Abstract
Formal analogies between the ordinary differential equations describing geophysical flows and Friedmann cosmology are developed. As a result, one obtains Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formulations of these equations, while laboratory experiments aimed at testing geophysical flows are shown to constitute analogue gravity systems for cosmology.
Introduction
There are unexpected formal analogies between cosmology and geophysical flows. Geophysical flows encompass many natural phenomena, including lava flows, the creep of glacier ice, avalanches, and mud slides. In particular, the analogy between early models of ice caps on a horizontal bed (based on an incorrect ice rheology) [1] and lava domes is well known [2, 3]. These early models of ice caps treated glacier ice as a perfectly plastic material, i.e., a non-Newtonian fluid that does not yield under stress until a certain threshold (“yield stress”) is reached, at which point the material deforms abruptly. This kind of material is nowadays referred to as a Bingham fluid. It is now established that glacier ice instead deforms under stress according to the non-linear Glen law relating the strain rate tensor and the deviatoric stresses [4]
| 1 |
where is a constant (that depends on the temperature, crystal orientation, and impurities [5–8]) and
| 2 |
is the effective stress [5–8]. However, Nye’s discussion applies without change to a Bingham fluid on a horizontal bed, which is a good model for lava flow, and gives the parabolic profile for a lava dome on horizontal bed [2, 3, 9]. (The Bingham fluid is the most common non-Newtonian fluid model to describe lava flows [10–17].) Similarly, the discussion of perfectly plastic glacier ice on a slope, although inadequate to describe an alpine glacier because of the wrong rheology, describes a lava flow on a slope. The corresponding analytical solution of the relevant fluid-mechanical equations appears in the pedagogical literature as a simple example of how different ice rheologies produce different macroscopic glacier profiles [18]. Unbeknownst to the author of [18], this solution is perfectly adequate to describe the flow of lava (a Bingham fluid) on a slope [3]. Below, we elaborate on this analogy.
The ordinary differential equations ruling the longitudinal profiles of glaciers, ice caps, lava flows, or lava domes lend themselves to analogies with the Einstein–Friedmann equations of cosmology. These equations describe the evolution of a spatially homogeneous and isotropic universe in general relativity and constitute the basis of modern (or Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker, in short “FLRW”) cosmology. The various solutions describing geophysical flows correspond to different matter contents and curvatures for these universes. Since Lagrangian and Hamiltonians for the equations of FLRW cosmology are known, the cosmic analogy provides a way to identify Lagrangians and Hamiltonians for the differential equations describing the analogous geophysical flows. While analogies between geophysical (and other) systems have been explored in the literature (see [19] for a review), the ones that we examine here are novel.
In the next section we recall the basics of FLRW cosmology for the reader unfamiliar with it. Sect. 3 discusses a Newtonian fluid model of a lava front and the relevant cosmic analogy, Lagrangian, and Hamiltonian. Section 4 studies a Bingham fluid model of a lava front; Sect. 5 discusses Bingham models of lava domes and ice caps on horizontal beds and their cosmic analogues, while Sect. 6 extends the discussion to flows on a slope and Sect. 7 contains the conclusions.
Basics of FLRW cosmology
We follow the notation of Refs. [20, 21] and use units in which the speed of light is unity. G is Newton’s constant and the four-dimensional metric tensor has signature .
Under the strong mathematical requirements of spatial homogeneity and isotropy motivated by observations of the cosmic microwave background permeating our universe and by large-scale structure surveys, the four-dimensional geometry of the universe is necessarily given by the FLRW line element, which reads [20–24]
| 3 |
in comoving polar coordinates , where is the metric tensor. The scale factor a(t) describes the expansion history of the universe, while the constant K describes the curvature of the 3-dimensional spatial sections (the 3-geometries obtained by setting ). If the line element (3) describes closed universes; if it corresponds to Euclidean (flat) spatial sections and, if , it describes hyperbolic 3-spaces [20, 21, 23, 24]. All the possible FLRW geometries fall in these three categories classified by the sign of the curvature index K.
The cosmological spacetime is curved by its mass-energy content and different matter contents produce different cosmic histories a(t). The cosmic matter is usually described by a perfect fluid with energy density and isotropic pressure P(t) related by a barotropic equation of state . The scale factor a(t) and the matter variables satisfy the Einstein–Friedmann equations (i.e., the Einstein equation of general relativity adapted to the symmetric line element (3) [20, 21, 23, 24]
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 6 |
where an overdot denotes differentiation with respect to the comoving time t while is the Hubble function [20, 21, 23, 24]. Given any two of these equations, the third one can be derived from them so that only two equations are independent. For convenience, here we choose the Friedmann Equation (4) and the energy conservation Equation (6) as primary, regarding the acceleration Equation (5) as derived. Therefore, our analogies between geophysical flows and FLRW cosmology will be valid only if the energy conservation Equation (6) is satisfied in addition to the Friedmann Equation (4) (which is easy to verify). This happens when a cosmological fluid satisfying the covariant conservation Equation (6) fills the analogous universe. If this fluid has barotropic equation of state with const., the conservation Equation (6) corresponds to an energy density scaling as
| 7 |
where is a positive integration constant determined by the initial conditions [20–24]. Therefore, to establish the validity of an analogy, it is sufficient to establish the validity of an equation of the form of the Friedmann equation with a fluid source satisfying Eq. (7), or sourced by a mixture of (mutually decoupled) fluids each satisfying Eq. (7).
The Lagrangian and Hamiltonian reproducing the Einstein–Friedmann equation through the Euler–Lagrange or the Hamilton equations are obtained from the action of general relativity with a perfect fluid [20, 21]
| 8 |
(where is the determinant of the metric ), which yields
| 9 |
| 10 |
where the dynamics is constrained and the “scalar” or “Hamiltonian” constraint must be satisfied [20–22]. We are now ready to build analogies between geophysical flows and FLRW cosmology.
Newtonian model of a lava front
Lava behaves as a Newtonian fluid near a vent, where it is hotter, but sometimes also the front of a lava flow is modelled as a Newtonian fluid [3]. An analytical Newtonian lava flow model is given in [25] and its analogy with FLRW cosmology was mentioned in Ref. [19], which we report and complete here.
Assume that the lava front is homogeneous and isothermal, that it moves at constant velocity on an inclined plane, and that it extends indefinitely in the transversal (y-) direction. Let x be a coordinate down-slope, h(x) be the lava thickness measured along an axis perpendicular to the bed, and L be the length of the flow, and assume (this shallow fluid approximation is common in glaciology and in the study of geophysical flows). Let and be the lava density and dynamic viscosity coefficient, g the acceleration of gravity, the slope of the plane lava bed, and the (constant) velocity of the lava in a reference frame fixed to the ground [25]. When lava is described a Newtonian fluid, the Navier–Stokes equations for laminar flow provide the differential equation for the lava flow profile h(x) [25]
| 11 |
where and
| 12 |
| 13 |
The analogy with FLRW cosmology follows from rewriting this equation as
| 14 |
which is analogous to the Friedmann equation
| 15 |
for a universe with negative curvature filled by a stiff fluid with equation of state and a radiation fluid with (which has negative energy density, a fact that would be unacceptable in realistic cosmology but is rather immaterial in our formal analogy). The map between lava front and cosmology reads
| 16 |
| 17 |
| 18 |
The well-known Lagrangian of the analogous FLRW universe indicates the Lagrangian for the lava flow problem
| 19 |
Since L does not depend explicitly on x, the corresponding Hamiltonian
| 20 |
is conserved. Equation (14) for the lava flow profile is recovered by setting (this is the Hamiltonian constraint of the Einstein equations).
An analytic solution of Eq. (11) is [25]
| 21 |
where and
| 22 |
This equation provides the scale factor a(t) of the spatially curved analogous universe
| 23 |
for , where
| 24 |
and . In the limit , the solution for the (now solidified) lava front degenerates into the trivial straight line . The analogous FLRW universe is empty and has hyperbolic three-dimensional spatial sections, according to
| 25 |
and linear scale factor . This is empty Minkowski spacetime in a hyperbolic foliation (i.e., in accelerated coordinates) in which the three-dimensional space is curved, while the four-dimensional curvature is identically zero [23, 24, 26].
The other limit of the solution (21) for , in which the bed becomes horizontal, corresponds to zero spatial curvature and the stiff fluid as the only matter source in the cosmic analogy. This limit is interesting because it reproduces the shape of an accretionary wedge in the oceanic crust [27]. Setting gives [25] the profile
| 26 |
for . The scale factor of the analogous spatially flat expanding universe reduces to the well-known power-law (with a positive constant) caused by a stiff fluid or a free scalar field [28].
Bingham fluid model of a lava front
Away from a vent, where lava is cooler and more viscous, it behaves more like a Bingham fluid. Consider now a Bingham model of a lava front flowing down an incline with constant slope . Let , and be the lava density, viscosity coefficient, yield stress, the acceleration of gravity, and the speed of the front, respectively. Then the Navier–Stokes equations give [25]
| 27 |
where
| 28 |
Rearranging this equation one obtains
| 29 |
In the analogous FLRW cosmos, the various terms in the right hand side of Eq. (29) describe, respectively, hyperbolic curvature, radiation with energy density , a stiff fluid with , a fluid with , and a dust with zero pressure and , where
| 30 |
| 31 |
| 32 |
| 33 |
| 34 |
Using the common values for lava Pa, Pas, m/s, one obtains Pa, making positive. However the dust fluid always has negative energy density.
Bingham fluid models of lava domes and ice caps on horizontal beds
A Bingham fluid on a horizontal bed assumes a well-known parabolic profile found by Nye in early studies of ice caps [1]. Nye used the incorrect Bingham (or “perfectly plastic”) rheology for ice, which was later superseded by Glen’s law (1) [4], however the discussion applies without modification to Bingham fluids spreading on a horizontal background, such as a lava dome, and is confirmed by experiments [2, 3].
Consider an axisymmetric flow and let x point in the radial direction, while h(x) is the thickness of the (incompressible) material of density at x. The simplified Navier–Stokes equations for stationary state in the thin lava approximation give
| 35 |
where g is the acceleration of gravity. The basal stress is equated to the yield stress everywhere [5–7], giving
| 36 |
which has as a solution the parabolic Nye profile [1, 5–7]
| 37 |
By squaring, Eq. (36) is written as
| 38 |
which is analogous to the Friedmann equation (4) for a spatially flat () FLRW universe filled with blackbody radiation with equation of state and energy density , in the correspondence
| 39 |
This energy density is positive-definite. In the standard cosmological description, the scale factor is with an increasing function a(t); for the ice cap model of Nye, the downward slope of the ice corresponds to and . This profile is reflected about the axis to produce an overall profile symmetric under the reflection and with a cusp at , where the left and right derivatives have opposite signs [5–8]. The ice cap model corresponding to the correct Glen law (1) for ice rheology satisfies instead the Vialov equation [5–8, 29]
| 40 |
where c(x) describes the accumulation rate of ice per unit of area normal to the vertical direction and per unit time (volume of ice added per unit time and per square meter, i.e., a flux density), for ice creep, and is the constant appearing in the Glen law (1). The Vialov profile is obtained for const.,
| 41 |
where , , and
| 42 |
(the Lagrangian formulation and cosmic analogy for this equation are presented in [19, 30]).
In the limit of plastic ice, the Vialov equation (40) reduces to (38) while the Vialov profile (41) becomes the parabolic Nye profile (37) [5, 29].
Lava dome on a uniform slope
Consider now the flow of a Bingham fluid over a plane of uniform slope , in stationary state and in the shallow lava approximation, building a dome on this slope [9]. The same problem has been approached in glaciology by studying an ice sheet made of plastic ice on a slope [18], although for purely pedagogical purposes since the correct rheology is given by Glen’s law (1) instead of plastic ice. The result of [18] is
| 43 |
This equation has the analytical solution (for arbitrary large slope angles ) [18]
| 44 |
which satisfies the boundary condition at .
There is a difference between ice caps and lava flows. While precipitation on a glacier is distributed (as described by the function c(x)), lava erupts from a vent and one must describe both down-slope and up-slope flows from this vent, as is done in theoretical descriptions, which commonly leads to two solutions of the relevant differential equation [3]. Although not considered in [18], the up-slope solution can be recovered by changing the sign of the basal stress , therefore of , in Eq. (43). Osmond & Griffiths [9] study a silicic lava dome on a slope (silicic lava has relatively low temperature and high viscosity). The lava thickness h(t, x, y) satisfies the equation [3, 9]
| 45 |
where one assumes symmetry about the line which, by continuity, results in on the line . Here is the vertical position of the lava, not its thickness h [3, 9], to which it is related by . Solving for the longitudinal lava profile along the line and using the rescaled variables
| 46 |
| 47 |
| 48 |
Osmond and Griffiths find the solution [3, 9]
| 49 |
which satisfies the boundary condition at , and where the flow has length and width [3, 9]. This solution coincides with the solution (44) of [18] for perfectly plastic ice and was rediscovered in Ref. [31] together with the Nye profile (37).
The cosmic analogy is obtained by rewriting Eq. (44) as
| 50 |
which is analogous to the Friedmann equation
| 51 |
where
| 52 |
| 53 |
| 54 |
The effective Lagrangian and‘ Hamiltonian for the lava flow obtained from the analogy are
| 55 |
| 56 |
and Eq. (43) is obtained by imposing the Hamiltonian constraint of general relativity .
The width of the lava flow in the transverse y-direction is obtained [9] for , which leads to
| 57 |
and to another cosmic analogy through the analogue of the Friedmann equation
| 58 |
(where now a prime denotes differentiation with respect to ), which describes a spatially closed () universe sourced by blackbody radiation. The solution of [9]
| 59 |
which can be inverted as
| 60 |
is a classic solution of FLRW cosmology [28] and can be rewritten in the parametric form
| 61 |
| 62 |
where the parameter corresponds to the conformal time of FLRW cosmology defined by . This FLRW universe begins at a Big Crunch, reaches a maximum size, and then shrinks and collapses to a Big Crunch, mirroring the transverse profile of the lava dome of finite extension. The corresponding Lagrangian and Hamiltonian are
| 63 |
| 64 |
Conclusions
The Friedmann equation (4) lends itself to various analogies [19], including the differential equations ruling lava flows, because it resembles the energy conservation equation for a one-dimensional motion. Analogue gravity, in which laboratory scale systems mimic gravitational systems such as black holes, wormholes, and universes that cannot be recreated in the lab, has become a mature area of science (e.g., [64–68]). Analogue gravity systems comprise Bose–Einstein condensates and other condensed matter systems [32–45], fluids [46–58], optical systems [59–63] and even soap bubbles [73, 74] and capillary flow [75]. Specifically, analogues of FLRW cosmology have been found in Bose–Einstein condensates [69–72]. Based on the cosmic analogies presented here, tabletop experiments studying the flow of Bingham fluids of interest in geophysics, which employ slurries descending inclines [3], can constitute analogue gravity systems for cosmology. The most interesting phenomena discovered in analogue gravity thus far involve wave propagation and perturbations, which have led to the discovery of analogue Hawking radiation [55], superradiance [54], and cosmological particle production [35], predicted in quantum field theory in curved spacetime and not directly observable in nature, but other aspects may be disclosed by analogue gravity in the future.
As seen above, negative energy densities for the cosmological fluids analogous to geophysical flows do occur sometimes and they are responsible for the appearance of hyperbolic functions in the scale factor a(t) (cosmologists are familiar with hyperbolic functions in the presence of a negative cosmological constant or of positive curvature index K [20–24]). While these negative densities would be unacceptable for real fluids in Einstein gravity, they can be viable in alternative theories where extra degrees of freedom with respect to general relativity can be described as effective fluids not subject to the usual physical requirements imposed on ordinary fluids (e.g., [76–78]). The extension of the cosmological analogies reported here to scalar-tensor and other theories of gravity alternative to general relativity will be pursued elsewhere.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by Bishop’s University and by the Natural Sciences & Engineering Research Council of Canada (Grant 2016-03803).
Data Availability Statement
This manuscript has no associated data or the data will not be deposited. [Authors’ comment: There are no data associated with this work because of its theoretical and mathematical nature.]
Contributor Information
Valerio Faraoni, Email: vfaraoni@ubishops.ca.
Sonia Jose, Email: sjose21@ubishops.ca.
References
- 1.Nye JF. The flow of glaciers and ice-sheets as a problem in plasticity. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A. 1951;207:554–72. doi: 10.1098/rspa.1951.0140. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 2.S. Blake, Visco-plastic models of lava domes. in Lava Flows and Domes: Emplacement Mechanisms and Hazard Implications, IUGG Congress, Vancouver, Canada 1990, Proc. Volcanol., vol. 2, ed. by J. H. Fink (Springer, New York, 1990)
- 3.Griffiths RW. The dynamics of lava flows. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 2000;32:477–518. doi: 10.1146/annurev.fluid.32.1.477. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Glen JW. The creep of polycrystalline ice. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A. 1958;228:519–38. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Paterson WSB. The Physics of Glaciers. 3. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann; 1994. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Cuffey KM, Paterson WSB. The Physics of Glaciers. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2010. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Hooke RLB. Principles of Glacier Mechanics. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Greve R, Blatter H. Dynamics of Ice Sheets and Glaciers. New York: Springer; 2009. [Google Scholar]
- 9.D.I. Osmond, R.W. Griffiths, Silicic lava domes on slopes. in Proc. 13th Australasian Fluid Mech. Conf., ed. by M.C. Thomson, K. Hourigan (Monash Univ., Melbourne, Australia, 1998), pp. 827–830
- 10.Robson GR. Thickness of Etnean lavas. Nature. 1967;216:251–252. doi: 10.1038/216251a0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Johnson AM. Physical Processes in Geology. New York: W. H. Freeman; 1970. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Hulme G. The interpretation of lava flow morphology. Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 1974;39:361–383. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.1974.tb05460.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Pinkerton H, Sparks RSJ. Field measurements of the rheology of lava. Nature. 1978;276:383–385. doi: 10.1038/276383a0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Dragoni M, Bonafede M, Boschi E. Downslope flow models of a Bingham liquid: implications for lava flows. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 1986;30:305–325. doi: 10.1016/0377-0273(86)90059-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Kilburn CRJ, Luongo G, editors. Active Lavas: Monitoring and Modelling. London: Univ. Coll. London Press; 1993. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Tallarico A, Dragoni M. Viscous Newtonian laminar flow in a rectangular channeled: application to Etna lava flows. Bull. Volcanol. 1999;61:40–47. doi: 10.1007/s004450050261. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Tallarico A, Dragoni M. A three-dimensional Bingham model for channeled lava flows. J. Geophys. Res. 2000;105(B11):969–980. doi: 10.1029/2000JB900201. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Faraoni V. Modelling the shapes of glaciers: an introduction. Eur. J. Phys. 2019;40:025802. doi: 10.1088/1361-6404/aaff0b. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Faraoni V. Cosmic Analogies: How Natural Systems Emulate the Universe. Singapore: World Scientific; 2022. [Google Scholar]
- 20.Wald RM. General Relativity. Chicago: Chicago University Press; 1984. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Carroll SM. Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity. San Francisco: Addison Wesley; 2004. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Misner CW, Thorne KS, Wheeler JA. Gravitation. San Francisco: Freeman; 1973. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Kolb EW, Turner MS. The Early Universe. Redwood City: Addison-Wesley; 1990. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Liddle A. An Introduction to Modern Cosmology. Chichester: Wiley; 2003. [Google Scholar]
- 25.Dragoni M, Borsari I, Tallarico A. A model for the shape of lava flow fronts. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth. 2005;110:B9. doi: 10.1029/2004JB003523. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Mukhanov V. Physical Foundations of Cosmology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005. [Google Scholar]
- 27.Emerman SH, Turcotte DL. A fluid model for the shape of accretionary wedges. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1983;63:379–384. doi: 10.1016/0012-821X(83)90111-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Faraoni V, Jose S, Dussault S. Multi-fluid cosmology in Einstein gravity: analytical solutions. Gen. Relat. Gravit. 2021;53(12):109. doi: 10.1007/s10714-021-02879-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 29.S.S. Vialov, Regularization of glacial shields movement and the theory of plastic viscous flow. in Symp. at Chamonix 1958 (IAHS Publ. 47, Physics of the Movement of the Ice) (IAHS Press, Wallingford, 1958)
- 30.Faraoni V. Lagrangian formulation, a general relativity analogue, and a symmetry of the Vialov equation of glaciology. Eur. Phys. J. Plus. 2020;135(11):887. doi: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-020-00909-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Liu KOF, Mei CC. Slow spreading of a sheet of Bingham fluid on an inclined plane. J. Fluid Mech. 1989;207:505–529. doi: 10.1017/S0022112089002685. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Barcelo C, Liberati S, Visser M. Analog gravity from Bose–Einstein condensates. Class. Quantum Gravity. 2001;18:1137. doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/18/6/312. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Fedichev PO, Fischer UR. Gibbons–Hawking effect in the sonic de Sitter space-time of an expanding Bose–Einstein-condensed gas. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2003;91:240407. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.240407. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Barcelo C, Liberati S, Visser M. Analog models for FRW cosmologies. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D. 2003;12:1641–1650. doi: 10.1142/S0218271803004092. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Fedichev PO, Fischer UR. ‘Cosmological’ quasiparticle production in harmonically trapped superfluid gases. Phys. Rev. A. 2004;69:033602. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.69.033602. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Fischer UR, Schutzhold R. Quantum simulation of cosmic inflation in two-component Bose–Einstein condensates. Phys. Rev. A. 2004;70:063615. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.70.063615. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Chä SY, Fischer UR. Probing the scale invariance of the inflationary power spectrum in expanding quasi-two-dimensional dipolar condensates. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017;118(13):130404. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.130404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Eckel S, Kumar A, Jacobson T, Spielman IB, Campbell GK. A rapidly expanding Bose–Einstein condensate: an expanding universe in the lab. Phys. Rev. X. 2018;8(2):021021. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.8.021021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Fedichev PO, Fischer UR. Observer dependence for the phonon content of the sound field living on the effective curved space-time background of a Bose–Einstein condensate. Phys. Rev. D. 2004;69:064021. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.69.064021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Volovik GE. Induced gravity in superfluid He-3. J. Low Temp. Phys. 1997;113:667–680. doi: 10.1023/A:1022545226102. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Jacobson TA, Volovik GE. Effective space-time and Hawking radiation from moving domain wall in thin film of He-3-A. JETP Lett. 1998;68:874–880. doi: 10.1134/1.567808. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Volovik GE. Links between gravity and dynamics of quantum liquids. Grav. Cosmol. Suppl. 2000;6:187–203. [Google Scholar]
- 43.Volovik GE. Effective gravity and quantum vacuum in superfluids. In: Novello M, Visser M, Volovik G, editors. Artificial Black Holes. Singapore: World Scientific; 2002. pp. 127–177. [Google Scholar]
- 44.Volovik GE. Black hole horizon and metric singularity at the brane separating two sliding superfluids. Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 2002;76:296–300. doi: 10.1134/1.1520613. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Pashaev OK, Lee JH. Resonance NLS solitons as black holes in Madelung fluid. Mod. Phys. Lett. A. 2002;17:1601. doi: 10.1142/S0217732302007995. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Unruh WG. Experimental black hole evaporation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1981;46:1351–1353. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.46.1351. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Unruh WG. Sonic analog of black holes and the effects of high frequencies on black hole evaporation. Phys. Rev. D. 1995;51:2827–2838. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.51.2827. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Visser M. Acoustic black holes: horizons, ergospheres, and Hawking radiation. Class. Quantum Gravity. 1998;15:1767–1791. doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/15/6/024. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Garay LJ, Anglin JR, Cirac JI, Zoller P. Sonic black holes in dilute Bose–Einstein condensates. Phys. Rev. A. 2001;63:023611. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.63.023611. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Fischer UR, Visser M. Riemannian geometry of irrotational vortex acoustics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2002;88:110201. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.110201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Schützhold R, Unruh WG. Gravity wave analogues of black holes. Phys. Rev. D. 2002;66:044019. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.66.044019. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 52.K.K. Nandi, Y.Z. Zhang, R.G. Cai, Acoustic wormholes. arXiv:gr-qc/0409085 [gr-qc]
- 53.Visser M, Weinfurtner SEC. Vortex geometry for the equatorial slice of the Kerr black hole. Class. Quantum Gravity. 2005;22:2493–2510. doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/22/12/011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Slatyer TR, Savage CM. Superradiant scattering from a hydrodynamic vortex. Class. Quantum Gravity. 2005;22:3833–3839. doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/22/19/002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Weinfurtner S, Tedford EW, Penrice MCJ, Unruh WG, Lawrence GA. Measurement of stimulated Hawking emission in an analogue system. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2011;106:021302. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.021302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Torres T, Patrick S, Coutant A, Richartz M, Tedford EW, Weinfurtner S. Observation of superradiance in a vortex flow. Nat. Phys. 2017;13:833–836. doi: 10.1038/nphys4151. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Patrick S, Coutant A, Richartz M, Weinfurtner S. Black hole quasibound states from a draining bathtub vortex flow. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2018;121(6):061101. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.061101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Patrick S, Goodhew H, Gooding C, Weinfurtner S. Backreaction in an analogue black hole experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2021;126(4):041105. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.041105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Schutzhold R, Plunien G, Soff G. Dielectric black hole analogs. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2002;88:061101. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.061101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Unruh WG, Schutzhold R. On slow light as a black hole analog. Phys. Rev. D. 2003;68:024008. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.68.024008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Davis CC. Linear and nonlinear optics of surface plasmon toy models of black holes and wormholes. Phys. Rev. B. 2004;69:205417. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.69.205417. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Schutzhold R, Unruh WG. Hawking radiation in an electro-magnetic wave-guide? Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005;95:031301. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.031301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Prain A, Maitland C, Faccio D, Marino F. Superradiant scattering in fluids of light. Phys. Rev. D. 2019;100(2):024037. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.024037. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Barcelo C, Liberati S, Visser M. Analogue gravity. Living Rev. Rel. 2005;8:12. doi: 10.12942/lrr-2005-12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Volovik GE. Int. Ser. Monogr. Phys. Oxford: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press; 2003. The Universe in a helium droplet. [Google Scholar]
- 66.F.D. Belgiorno, S.L. Cacciatori, D. Faccio, Hawking Radiation: From Astrophysical Black Holes to Analogous Systems in the Lab, WSP, 2019. 10.1142/8812. (ISBN 978-981-4508-53-7, 978-981-4508-55-1)
- 67.Visser M, Barcelo C, Liberati S. Analog models of and for gravity. Gen. Relat. Gravit. 2002;34:1719–1734. doi: 10.1023/A:1020180409214. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Liberati S. Analogue gravity models of emergent gravity: lessons and pitfalls. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2017;880(1):012009. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/880/1/012009. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Volovik GE. He and universe parallelism. In: Bunkov YM , Godfrin H, editors. Topological Defects and the Non-equilibrium Dynamics of Symmetry Breaking Phase Transitions. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic; 2000. pp. 353–387. [Google Scholar]
- 70.Volovik GE. Superfluid analogies of cosmological phenomena. Phys. Rep. 2001;351:195–348. doi: 10.1016/S0370-1573(00)00139-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Prain A, Fagnocchi S, Liberati S. Analogue cosmological particle creation: quantum correlations in expanding Bose Einstein condensates. Phys. Rev. D. 2010;82:105018. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.82.105018. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Braden J, Johnson MC, Peiris HV, Pontzen A, Weinfurtner S. Nonlinear dynamics of the cold atom analog false vacuum. JHEP. 2019;10:174. doi: 10.1007/JHEP10(2019)174. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Criado C, Alamo N. Solving the brachistochrone and other variational problems with soap films. Am. J. Phys. 2010;78:1400–1405. doi: 10.1119/1.3483276. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Rousseaux G, Mancas SC. Visco-elastic cosmology for a sparkling universe? Gen. Relat. Gravit. 2020;52:1–8. doi: 10.1007/s10714-020-02705-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Bini D, Succi S. Analogy between capillary motion and Friedmann–Robertson–Walker cosmology. Europhys. Lett. 2008;82:34003. doi: 10.1209/0295-5075/82/34003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Faraoni V, Coté J. Imperfect fluid description of modified gravities. Phys. Rev. D. 2018;98(8):084019. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.98.084019. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Giusti A, Zentarra S, Heisenberg L, Faraoni V. First-order thermodynamics of Horndeski gravity. Phys. Rev. D. 2022;105(12):124011. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.105.124011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 78.M. Miranda, D. Vernieri, S. Capozziello, V. Faraoni, Fluid nature constrains Horndeski gravity. arXiv:2209.02727 [gr-qc]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
This manuscript has no associated data or the data will not be deposited. [Authors’ comment: There are no data associated with this work because of its theoretical and mathematical nature.]
