IMO the evolution of the Universe can de divided into four periods.
One way to learn something about the Big Bang is to compare it with three diffent objects:
One parameter to describe the background radiation is temperature. But this is wrong because temperature is a human parameter. The only two parameters to describe the background radiation is by intensity and frequency.
The same concept that can also not be used is cooling. Again this is a human concept. What happened is that the wave length of the photons increased. The reason is the expanding Universe.
The background radiation (soup) that we measure is not every where the same but is shows a pattern of fluctuations in intensity. The following picture shows this pattern of intensity by + and  signs in a rather abstract way. You can compare this pattern with an interference patern of two waves under an angle of 60 degrees.
+ + + +     + + + +     + + + +     + + + Figure 1 BackGround Radiation 
Document Literature (25) from 2010 at page 8 shows that there are roughly 21000 hotspots
With a radius of observed background of R, the distance between two hotspots is d and the distance between a hot and cold spot is a we get:
100/0,79 = 115. This number explains the position of the first peak in the microwave Background radiation power spectrum.
One question to answer is what is the path of the oldest photons which is oberved now as the Microwave BackGround Radiation.
When you study the document: The path of a light ray you can see that the path from a supernova follows the blue line in the x direction as described by Friedmann's Equation. That means in an expanding Universe the path of the photons from oldest supernovae start very close near the origin, but near the rim of the Universe were space expansion is very high. First they move outward but always to a region where space expansion is less. Finally they move inward towards the origin.
In an ideal empty universe the number of photons that reach the observer is a function of L/d^2. With d the distance that the lightray has travelled. This function describes for example from a lighthouse the amount of light that reaches the observer at a distance d from a lighthouse. However this function is not totally correct. When there is fog you cannot see the light. The reason is dispersion by the free floating water molecules.
The same problem exists for light from a supernova, but is even more severe from photons emitted immediate after the Big Bang.
Figure 2 and Figure 3 shows the issues infolved in more detail. The most important event is the * in Figure 3. The horizontal axis is the time since the Big Bang. The vertical axis is the line of sight from an observer at t = 14 billion years after the Big Bang.


Those reflected single photons we observe now as the Back Ground Radiation. The wave length is increased being caused by an expanding Universe.
The following url: Cosmic Inflation explains the origin of the CMB radiation. IMO this picture is misleading. We assume that our Universe is homogeneous. That means for example that is has the same density in all directions. Recombination happend 300.000 years after the Big Bang. That is the origin of the CMB radiation we observe today. Also during that period the Universe was homogeneous, implying that everywhere this recombination happened at the same time. However that is not what is observed. What we observe are the events happening on the surface of a sphere almost at the rim of the universe at that epoch. As such we do not observe what has happened at the center of the sphere, nor, and that is very important, that we can claim by observing the CMB radiation that the Universe is homogeneous.
When you go to the documents mentioned in Literature (2), specific to: the Intermediate Level CMB tutorial, Third Peak, Summary "Tab" you will read that the first peak of the power spectrum is explained by the parameter Omega(K), the second peak by the parameter Omega(Baryon) and the third peak by the parameter Omega(CDM). That means (my impression) the CMB radiation can not be used to calculate the parameter H, Omega(Lambda) and the Age of the Universe.
However this also raises a serious question: At which epoch are we speaking ?
When you go to the document: Intermediate Level CMB tutorial, Angular Peaks, Streaming "Tab" you will read:

Document Literature (25) Paragraph 3.2.4 Luminosity Distances page 13 is written:
Document Literature (23) only mentions two cases where Super Novae SN Data is used. (At page 17).
The fact that the Universe is mathematical flat still means that the Universe can be either physical Open or Closed as a function of the parameter Lambda. Lambda < 0 means closed. Lambda > or equal zero means "Open"
The following table shows certain combinations of k=1, k=0 and k=1 with the objective that omega(m)*h2 = Constant = 0.1366 The program used is Friedmann's Equation.xls. The parameter optimised is Lambda.



The purpose of table 2 is to adjust the parameters Omaga(k), by try and error, such that the age of the universe is either 13 or 14. The program used is CAMB (See next paragraph), The boundary condition is that omega(m)*h2 = Constant = 0.1366.
The purpose of table 3 is to adjust both the parameter k and Lambda when the age of the Universe is either 13 or 14. The program used is: Friedmann's Equation.xls The boundary condition is that omega(m)*h2 = Constant = 0.1366.


Table 2 shows that in case the age of the Universe is 13 Omaga(k) = 0.55 and when the age = 14 that Omega(k) is 0.178.



The tests 810 also use H0=70 with different values for the parameters: Omega(CDM)*h^2, T CMB and Helium Factor. The three values are respectivily: 0.120 , 3 and 0.54 The "standard" values for H0=70 (in Test 3) are: 0.114 , 2.725 and 0.24
In all the three cases the shape of the power spectrum changes, specific for the higher peaks.
It is important to mention that in these three tests the parameters H0, Omega(Lambda) and Omega(M) are identical as in the case of H0=70.
In the first case the parameter Omega(CDM)*h^2 is modified and is equal to 0.114. But so is Omega(Baryon)*h^2 and is set equal to 0.0166. The sum of those values is 0.1366 ( = Omega(m)*h^2) which is the same as for the other two cases. The result is that in all these three cases the value of Omega(Lambda) is the same and equal to the Omega(Lambda) of H0=70.
The question could be asked: are the calculations involved to calculate the power spectra correct. That means is the program CAMB correct.
The problem is there is no way to test that.
The Power Spectra in the three tests 8 to 10 are different compared to the case of H0=70 but that does not mean that the corresponding parameters for H0=70 are correct for t=0 at present ?
Back to Question 13: Is it possible to calculate the paramaters H0, omega(Lambda), Omega(M) alone using the CMB radiation ?
Back to my home page Contents of This Document