International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences

International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences / 2009 / Article

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2009 |Article ID 471938 | 20 pages | https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/471938

Accelerated Lyra's Cosmology Driven by Electromagnetic Field in Inhomogeneous Universe

Academic Editor: Christian Corda
Received13 Jul 2009
Accepted11 Dec 2009
Published27 Jan 2010

Abstract

A new class of cylindrically symmetric inhomogeneous cosmological models for perfect fluid distribution with electromagnetic field is obtained in the context of Lyra's geometry. We have obtained solutions by considering the time dependent displacement field. The source of the magnetic field is due to an electric current produced along the z-axis. Only š¹12 is a nonvanishing component of electromagnetic field tensor. To get the deterministic solution, it has been assumed that the expansion šœƒ in the model is proportional to the shear šœŽ. It has been found that the solutions are consistent with the recent observations of type Ia supernovae, and the displacement vector š›½(š‘”) affects entropy. Physical and geometric aspects of the models are also discussed in presence and absence of magnetic field.

1. Introduction and Motivations

The inhomogeneous cosmological models play a significant role in understanding some essential features of the universe such as the formation of galaxies during the early stages of evolution and process of homogenization. The early attempts at the construction of such models have been done by Tolman [1] and Bondi [2] who considered spherically symmetric models. Inhomogeneous plane-symmetric models were considered by Taub [3, 4] and later by Tomimura [5], Szekeres [6], Collins and Szafron [7, 8], and Szafron and Collins [9]. Senovilla [10] obtained a new class of exact solutions of Einstein's equations without big bang singularity, representing a cylindrically symmetric, inhomogeneous cosmological model filled with perfect fluid which is smooth and regular everywhere satisfying energy and causality conditions. Later, Ruiz and Senovilla [11] have examined a fairly large class of singularity-free models through a comprehensive study of general cylindrically symmetric metric with separable function of š‘Ÿ and š‘” as metric coefficients. Dadhich et al. [12] have established a link between the FRW model and the singularity-free family by deducing the latter through a natural and simple in-homogenization and anisotropization of the former. Recently, Patel et al. [13] have presented a general class of inhomogeneous cosmological models filled with nonthermalized perfect fluid assuming that the background space-time admits two space-like commuting Killing vectors and has separable metric coefficients. Singh et al. [14] obtained inhomogeneous cosmological models of perfect fluid distribution with electromagnetic field. Recently, Pradhan et al. [15ā€“18] have investigated cylindrically-symmetric inhomogeneous cosmological models in various contexts.

The occurrence of magnetic field on galactic scale is a well-established fact today, and its importance for a variety of astrophysical phenomena is generally acknowledged as pointed out by Zeldovich et al. [19]. Also Harrison [20] suggests that magnetic field could have a cosmological origin. As natural consequences, we should include magnetic fields in the energy-momentum tensor of the early universe. The choice of anisotropic cosmological models in Einstein system of field equations leads to the cosmological models more general than Robertson-Walker model [21]. The presence of primordial magnetic field in the early stages of the evolution of the universe is discussed by many [22ā€“31]. Strong magnetic field can be created due to adiabatic compression in clusters of galaxies. Large-scale magnetic field gives rise to anisotropies in the universe. The anisotropic pressure created by the magnetic fields dominates the evolution of the shear anisotropy and decays slowly as compared to the case when the pressure is held isotropic [32, 33]. Such fields can be generated at the end of an inflationary epoch [34ā€“38]. Anisotropic magnetic field models have significant contribution in the evolution of galaxies and stellar objects. Bali and Ali [39] obtained a magnetized cylindrically symmetric universe with an electrically neutral perfect fluid as the source of matter. Pradhan et al. [40ā€“44] have investigated magnetized cosmological models in various contexts.

In 1917 Einstein introduced the cosmological constant into his field equations of general relativity in order to obtain a static cosmological model since, as is well known, without the cosmological term his field equations admit only nonstatic solutions. After the discovery of the red-shift of galaxies and explanation thereof Einstein regretted for the introduction of the cosmological constant. Recently, there has been much interest in the cosmological term in context of quantum field theories, quantum gravity, super-gravity theories, Kaluza-Klein theories and the inflationary-universe scenario. Shortly after Einstein's general theory of relativity Weyl [45] suggested the first so-called unified field theory based on a generalization of Riemannian geometry. With its backdrop, it would seem more appropriate to call Weyl's theory a geometrized theory of gravitation and electromagnetism (just as the general theory was a geometrized theory of gravitation only), instead of a unified field theory. It is not clear as to what extent the two fields have been unified, even though they acquire (different) geometrical significance in the same geometry. The theory was never taken seriously inasmuchas it was based on the concept of nonintegrability of length transfer; and, as pointed out by Einstein, this implies that spectral frequencies of atoms depend on their past histories and therefore have no absolute significance. Nevertheless, Weyl's geometry provides an interesting example of nonRiemannian connections, and recently Folland [46] has given a global formulation of Weyl manifolds clarifying considerably many of Weyl's basic ideas thereby.

In 1951 Lyra [47] proposed a modification of Riemannian geometry by introducing a gauge function into the structureless manifold, as a result of which the cosmological constant arises naturally from the geometry. This bears a remarkable resemblance to Weyl's geometry. But in Lyra's geometry, unlike that of Weyl, the connection is metric preserving as in Remannian; in other words, length transfers are integrable. Lyra also introduced the notion of a gauge and in the ā€œnormalā€ gauge the curvature scalar in identical to that of Weyl. In consecutive investigations Sen [48], Sen and Dunn [49] proposed a new scalar-tensor theory of gravitation and constructed an analog of the Einstein field equations based on Lyra's geometry. It is, thus, possible [48] to construct a geometrized theory of gravitation and electromagnetism much along the lines of Weyl's ā€œunifiedā€ field theory, however, without the inconvenience of nonintegrability length transfer.

Halford [50] has pointed out that the constant vector displacement field šœ™š‘– in Lyra's geometry plays the role of cosmological constant Ī› in the normal general relativistic treatment. It is shown by Halford [51] that the scalar-tensor treatment based on Lyra's geometry predicts the same effects within observational limits as the Einstein's theory. Several authors Sen and Vanstone [52], Bhamra [53], Karade and Borikar [54], Kalyanshetti and Waghmode [55], Reddy and Innaiah [56], Beesham [57], Reddy and Venkateswarlu [58], Soleng [59], have studied cosmological models based on Lyra's manifold with a constant displacement field vector. However, this restriction of the displacement field to be constant is merely one for convenience, and there is no a priori reason for it. Beesham [60] considered FRW models with time-dependent displacement field. He has shown that by assuming the energy density of the universe to be equal to its critical value, the models have the š‘˜=āˆ’1 geometry. T. Singh and G. P. Singh [61ā€“64], Singh and Desikan [65] have studied Bianchi-type I, III, Kantowaski-Sachs and a new class of cosmological models with time-dependent displacement field and have made a comparative study of Robertson-Walker models with constant deceleration parameter in Einstein's theory with cosmological term and in the cosmological theory based on Lyra's geometry. Soleng [59] has pointed out that the cosmologies based on Lyra's manifold with constant gauge vector šœ™ will either include a creation field and be equal to Hoyle's creation field cosmology [66ā€“68] or contain a special vacuum field, which together with the gauge vector term, may be considered as a cosmological term. In the latter case the solutions are equal to the general relativistic cosmologies with a cosmological term.

Recently, Pradhan et al. [69ā€“73], Casana et al. [74], Rahaman et al. [75, 76], Bali and Chandnani [77], Kumar and Singh [78], Singh [79], Rao, Vinutha et al. [80] and Pradhan [81] have studied cosmological models based on Lyra's geometry in various contexts. Rahaman et al. [82, 83] have evaluated solutions for plane-symmetric thick domain wall in Lyra geometry by using the separable form for the metric coefficients. Rahaman [84ā€“87] has also studied some topological defects within the framework of Lyra geometry. With these motivations, in this paper, we have obtained exact solutions of Einstein's modified field equations in cylindrically symmetric inhomogeneous space-time within the frame work of Lyra's geometry in the presence and absence of magnetic field for time varying displacement vector. This paper is organized as follows. In Section 1 the motivation for the present work is discussed. The metric and the field equations are presented in Section 2. In Section 3 the solutions of field equations are derived for time varying displacement field š›½(š‘”) in presence of magnetic field. Section 4 contains the physical and geometric properties of the model in presence of magnetic field. The solutions in absence of magnetic field are given in Section 5. The physical and geometric properties of the model in absence of magnetic field are discussed in Section 6. Finally, in Section 7 discussion and concluding remarks are given.

2. The Metric and Field Equations

We consider the cylindrically symmetric metric in the form

š‘‘š‘ 2=š“2ī€·š‘‘š‘„2āˆ’š‘‘š‘”2ī€ø+šµ2š‘‘š‘¦2+š¶2š‘‘š‘§2,(2.1) where š“ is the function of š‘”, alone and šµ and š¶ are functions of š‘„ and š‘”. The energy momentum tensor is taken as having the form

š‘‡š‘—š‘–=(šœŒ+š‘)š‘¢š‘–š‘¢š‘—+š‘š‘”š‘—š‘–+šøš‘—š‘–,(2.2) where šœŒ and š‘ are, respectively, the energy density and pressure of the cosmic fluid, and š‘¢š‘– is the fluid four-velocity vector satisfying the condition

š‘¢š‘–š‘¢š‘–=āˆ’1,š‘¢š‘–š‘„š‘–=0.(2.3) In (2.2), šøš‘—š‘– is the electromagnetic field given by Lichnerowicz [88]

šøš‘—š‘–=šœ‡ī‚ƒā„Žš‘™ā„Žš‘™ī‚€š‘¢š‘–š‘¢š‘—+12š‘”š‘—š‘–ī‚āˆ’ā„Žš‘–ā„Žš‘—ī‚„,(2.4) where šœ‡ is the magnetic permeability and ā„Žš‘– the magnetic flux vector defined by

ā„Žš‘–=1šœ‡āˆ—š¹š‘—š‘–š‘¢š‘—,(2.5) where the dual electromagnetic field tensor āˆ—š¹š‘–š‘— is defined by Synge [89]

āˆ—š¹š‘–š‘—=āˆšāˆ’š‘”2šœ–š‘–š‘—š‘˜š‘™š¹š‘˜š‘™.(2.6) Here š¹š‘–š‘— is the electromagnetic field tensor and šœ–š‘–š‘—š‘˜š‘™ is the Levi-Civita tensor density.

The coordinates are considered to be comoving so that š‘¢1 = 0 = š‘¢2 = š‘¢3 and š‘¢4=1/š“. If we consider that the current flows along the š‘§-axis, then š¹12 is the only nonvanishing component of š¹š‘–š‘—. The Maxwell's equations

š¹[]ī‚ø1š‘–š‘—;š‘˜=0,šœ‡š¹š‘–š‘—ī‚¹;š‘—=0,(2.7) require that š¹12 is the function of š‘„-alone. We assume that the magnetic permeability is the functions of š‘„ and š‘” both. Here the semicolon represents a covariant differentiation.

The field equations (in gravitational units š‘=1, šŗ=1), in normal gauge for Lyra's manifold, were obtained by Sen [48] as

š‘…š‘–š‘—āˆ’12š‘”š‘–š‘—3š‘…+2šœ™š‘–šœ™š‘—āˆ’34š‘”š‘–š‘—šœ™š‘˜šœ™š‘˜=āˆ’8šœ‹š‘‡š‘–š‘—,(2.8) where šœ™š‘– is the displacement field vector defined as

šœ™š‘–=(0,0,0,š›½(š‘”)),(2.9) where other symbols have their usual meaning as in Riemannian geometry.

For the line-element (2.1), the field (2.8) with (2.2) and (2.9) leads to the following system of equations:

1š“2ī‚øāˆ’Ģˆšµšµāˆ’Ģˆš¶š¶+Ģ‡š“š“ī‚µĢ‡šµšµ+Ģ‡š¶š¶ī‚¶āˆ’Ģ‡šµĢ‡š¶+šµšµš¶ī…žš¶ī…žī‚¹āˆ’3šµš¶4š›½2īƒ©š¹=8šœ‹š‘+2122šœ‡š“2šµ2īƒŖ1,(2.10)š“2ī‚µĢ‡š“2š“2āˆ’Ģˆš“š“āˆ’Ģˆš¶š¶+š¶ī…žī…žš¶ī‚¶āˆ’34š›½2īƒ©š¹=8šœ‹š‘+2122šœ‡š“2šµ2īƒŖ1,(2.11)š“2ī‚µĢ‡š“2š“2āˆ’Ģˆš“š“āˆ’Ģˆšµšµ+šµī…žī…žšµī‚¶āˆ’34š›½2īƒ©š¹=8šœ‹š‘āˆ’2122šœ‡š“2šµ2īƒŖ1,(2.12)š“2ī‚øāˆ’šµī…žī…žšµāˆ’š¶ī…žī…žš¶+Ģ‡š“š“ī‚µĢ‡šµšµ+Ģ‡š¶š¶ī‚¶āˆ’šµī…žš¶ī…ž+Ģ‡šµĢ‡š¶šµš¶ī‚¹+3šµš¶4š›½2īƒ©š¹=8šœ‹šœŒ+2122šœ‡š“2šµ2īƒŖĢ‡šµ,(2.13)ī…žšµ+Ģ‡š¶ī…žš¶āˆ’Ģ‡š“š“ī‚µšµī…žšµ+š¶ī…žš¶ī‚¶=0.(2.14) Here, and also in the following expressions, a dot and a dash indicate ordinary differentiation with, respect to š‘” and š‘„ respectively.

The energy conservation equation š‘‡š‘–š‘–;š‘—=0 leads to

ī‚µ2Ģ‡š“Ģ‡šœŒ+(šœŒ+š‘)š“+Ģ‡šµšµ+Ģ‡š¶š¶ī‚¶ī‚€š‘…=0,(2.15)š‘—š‘–āˆ’12š‘”š‘—š‘–š‘…ī‚;š‘—+32ī€·šœ™š‘–šœ™š‘—ī€ø;š‘—āˆ’34ī€·š‘”š‘—š‘–šœ™š‘˜šœ™š‘˜ī€ø;š‘—=0.(2.16) Equation (2.16) leads to 32šœ™š‘–ī‚øšœ•šœ™š‘—šœ•š‘„š‘—+šœ™š‘™Ī“š‘—š‘™š‘—ī‚¹+32šœ™š‘—ī‚øšœ•šœ™š‘–šœ•š‘„š‘—āˆ’šœ™š‘™Ī“š‘™š‘–š‘—ī‚¹āˆ’34š‘”š‘—š‘–šœ™š‘˜ī‚øšœ•šœ™š‘˜šœ•š‘„š‘—+šœ™š‘™Ī“š‘˜š‘™š‘—ī‚¹āˆ’34š‘”š‘—š‘–šœ™š‘˜ī‚øšœ•šœ™š‘˜šœ•š‘„š‘—+šœ™š‘™Ī“š‘™š‘˜š‘—ī‚¹=0.(2.17) Equation (2.17) is identically satisfied for š‘–=1,2,3. For š‘–=4, (2.17) reduces to

32š›½Ģ‡3š›½+2š›½2ī‚µ2Ģ‡š“š“+Ģ‡šµšµ+Ģ‡š¶š¶ī‚¶=0.(2.18)

3. Solution of Field Equations in Presence of Magnetic Field

Equations (2.10)ā€“(2.14) are five independent equations in seven unknowns š“, šµ, š¶, šœŒ, š‘, š›½, and š¹12. For the complete determinacy of the system, we need two extra conditions which are narrated hereinafter. The research on exact solutions is based on some physically reasonable restrictions used to simplify the field equations.

To get determinate solution, we assume that the expansion šœƒ in the model is proportional to the shear šœŽ. This condition leads to

ī‚€šµš“=š¶ī‚š‘›,(3.1) where š‘› is a constant. The motive behind assuming this condition is explained with reference to Thorne [90]; the observations of the velocity-red-shift relation for extragalactic sources suggest that Hubble expansion of the universe is isotropic today within ā‰ˆ30 percent [91, 92]. To put more precisely, red-shift studies place the limit

šœŽš»ā‰¤0.3(3.2) on the ratio of shear, šœŽ, to Hubble constant, š», in the neighbourhood of our Galaxy today. Collins et al. [93] have pointed out that for spatially homogeneous metric, the normal congruence to the homogeneous expansion satisfies that the condition šœŽ/šœƒ is constant.

From (2.15)ā€“(2.17), we have

š“44š“āˆ’š“24š“2+š“4šµ4+š“š“šµ4š¶4āˆ’šµš“š¶44šµāˆ’šµ4š¶4=š¶šµš¶11š¶āˆ’šµ1š¶1šµš¶=K(constant),(3.3)8šœ‹š¹212šœ‡šµ2š¶=āˆ’44š¶+š¶11š¶+šµ44šµāˆ’šµ11šµ.(3.4) We also assume that

šµ=š‘“(š‘„)š‘”(š‘”),š¶=š‘“(š‘„)š‘˜(š‘”).(3.5) Using (3.1) and (3.5) in (2.14) and (3.3) leads to

š‘˜4š‘˜=(2š‘›āˆ’1)š‘”(2š‘›+1)4š‘”,(š‘”(3.6)š‘›āˆ’1)44š‘”š‘˜āˆ’š‘›44š‘˜āˆ’š‘”4š‘”š‘˜4š‘˜=š¾,(3.7)š‘“š‘“11āˆ’š‘“21=š¾š‘“2.(3.8) Equation (3.6) leads to

š‘˜=š‘0š‘”š›¼,(3.9) where š›¼=(2š‘›āˆ’1)/(2š‘›+1) and š‘0 is the constant of integration. From (3.7) and (3.9), we have

š‘”44š‘”š‘”+ā„“24š‘”2=š‘,(3.10) where

ā„“=š‘›š›¼(š›¼āˆ’1)+š›¼š¾š‘›(š›¼āˆ’1)+1,š‘=.š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)āˆ’1(3.11) Equation (3.8) leads to

ī‚€1š‘“=exp2š¾ī€·š‘„+š‘„0ī€ø2ī‚,(3.12) where š‘„0 is an integrating constant. Equation (3.10) leads to

ī€·š‘š‘”=1š‘’š‘š‘”+š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘”ī€ø1/(ā„“+1),(3.13) where āˆšš‘=(ā„“+1)š‘ and š‘1, š‘2 are integrating constants. Hence from (3.9) and (3.13), we have

š‘˜=š‘0ī€·š‘1š‘’š‘š‘”+š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘”ī€øš›¼/(ā„“+1).(3.14) Therefore, we obtain

ī‚€1šµ=exp2š¾ī€·š‘„+š‘„0ī€ø2ī‚ī€·š‘1š‘’š‘š‘”+š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘”ī€ø1/(ā„“+1),ī‚€1š¶=exp2š¾ī€·š‘„+š‘„0ī€ø2ī‚š‘0ī€·š‘1š‘’š‘š‘”+š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘”ī€øš›¼/(ā„“+1),ī€·š‘š“=š‘Ž1š‘’š‘š‘”+š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘”ī€øš‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(ā„“+1),(3.15) where š‘Ž=š‘3/š‘0, š‘3 being a constant of integration.

After using suitable transformation of the coordinates, the model (2.1) reduces to the form

š‘‘š‘ 2=š‘Ž2ī€·š‘1š‘’š‘š‘‡+š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘‡ī€ø2š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(ā„“+1)ī€·š‘‘š‘‹2āˆ’š‘‘š‘‡2ī€ø+š‘’š¾š‘‹2ī€·š‘1š‘’š‘š‘‡+š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘‡ī€ø2/(ā„“+1)š‘‘š‘Œ2+š‘’š¾š‘‹2ī€·š‘1š‘’š‘š‘‡+š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘‡ī€ø2š›¼/(ā„“+1)š‘‘š‘2,(3.16) where š‘„+š‘„0=š‘‹, š‘”=š‘‡, š‘¦=š‘Œ, and š‘0š‘§=š‘.

4. Some Physical and Geometric Properties of the Model in Presence of Magnetic Field

Equation (2.18) gives

Ģ‡š›½š›½ī‚µ2Ģ‡š“=āˆ’š“+Ģ‡šµšµ+Ģ‡š¶š¶ī‚¶,asš›½ā‰ 0,(4.1) which leads to

Ģ‡š›½š›½=āˆ’š‘{2š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+1+š›¼}ī‚øš‘(ā„“+1)1š‘’š‘š‘‡āˆ’š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘‡š‘1š‘’š‘š‘‡+š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘‡ī‚¹.(4.2) Equation (4.2) on integration gives

š›½=š¾0ī€·š‘1š‘’š‘š‘‡+š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘‡ī€øšœ…,(4.3) where š¾0 is a constant of integration and

šœ…=š‘{2š‘›(š›¼āˆ’1)āˆ’(š›¼+1)}.(ā„“+1)(4.4) Using (3.15) and (4.3) in (2.10) and (2.13), the expressions for pressure š‘ and density šœŒ for the model (3.16) are given by

18šœ‹š‘=š‘Ž2šœ“22š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(ā„“+1)īƒ¬š¾2š‘‹2āˆ’2(3+š›¼)š‘2š‘1š‘2(ā„“+1)šœ“22āˆ’ī€·2š‘›š›¼2+š›¼2ī€øš‘+2š›¼āˆ’2š‘›+322(ā„“+1)2šœ“21šœ“22īƒ­āˆ’34š¾20šœ“22šœ…,18šœ‹šœŒ=š‘Ž2šœ“22š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(ā„“+1)īƒ¬āˆ’3š¾2š‘‹2āˆ’2š¾+2š‘2(š›¼āˆ’1)š‘1š‘2(ā„“+1)šœ“22āˆ’ī€·2š‘›š›¼2āˆ’š›¼2ī€øš‘āˆ’2š›¼āˆ’2š‘›+122(ā„“+1)2šœ“21šœ“22īƒ­+34š¾20šœ“22šœ…,(4.5) where

šœ“1=š‘1š‘’š‘š‘‡āˆ’š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘‡,šœ“2=š‘1š‘’š‘š‘‡+š‘2š‘’āˆ’š‘š‘‡.(4.6) From (3.4) the nonvanishing component š¹12 of the electromagnetic field tensor is obtained as

š¹212=šœ‡š‘8šœ‹2(1āˆ’š›¼)(ā„“+1)2š‘’š¾š‘‹2šœ“22/(ā„“+1)īƒ¬4(ā„“+1)š‘1š‘2+(1+š›¼)šœ“21šœ“22īƒ­.(4.7) From the above, equation it is observed that the electromagnetic field tensor increases with time.

The reality conditions (Ellis [94])

(i)šœŒ+š‘>0,(ii)šœŒ+3š‘>0,(4.8) lead to

š‘2ī€·š‘›āˆ’š‘›š›¼2ī€øāˆ’1(ā„“+1)2šœ“21šœ“22āˆ’4š‘2š‘1š‘2(ā„“+1)šœ“22ī€·>š¾š¾š‘‹2ī€ø,š‘+1(4.9)2ī€·4š‘›āˆ’4š‘›š›¼2āˆ’š›¼2ī€øāˆ’2š›¼āˆ’5(ā„“+1)2šœ“21šœ“22āˆ’4š‘2(š›¼+5)š‘1š‘2(ā„“+1)šœ“223>2š¾+2š›½2š‘Ž2šœ“22š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(ā„“+1),(4.10) respectively.

The dominant energy conditions (Hawking and Ellis [95])

(i)šœŒāˆ’š‘ā‰„0,(ii)šœŒ+š‘ā‰„0,(4.11) lead to

š‘2(š›¼+1)2(ā„“+1)2šœ“21šœ“22+4š‘2(š›¼+1)š‘1š‘2(ā„“+1)šœ“22+32š›½2š‘Ž2šœ“22š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(ā„“+1)ī€·ā‰„2š¾2š¾š‘‹2ī€øš‘+1,(4.12)2ī€·š‘›āˆ’š‘›š›¼2ī€øāˆ’1(ā„“+1)2šœ“21šœ“22āˆ’4š‘2š‘1š‘2(ā„“+1)šœ“22ī€·ā‰„š¾š¾š‘‹2ī€ø,+1(4.13) respectively. The conditions (4.10) and (4.12) impose a restriction on displacement vector š›½(š‘”).

The expressions for the expansion šœƒ, Hubble parameter š», shear scalar šœŽ2, deceleration parameter š‘ž, and proper volume š‘‰3 for the model (3.16) are given by

š»=3šœƒ=3š‘{š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+(1+š›¼)}(ā„“+1)š‘Žšœ“2š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(ā„“+1)šœ“1šœ“2,šœŽ(4.14)2=š‘2ī€ŗ{š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+(1+š›¼)}2ī€»āˆ’3š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)(1+š›¼)āˆ’3š›¼3(ā„“+1)2š‘Ž2šœ“22š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(ā„“+1)šœ“21šœ“22,(4.15)š‘ž=āˆ’1āˆ’6š‘1š‘2(ā„“+1)š‘›ī€·1āˆ’š›¼2ī€øšœ“21š‘‰,(4.16)3=āˆšāˆ’š‘”=š‘Ž2šœ“22š‘›(1+š›¼)(1āˆ’š›¼)/(ā„“+1)š‘’š¾š‘‹2.(4.17) From (4.14) and (4.15), we obtain

šœŽ2šœƒ2={š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+(1+š›¼)}2ī€·āˆ’3š‘›1āˆ’š›¼2ī€øāˆ’3š›¼3{š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+(1+š›¼)}2=constant.(4.18) The rotation šœ” is identically zero.

The rate of expansion š»š‘– in the direction of š‘„, š‘¦, and š‘§ is given by

š»š‘„=š“4š“=š‘›š‘(1āˆ’š›¼)šœ“(ā„“+1)1šœ“2,š»š‘¦=šµ4šµ=š‘(šœ“ā„“+1)1šœ“2,š»š‘§=š¶4š¶=š‘š›¼šœ“(ā„“+1)1šœ“2.(4.19) Generally the model (3.16) represents an expanding, shearing, and nonrotating universe in which the flow vector is geodetic. The model (3.16) starts expanding at š‘‡>0 and goes on expanding indefinitely when š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(ā„“+1)<0. Since šœŽ/šœƒ = constant, the model does not approach isotropy. As š‘‡ increases the proper volume also increases. The physical quantities š‘ and šœŒ decrease as š¹12 increases. However, if š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(š›½+1)>0, the process of contraction starts at š‘‡>0, and at š‘‡=āˆž the expansion stops. The electromagnetic field tensor does not vanish when š‘ā‰ 0, and š›¼ā‰ 1. It is observed from (4.16) that š‘ž<0 when š‘1>0 and š‘2>0 which implies an accelerating model of the universe. Recent observations of type Ia supernovae [96ā€“100] reveal that the present universe is in accelerating phase and deceleration parameter lies somewhere in the range āˆ’1<š‘žā‰¤0. It follows that our models of the universe are consistent with recent observations. Either when š‘1=0 or š‘2=0, the deceleration parameter š‘ž approaches the value (āˆ’1) as in the case of de-Sitter universe.

5. Field Equations and Their Solution in Absence of Magnetic Field

In absence of magnetic field, the field (2.8) with (2.2) and (2.9) for metric (2.1) reads as

1š“2ī‚øāˆ’šµ44šµāˆ’š¶44š¶+š“4š“ī‚µšµ4šµ+š¶4š¶ī‚¶āˆ’šµ4š¶4+šµšµš¶1š¶1ī‚¹3šµš¶=8šœ‹š‘+4š›½21,(5.1)š“2īƒ©š“24š“2āˆ’š“44š“āˆ’š¶44š¶+š¶11š¶īƒŖ3=8šœ‹š‘+4š›½21,(5.2)š“2īƒ©š“24š“2āˆ’š“44š“āˆ’šµ44šµ+šµ11šµīƒŖ3=8šœ‹š‘+4š›½21,(5.3)š“2ī‚øāˆ’šµ11šµāˆ’š¶11š¶+š“4š“ī‚µšµ4šµ+š¶4š¶ī‚¶āˆ’šµ1š¶1+šµšµš¶4š¶4ī‚¹3šµš¶=8šœ‹šœŒāˆ’4š›½2šµ,(5.4)14šµ+š¶14š¶āˆ’š“4š“ī‚µšµ1šµ+š¶1š¶ī‚¶=0.(5.5) Equations (5.2) and (5.3) lead to

šµ44šµāˆ’šµ11šµāˆ’š¶44š¶+š¶11š¶=0.(5.6) Equations (3.5) and (5.6) lead to

š‘”44š‘”āˆ’š‘˜44š‘˜=0.(5.7) Equations (3.9) and (5.7) lead to

š‘”44š‘”š‘”+š›¼24š‘”2=0,(5.8) which on integration gives

ī€·š‘š‘”=4š‘”+š‘5ī€ø1/(š›¼+1),(5.9) where š‘4 and š‘5 are constants of integration. Hence from (3.9) and (5.9), we have

š‘˜=š‘0ī€·š‘4š‘”+š‘5ī€øš›¼/(š›¼+1).(5.10) In this case (3.8) also leads to the same as (3.12).

Therefore, in absence of magnetic field, we have

ī‚€1šµ=exp2š¾ī€·š‘„+š‘„0ī€ø2ī‚ī€·š‘4š‘”+š‘5ī€ø1/(š›¼+1),ī‚€1š¶=exp2š¾ī€·š‘„+š‘„0ī€ø2ī‚š‘ī€·š‘4š‘”+š‘5ī€øš›¼/(š›¼+1),ī€·š‘š“=š‘Ž4š‘”+š‘5ī€øš‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(1+š›¼),(5.11) where š‘Ž is already defined in previous section.

After using suitable transformation of the coordinates, the metric (2.1) reduces to the form š‘‘š‘ 2=š‘Ž2ī€·š‘4š‘‡ī€ø2š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(1+š›¼)ī€·š‘‘š‘‹2āˆ’š‘‘š‘‡2ī€ø+š‘’š¾š‘‹2ī€·š‘4š‘‡ī€ø2/(š›¼+1)š‘‘š‘Œ2+š‘’š¾š‘‹2ī€·š‘4š‘‡ī€ø2š›¼/(š›¼+1)š‘‘š‘2,(5.12) where š‘„+š‘„0=š‘‹, š‘¦=š‘Œ, š‘0š‘§=š‘, and š‘”+š‘5/š‘4=š‘‡.

6. Some Physical and Geometric Properties of the Model in Absence of Magnetic Field

With the use of (5.11), equation (2.18) leads to

Ģ‡š›½š›½=1š‘‡ī‚ø2š‘›(š›¼āˆ’1)āˆ’(š›¼+1)ī‚¹(š›¼+1),asš›½ā‰ 0,(6.1) which upon integration leads to

š›½=ā„œš‘‡((2š‘›(š›¼āˆ’1)āˆ’(š›¼+1))/(š›¼+1)),(6.2) where ā„œ is an integrating constant.

Using (5.11) and (6.2) in (5.1) and (5.4), the expressions for pressure š‘ and density šœŒ for the model (5.12) are given by

18šœ‹š‘=š‘Ž2ī€·š‘4š‘‡ī€ø2š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(1+š›¼)š‘›ī€·īƒ¬īƒÆ1āˆ’š›¼2ī€ø+š›¼(š›¼+1)2īƒ°1š‘‡2+š¾2š‘‹2īƒ­āˆ’34ā„œ2š‘‡2((2š‘›(š›¼āˆ’1)āˆ’(š›¼+1))/(š›¼+1)),18šœ‹šœŒ=š‘Ž2ī€·š‘4š‘‡ī€ø2š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(1+š›¼)š‘›ī€·īƒ¬īƒÆ1āˆ’š›¼2ī€ø+š›¼(š›¼+1)2īƒ°1š‘‡2ī€·āˆ’š¾2+3š¾š‘‹2ī€øīƒ­+34ā„œ2š‘‡2((2š‘›(š›¼āˆ’1)āˆ’(š›¼+1))/(š›¼+1)).(6.3) The dominant energy conditions (Hawking and Ellis [95])

(i)šœŒāˆ’š‘ā‰„0,(ii)šœŒ+š‘ā‰„0,(6.4) lead to

34š›½2š‘Ž2ī€·š‘4š‘‡ī€ø2š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(1+š›¼)ī€·ā‰„š¾1+2š¾š‘‹2ī€ø,īƒÆš‘›ī€·(6.5)1āˆ’š›¼2ī€ø+š›¼(1+š›¼)2īƒ°1š‘‡2ī€·ā‰„š¾1+š¾š‘‹2ī€ø,(6.6) respectively.

The reality conditions (Ellis [94])

(i)šœŒ+š‘>0,(ii)šœŒ+3š‘>0,(6.7) lead to

īƒÆš‘›ī€·1āˆ’š›¼2ī€ø+š›¼(1+š›¼)2īƒ°1š‘‡2ī€·>š¾1+š¾š‘‹2ī€ø2ī€ŗš‘›ī€·,(6.8)1āˆ’š›¼2ī€øī€»+š›¼(1+š›¼)21š‘‡23>š¾+4š›½2ī€·š‘4š‘‡ī€ø2š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(1+š›¼).(6.9) The conditions (6.5) and (6.9) impose a restriction on š›½(š‘”).

The expressions for the expansion šœƒ, Hubble parameter š», shear scalar šœŽ2, deceleration parameter š‘ž, and proper volume š‘‰3 for the model (5.12) in absence of magnetic field are given by

š»=3šœƒ=š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+(1+š›¼)š‘Ž(1+š›¼)š‘4š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(1+š›¼)1š‘‡(š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+(1+š›¼))/(1+š›¼),šœŽ(6.10)2={š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+(1+š›¼)}2ī€·āˆ’3š‘›1āˆ’š›¼2ī€øāˆ’3š›¼3š‘Ž2(1+š›¼)2š‘4š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)/(1+š›¼)1š‘‡(2š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+2(1+š›¼))/(1+š›¼),(6.11)š‘ž=āˆ’1+3(š›¼+1)š‘‰2š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+2(1+š›¼),(6.12)3=āˆšāˆ’š‘”=š‘Ž2š‘’š¾š‘‹2ī€·š‘4š‘‡ī€ø(2š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+(1+š›¼))/(1+š›¼).(6.13) From (6.10) and (6.11), we obtain

šœŽ2šœƒ2={š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+(1+š›¼)}2ī€·āˆ’3š‘›1āˆ’š›¼2ī€øāˆ’3š›¼3{š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)+(1+š›¼)}2=constant.(6.14) The rotation šœ” is identically zero.

The rate of expansion š»š‘– in the direction of š‘„, š‘¦, and š‘§ are given by

š»š‘„=š“4š“=š‘›(1āˆ’š›¼)1(1+š›¼)š‘‡,š»š‘¦=šµ4šµ=11(1+š›¼)š‘‡,š»š‘§=š¶4š¶=š›¼1(1+š›¼)š‘‡.(6.15) The model (5.12) starts expanding with a big bang at š‘‡=0 and it stops expanding at š‘‡=āˆž. It should be noted that the universe exhibits initial singularity of the Point-type at š‘‡=0. The space-time is well behaved in the range 0<š‘‡<š‘‡0. In absence of magnetic field, the model represents a shearing and nonrotating universe in which the flow vector is geodetic. At the initial moment š‘‡=0, the parameters šœŒ, š‘, š›½, šœƒ, šœŽ2 and š» tend to infinity. So the universe starts from initial singularity with infinite energy density, infinite internal pressure, infinitely large gauge function, infinite rate of shear and expansion. Moreover, šœŒ, š‘, š›½, šœƒ, šœŽ2 and š» are monotonically decreasing toward a nonzero finite quantity for š‘‡ in the range 0<š‘‡<š‘‡0 in absence of magnetic field. Since šœŽ/šœƒ = constant, the model does not approach isotropy. As š‘‡ increases the proper volume also increases. It is observed that for the derived model, the displacement vector š›½(š‘”) is a decreasing function of time and therefore it behaves like cosmological term Ī›. It is observed from (6.12) that š‘ž<0 when š›¼<(2š‘›āˆ’1)/(2š‘›+1) which implies an accelerating model of the universe. When š›¼=āˆ’1, the deceleration parameter š‘ž approaches the value (āˆ’1) as in the case of de-Sitter universe. Thus, also in absence of magnetic field, our models of the universe are consistent with recent observations.

7. Discussion and Concluding Remarks

In this paper, we have obtained a new class of exact solutions of Einstein's modified field equations for cylindrically symmetric space-time with perfect fluid distribution within the framework of Lyra's geometry both in presence and absence of magnetic field. The solutions are obtained using the functional separability of the metric coefficients. The source of the magnetic field is due to an electric current produced along the š‘§-axis. š¹12 is the only nonvanishing component of electromagnetic field tensor. The electromagnetic field tensor is given by (4.7), šœ‡ remains undetermined as function of both š‘„ and š‘”. The electromagnetic field tensor does not vanish if š‘ā‰ 0 and š›¼ā‰ 1. It is observed that in presence of magnetic field, the rate of expansion of the universe is faster than that in absence of magnetic field. The idea of primordial magnetism is appealing because it can potentially explain all the large-scale fields seen in the universe today, specially those found in remote proto-galaxies. As a result, the literature contains many studies examining the role and the implications of magnetic fields for cosmology. In presence of magnetic field, the model (3.16) represents an expanding, shearing and nonrotating universe in which the flow vector is geodetic. But in the absence of magnetic field, the model (5.12) found that in the universe all the matter and radiation are concentrated at the big bang epoch and the cosmic expansion is driven by the big bang impulse. The universe has singular origin and it exhibits power-law expansion after the big bang impulse. The rate of expansion slows down and finally stops at š‘‡ā†’āˆž. In absence of magnetic field, the pressure, energy density and displacement field become zero whereas the spatial volume becomes infinitely large as š‘‡ā†’āˆž.

It is possible to discuss entropy in our universe. In thermodynamics the expression for entropy is given by

ī€·š‘‡š‘‘š‘†=š‘‘šœŒš‘‰3ī€øī€·+š‘š‘‘š‘‰3ī€ø,(7.1) where š‘‰3=š“2šµš¶ is the proper volume in our case. To solve the entropy problem of the standard model, it is necessary to treat š‘‘š‘†>0 for at least a part of evolution of the universe. Hence (7.1) reduces to

š‘‡š‘‘š‘†=šœŒ4ī‚µ2š“+(šœŒ+š‘)4š“+šµ4šµ+š¶4š¶ī‚¶>0.(7.2) The conservation equation š‘‡š‘—š‘–āˆ¶š‘—=0 for (2.1) leads to

šœŒ4ī‚µš“+(šœŒ+š‘)4š“+šµ4šµ+š¶4š¶ī‚¶+32š›½š›½4+32š›½2ī‚µ2š“4š“+šµ4šµ+š¶4š¶ī‚¶=0.(7.3) Therefore, (7.1) and (7.2) lead to

32š›½š›½4+32š›½2ī‚µ2š“4š“+šµ4šµ+š¶4š¶ī‚¶<0,(7.4) which gives to š›½<0. Thus, the displacement vector š›½(š‘”) affects entropy because for entropy š‘‘š‘†>0 leads to š›½(š‘”)<0.

In spite of homogeneity at large scale, our universe is inhomogeneous at small scale, so physical quantities being position-dependent are more natural in our observable universe if we do not go to super high scale. This result shows this kind of physical importance. It is observed that the displacement vector š›½(š‘”) coincides with the nature of the cosmological constant Ī› which has been supported by the work of several authors as discussed in the physical behaviour of the model in Sections 4 and 6. In the recent time Ī›-term has attracted theoreticians and observers for many a reason. The nontrivial role of the vacuum in the early universe generates a Ī›-term that leads to inflationary phase. Observationally, this term provides an additional parameter to accommodate conflicting data on the values of the Hubble constant, the deceleration parameter, the density parameter and the age of the universe (see, e.g., [101, 102]). In recent past there is an upsurge of interest in scalar fields in general relativity and alternative theories of gravitation in the context of inflationary cosmology [103ā€“105]. Therefore the study of cosmological models in Lyra's geometry may be relevant for inflationary models. There seems a good possibility of Lyra's geometry to provide a theoretical foundation for relativistic gravitation, astrophysics, and cosmology. However, the importance of Lyra's geometry for astrophysical bodies is still an open question. In fact, it needs a fair trial for experiment.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Harish-Chandra Research Institute, Allahabad, India for local hospitality where this work is done. The authors also thank the referee for his fruitful comments.

References

  1. R. C. Tolman, ā€œEffect of inhomogeneity on cosmological models,ā€ Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 169ā€“176, 1934. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
  2. H. Bondi, ā€œSpherically symmetrical models in general relativity,ā€ Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 107, pp. 410ā€“425, 1947. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  3. A. H. Taub, ā€œEmpty space-times admitting a three parameter group of motions,ā€ Annals of Mathematics, vol. 53, pp. 472ā€“490, 1951. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  4. A. H. Taub, ā€œIsentropic hydrodynamics in plane symmetric space-times,ā€ Physical Review, vol. 103, pp. 454ā€“467, 1956. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  5. N. Tomimura, ā€œEvolution of inhomogeneous plane-symmetric cosmological models,ā€ Il Nuovo Cimento B Series, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 372ā€“380, 1978. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. P. Szekeres, ā€œA class of inhomogeneous cosmological models,ā€ Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 41, pp. 55ā€“64, 1975. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  7. C. B. Collins and D. A. Szafron, ā€œA new approach to inhomogeneous cosmologies: instinsic symmetries I,ā€ Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 20, pp. 2347ā€“2353, 1979. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. C. B. Collins and D. A. Szafron, ā€œA new approach to inhomogeneous cosmologies: instinsic symmetries III,ā€ Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 20, pp. 2362ā€“2370, 1979. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. D. A. Szafron and C. B. Collins, ā€œA new approach to inhomogeneous cosmologies: intrinsic symmetries. II. Conformally flat slices and an invariant classification,ā€ Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 20, no. 11, pp. 2354ā€“2361, 1979. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  10. J. M. M. Senovilla, ā€œNew class of inhomogeneous cosmological perfect-fluid solutions without big-bang singularity,ā€ Physical Review Letters, vol. 64, no. 19, pp. 2219ā€“2221, 1990. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  11. E. Ruiz and J. M. M. Senovilla, ā€œGeneral class of inhomogeneous perfect-fluid solutions,ā€ Physical Review D, vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 1995ā€“2005, 1992. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  12. N. Dadhich, R. Tikekar, and L. K. Patel, ā€œOn singularity free cosmological models,ā€ Current Science, vol. 65, p. 694, 1993. View at: Google Scholar
  13. L. K. Patel, R. Tikekar, and N. Dadhich, ā€œInhomogeneous cosmological models with heat flux,ā€ Pramana—Journal of Physics, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 213ā€“224, 1997. View at: Google Scholar
  14. G. Singh, P. Mehta, and S. Gupta, ā€œSome inhomogeneous perfect fluid cosmological models in the presence of electromagnetic field,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 281, no. 4, pp. 677ā€“688, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
  15. A. Pradhan, P. K. Singh, and R. Kanti Jotania, ā€œCylindrically symmetric inhomogeneous cosmological models with viscous fluid and varying Λ,ā€ Czechoslovak Journal of Physics, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 641ā€“660, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
  16. A. Pradhan, A. Rai, and S. K. Singh, ā€œCylindrically symmetric inhomogeneous universe with electromagnetic field in string cosmology,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 312, no. 3-4, pp. 261ā€“265, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. A. Pradhan, ā€œMagnetized string cosmological model in cylindrically-symmetric inhomogeneous universe with variable cosmological term Λ,ā€ Fizika B, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 205ā€“222, 2007. View at: Google Scholar
  18. A. Pradhan, K. Jotania, and A. Singh, ā€œMagnetized string cosmological model in cylindrically symmetric inhomogeneous universe with time dependent cosmological-term Λ,ā€ Brazilian Journal of Physics, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 167ā€“177, 2008. View at: Google Scholar
  19. Ya. B. Zeldovich, A. A. Ruzmainkin, and D. D. Sokoloff, Magnetic Field in Astrophysics, Gordon and Breach, New York, NY, USA, 1993.
  20. E. R. Harrison, ā€œOrigin of magnetic fields in the early universe,ā€ Physical Review Letters, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 188ā€“190, 1973. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. A. G. Walker, ā€œOn Milne's theory of world-structure,ā€ Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 90ā€“127, 1937. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne, and J. A. Wheeler, Gravitation, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, Calif, USA, 1973. View at: MathSciNet
  23. E. Asseo and H. Sol, ā€œExtragalatic magnetic fields,ā€ Physics Reports, vol. 148, no. 6, pp. 307ā€“435, 1987. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  24. M. A. Melvin, ā€œHomogeneous axial cosmologies with electromagnetic fields and dustfn1,ā€ Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol. 262, pp. 253ā€“274, 1975. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. R. E. Pudritz and J. Silk, ā€œThe origin of magnetic fields and primordial stars in protogalaxies,ā€ Astrophysical Journal, vol. 342, pp. 650ā€“659, 1989. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. K.-T. Kim, P. P. Kronberg, and P. C. Tribble, ā€œDetection of excess rotation measure due to intracluster magnetic fields in clusters of galaxies,ā€ Astrophysical Journal, vol. 379, no. 1, pp. 80ā€“88, 1991. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. R. A. Perley and G. B. Taylor, ā€œVLA observations of 3C 295—a young radio galaxy?ā€ Astronomical Journal, vol. 101, no. 5, pp. 1623ā€“1631, 1991. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. P. P. Kronberg, J. J. Perry, and E. L. H. Zukowski, ā€œDiscovery of extended faraday rotation compatible with spiral structure in an intervening galaxy at z=0.395: new observations of PKS 1229-021,ā€ Astrophysical Journal, vol. 387, no. 2, pp. 528ā€“535, 1992. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. A. M. Wolfe, K. M. Lanzetta, and A. L. Oren, ā€œMagnetic fields in damped Ly-alpha systems,ā€ Astrophysical Journal, vol. 388, no. 1, pp. 17ā€“22, 1992. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. R. M. Kulsrud, R. Cen, J. P. Ostriker, and D. Ryu, ā€œThe protogalactic origin for cosmic magnetic fields,ā€ Astrophysical Journal, vol. 480, no. 2, part 1, pp. 481ā€“491, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. E. G. Zweibel and C. Heiles, ā€œMagnetic fields in galaxies and beyond,ā€ Nature, vol. 385, no. 6612, pp. 131ā€“136, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. J. D. Barrow, ā€œCosmological limits on slightly skew stresses,ā€ Physical Review D, vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 7451ā€“7460, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. Ya. B. Zeldovich, Soviet Astronomy, vol. 13, p. 608, 1970.
  34. M. S. Turner and L. M. Widrow, ā€œInflation-produced, large-scale magnetic fields,ā€ Physical Review D, vol. 37, no. 10, pp. 2743ā€“2754, 1988. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. J. M. Quashnock, A. Loeb, and D. N. Spergel, ā€œMagnetic field generation during the cosmological QCD phase transition,ā€ Astrophysical Journal, vol. 344, pp. L49ā€“L51, 1989. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. B. Ratra, ā€œCosmological “seed” magnetic field from inflation,ā€ Astrophysical Journal, vol. 391, no. 1, part 2, pp. L1ā€“L4, 1992. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  37. A. Dolgov and J. Silk, ā€œElectric charge asymmetry of the Universe and magnetic field generation,ā€ Physical Review D, vol. 47, no. 8, pp. 3144ā€“3150, 1993. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. A. D. Dolgov, ā€œBreaking of conformal invariance and electromagnetic field generation in the Universe,ā€ Physical Review D, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 2499ā€“2501, 1993. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. R. Bali and M. Ali, ā€œMagnetized cylindrically symmetric universe in general relativity,ā€ Pramana—Journal of Physics, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 25ā€“31, 1996. View at: Google Scholar
  40. A. Pradhan and O. P. Pandey, ā€œBianchi type I anisotropic magnetized cosmological models with varying Λ,ā€ International Journal of Modern Physics D, vol. 12, no. 7, pp. 1299ā€“1314, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  41. A. Pradhan, S. K. Srivastav, and K. R. Jotania, ā€œSome inhomogeneous magnetized viscous-fluid cosmological models with varying Λ,ā€ Czechoslovak Journal of Physics, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 255ā€“272, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  42. A. Pradhan and S. K. Singh, ā€œBianchi type I magnetofluid cosmological models with variable cosmological constant revisited,ā€ International Journal of Modern Physics D, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 503ā€“516, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  43. A. Pradhan, P. Pandey, and K. K. Rai, ā€œMagnetized anisotropic cosmological models with varying Λ,ā€ Czechoslovak Journal of Physics, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 303ā€“313, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
  44. A. Pradhan, A. K. Yadav, and J. P. Singh, ā€œA new class of plane-symmetric inhomogeneous cosmological models of perfect fluid distribution with electromagnetic field,ā€ Fizika B, vol. 16, pp. 175ā€“196, 2007. View at: Google Scholar
  45. H. Weyl, Sber. Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, p. 465, 1918.
  46. G. B. Folland, ā€œWeyl manifolds,ā€ Journal of Differential Geometry, vol. 4, pp. 145ā€“153, 1970. View at: Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  47. G. Lyra, ā€œÜber eine Modifikation der Riemannschen Geometrie,ā€ Mathematische Zeitschrift, vol. 54, pp. 52ā€“64, 1951. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  48. D. K. Sen, ā€œA static cosmological model,ā€ Zeitschrift für Physik C, vol. 149, pp. 311ā€“323, 1957. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  49. D. K. Sen and K. A. Dunn, ā€œA scalar-tensor theory of gravitation in a modified Riemannian manifold,ā€ Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 12, pp. 578ā€“586, 1971. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  50. W. D. Halford, ā€œCosmological theory based on Lyra's geometry,ā€ Australian Journal of Physics, vol. 23, p. 863, 1970. View at: Google Scholar
  51. W. D. Halford, ā€œScalar-tensor theory of gravitation in a Lyra manifold,ā€ Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 1699ā€“1703, 1972. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  52. D. K. Sen and J. R. Vanstone, ā€œOn Weyl and Lyra manifolds,ā€ Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 13, pp. 990ā€“993, 1972. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  53. K. S. Bhamra, ā€œA cosmological model of class one in Lyra's manifold,ā€ Australian Journal of Physics, vol. 27, pp. 541ā€“547, 1974. View at: Google Scholar
  54. T. M. Karade and S. M. Borikar, ā€œThermodynamic equilibrium of a gravitating sphere in Lyra's geometry,ā€ General Relativity and Gravitation, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 431ā€“436, 1978. View at: Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  55. S. B. Kalyanshetti and B. B. Waghmode, ā€œA static cosmological model in Einstein-Cartan theory,ā€ General Relativity and Gravitation, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 823ā€“830, 1982. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  56. D. R. K. Reddy and P. Innaiah, ā€œA plane symmetric cosmological model in Lyra manifold,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 123, no. 1, pp. 49ā€“52, 1986. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  57. A. Beesham, ā€œFriedmann's cosmology in Lyra's manifold,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 127, no. 2, pp. 355ā€“359, 1986. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  58. D. R. K. Reddy and R. Venkateswarlu, ā€œBirkhoff-type theorem in the scale-covariant theory of gravitation,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 136, no. 1, pp. 191ā€“194, 1987. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  59. H. H. Soleng, ā€œCosmologies based on Lyra's geometry,ā€ General Relativity and Gravitation, vol. 19, no. 12, pp. 1213ā€“1216, 1987. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  60. A. Beesham, ā€œFLRW cosmological models in Lyra's manifold with time dependent displacement field,ā€ Australian Journal of Physics, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 833ā€“842, 1988. View at: Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  61. T. Singh and G. P. Singh, ā€œBianchi type-I cosmological models in Lyra's geometry,ā€ Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 2456ā€“2458, 1991. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
  62. T. Singh and G. P. Singh, ā€œSome cosmological models with constant deceleration parameter,ā€ Il Nuovo Cimento B, vol. 106, no. 6, pp. 617ā€“622, 1991. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  63. T. Singh and G. P. Singh, ā€œBianchi type III and Kantowski-Sachs cosmological models in Lyra geometry,ā€ International Journal of Theoretical Physics, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 1433ā€“1446, 1992. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  64. T. Singh and G. P. Singh, ā€œLyra's geometry and cosmology: a review,ā€ Fortschritte der Physik, vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 737ā€“764, 1993. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  65. G. P. Singh and K. Desikan, ā€œA new class of cosmological models in Lyra geometry,ā€ Pramana—Journal of Physics, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 205ā€“212, 1997. View at: Google Scholar
  66. F. Hoyle, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 108, p. 252, 1948.
  67. F. Hoyle and J. V. Narlikar, ā€œMach's principle and the creation of matter,ā€ Proceedings of the Royal Society A, vol. 273, pp. 1ā€“11, 1963. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  68. F. Hoyle and J. V. Narlikar, ā€œA new theory of gravitation,ā€ Proceedings of the Royal Society A, vol. 282, pp. 191ā€“207, 1964. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
  69. A. Pradhan, I. Aotemshi, and G. P. Singh, ā€œPlane symmetric domain wall in Lyra geometry,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 288, no. 3, pp. 315ā€“325, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
  70. A. Pradhan and A. K. Vishwakarma, ā€œA new class of LRS Bianchi type-I cosmological models in Lyra geometry,ā€ Journal of Geometry and Physics, vol. 49, no. 3-4, pp. 332ā€“342, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  71. A. Pradhan, L. Yadav, and A. K. Yadav, ā€œIsotropic homogeneous universe with a bulk viscous fluid in Lyra geometry,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 299, no. 1, pp. 31ā€“42, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  72. A. Pradhan, V. Rai, and S. Otarod, ā€œPlane symmetric bulk viscous domain wall in Lyra geometry,ā€ Fizika B, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 57ā€“70, 2006. View at: Google Scholar
  73. A. Pradhan, K. K. Rai, and A. K. Yadav, ā€œPlane symmetric bulk viscous domain wall in lyra geometry,ā€ Brazilian Journal of Physics, vol. 37, no. 3B, pp. 1084ā€“1093, 2007. View at: Google Scholar
  74. R. Casana, C. A. M. De Melo, and B. M. Pimentel, ā€œSpinorial field and Lyra geometry,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 305, no. 2, pp. 125ā€“132, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  75. F. Rahaman, B. C. Bhui, and G. Bag, ā€œCan Lyra geometry explain the singularity free as well as accelerating universe?ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 295, no. 4, pp. 507ā€“513, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  76. F. Rahaman, S. Das, N. Begum, and M. Hossain, Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 295, p. 507, 2005.
  77. R. Bali and N. K. Chandnani, ā€œBianchi type-I cosmological model for perfect fluid distribution in Lyra geometry,ā€ Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 49, no. 3, Article ID 032502, 8 pages, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  78. S. Kumar and C. P. Singh, ā€œAn exact Bianchi type-I cosmological model in Lyra's manifold,ā€ International Journal of Modern Physics A, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 813ā€“822, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  79. J. K. Singh, ā€œExact solutions of some cosmological models in Lyra geometry,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 314, no. 4, pp. 361ā€“365, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  80. V. U. M. Rao, T. Vinutha, and M. V. Santhi, ā€œBianchi type-V cosmological model with perfect fluid using negative constant deceleration parameter in a scalar tensor theory based on Lyra manifold,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 314, no. 1–3, pp. 213ā€“216, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  81. A. Pradhan, ā€œCylindrically symmetric viscous fluid universe in Lyra geometry,ā€ Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 50, no. 2, Article ID 022501, 13 pages, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  82. F. Rahaman, S. Chakraborty, and M. Kalam, ā€œDomain wall in Lyra geometry,ā€ International Journal of Modern Physics D, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 735ā€“739, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  83. F. Rahaman, M. Kalam, and R. Mondal, ā€œThin domain walls in Lyra Geometry,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 305, no. 4, pp. 337ā€“340, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  84. F. Rahaman, ā€œGlobal monopoles in Lyra geometry,ā€ International Journal of Modern Physics D, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 775ā€“779, 2000. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
  85. F. Rahaman, S. Chakraborty, and J. K. Bera, ā€œA study of an inhomogeneous Bianchi-I model in Lyra geometry,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 281, no. 3, pp. 595ā€“600, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  86. F. Rahaman, N. Begum, and S. Das, ā€œA class of higher dimensional spherically symmetric cosmological model in Lyra geometry,ā€ Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 294, no. 3-4, pp. 219ā€“224, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  87. F. Rahaman and P. Ghosh, ā€œGeneral relativistic domain wall in Lyra geometry,ā€ Fizika B, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 719ā€“724, 2004. View at: Google Scholar
  88. A. Lichnerowicz, Relativistic Hydrodynamics and Magnetohydrodynamics, W. A. Benzamin, New York, NY, USA, 1967.
  89. J. L. Synge, Relativity: The General Theory, Series in Physics, North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1960. View at: MathSciNet
  90. K. S. Thorne, ā€œPrimordial element formation, primordial magnetic fields, and the isotropy of the universe,ā€ The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 148, p. 51, 1967. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  91. R. Kantowski and R. K. Sachs, ā€œSome spatially homogeneous anisotropic relativistic cosmological models,ā€ Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 443ā€“446, 1966. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  92. J. Kristian and R. K. Sachs, ā€œObservations in cosmology,ā€ The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 143, pp. 379ā€“399, 1966. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  93. C. B. Collins, E. N. Glass, and D. A. Wilkinson, ā€œExact spatially homogeneous cosmologies,ā€ General Relativity and Gravitation, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 805ā€“823, 1980. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH | MathSciNet
  94. G. F. R. Ellis, in General Relativity and Cosmology, R. K. Sachs, Ed., p. 117, Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, 1973.
  95. S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics, Cambridge University Press, London, UK, 1973. View at: MathSciNet
  96. S. Perlmutter, S. Gabi, G. Goldhaber et al., ā€œMeasurements1 of the cosmological parameters Ω and Λ from the first seven supernovae at z0.35,ā€ Astrophysical Journal, vol. 483, no. 2, part 1, pp. 565ā€“581, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  97. S. Perlmutter, G. Aldering, M. Della Valle et al., ā€œDiscovery of a supernova explosion at half the age of the universe,ā€ Nature, vol. 391, no. 6662, pp. 51ā€“54, 1998. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  98. S. Perlmutter, G. Aldering, G. Goldhaber et al., ā€œMeasurements of Ω and Λ from 42 high-redshift Supernovae,ā€ Astrophysical Journal, vol. 517, no. 2, part 1, pp. 565ā€“586, 1999. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  99. A. G. Riess, A. V. Filippenko, P. Challis et al., ā€œObservational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant,ā€ Astronomical Journal, vol. 116, no. 3, pp. 1009ā€“1038, 1998. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  100. A. G. Riess, L.-G. Sirolger, J. Tonry et al., ā€œType Ia supernova discoveries at z>1 from the hubble space telescope: evidence for past deceleration and constraints on dark energy evolution,ā€ Astrophysical Journal, vol. 607, no. 2, part 1, pp. 665ā€“687, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  101. J. E. Gunn and B. M. Tinsley, ā€œAn accelerating universe,ā€ Nature, vol. 257, no. 5526, pp. 454ā€“457, 1975. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  102. E. J. Wampler and W. L. Burke, in New Ideas in Astronomy, F. Bertola, J. W. Sulentix, and B. F. Madora, Eds., p. 317, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1988.
  103. G. F. R. Ellis, Standard and Inflationary Cosmologies, SISSA, Trieste, Italy, 1990.
  104. D. La and P. J. Steinhardt, ā€œExtended inflationary cosmology,ā€ Physical Review Letters, vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 376ā€“378, 1989. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  105. J. D. Barrow, ā€œGraduated inflationary universes,ā€ Physics Letters B, vol. 235, no. 1-2, pp. 40ā€“43, 1990. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet

Copyright © 2009 Anirudh Pradhan and Padmini Yadav. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


More related articles

518Ā Views | 355Ā Downloads | 8Ā Citations
 PDF  Download Citation  Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

We are committed to sharing findings related to COVID-19 as quickly and safely as possible. Any author submitting a COVID-19 paper should notify us at help@hindawi.com to ensure their research is fast-tracked and made available on a preprint server as soon as possible. We will be providing unlimited waivers of publication charges for accepted articles related to COVID-19. Sign up here as a reviewer to help fast-track new submissions.