Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Does dark energy really revive using DESI 2024 data?

Published 18 Apr 2024 in astro-ph.CO and gr-qc | (2404.12068v1)

Abstract: We investigate the impact of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) 2024 data on dark energy scenarios. We thus analyze three typologies of models, the first in which the cosmic speed up is related to thermodynamics, the second associated with Taylor expansions of the barotropic factor, whereas the third based on \emph{ad hoc} dark energy parameterizations. In this respect, we perform Monte Carlo Markov chain analyses, adopting the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm, of 12 models. To do so, we first work at the background, inferring \emph{a posteriori} kinematic quantities associated with each model. Afterwards, we obtain early time predictions, computing departures on the growth evolution with respect to the model that better fits DESI data. We find that the best model to fit data \emph{is not} the Chevallier-Polarski-Linder (CPL) parametrization, but rather a more complicated log-corrected dark energy contribution. To check the goodness of our findings, we further directly fit the product, $r_d h_0$, concluding that $r_d h_0$ is anticorrelated with the mass. This treatment is worked out by removing a precise data point placed at $z=0.51$. Surprisingly, in this case the results again align with the $\Lambda$CDM model, \emph{indicating that the possible tension between the concordance paradigm and the CPL model can be severely alleviated}. We conclude that future data points will be essential to clarify whether dynamical dark energy is really in tension with the $\Lambda$CDM model.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (114)
  1. S. Perlmutter et al. Measurements of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω and ΛΛ\Lambdaroman_Λ from 42 High Redshift Supernovae. Astrophys. J., 517:565–586, 1999.
  2. S. Perlmutter et al. Discovery of a supernova explosion at half the age of the Universe and its cosmological implications. Nature, 391:51–54, 1998.
  3. Adam G. Riess et al. Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant. Astron. J., 116:1009–1038, 1998.
  4. John L. Tonry et al. Cosmological results from high-z supernovae. Astrophys. J., 594:1–24, 2003.
  5. Precision cosmology? Not just yet… Science, 299:1532, 2003.
  6. C. L. Bennett et al. First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Preliminary maps and basic results. Astrophys. J. Suppl., 148:1–27, 2003.
  7. G. Hinshaw et al. First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: The Angular power spectrum. Astrophys. J. Suppl., 148:135, 2003.
  8. A. Kogut et al. Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) first year observations: TE polarization. Astrophys. J. Suppl., 148:161, 2003.
  9. D. N. Spergel et al. First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Determination of cosmological parameters. Astrophys. J. Suppl., 148:175–194, 2003.
  10. Daniel J. Eisenstein et al. Detection of the Baryon Acoustic Peak in the Large-Scale Correlation Function of SDSS Luminous Red Galaxies. Astrophys. J., 633:560–574, 2005.
  11. The Case for a positive cosmological Lambda term. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 9:373–444, 2000.
  12. Dynamics of dark energy. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 15:1753–1936, 2006.
  13. The Cosmological Constant and Dark Energy. Rev. Mod. Phys., 75:559–606, 2003.
  14. T. Padmanabhan. Cosmological constant: The Weight of the vacuum. Phys. Rept., 380:235–320, 2003.
  15. Characterizing repulsive gravity with curvature eigenvalues. Phys. Rev. D, 90(8):084032, 2014.
  16. Self-accelerated universe induced by repulsive effects as an alternative to dark energy and modified gravities. Found. Phys., 48(1):17–26, 2018.
  17. Toward an invariant definition of repulsive gravity. In 12th Marcel Grossmann Meeting on General Relativity, pages 1029–1031, 5 2010.
  18. Observational Probes of Cosmic Acceleration. Phys. Rept., 530:87–255, 2013.
  19. N. Aghanim et al. Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters. Astron. Astrophys., 641:A6, 2020. [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)].
  20. N. Aghanim et al. Planck 2018 results. I. Overview and the cosmological legacy of Planck. Astron. Astrophys., 641:A1, 2020.
  21. N. Aghanim et al. Planck 2018 results. VIII. Gravitational lensing. Astron. Astrophys., 641:A8, 2020.
  22. P. A. R. Ade et al. Planck 2015 results. XIII. Cosmological parameters. Astron. Astrophys., 594:A13, 2016.
  23. R. Adam et al. Planck 2015 results. I. Overview of products and scientific results. Astron. Astrophys., 594:A1, 2016.
  24. N. Aghanim et al. Planck 2015 results. XI. CMB power spectra, likelihoods, and robustness of parameters. Astron. Astrophys., 594:A11, 2016.
  25. P. A. R. Ade et al. Planck 2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters. Astron. Astrophys., 571:A16, 2014.
  26. P. A. R. Ade et al. Planck 2013 results. I. Overview of products and scientific results. Astron. Astrophys., 571:A1, 2014.
  27. P. A. R. Ade et al. Planck 2013 results. XV. CMB power spectra and likelihood. Astron. Astrophys., 571:A15, 2014.
  28. M. Kowalski et al. Improved Cosmological Constraints from New, Old and Combined Supernova Datasets. Astrophys. J., 686:749–778, 2008.
  29. Reconstructing Dark Energy. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 15:2105–2132, 2006.
  30. Modified Gravity Theories on a Nutshell: Inflation, Bounce and Late-time Evolution. Phys. Rept., 692:1–104, 2017.
  31. A. G. Adame et al. DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological Constraints from the Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations. 4 2024.
  32. Does DESI 2024 Confirm ΛΛ\Lambdaroman_ΛCDM? 4 2024.
  33. Toward unbiased estimations of the statefinder parameters. Phys. Dark Univ., 17:25–37, 2017.
  34. Cosmographic study of the universe’s specific heat: A landscape for Cosmology? Gen. Rel. Grav., 46:1649, 2014.
  35. Cosmological degeneracy versus cosmography: a cosmographic dark energy model. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 26(03):1750015, 2016.
  36. Jerome Martin. Everything You Always Wanted To Know About The Cosmological Constant Problem (But Were Afraid To Ask). Comptes Rendus Physique, 13:566–665, 2012.
  37. On the Nature of the Cosmological Constant Problem. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A, 24:1545–1548, 2009.
  38. Philip Bull et al. Beyond ΛΛ\Lambdaroman_ΛCDM: Problems, solutions, and the road ahead. Phys. Dark Univ., 12:56–99, 2016.
  39. Challenges for ΛΛ\Lambdaroman_ΛCDM: An update. New Astron. Rev., 95:101659, 2022.
  40. Steven Weinberg. The Cosmological Constant Problem. Rev. Mod. Phys., 61:1–23, 1989.
  41. An Alternative to quintessence. Phys. Lett. B, 511:265–268, 2001.
  42. Eric V. Linder. Exploring the expansion history of the universe. Phys. Rev. Lett., 90:091301, 2003.
  43. The Chaplygin gas as a model for dark energy. In 10th Marcel Grossmann Meeting on Recent Developments in Theoretical and Experimental General Relativity, Gravitation and Relativistic Field Theories (MG X MMIII), pages 840–859, 3 2004.
  44. Constraints From Cosmography in Various Parametrizations. In 13th Marcel Grossmann Meeting on Recent Developments in Theoretical and Experimental General Relativity, Astrophysics, and Relativistic Field Theories, pages 1570–1573, 2015.
  45. Generalized Chaplygin gas, accelerated expansion and dark energy matter unification. Phys. Rev. D, 66:043507, 2002.
  46. Generalizing the generalized Chaplygin gas. Phys. Rev. D, 72:063511, 2005.
  47. Unifying the dark sector through a single matter fluid with nonzero pressure. Phys. Rev. D, 109(2):023510, 2024.
  48. Double polytropic cosmic acceleration from the Murnaghan equation of state. 3 2024.
  49. Effective field description of the Anton-Schmidt cosmic fluid. Phys. Rev. D, 99(2):023532, 2019.
  50. Cosmic acceleration from a single fluid description. Phys. Dark Univ., 20:1–12, 2018.
  51. Testing generalized logotropic models with cosmic growth. Phys. Rev. D, 104(2):023520, 2021.
  52. Pierre-Henri Chavanis. Predictions from the logotropic model: The universal surface density of dark matter halos and the present proportions of dark matter and dark energy. Phys. Dark Univ., 37:101098, 2022.
  53. Comparison between the Logotropic and ΛΛ\Lambdaroman_ΛCDM models at the cosmological scale. JCAP, 05:018, 2017.
  54. Pierre-Henri Chavanis. Is the Universe logotropic? Eur. Phys. J. Plus, 130:130, 2015.
  55. Parametrizations of Dark Energy Models in the Background of General Non-canonical Scalar Field in D𝐷Ditalic_D-dimensional Fractal Universe. Eur. Phys. J. C, 79(8):722, 2019.
  56. Gravitational lensing as a probe of quintessence. Astrophys. J. Lett., 513:L95–L98, 1999.
  57. Revisiting the parametrization of Equation of State of Dark Energy via SNIa Data. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 388:275, 2008.
  58. Is cosmic acceleration slowing down? Phys. Rev. D, 80:101301, 2009.
  59. Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 10:213–224, 2001.
  60. Possible signals of vacuum dynamics in the Universe. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 478(4):4357–4373, 2018.
  61. High redshift cosmography: new results and implication for dark energy. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 426:1396–1415, 2012.
  62. Unveiling cosmography from the dark energy equation of state. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 28(12):1950154, 2019.
  63. Cosmological tracking solutions. Phys. Rev. D, 59:123504, 1999.
  64. WMAP constraints on low redshift evolution of dark energy. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 356:L11–L16, 2005.
  65. Observational constraints on low redshift evolution of dark energy: How consistent are different observations? Phys. Rev. D, 72:103503, 2005.
  66. Understanding the origin of CMB constraints on Dark Energy. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 405:2639–2650, 2010.
  67. Dark energy equation of state parameter and its evolution at low redshift. JCAP, 06:012, 2017.
  68. G. Efstathiou. Constraining the equation of state of the universe from distant type Ia supernovae and cosmic microwave background anisotropies. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 310:842–850, 1999.
  69. On the thermodynamics of dark energy. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 16:469–473, 2007.
  70. A new equation of state for dark energy model. JCAP, 11:034, 2011.
  71. Dark energy cosmology: the equivalent description via different theoretical models and cosmography tests. Astrophys. Space Sci., 342:155–228, 2012.
  72. Matt Visser. Cosmography: Cosmology without the Einstein equations. Gen. Rel. Grav., 37:1541–1548, 2005.
  73. Cosmographic Constraints and Cosmic Fluids. Galaxies, 1:216–260, 2013.
  74. Peter K. S. Dunsby and Orlando Luongo. On the theory and applications of modern cosmography. Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys., 13(03):1630002, 2016.
  75. Cosmography: Extracting the Hubble series from the supernova data. 3 2007.
  76. Michele Moresco et al. Unveiling the Universe with emerging cosmological probes. Living Rev. Rel., 25(1):6, 2022.
  77. J. L. Tonry et al. The Pan-STARRS1 Photometric System. Astrophys. J., 750:99, 2012.
  78. The effect of systematic redshift biases in BAO cosmology. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 503(3):3510–3521, 2021.
  79. Constraining cosmological parameters based on relative galaxy ages. Astrophys. J., 573:37–42, 2002.
  80. Improving sampling and calibration of gamma-ray bursts as distance indicators. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 501(3):3515–3526, 2021.
  81. Formation of Merging Stellar-mass Black Hole Binaries by Gravitational-wave Emission in Active Galactic Nucleus Disks. Astrophys. J., 964(1):43, 2024.
  82. Four new observational H⁢(z)𝐻𝑧H(z)italic_H ( italic_z ) data from luminous red galaxies in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey data release seven. Res. Astron. Astrophys., 14(10):1221–1233, 2014.
  83. Constraints on the redshift dependence of the dark energy potential. Phys. Rev. D, 71:123001, 2005.
  84. M. Moresco et al. Improved constraints on the expansion rate of the Universe up to z~1.1 from the spectroscopic evolution of cosmic chronometers. JCAP, 08:006, 2012.
  85. A 6% measurement of the Hubble parameter at z∼0.45similar-to𝑧0.45z\sim 0.45italic_z ∼ 0.45: direct evidence of the epoch of cosmic re-acceleration. JCAP, 05:014, 2016.
  86. Age-dating Luminous Red Galaxies observed with the Southern African Large Telescope. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 467(3):3239–3254, 2017.
  87. Cosmic Chronometers: Constraining the Equation of State of Dark Energy. I: H(z) Measurements. JCAP, 02:008, 2010.
  88. Toward a Better Understanding of Cosmic Chronometers: A New Measurement of H(z) at z ∼similar-to\sim∼ 0.7. Astrophys. J. Lett., 928(1):L4, 2022.
  89. New Observational H(z) Data from Full-spectrum Fitting of Cosmic Chronometers in the LEGA-C Survey. Astrophys. J. Suppl., 265(2):48, 2023.
  90. A new measurement of the expansion history of the Universe at z = 1.26 with cosmic chronometers in VANDELS. Astron. Astrophys., 679:A96, 2023.
  91. Michele Moresco. Raising the bar: new constraints on the Hubble parameter with cosmic chronometers at z ∼similar-to\sim∼ 2. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 450(1):L16–L20, 2015.
  92. Adam G. Riess et al. Type Ia Supernova Distances at Redshift >>> 1.5 from the Hubble Space Telescope Multi-cycle Treasury Programs: The Early Expansion Rate. Astrophys. J., 853(2):126, 2018.
  93. Andrew R Liddle. Information criteria for astrophysical model selection. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 377:L74–L78, 2007.
  94. Measuring the effective complexity of cosmological models. Phys. Rev. D, 74:023503, 2006.
  95. Marek Biesiada. Information-theoretic model selection applied to supernovae data. JCAP, 02:003, 2007.
  96. Towards testing interacting cosmology by distant type ia supernovae. Phys. Rev. D, 73:063516, 2006.
  97. Which cosmological model with dark energy - phantom or lambda-CDM. Phys. Lett. B, 623:10–16, 2005.
  98. Top ten accelerating cosmological models. Phys. Lett. B, 642:171–178, 2006.
  99. Testing and selection cosmological models with dark energy. AIP Conf. Proc., 861(1):1031–1036, 2006.
  100. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer Verlag, 2002.
  101. Holographic dark energy models: A comparison from the latest observational data. JCAP, 06:036, 2009.
  102. Gideon Schwarz. Estimating the Dimension of a Model. Annals Statist., 6:461–464, 1978.
  103. Nariaki Sugiura. Further analysts of the data by akaike’ s information criterion and the finite corrections. Communications in Statistics-theory and Methods, 7:13–26, 1978.
  104. Revisiting Chaplygin gas cosmologies with the recent observations of high-redshift quasars. Eur. Phys. J. C, 82(7):582, 2022.
  105. Generalized Chaplygin gas and CMBR constraints. Phys. Rev. D, 67:063003, 2003.
  106. The Revival of the unified dark energy - dark matter model? Phys. Rev. D, 70:083519, 2004.
  107. How robust are the parameter constraints extending the ΛΛ\Lambdaroman_ΛCDM model? 4 2024.
  108. Model independent cosmographic constraints from DESI 2024. 4 2024.
  109. High redshift constraints on extended logotropic models. Astropart. Phys., 151:102852, 2023.
  110. Speeding up the universe using dust with pressure. Phys. Rev. D, 98(10):103520, 2018.
  111. Particle production from non-minimal coupling in a symmetry breaking potential transporting vacuum energy. Phys. Dark Univ., 44:101458, 2024.
  112. Healing the cosmological constant problem during inflation through a unified quasi-quintessence matter field. Class. Quant. Grav., 39(19):195014, 2022.
  113. Quasi-quintessence inflation with non-minimal coupling to curvature in the Jordan and Einstein frames. 9 2023.
  114. Orlando Luongo. Revising the cosmological constant problem through a fluid different from the quintessence. Phys. Sci. Tech., 10(3-4):17–27, 2023.
Citations (18)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 0 likes about this paper.