 π 3 
dV ( φ )
Klein-Gordon φ + 3H φ + 0.
=
dφ
Slow-roll approximation
1 H
If Ekin ≡ φ2  E pot ≡ V (φ ) or ε H  1 , ε H ≡ − 2 (slow-roll parameter
2 H
φ
1), and almost constant velocity, η H = −  1 (slow-roll parameter 2), we
H φ
have persisting slow-roll condition ε H  1 , η H  1 (slow-roll approxima-
tion), which yields approximate fundamental equations with approximations
H V ′ φ 1 V′ 
2

3H φ ≈ −V ′ and 3H 2 ≈ 8πGV and ε H = − 2 = − =   and

H 2V H 16πG  V 

φ V ′′ 1  V ′′ 
ηH = −

=2 =   and for the scale factor
H φ 3H 8πG  V 
t   t
V 
=a ( t ) a ( tin ) exp  ∫= H ( t ) dt  a ( tin ) exp  −8πG ∫ dφ  .
t   tin V
′ 
 in  
Square potential
c1 c2 (φ − φ0 ) , =
We use the square potential V (φ ) =+ c1 1.16 × 10−124 , slow-roll
2

Λ
condition: c1  c2 with the minimum value V (φ0 =
) c=1 = 1.16 × 10−124 and
κ
rinf = 2 × 10−26 m , we get the following relations:

t   t
V 
=a ( t ) a ( tin ) exp  ∫= H ( t ) dt  a ( tin ) exp  −8π ∫ dφ 
t   tin V
′ 
 in  

 φ0 
a ( t ) a ( tin ) exp  4π ∫ (φ −=
=
 (
φ0 ) dφ  a ( tin ) exp 2πφ02 )
 0 

1  a (t )  1
=φ0 =
log  = log ( finf ) 3.31
 
2π  a ( tin )  2π
2
 
 
1 V′ 
2
1  2  ≈ 1 1
=εH =  
16π  V  16π  c1  4π (φ − φ0 )2
 c (φ − φ ) + (φ − φ0 ) 
 2 0 

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 207 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

1  V ′′  1  2c2  1 1
=ηH =    ≈

8π  V  8π c1 + c2 (φ − φ0 ) 2
 4π (φ − φ0 )2
 
3 2 φ2
ρ rm
= H − − V (φ )
8π 2
 3 2 
for t → ∞ , φ = δ c1  1 , H = H 0 , φ → φ0 , ρ=  H 0 − c=
1 0,
 8π
rm

3 2
so condition for convergence is: c1 = H0 .
8π
The fundamental equations become
 4 3 2 φ2 
Friedmann H = −4π  φ2 − H − − V (φ )  ;
 3 8π 2 
dV ( φ )
Klein-Gordon φ + 3H φ + 0;
=
dφ
slow-roll H ≈ −6πφ2 ;
3 boundary conditions for =t lPl= 1 : H (1) = H1 , φ (1) = φ1 , φ (1) = φd 1 ;
with 3 potential parameters c1 , c2 , φ .
Example: δ c1 = 0.05 , H 0 = 5 , φ0 = 2.3 , c1 = 3 , c2 = 1 [13].
Below in Figure 2 and Figure 3 are inflaton amplitude and Hubble parameter.

5. Background Calculations
There are basically two possible ways for background calculation:
-numerical solution of two Friedmann equations in two variables, calculating
backward from boundary conditions at present time x0;
-analytical solution, where the second equation is solved analytically, and in-
serted into the first, which gives an integral, which is calculated numerically.
The numerical solution encounters the problem of limited convergence: it
stops at some time xc.
The analytical solution avoids the convergence problem, and this solution
scheme is used in the calculation of results presented below.

Figure 2. Inflaton amplitude φ ( t ) .

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 208 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

Figure 3. Hubble parameter H ( t ) .

5.1. Numerical Solution

We solve for dimensionless function variables a, ρ r , in dimensionless relative time
tc
variable x = , limits 0 ≤ x ≤ x00 =0.96 , where the upper limit is the relative
RH
ct0 R0
cosmic time today x=
00 = = 0.96 , from Planck data =
t0 13.9 × 109 y ,
RH RH
with boundary conditions: ρ r ( x0 ) = Ω m,0 + Ω rad ,0 , a ( x0 ) = 1 , a ' ( x0 ) = 1 (be-
cause H ( x0 ) = RH ) from a ' ( x0 ) = 1 follows k0 = −0.0042 which is compati-
ble with Planck data
Λ1 2
( a ') + k0 − a − ρr a 2 =
0 sF1 (3a)
2

3
1 a 2 ρcrH  ρr 
a '' a − Λ1a 2 =−  Pr + 3  sF2 (3b)
3 2  
ρcrH
a '' a + 2 ( a ') + 2k − Λ1a 2 + ( Pr − ρr ) a 2 =0 sF3 (3c)
2

2
ρr ' a
+ a ' ( Pr + ρ r ) =
0 sF4 (3d)
3
The two independent (3c and 3d is derived) Equations (3a, 3d) are non-linear
second-order differential equations quadratic in the variables a, ρ r .
Alternatively, one can solve for function variables a, Eth = k BT , the latter with

thermal energy Eth = k BT , photon density ργ = aSB 0 Eth4 , Pγ ( ργ ) = ργ , matt-

1
3
Kma Ωb ,0
ter density ρ mat = ρb + ρc = ρ r , baryon density ρb = ρ mat ,
Ks + Km a Ωb ,0 + Ωc ,0
Ωc ,0
cold-dark-matter (cdm) density ρc = ρ mat
Ωb ,0 + Ωc ,0

Eth
Pb ( ρb , Eth ) = ρb .
mp c2

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 209 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

The additional equation for pressure is the equation-of-state (eos) for the
pressure Pr : Pr = P ( a, ρ r ) .
Solution 1
One solves numerically [9] [13] [19] (3ac) with boundary conditions
a ( x0 ) = 1 , a ' ( x0 ) = 1 as algebraic-differential equations for function variables a,
Eth = k BT . The solution exists until x1c = 0.14 , where numerical integration stops
converging.
Solution 2
One solves numerically [9] [13] [19] (3ad) with boundary conditions
a ( x0 ) = 1 , a ' ( x0 ) = 1 as differential equations for function variables a, ρ r . The
solution exists until x1c = 0.0196 , where numerical integration stops converg-
ing.
Plot a(x) is shown below [13] in Figure 4.
The solution limit x1c = 0.0196 indicates the transition from matter-domi-
nated to the radiation-dominated regime, which happens approximately at pho-
ton decoupling time tre = 370 ky , xre = 0.000026 . For x ≤ x1c solution is con-
tinued by pure radiation density ([13]).
Solution 3
One solves numerically [13] (3a) with boundary conditions a ( x0 ) = 1 ,
a ' ( x0 ) = 1 as differential equation for function variable a, with ansatz for
Ks Km
ρ=
r + . This is the usual solution method for background functions, used
a 4 a3
in CAMB [20] and in CMBquick ([21] [22]).
The solution exists until x1c = 0.0055 , where numerical integration stops con-
verging, and the solution becomes complex (i.e. Im ( a ) ≠ 0 ).
Plot a(x) is shown below [13] in Figure 5.
The solution limit x1c = 0.0055 indicates the transition from matter-domi-
nated to the radiation-dominated regime, which happens approximately at pho-
ton decoupling time tre = 370 ky , xre = 0.000026 . For x ≤ x1c solution is con-
tinued by pure radiation density ([13] [20] [22]).

Figure 4. The scale factor a(x) in dependence of relative time

tc
x= , numerical solution 2.
RH

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 210 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

Figure 5. The scale factor a(x) in dependence of relative time

tc
x= , numerical solution 3.
RH

5.2. Analytic Solution

The analytic solution scheme transforms the two basic equations into a parame-
terized integral x ( a ) , which is the inverted scale factor a ( x ) .
In order to calculate the thermal energy, we apply an iteration, we calculate
K
the temperature Eth ( a ) from ρ rad ≡ ργ + ρν = s ρ r , using the solution
Ks + Km a

( )
a ( x ) in the next iteration: Eth( n +1) = Eth( n ) a ( n ) ( x ) , as shown in the schematic in
chap. 11.
The zero iteration is the “naive” thermal energy Eth( 0 ) = Eth ,0 a .
The variables are scale factor and density a, ρ r .
The boundary conditions are ρ r ( x0 ) = Ω m,0 + Ω rad ,0 , a ( x0 ) = 1 , a ' ( x0 ) = 1 ,
from a ' ( x0 ) = 1 follows k = −0.0042 which is compatible with Planck data
Λ1 2
( a ') + k0 − a − ρr a 2 =
0 sF1 (3a)
2

3
ρr ' a
+ a ' ( Pr + ρ r ) =
0 sF4 (3d)
3
The two Equations (3ad) are non-linear first-order differential equations qua-
dratic in the variables a, ρ r .
The third equation is the equation-of-state (eos) for the pressure Pr :
Pr = P ( a, ρ r ) .
The density and pressure have the form: relative energy density
ρ r = ρb + ργ + ρc + ρe + ρν for baryons, photons, dark matter, free electrons,
neutrinos, relative pressure Pr = Pb + Pγ + Pc + Pe + Pν , where radiation pressure
ργ + ρν
Prad = Pγ + Pν = , and matter pressure (neglecting electrons) is the ba-
3
k BT
ryon ideal gas pressure Pmat= P=
b ρb , for under-nuclear temperature
mb c 2
k BT  mb c 2 = 0.94 GeV the baryon matter is dust-like, i.e. pressure is almost
zero.

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 211 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

The densities have the form

ρ r ρ mat + ρ rad
=

Kma Ks
ρ mat = ρb + ρc = ρ r , ρ rad = ργ + ρν = ρr
Ks + Km a Ks + Km a

Ωc ,0 Ωb ,0
ρc = ρ mat , ρb = ρ mat
Ωb ,0 + Ωc ,0 Ωb ,0 + Ωc ,0

Ων ,0
ργ = aSB 0 Eth4 , ρν =
a3
K
We calculate the temperature Eth ( a ) from ρ rad ≡ ργ + ρν = s ρr
Ks + Km a
(12a)
14
1  Ks Ω 
i.e. Eth ( a )
= 14 
ρ r ( a ) − ν3,0  (12a1)
aSB 0  K s + K m a a 

and all the pressure becomes a function of a,

 Ks Kma Ωb ,0 Eth ( a ) 
Pr ( a, ρ r ) = Prad + Pmat =  + 2 
ρ (12b)
K +K a K +K a Ω +Ω  r
 s m s m b ,0 c ,0 mb c 

P  K K a Ω E (a) 
i.e.= ρ (a)
P=  + 2 
r s m b ,0 th

ρr K + K a K + K a Ω + Ω m 
 s m s m b ,0 c ,0 bc 

then we can integrate (3d) in a :

ρr ' a a
 3 + Pρ ( a ) 
log ( ρ r ( a ) ) = + a ' ( Pr + ρ r ) =
− ∫ da   + c1 (12c)
3 0  a 
and then can integrate (3a) in a :
a
Λ1 k
x(a)
= ∫ da a + ρ r ( a ) − 02 + c2 , (12d)
0 3 a
where c1 and c2 are set to fulfill the boundary conditions
ρ
ρ r ( x0 ) = Ω m,0 + Ω rad ,0 , a ( x0 ) = 1 , Ω =
ρcrit ,0

5.3. Background Results

Results for density and relative time in dependence of scale factor ρ r ( a ) ,
x ( a ) , are shown below [13].
Relative density in ρcrit ,0 units is shown over scale factor a, in double-loga-
rithmic plot Figure 6.
There is a critical point aT ≈ 0.5 × 10−4 , where the density changes its beha-
vior, it coincides roughly with the critical point in temperature. The corres-
ponding time is xT ≈ 10−8 , thermal energy Eth ≈ 1 eV .
The analytic solution yields directly the inverse scale factor function x ( a ) , it
shown in Figure 7.

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 212 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

Figure 6. The density ρ r ( a ) in dependence of scale factor a,

analytic solution.

tc
Figure 7. Relative time x = and scale factor a, analytic solu-
RH
tion.

There is a critical point at photon decoupling, adec= 0.9 × 10−3 ,

= 0.3 × 10−4  370 ky , redshift zdec = 1090 , thermal energy Eth = 0.25 eV .
xdec
The scale factor changes its power-law dependence on time:
 x, x > xdec

a ( x) ≅  1 2
 x , x < xdec


It is useful to compare the result for x ( a ) from the analytical solution and
the standard CAMB solution ([13] [20]) Figure 8. The two curves separate
= 0.9 × 10−3 , the CAMB curve continues approximately linearly,
roughly at adec
whereas in the analytical solution time decreases quadratically, x ( a ) ≅ a 2 .
The plots of density ρ r ( a ) (blue) and radiation density ρ rad ( a ) are shown
in comparison below ([13]) in Figure 9. As expected, we have radiation domin-
ance roughly for a < adec , and matter dominance for a > adec .
The Hubble parameter is approximately linear in x, as it should be. However,
there is a small deviation at critical point xcH ≈ 10−8 , scale factor acH ≈ 0.5 × 10−4 ,
redshift zcH ≈ 1 a ≈ 20000 .
This is apparently responsible for the small correction of the present Hubble

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 213 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

constant H0, compared to CAMB solution.

The plot of the Hubble parameter is shown in Figure 10.

tc
Figure 8. Relative time x = in dependence of scale factor
RH
a, analytic solution (blue), CAMB-solution (orange).

Figure 9. The density ρ r ( a ) (blue) and radiation density

ρ rad ( a ) (orange), in dependence of scale factor a, analytic
solution.

Figure 10. The Hubble parameter H ( x ) , in dependence of

tc
relative time x = , analytic solution.
RH

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 214 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

The “naive” temperature Eth( 0 ) ( a ) from (12a) is compared to the iterated

temperature Eth(1) ( a ) calculated from the first analytic solution in (12a1) is
shown in Figure 11. The point of deviation is aT ≈ 0.5 × 10−4 , the corresponding
time is xT ≈ 10−8 , thermal energy Eth ≈ 1 eV . This point coincides roughly with
the critical point in density Figure 6.
Hubble parameter
Baryon pressure correction
Baryon pressure correction yields t0 c = t0 1.043t0 , so H 0 c = 1.043H 0 , the cor-
rected Planck-value is H 0 Pc =H 0 P × 1.043 =70.6 ± 0.4 ;
H=0R 69.8 ± 1.7 Red-Giants Freedmann 09/21;
H 0 S 73.04 ± 1.04 Cepheids-SNIa SHOES 12/21;
=
H 0 P 67.66 ± 0.42 Planck 07/18.
=
H0R Red-Giants is in agreement with corrected Planck within error margin.
Assessed correction of the Cepheids-SNIa-measurement
Cepheids-SNIa-measurement based on time-brightness calibration for small
redshift z, peak power Pmax ~ T ( tcr ) ~ mb , with average nucleus mass mb per-
centage of higher-mass nuclei at present: r ( O ) = 1.04% , r ( C ) = 0.46% , so
Pmax ( z  1)
≈ (1 + r ( O ) + r ( C ) ) =
1.015 so z-corrected Cepheids-SNIa becomes
Pmax ( z  1)
73.04/1.015 = 72. H 0=
Sc = 72. ± 1. , which is at error margin.
H 0 S 1.015

6. Relativistic Perturbations and the Perturbed

Lambda-CDM Model
The Lambda-CDM model is locally homogeneous, but during inflation the
quantum fluctuations are “blown-up”, and the universe becomes inhomogene-
ous on small (galactic) scales and remains homogeneous on large scales. These
local inhomogeneities generate structure, which we observe today.
In order to reproduce these local inhomogeneities in the perturbed Lamb-
da-CDM model, we introduce small perturbations in the metric and in the den-
sity distribution. These perturbations are functions of conformal time η (defined
dt
by dη = ), and space location vector xi , and are not random variables.
a
The randomness is introduced by initial conditions for perturbations (see
chap. 8).
We introduce metric perturbations A, Bi , Eij in the RW-metric [2] [3] [4]

(
ds 2 a 2 (η ) − (1 + 2 A ) dη 2 + 2 Bi dxi dη + (δ ij + 2 Eij ) dxi dx j
= ) (13)

and split-up in scalar, vector, tensor parts:

scalar A
Bi = ∂ i B + Bˆi , scalar B, vector Bˆi
( )
Eij Cδ ij + ∂ i ∂ j E + ∂ i Eˆ j − ∂ j Eˆ i + Eˆ ij , scalar C E, vector Eˆ i , tensor Eˆ ij ,
=
where ∑ Ei = 3C
i

i
Furthermore, we form the gauge-invariant Bardeen variables with 8 = 1scalar
(A) + 3vector (Bi) + 4tensor (Eij) degrees-of-freedom (dof’s)

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 215 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

Figure 11. The naive temperature Eth( ) ( a ) compared to the iterated

0

temperature Eth( ) ( a ) , in dependence of scale factor a, analytic solution.

1

Ψ= A + H ( B − E' ) + ( B − E' )' , Φ = −C + ∇ 2 E − H ( B − E' ) ,

1
3
Φ
ˆ = Bˆ − Eˆ ' , Eˆ
i i i ij

Since we have 6 Einstein equations, we can remove the 8 − 6 = 2 dof’s by

gauge-fixing.
▪ Newtonian gauge B= E= 0

(
ds 2 a 2 (η ) − (1 + 2Ψ ) dη 2 + (1 − 2Φ ) δ ij dxi dx j
= )
A = Ψ , C = −Φ (6.30)
▪ Spatially flat gauge C = E = 0
▪ Synchronous gauge A = B = 0
From now on, we use the Newtonian gauge.
We get for the energy-density tensor
− ( ρ + δρ )
T00 =

− ( ρ + P ) vi
T0i =

T ji = − ( P + δ P ) δ ij + Π ij , Π ii = 0 ∀i (14)

The relativistic Euler equation is

   
 ρ c2 vi
+ p
1 d +∂ p+ 1 dp
vi =0 ,
  2 dt  1 − ( v c ) 2  i

 1 − (v c)  c 1 − (v c) ( )
2 2
c 2
1 − v c
2 dt
 
The Euler equation in the RW metric becomes
 P' 
vi' = −  H +
+ ρ
 vi −
1
+ ρ
(
∂ iδ P + ∂ j Π i j − ∂ i Ψ ) (6.76)
 P  P

where Π ij is the anisotropic stress with the decomposition

(
Π ij = ∂ i ∂ j Π + ∂ i Π
ˆ −∂ Π
j j i + Π ij
ˆ ˆ ) (6.39)

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 216 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

Finally, we get 10 fundamental equations:

6 Einstein equations
[4]
∇ 2 Φ − 3H ( Φ′ + H Ψ ) =πGa 2δρ
a′′
Φ′ + H Ψ =πGa 2
a′H
∂ i ∂ j ( Φ −=
Ψ ) 8πGa 2 Π i j , i < j
1
( )
Φ′′ + H Ψ ′ + 2 H Φ′ + ∇ 2 ( Φ − Ψ ) + 2 H ′ + H 2 Ψ =πGa 2δ P
3
(15a-d)

4 conservation equations: continuity +Euler

[4]
 P δP P 
δ ′ =− 1 +  ( ∂ i vi − 3Φ′ ) − 3H  − δ
 ρ   δρ ρ 
 P' 
vi' = −  H +
+ ρ
 vi −
1
+ ρ
(
∂ iδ P + ∂ j Π i j − ∂ i Ψ ) (15ef)
 P  P
δρ a′′
q=
i
( ρ + P )v i
, δ=
ρ
decelaration conformal q = −
a′H
, Ti 0 = ∂ i q ,

for 10 variables 4 scalar Φ , Ψ , δ , δ P , 3 vector vi , 3 tensor Π ij ;

initial conditions 6
Φ 2c, Ψ 1c, v 3c, (δ , δ P ) 0c;
i

background parameters
a′ a′′
H = , q= − , a, ρ, P.
a a′H
Fundamental equations in k-space ([14] Ma)
In the following, we transform the fundamental equations via Fourier-transform
into k-space.
da
We use Newtonian gauge, conformal time η , a′ = , the metric in New-
dη
tonian gauge reduces to

(
s 2 a (η ) − (1 + 2Ψ ) dη 2 + (1 − 2Φ ) dxi dxi
d= )
We get 4 Einstein equations in k-space
k 2 Φ − 3H ( Φ′ + H Ψ ) =πGa 2δρ

H Ψ ) πGa 2 ( P + ρ )θ
k 2 ( Φ′ +=

( Φ − Ψ ) 12πGa 2 ( P + ρ )σ
k 2=
1
(
Φ′′ + H ( Ψ ′ + 2Φ′ ) + k 2 ( Φ − Ψ ) + 2 H ′ + H 2 Ψ =4πGa 2δ P
3
) (16a-d)

and 2 continuity-Euler equs in k-space

 P δP P 
δ ′ =− 1 +  (θ − 3Φ′ ) − 3H  −  δ density equ
 ρ   ρδ ρ 

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 217 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

 P′  δP 2 2
θ′ =− H + θ − k − k σ + k 2 Ψ velocity equ (16ef)
 P+ρ P+ρ

with the definitions

 ˆ ˆ δi j 
 ki k j −  Πi j
δρ
, θ = ik j v j , σ = − 
3 
δ= ,
ρ P+ρ

k
where k =
ˆ is the k-unit-vector, Π ij anisotropic stress
k
and the relations
δρ T0
− ( ρ + δρ ) , T=
T00 = i
0
(ρ + P)v , i T=
i
j ( P + δ P )δ i
j + Π ij , δ =
ρ
= − 0
ρ

Π=
i
i 0, =
i 1, 2,3 , Π ij ≡ T ji − Tkk δ ij

 1 
θ = ik j v j , ( ρ + P )θ =
ik δ T j
j
0
, ( ρ + P )σ =
−  kˆ kˆ i j
− δ ij  Π ij .
 3 

We have here 6 variables Φ, Ψ ,θ , σ , δ , δ P , δ P = δ Ti i , δρ = δ T00 , which are

functions of ( k ,η ) .

7. Evolution of Distribution Momenta

We introduce here density distribution momenta for density components radia-
tion γ, neutrinos ν , electrons e, baryons b, cold-dark-matter d. The densities
acquire their random nature from random initial conditions, and have therefore
a (Gaussian) probability distribution. These distribution momenta are used in
the calculation of CMB spectrum in chap. 10.
Evolution of distribution function momenta (Ma [14])
da
We have for Newtonian gauge, conformal time η , a′ =
dη

(
s 2 a (η ) − (1 + 2Ψ ) dη 2 + (1 − 2Φ ) dxi dxi .
d= )
Phase space distribution
With phase space element dx1dx 2 dx3dP1dP2 dP3
( )
dN = f xi , Pj ,η dx1dx 2 dx3dP1dP2 dP3 particle number in element (32)
Pi a (1 − Φ ) pi co-moving disturbed momentum
=
density distribution for matter fermions (Fermi-Dirac distribution +), density
distribution for radiation bosons (Bose-Einstein distribution -)
gs 1
f0 (ε ,T ) = (17)
h3  ε 
exp   ±1
 k BT 
energy ε = a p 2 + m 2 = P 2 + a 2 m 2 , temperature T, today temperature T0.
We change variables: xi Pj to xi q j , and get the expressions:
scaled momentum = q j ap=j qn j , unit momentum vector n̂ with ni ni = 1
ε
energy= q 2 + a 2 m2 ;

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 218 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

( )
change distribution f xi , Pj ,η to f xi , q, n j ,η . ( )
Finally we get for the neutrino distribution perturbation function ψ xi , q, n j ,η ( )
(not equal to the metric perturbation Ψ )

(
xi , Pj ,η
f= ) (
f 0 ( ε , T ) 1 + ψ xi , q, n j ,η ( )) (35)

for the distribution of energy tensor

a −4 ∫ dqdΩ q 2ε f 0 ( ε , T )(1 + ψ )
T00 =
a −4 ∫ dqdΩ qni f 0 ( ε , T )(1 + ψ )
Ti 0 =

ni n j q 2
a −4 ∫ dqd
T ji =Ω f 0 ( ε , T )(1 + ψ )
ε
∂fC
Boltzmann equation in ( x , q, n ,η ) , with collision term
i
j
∂η
becomes

Df ∂f ∂xi ∂f ∂q ∂f ∂ni ∂f ∂fC

= + + + =
dη ∂η ∂η ∂xi ∂η ∂q ∂η ∂ni ∂η
dP µ µ
GR geodesic equation P 0 + Γαβ Pα P β =0 gives
dη
dq  − ε ( q,η ) n ∂ Ψ (39)
= qΦ
dη
i i

and Boltzmann equation becomes

∂ψ q  d ln f 0   ε   1 ∂fC
∂η ε
( )
+ i k ⋅ nˆ ψ +
d ln q 
 Φ − i k ⋅ nˆ Ψ  =
q  f 0 ∂η
( ) (18)

with fluid equations cdm

a'
δ c' =−θc + 3Φ' , θ c' =− θc + k 2 Ψ (19a)
a
Component evolution equations
In the following we present the evolution equations for l-momenta in k-space
for important components.
Evolution equations massive neutrinos
We have for (average) background density, pressure
1 −4 q2
=ρ h a −4 ∫ dqdΩ q 2ε f 0 ( ε=
, T ) , Ph a ∫ dqdΩ q 2 f (ε ,T )
3 ε 0
the perturbations
1 −4 q2
δρ h a −4 ∫ dqdΩ q 2ε f 0 ( ε , T )=
= ψ , δ Ph a ∫ dqdΩ q 2 f ( ε , T )ψ
3 ε 0
δ Th 0i a −4 ∫ dqdΩ qni f 0 ( ε , T )ψ ,
=

1 −4 q2  1 
δ=
Π h 0i a ∫ dqdΩ q 2  ni n j − δ i j  f 0 ( ε , T )ψ
3 ε  3 
distribution perturbation function are developed in Legendre polynomials of the
( )
angle kˆ ⋅ nˆ
 
) ( )
∞
(
ψ k , nˆ , q,η = )
∑ ( −i ) ( 2l + 1)ψ l k , q,η Pl kˆ ⋅ nˆ
l =0
l
( (54)

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 219 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

4π −4 q2
δρ h = 4πa −4 ∫ dq q 2ε f 0 ( ε , T )ψ 0 , δ Ph = a ∫ dq q 2 f ( ε , T )ψ 0
3 ε 0
(ρ h + Ph )θ h =
4πka −4 ∫ dq q 3 f 0 ( ε , T )ψ 1 ,

4π −4 q2
(ρ h + Ph ) σ h =
3
a ∫ dq q 2
ε 0
f ( ε , T )ψ 0 .

Boltzmann equation yields for evolution of perturbation momenta

qk d ln f 0 qk ε k d ln f 0
ψ 0' = − ψ 1 − Φ' , ψ=
1' (ψ 0 − 2ψ 2 ) − Ψ
ε d ln q 3ε 3q d ln q

( lψ l −1 − ( l + 1)ψ l +1 ) ,
qk
=ψ l' l≥2 (19b)
( 2l + 1) ε
truncating order lmax
( 2lmax + 1) ε
=ψ lmax +1 ψ lmax − ψ lmax −1 .
qkη

Evolution equations photons

We assume γ − e Thomson scattering with the Thomson cross-section
dσ 1 + cos 2 θ
= 3σ T σ T 0.665 × 10−24 cm 2
,=
dΩ 16π
with Fγ ( k , nˆ ,η ) distribution total intensity

with Gγ ( k , n ,η ) distribution difference polarization components
with collision terms
 ∂Fγ  

 ∂η
=
C
(
aneσ T − Fγ + Fγ 0 + 4 ( nˆ ⋅ ve ) − ( Fγ 2 + Gγ 0 + Gγ 2 ) P2 )
 ∂Gγ   
aneσ T  −Gγ + ( Fγ 2 + Gγ 0 + Gγ 2 ) (1 − P2 ) 
1
 =
 ∂η C  2 

with expansion
 ∂Fγ   4i   ∞

aneσ T  (θγ − θb ) P1 +  9σ γ − Gγ 0 − Gγ 2  P2 − ∑ ( −i ) ( 2l + 1) Fγ l Pl 
1 1
=
l
 
 ∂η C k  2 2  l =3 

 ∂Gγ  1 ∞

= aneσ T  ( Fγ 2 + Gγ 0 + Gγ 2 ) (1 − P )2 − ∑ ( −i ) ( 2l + 1) Gγ l Pl  .
l
 
 ∂η C 2 l =0 

Resulting fluid equations are then

1  2
 + k Ψ + aneσ T (θb − θγ )
4
' , θγ ' k 2  δ γ − σ γ
δ γ ' =− θγ + 4Φ= (19c1)
3 4 
and momenta evolution becomes

Fγ 2' =2σ γ ' = θγ − kFγ 3 − aneσ T σ γ (θγ − θb )

8 3 9
15 5 5
+ aneσ T (θγ − θb )( Gγ 0 + Gγ 2 )
1
10

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 220 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

=Fγ l'
k
(
lF
2l + 1 γ ( l −1)
)
− ( l + 1) Fγ ( l +1) − aneσ T Fγ l , l ≥ 3 (19c2)

=Gγ l'
k
(
lG
2l + 1 γ ( l −1)
− ( l + 1) Gγ ( l +1))
(19c3)
  δ 
+ aneσ T  −Gγ l + ( Fγ 2 + Gγ 0 + Gγ 2 )  δ l 0 + l 2  
1
 2  5 

Evolution equations baryons

We have the fluid equations
4 ργ
aneσ T (θb − θγ ) + k 2 Ψ (19d1)
a'
δ b' =−θb + 3Φ' , θb' =− θb + cs2 k 2δ b −
a 3ρb
k BTb  1 d ln Tb 
with sound speed
= cs2 1−  , µ mean baryon mass.
µ  3 d ln a 
The temperature equation becomes
8 µ ργ
aneσ T (Tγ − Tb )
a'
Tb' =
−2 Tb +
a 3 me ρb

Before recombination tight-coupling γ − b , we have

 1  2 
θb − θ=
γ τ c  θγ ' − k 2  δ γ − σ γ −k Ψ (19d2)
 4  
τc  8 
σ γ=  θγ − 10σ γ ' − 3kFγ 3  (19d3)
9 3 

3 ρb  a'  21   3 ρb  2
θγ ' =−  θb' + θb − cs k δ b  + k  δ γ − σ γ
2 2
 + 1 +  k Ψ (19d4)
4 ργ  a  4   4 ργ 

8. Initial Conditions
Initial conditions in k-space for density components (radiation γ, neutrinos ν ,
electrons e, baryons b, cold-dark-matter c) and metric perturbations Ψ , Φ gen-
erate the random (Gaussian distributed) inhomogeneities required for structure
formation.
Initial conditions k-space
For Newtonian gauge in conformal time η , initial conditions are chosen in
such a way, that only the largest order in kη is present (Ma [14])
40C
δ γ =− =−2Ψ
3( P + ρ )
3 3
δ=
c δ=
b δ=
ν δγ
4 4
k 2η
θ=
γ θ=
ν θ=
b θ=
c
10C
15 + 4 Rν
( )
k 2η=
2
Ψ

( kη )
2
4C
σν
= (=
kη ) Ψ
2

3 (15 + 4 Rν ) 15

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 221 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

20C  2 
Ψ= , Φ= 1 + Rν Ψ
15 + 4 Rν  5 
ρν
with neutrino density ratio Rν =
ργ + ρν

9. Structure Formation
In the following, we present in concise form cross sections, reaction rates and
densities for important cosmological particle processes [2] [3] [4] [11] [23]. They
are used in the background eos equations in chap. 2, and in the evolution equa-
tions of density distribution momenta in chap. 7.
Cosmic neutrino background
The reaction is ν e + ν e ↔ e + + e − , e − + ν e ↔ e − + ν e
Γ nσ v ≈ GF2 T 5 , GF ≈ 1.2 × 10−5 GeV −2 (3.58)
with reaction rate =
3
T2 Γ  T 
and corresponding Hubbble rate H ≈ , ≈  ,
M Pl H  1 MeV 
neutrinos decouple at Tν , d = 1 MeV , tν , d = 1s ,
1
the number density nν ∝ a −3 ∫ d 3 q ,
 q 
exp  + 1
 aTν 
with Tν ∝ a −1 for Tν > Tν ,d .
Gamma pair production
The gamma-pair production reaction is γ + A → e + + e − + A [24] [25]
with the cross-section σ = α re2 Z 2 P ( E , Z ) , where Z = atomic number of materi-
Eγ
al A, k = , α fine-structure-constant, and
Ee
3
2π  k − 2 
P ( E, Z ) ≈   , 2<k <4,
3  k 

28 218  Eγ 
P ( E, Z ) ≈ ln ( 2k=
)− 3.11ln  2  − 8.07 , k > 4 ,
9 27  Ee 
wih reaction rate Γ =nσ c .
Electron-positron annihilation
The ep-annihilation reaction is e + + e − → γ + γ shown in Figure 12.
wih the cross-section
 πα  2α  1 + β 2 1+ β    s 
σ e+ e− (ω 0 ) =1 + σ 0 ( β ) − − log   − 1 log   σ 0 ( β ) [24]
 v  π  2 β 1− β    2ω0 

Figure 12. e-p annihilation.

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 222 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

πα 2  3 − β 4 1+ β  2 
where σ 0 ( β )=
sβ 
−
β
log  ( )
 − 2 2 − β  Born cross-section, and
1− β  
Mandelstamm variables = ( p1 + p2 ) ,= ( p1 − p3 ) ( p1 − p4 )
2
,= , where
2 2
s t u
1+ β
( )
2
β= 1 − 4 mc 2 s, z=
1− β
2β
ω0 soft cut-off, v = relative velocity, dof number
1+ β 2
 7 11
2 + =
×4 T ≥ me
gS =  8 2 with photons decoupling at Te, d = 0.5 MeV ,
2 T < me
α2
te,d = 6 s , duration ∆te,d = = 10−18 s
me
13
4
Tν =   Tγ , t > te, d after ep-annihilation, so Tγ ,0 = 2.73 K , Tν ,0 = 1.95 K .
 11 
Planck data yield ∑ mν i < 0.13 eV , Ων < 0.003 .
General photon eos
i

For T > Tan in pair-production regime, we have in equilibrium (relativistic)

2πα 2 v
σ0 (β ) = , β= e
sβ c

2πα 2  2 c 2  πα 
2ne + vσ ≈ 2ne + β c
Γ eeγ = 1 + 
sβ  β 
 E   nb
Γγ= 2nγ cσ ≈ 2nγ cα re2 Z ef2  3.1ln  γ  − 8.1 with Z ef = 1 , s = 4 Eth
2
ee
 E  n
  e   γ

E 
re2 3.1ln  γ 
n2 E 
Γ eeγ =
Γγ ee results nγ = b Eth2  e n
, i.e. nγ ~ b nb Eth2  Eth4 ,
ne +  πα c  n
4πα  2 c 2 1 + 
e+

 ve 

with thermal energy Eth = k BT .

In the black-body regime we have the Stefan-Boltzmann relation nγ = aSB Eth4 .
The positron density ne + results from equality of both nγ from pair-pro-
duction-annihilation and Stefan-Boltzmann
2 2
n2  E  nb2  Eth 
ne + ≈ b 0.17α  th 2  = 
−3
 1.2 × 10 .
nγ  me c  nγ  me c 2 

Thomson scattering ([26] Hu)

We get density of free electrons
 Yp 
ne= 1 −  X e nb ≈ Ωb h 2 (1 + z ) × 10−5 cm −3 , ionization fraction X e ≈ 1 ,
3

 2 
where Yp ≈ 0.24 Helium mass fraction.
dτ
The optical depth τ results from the Thomson equation = neσ T a ,
dη

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 223 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

8πα 2
σT
where= = 6.65 × 10−25 cm 2 is the Thomson cross-section in photon-
3me2
electron scattering.
Photons and neutrinos
After photon decoupling we have the relation for neutrino and photon tem-
perature
13
4
Tν =   Tγ (3.62)
 11 
Hydrogen recombination ([4], chap. 2)
For hydrogen recombination we have the reaction e − + p + → H + γ ,
32
n   2π  E 
and number density  H2 =  exp  ion ,
 ne   meT   T 
with ionization energy Eion = m p + me − mH = 13.6 eV , EH , re = 13.6 eV
ne ne
and free electron fraction X e ≡ = .
n p + nH nb
The free electron fraction obeys Saha equation

1 − X e 2ζ ( 3)  2π 
32
 Eion 
=   η exp   (3.78) ζ ( 3) = 1.202
Xe2
π  meT 
2
 T 

nb nb ,0 0.242 m −3
where = = = 0.59 × 10−9 , and baryon-photon ratio
nγ nγ ,0 0.41 × 109 m −3
η ≈ 6 × 10−10 .
−1 + 1 + 4 f ( Eth )
The solution is X e = ,
2 f ( Eth )
32 32
2  Eth   E re  −9  Eth  E 
f ( E=
th ) 4ζ ( 3) η  exp  H ,=  2.26 × 10  2 
exp  H , re ,
π  me c 2   Eth   me c   Eth 

with limits
1 nb
f 1 , Xe ≈ , ne = nb , 1
f ( Eth ) nH

f  1 , X e ≈ 1 , ne = nb , nH = 0 ,

3760 K , trec ≈ 290 ky .

and recombination temperature Trec ≈ 0.32 eV =
Photon decoupling
The photon decoupling reaction is e − + γ ↔ e − + γ , with reaction rate
Γγ ≈ neσ T , σ T ≈ 2 × 10−3 MeV −2 , and decoupling temperature
π2 H 0 Ωm
Γγ (Tdec ) ≈ H (Tdec ) , X e (Tdec ) Tdec
32
≈ , Tdec ≈ 0.25 eV =
2970 K
2ζ ( 3) ησ T T03 2
for tdec ≈ 370 ky .
  ∂f
∂f p
The Boltzmann equation is + ∇f + F ⋅  =C ( f ) , for reaction
∂t m ∂p

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 224 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

1 + 2 ↔ 3 + 4 collision term is Ci  n j  = { }
−α c n1n2 + α c β c n3 n4 , where α c = σ v
nn 
thermally averaged cross-section, β c =  1 2  detailed balanced coefficient.
 n3 n4 eq
From this follows cosmic Boltzmann equation with collision term

1 d ni a
3
( )
− σ v ( n1n2 − β c n3 n4 )
= (3.96)
a 3 dt
ni d ( log N1 ) Γ   N N  N3 N 4 
where the particle number is Ni ≡ ∝ ni a 3 , − 1 1 −  1 2 
= ,
s d ( log a ) H   N 3 N 4 eq N1 N 2 
 
where Γ1 ≡ n2 σ v (1,2) interaction rate.
Dark matter cdm decoupling
The reaction for cdm particle X, light particle l: X + X ↔ l + l with
( 3
)=
Boltzmann equation
1 d nX a
a3 dt
− σv n ( 2
X )
− ( nX )eq , with YX ≡
2 nX
T3
particles

M X dx
in co-moving volume, and reduced mass x ≡ , = Hx .
T dt
Γ(M X ) M X3 σ v
Using λ ≡ = , we get the Riccati equation
H (M X ) H (M X )
dYX
dx
λ
(
− 2 YX2 − (YX )eq .
=
x
2
)
xf
The asympotic value is YX ,∞ ≈ with x f reduced mass at freeze-out.
λ
xf 10−8 GeV −2
The cdm density is Ω X ~ 0.1 with reaction rate
gs ( M X ) σv
σ v ~ 10−8 GeV −2 ~ 0.1 GF (≈weak interaction).
Baryo-genesis
In the following we present important cosmological processes of nuclei, with
density evolution equation, cross-section, and charasteristic (freeze-out) time.
Neutron-proton decay
The reaction here is n + ν e ↔ p + + e − , n + e + ↔ p + + ν e with density ratio
n   Enp 
( mn − m p ) c 2 =
nn
 n=  exp  −  , Enp = 1.30 MeV , and with X n ≡
 n p eq  k BT  nn + n p
relative n-abundance.
For X n we get the equation
dX n   Enp 
= −Γ n ( x )  X n − (1 − X n ) exp  −  
dt   k BT 
where
255 12 + 6 x + x 2 Enp
Γn ( x ) = , x= , τ n 886.7 ± 0.8 s neutron lifetime.
=
τn x 5
k BT
 t 
X n ( t ) X n ,∞ exp  −  .
With freeze-out abundance X n ,∞ = 0.15 it becomes=
 τn 

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 225 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

Deuterium
32
n  3  4π 2 c 2   EnpD 
The density ratio is  D
 np  = nn ,eq  2 

exp   , with
 eq 4  m p c k BT   k BT 
EnpD = ( mn + m p − mD ) c 2 = 2.22 MeV and temperature Tnuc = 0.06 MeV at
 nD   0.1 MeV 
2

  = (T T=
nuc ) 1 , the corresponding
= time is tnuc   120 s ≈ 330 s .
 np eq  Tnuc 
Helium
The reactions are
D + p + ↔ He3 + γ , H 3 + p + ↔ He3 + n

D + D ↔ H 3 + p + , H 3 + D ↔ He4 + p +

D + D ↔ He3 + n , He3 + D ↔ He 4 + p +

helium-hydrogen ratio is then

4nHe 4nHe 2 X n ( tnuc )
= YP = ≈ ~ 0.25 , which is observed.
nH np 1 − X n ( tnuc )
Lithium beryllium
The reactions are
Be7 + n ↔ Li 7 + p + , Li 7 + p + ↔ He4 + He4 , Be7 + e− ↔ Li 7 + ν e
He3 + He 4 ↔ Be7 + γ , H 3 + He4 ↔ Li 7 + γ .
Hydrogen recombination
The process of hydrogen recombination is shown in Figure 13.
We have the Peebles equation for free electron density Xe with an improved
calculation in redshift z [27]

Cr (T )   me c k BT
12
dX e
2
  EI 
=
−   (1 − X e ) exp  − 
dz H ( z )(1 + z )   2π 
  k BT 
 (20)
n 2ζ ( 3) 
− α (T ) b ( )
3
k BT X e2 
nγ π 2 


Figure 13. Hydrogen recombination state diagram [4].

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 226 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

with
Λ 2 γ + Λα
Cr ( T ) ≡ ,
Λ 2 γ + Λ α + βα

27 H (T )
Λα = ,
128 ζ ( 3) (1 − X e ) ( nb nγ ) ( k BT EI )3

8.227 s −1 ,
Λ 2γ =

8πc  3EI 
λα = Lyman wavelength, βα = β (T ) exp  ,
3EI  4k BT 
12
α2  EI   E 
α (T ) ≈ 9.8   log  I ,
( )
2
me c 2  k BT   k BT 

 1+ z 
H ( z) =Ω m H 0 (1 + z ) 1 +  ,
32

 1 + zeq 
H 0 ≈ 1.5 × 10−33 eV , T= (1 + z ) 0.235 eV .

10. CMB Spectrum

In this chapter, we present first in concise way the contributions to the temper-
ature anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background CMB.
Then we describe the scheme for the calculation of the CMB spectrum coeffi-
cients Cl.
The schematic of the calculation is shown in chap. 11.
Finally, we present the self-calculated results and a comparison with data.

10.1. CMB Spectrum Theory

CMB spectrum today
CMB as measured today has the parameters [28]:
temperature=
Tγ ,0 2.7255 ± 0.0006 K .
CMB dipole is around 3.3621 ± 0.0010 mK
relative density Ωγ = 6 × 10−5
∆Tγ ,0 30 µK
temperature anisotropy ∆Tγ ,0 ≈ 30 µK , so ≈ 1.1 × 10−5 .
=
Tγ ,0 2.72 K
Temperature anisotropy
The temperature anisotropy of the CMB has the following contributions:
δT
T

( nˆ ) =  SW =  δ γ
 4
1  
* 
( 
)
η0
(
+ Ψ   + Dop = − ( nˆ ⋅ vb )* + ISW = ∫ dη ( Φ′ + Ψ ′ )
η* ) (7.29)

at conformal time η= η= * ηdec .

▪ SW The first term is the so-called Sachs–Wolfe term. It represents the in-
trinsic temperature fluctuations associated to the photon density fluctuations
δ γ 4 and the metric perturbation Ψ at last scattering.

▪ Doppler The second term is the Doppler term nˆ ⋅ vb caused by local veloc-

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 227 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

ity, this contribution is small on large scales.

▪ ISW The last term describes the additional gravitational redshift
η0
∫η dη ( Φ′ + Ψ ′ ) due to the evolution of the metric.
*

The temperature anisotropy has the form

   
∫ ( 2π )3 exp ( ik ⋅ nˆ ct (η* ) ) ( F (η* , k ) + i ( k ⋅ nˆ ) G (η* , k ) ) ,
δT d3k
Θ ( nˆ )=
≡ ( nˆ )
T

 1  F η , k ( )
where F η*= ( ) 
 δ γ + Ψ  , G η* , k = vb , F* ( k ) =
*
(  , )
( )
,k
4  R η = 0, k

G η* , k ( ) 
G* ( k ) = (
 and R η = 0, k are the initial curvature anisotropies. )
(
R η = 0, k )
We get for the anisotropy the series in Legendre polynomials
 
Θ (=
nˆ ) ∑ il ( 2l + 1) ∫
l
d3k
( 2π )
3 ( ) (
Θl ( k ) R 0, k Pl k ⋅ nˆ )
with the transfer function including ISW

( F* ( k ) j j ( χ*k ) − G* ( k ) j j' ( χ*k ) ) + ∫η dη ( Φ′ + Ψ′) j j ( ct (η ) k ) ,

η0
Θl ( k ) =
Θl ( k ) =
*

with χ* = ct (η* ) .
The two-point temperature correlation (scalar TT-correlation) spectrum meas-
ured in CMB is C (θ ) =Θ ( nˆ ) Θ ( nˆ ′ ) , with directions nˆ , nˆ ′ , angle cos θ= nˆ ⋅ nˆ ′ ,
and the series in Legendre polynomials
2l + 1
C (θ ) = ∑ Cl Pl ( cosθ )
l 4π

with series coefficients Cl

dk 2
Cl 2π ∫ 1 d ( cos θ ) C (=
θ ) Pl ( cosθ ) 4π∫ Θl ( k ) ∆ 2R ( k )
1
= (7.6)
− k
ns −1
k 
where ∆ 2R ( k ) =As   is the power amplitude, and where sound horizon is
 k0 
dη
rs = ∫ , with curvature R (η ) .
3 (1 + R (η ) )
Weinberg semi-analytic solution [29]
Weinberg proposed a semi-analytic solution for photon density perturbations
 
  S (k ) 
δγ
=
4
η 0, k 
R= (  ) ( ( ))

cos ( krs + θ ( k ) ) − 1 + 3R η , k T ( k ) 
( ( ))
14
5  1 + R η, k 
 
with Weinberg semi-analytic transfer functions for SW and Doppler with
 
1  k2  S (k )  
F* ( k )=  exp  − 2   (
cos ( krs* + θ ( k ) ) − 3R η* , k T ( k ) )
( ( ))
14
5  k D*  1 + R η* , k 
 

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 228 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

 k2  S (k )
sin ( krs* + θ ( k ) )
3
G* ( k ) =
− exp  − 2   where
( ( ))
14
5  k D*  1 + R η* , k

k D−1* = 8.8 Mpc

and the resulting CMB power spectrum
l ( l + 1) ∞
dβ  2  lβ  β 2 −1 2  lβ   2  lβ 
= Cl ∫  F*   + G*    ∆ R   with
2π 1 β
2
β 2 − 1   χ*  β2  χ*    χ* 
χ* = ct (η* )
where
2
 1 + (1.209κ )2 + ( 0.5611κ )4 + 5 ( 0.1567κ )6 
S (κ ) =  
 1 + ( 0.9459κ )2 + ( 0.4249κ )4 + ( 0.167κ )6 
 

T (κ ) =
( 
)
log 1 + ( 0.124κ )  1 + (1.257κ )2 + ( 0.4452κ )4 + ( 0.2197κ )6
2 12


( 0.124κ )
2  1 + (1.606κ )2 + ( 0.8568κ )4 + ( 0.3927κ )6 
 
12
 (1.1547κ ) + ( 0.5986κ ) + 5 ( 0.2578κ ) 
2 4 6

θ (κ ) =   .
 1 + (1.723κ ) + ( 0.8707κ ) + ( 0.4581κ ) + ( 0.2204κ ) 
2 4 6 8
 
Calculation of CMB spectrum coefficients Cl ([30] Hu)
The temperature and photon polarization Stokes parameters anisotropy are
expanded in a series in angular momentum (l, m),
 d3k ∞ 2
Θ (η , =
x , nˆ ) ∫ ( 2 π )3 ∑ ∑ ΘlmGlm (21a)
l = 0 m = −2

 d3k ∞ 2
( Q ± iU )(η ,=
x , nˆ ) ∫ ∑ ∑ ( Elm ± iBlm ) Glm
( 2π )
3
l = 0 m = −2

with temperature (l, m)-moments

 
Θ(l )
= ∫ dnYlm ( n ) Θ ( n ) (21b)
m *

and with temperature basis functions

4π  
( i)
Glm =−
l

2l + 1 l
( l
)
Ylm ( nˆ ) exp ik ⋅ x =∑ ( −i ) 4π ( 2l + 1) jl ( kr ) Yl 0 (θ , ϕ ) ,

∑ ( −i )
Gl ' m = 4π ( 2l + 1) jll ' m ( kr ) Ylm (θ , ϕ ) ,
l

where
 
(
exp ik ⋅ x = ) ∑ ( −i )
l
l
4π ( 2l + 1) jl ( kr ) Yl 0 (θ , ϕ ) .

In this representation, the spectrum coefficients Cl are

Θl( ) , Θ(l ′
m′ )
≡ ∫ dη Θ *l( ) Θl(′
m′ )
m m
δ ll ′δ mm′Cl
= (21c)
η

where the power spectrum on the angular momentum l is

l ( l + 1)
∆T2 ( l ) = Cl T 2 in μK2 (21d)
2π

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 229 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

We use the variables:

η′
8πG 8πG 2
averaged pressure V (η ′, k ) = − 2 ∫
dη a 4δ P , V ′ (η , k ) = − a δP
ka 0 k
η′
optical depth τ (η ′ ) = σ T ∫ dη ne a , τ ′ (η ) = neσ T a .
0

The temperature (l, m)-moments are calculated from the evolution equations
 κm κm 
Θ'lm k  0l Θlm − 0l +1 Θl +1m  − τ ' Θlm + Slm
= (21e)
 2l − 1 2l + 3 
with sources
S00 = τ ' Θ00 − Φ′ , S=
10 τ ′vb 0 + k Ψ , =
S11 τ ′vb1 + V ′

S=
20
1
10
(
τ ′ Θ 20 − 6 E20 , S=
21
1
10
)
τ ′ Θ 21 − 6 E21 , ( )
=
S22
1
10
(
τ ′ Θ 22 − 6 E22 − Φ′ )
S=
20
1
10
(
τ ′ Θ 20 − 6 E20 , S=
21
1
10
)
τ ′ Θ21 − 6 E21 , ( )
=
S22
1
10
(
τ ′ Θ 22 − 6 E22 − Φ′ )
Θlm (η0 , k ) η0

2l + 1 ∫ dη exp ( −τ ) ∑ Sl′m (η ) jll′m ( k (η0 − η ) )

=
l′
0

and jll ′m are spherical Bessel functions

jl 00 ( x ) = jl ( x ) , jl10 ( x ) = jl' ( x ) = ( 3 jl'' ( x ) + jl ( x ) )

1
, jl 20 ( x )
2

l ( l + 1) jl ( x ) 3l ( l + 1) d  jl ( x ) 
jl11 ( x ) = , jl 21 ( x ) =  ,
2 x 2 dx  x 

3 ( l + 2 )! jl ( x )
jl 22 ( x ) = .
8 ( l − 2 )! x 2

10.2. CMB Calculation Results

The metric perturbations Ψ , Φ in k-space for k = 5 are shown in Figure 14, as
a function of relative scale factor a aeq , where a=
eq = 0.9 × 10−3 at photon
adec
decoupling. Note the transition from high to low amplitude at decoupling.
Density fluctuations for baryons, radiation, cdm δb, δr, δc, for k = 5 are shown
in Figure 15, as a function of relative scale factor a aeq . The matter fluctua-
tions decay before or after decoupling, whereas radiation fluctuation stabilizes at
a higher level.
The calculated normalized scalar TT-correlation power spectrum of CMB,
l ( l + 1)
∆T2 ( l ) = Cl T 2 , is shown in Figure 16, in μK2 over multipole order l, cal-
2π
culated for the original Planck Hubble value =H 0, P 67.74 km ⋅ s −1 ⋅ Mpc . Note

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 230 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

the characteristic decrease from the first to the second maximum and from the
third to the following maxima.

Figure 14. Metric perturbations, Ψ, k = 5 [31].

Figure 15. Density fluctuations δb, δr, δc, k = 5 [31], double loga-
rithmic plot.

Figure 16. Temperature scalar TT-correlation spectrum

l ( l + 1)
y =T2 Cl , [ y ] = µK 2 , x = l [31].
2π

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 231 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

The background Hubble parameter H0 influences the CMB spectrum, but the
deviation δ = 1.3% caused by the calculated correction from chap. 5 is within
measurement error.
The plot in Figure 17 shows the difference between the power spectrum for
l ( l + 1)
Planck-Hubble-parameter ∆T2 ( l , H 0, P ) = Cl T 2 , and for the background-
2π
l ( l + 1)
corrected Hubble-parameter ∆T2 ( l , H 0, Pc ) = Cl T 2 , where
2π
H 0, Pc =H 0, P × 1.043 =70.6 ± 0.4 , with maximum deviation of δ = 1.3%.
In Figure 18 is shown the scalar TT-correlation power spectrum from Figure
16, together with measurement data and its error bars.

Figure 17. Power TT spectrum Hubble correction, max rel.dev. δ = 1.3%

[31].

Figure 18. Temperature scalar TT-correlation power spectrum with

measured data [22] [31], for measurements Planck, WMAP, ACBAR,
CBI, and BOOMERANG.

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 232 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

11. Concise Presentation

In the following, we present the fundamental equations, the solution process and
results in form of schematic diagrams for the background calculation and for the
CMB calculation.
Lambda-CDM background calculation:

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 233 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

Lambda-CDM CMB calculation:

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 234 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

12. Conclusions
The results for the background part are presented in schematic form in chap. 11
Lambda-CDM background calculation.
We start with the Friedmann equations
Λ1 2
( a ') +k− a − ρ a2 =
2
0
3
ρ 'a
+ a '( P + ρ ) =
0
3
with the variables in dependence of the scale factor a (inverting the scalefactor-
time relation a = a ( x ) ,
x ( a ) time,
ρi ( a ) density of component i,
Eth ( a ) temperature,
for components radiation γ, neutrinos ν , electrons e, protons p, neutrons n,
cdm d, where the pressure Pi ( a ) is eliminated using the component eos
Pi = Pi ( ρi , Eth ) .
In difference to the conventional ansatz,
-the temperature resp. thermal energy is introduced as explicit function of
time Eth ( t ) ;
-we use the ideal gas eos for baryons, instead of the usual setting Pb = 0
(dust eos).
As we show in chap. 5, this leads to a correction of 4.3% for the present value
of Hubble parameter H 0 c = 1.043H 0 , which brings it into agreement with the
measured Red-Giant-result, and within error margin with the Cepheids-SNIa-
measurement.
We carry out an iterated calculation with two steps i = 1 and i = 2, the results
are shown graphically in chap. 10.2.
Note the deviation of the temperature from the conventional linear behavior
(brown) to the calculated first-iteration-value (blue) for later times. This pro-
duces also a slight “bump” for the Hubble parameter H ( a ) , and there is a
slight “kink” in x ( a ) .
The results for the perturbation part are presented in schematic form in chap.
11 Lambda-CDM CMB calculation.
We start with the perturbed metric

(
s 2 a (η ) − (1 + 2Ψ ) dη 2 + (1 − 2Φ ) dxi dxi
d= )
perturbations Φ, Ψ ,θ , σ , δ , δ P , where
δ P pressure
θ = ik j v j velocity
δ = δρ ρ relative density
 1 
σ= −  kˆi kˆ j − δ ij  Π ij ( ρ + P ) stress
 3 
ρ , P , a , Eth are background functions calculated already in the background

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 235 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

part.
And τ = reionization optical depth is a parameter used for the CMB calcula-
tion.
The perturbations result from (random) initial conditions and represent the
random nature of structure formation.
The resulting fundamental equations are transformed to k-space (i.e. Fourier
transformed), and consist of two parts.
The Einstein equations in k-space resulting from the perturbed metric ansatz
k 2 Φ − 3H ( Φ′ + H Ψ ) =πGa 2δρ

H Ψ ) πGa 2 ( P + ρ )θ
k 2 ( Φ′ +=

( Φ − Ψ ) 12πGa 2 ( P + ρ )σ
k 2=
1
( )
Φ′′ + H ( Ψ ′ + 2Φ′ ) + k 2 ( Φ − Ψ ) + 2 H ′ + H 2 Ψ =4πGa 2δ P
3
and the thermodynamic: density and Euler (relativistic fluid) equation, resulting
from the relativistic Boltzmann transport equation
 P  δP P 
δ ′ =− 1 +  (θ − 3Φ′ ) − 3H  − δ
 ρ ρδ ρ
 P′  δP 2 2
θ′ =− H + θ − k − k σ + k 2Ψ
 P+ρ P+ρ
The CMB power spectrum coefficients Cl depend on the angular moments of
temperature correlation Θlm , which obey the iterative differential equation in
k-space
 κm κm 
Θ'lm k  0l Θlm − 0l +1 Θl +1m  − τ ' Θlm + Slm
=
 2l − 1 2l + 3 
with parameters, which are calculated from the fundamental equations.
The actual numerical calculation is performed in program [31], based on a
function library from [22].
Then a fit is carried out between the calculated parameterized coefficients
Cl ( pi ) and tthe measured values Cl ,exp .
The 13 fitted parameters
 dn 
pi =  Ωb , Ωc , Ω Λ , t0 , H 0 , As , ns ,τ , w, Σmν , Nν , rt , s  are calculated by the Plan-
 dk 
ck collaboration [32], and are not recalculated here.
The fitted [32] and measured coefficients Cl are shown in a plot.

Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this pa-
per.

References
[1] Fliessbach, T. (1990) Allgemeine Relativitätstheorie. Bibliographisches Institut, Leipzig.

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 236 Journal of Modern Physics

 J. Helm

[2] Dodelson, S. and Schmidt, F. (2021) Modern Cosmology. Academic Press, Cambridge.
[3] Vittorio, N. (2018) Cosmology. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
https://doi.org/10.1201/b22176
[4] Baumann, D. (2022) Cosmology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108937092
[5] Ciufolini, I. and Wheeler, A. (1996) Gravitation and Inertia. Princeton University
Press, Princeton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691190198
[6] Soff, G. (1993) Allgemeine Relativitätstheorie. Univ. Frankfurt/M, Frankfurt.
[7] Blau, M. (2000) Lecture Notes on General Relativity. Bern University, Bern.
[8] Stefani, H., et al. (2003) Exact Solutions of Einstein’s Field Equations. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
[9] Steiner, F. (2008) Solution of the Friedmann Equation Determining the Time Evo-
lution. Ulm University, Ulm.
[10] Armendariz-Picon, C. and Neelakanta, J. (2014) Journal of Cosmology and Astropar-
ticle Physics, 3, 49. https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2014/03/049
[11] Particle Data Group (2022).
https://pdg.lbl.gov/2011/reviews/rpp2011-rev-cosmological-parameters.pdf
[12] Shaw, J.R. and Lewis, A. (2010) Physical Review D, 81, Article ID: 043517.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.81.043517
[13] Helm, J. (2023) LamCDM.nb Mathematica Program.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jan-Helm/publications
[14] Ma, C.-H. and Bertschinger, E. (1995) Cosmological Perturbation Theory.
[15] Planck Collaboration (2022).
https://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/planck/planck-collaboration
[16] Aydiner, E. (2022) The European Physical Journal, 82, 39.
https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-09996-2
[17] Davis, T.M. and Lineweaver, C.H. (2003) Expanding Confusion.
[18] Helm, J. (2018) A Covariant Formulation of the Ashtekar-Kodama Quantum Grav-
ity and Its Solutions. https://www.researchgate.net
[19] Crevecoeur, G.U. (2016) Evolution of the Distance Scale Factor and the Hubble Pa-
rameter.
[20] Lewis, A. and Challinor, A. (2013) Code for Anisotropies in the Microwave Back-
ground CAMB Fortran-Python Code.
[21] Bernardeau, F., Pitrou, C. and Uzan, J.-P. (2010) CMB Spectra and Bispectra Calcu-
lations: Making the Flat-Sky Approximation Rigorous. arXiv: astro-ph/1012.2652.
[22] Pitrou, C. (2018) CMBquick Mathematica Program.
https://www2.iap.fr/users/pitrou
[23] Croswell, K. (1996) Alchemy of the Heavens. Anchor, New York.
[24] Lee, R. (2020) Nuclear Physics B, 860, Article ID: 115200.
[25] Maximon, L.C. (1968) Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards B,
72, 79-88. https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.072B.011
[26] Hu, W. (2017) CMB. Lecture, University of Chicago, Chicago.
[27] Peebles, P.J.E. (1968) The Astrophysical Journal, 153, 1.
https://doi.org/10.1086/149628
[28] Hu, W. (2001) Cosmic Microwave Background. University of Chicago, Chicago.
https://background.uchicago.edu

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 237 Journal of Modern Physics

J. Helm

[29] Weinberg, S. (2008) Cosmology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198526827.001.0001
[30] Hu, W. and White, M. (1997) CMB Anisotropies: Total Angular Momentum Me-
thod.
[31] Helm, J. (2023) LamCDMcmb.nb Mahematica Program.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jan-Helm/publications
[32] Planck Collaboration (2016) Astronomy & Astrophysics, 594, A13.

DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2024.152011 238 Journal of Modern Physics