DOCSLIB.ORG

Will Dark Energy Tear the Universe Apart?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Will Dark Energy Tear the Universe Apart? Cosmology and its crucial observations begins to collapse. The star doesn't col­ lapse much before the remaining mate­ rial ignites, and then the star explodes Learning about the composition of our universe has involved multiple astro­ with a fantastically bright blast. Because nomical surveys. Below are a collection all type Ia supernovae originate from of the types of observations that have white dwarfs of the same mass, they all led to astronomers' current understand­ have a similar luminosity. ing of the universe. Both groups observed the light curves from type Ia supernovae and found that • Gravitational lensing showed that gal­ the more distant supernovae (which are axy clusters must have additional mass from an earlier time) were dimmer than that isn't luminous. A massive object­ expected if the universe was expanding at in this case, a cluster of galaxies - can a constant rate. This means that the dis­ warp space-time. The light from a dis­ tances between those supernovae and the tant object follows this bent space-time, . which allows the observer to see what telescopes that observed them are greater sits behind the galaxy cluster. The lumi­ J than predicted. The universe's expansion nous mass in a galaxy cluster is not ~ has accelerated over time! enough alone to warp space. ~ So, what is the stuff - dubbed "dark ~ energy" - that's accelerating the expan­ • Galaxy structure surveys showed that j sion rate? This question is one of the big­ luminous matter (galaxy clusters) gest facing science today. clumps in the same way as expected I Everything that we directly observe ­ by dark matter simulations. Luminous people, stars, interstellar medium ­ matter follows the lead of dark matter composes only about 4.6 percent of our because of the gravitational force. universe. What about the other 95.4 per­ •Type la supernovae observations indi­ cent? Through supernova observations cated the universe's expansion is accel­ and CMB observations, astrophysicists erating. Higher red shift type la have determined that roughly 23 percent supernovae (those that are further back of the universe is something called dark in time and therefore farther away) are matter and about 72 percent is dark dimmer than expected. Astronomers energy. Dark matter interacts via the concluded the supernovae must be even but the most recent experiment, the Wilkin­ gravitational force but not the electro­ more distant than expected, which means son Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), magnetic force, meaning scientists know the universe's expansion is increasing. has been crucial in determining many of the the matter exists, but there's no way to universe's parameters. WMAp, which launched observe it directly. Dark energy is even • Cosmic microwave background (eMB) June 2001, has since measured the tempera­ more bizarre. Most of what astronomers observations first showed in the 1%Os that ture of the universe (2.725 kelvin), how old it microwave radiation emanates from all is (13.7 billion years), the percentage of stuff know about dark energy is that it can be directions in space. This observation was in the universe (4.6 percent normal matter, any type of uniform negative pressure evidence for the Big Bang as the universe's 23 percent dark matter, 72 percent dark energy and that it accelerates the uni­ beginning. A number of eMB experiments energy; all within 1 percent), and the geome­ verse's expansion. have narrowed down eMB characteristics, try of the universe (mostly flat). Wh at is dark energy? Even though cosmologists aren't sure The period of a Cepheid variable star is observer. Hubble compared the distances what dark energy is, they have a few related to its luminosity. By observing the (obtained via Cepheid observations) with ideas. Scientists have three possible dark period and the brightness of the Cepheid, how fast the galaxies appear to be moving energy candidates: quintessence, vacuum Hubble could compare the observed away and noticed a direct correlation: energy, and phantom energy. Each would brightness with the intrinsic luminosity The farther away the galaxy, the faster the result in a different ending to our uni­ to determine the distance to the Cepheid. galaxy moves. The universe is expanding! verse. Which scenario occurs depends Knowing only the distance, though, Schmidt and Perlmutter's teams used both on the value of one parameter and isn't enough to conclude the universe is type Ia supernovae - a different sort of whether that parameter changes in time. expanding. Hubble also looked at the standard candle - for their observa­ This parameter, called the equation of spectra of those galaxies and saw that tions. A type Ia supernova originates state, w, is the ratio between pressure and spectral lines were shifted toward the red from a white dwarf star that is part of a energy density (see "The parameter end of the spectrum. This "redshift" binary star system. The white dwarf pulls everything hinges on:' page 37). means the object is moving away from the material from its binary companion, and A positive value of the equation of once the white dwarf reaches a critical state would cause deceleration in the uni­ Liz Kruesi is an associate editor of Astronomy. mass - 1.4 times that of the Sun - it verse as a result of the gravitational force. 36 Astronomy· Februa ry 09 Each dark energy candidate has negative have an equation of state value more idea of the cosmological constant, calling pressure and therefore a negative equa­ negative than - 'h. The value also deter­ it his greatest "blunder:' tion of state parameter. In fact, in order mines how fast the universe expands. While the cosmological constant looks to generate acceleration, the total And there's more: The equation of state promising as a result of its energy denSity amount of "stuff" in the universe must value does not need to remain constant; - an equation of state of -1 closely fits it can vary in time. CMB observations - the problem arises The parameter ..."0 • Cosmologists split the dark energy when physicists calculate how much vac­ everything hinges on ·~.:: candidates by their equation of state val­ uum energy is expected in the universe. ues. Quintessence has a value between - '13 The standard model of particle phYSics The equation of state, W, does not char­ and -1. It is a dynamic field, meaning its predicts 10 120 times more vacuum energy acterize only a dark energy candidate. density could change over time or from than what scientists observe. The following table shows various values one place to another in the universe. An equation of state parameter more for wand what that value represents. Vacuum energy gets its name from its negative than -1 corresponds to phantom Equation of What that role as the energy of "empty" space. Space energy - the third dark energy candi­ state value (wj value represents is filled with a smooth energy density of date. In this scenario, the universe would virtual particles (particle-antiparticle become progressively more dark-energy­ w=Y! Electromagnetic radiation pairs) that pop in and out of existence. dominated, and acceleration therefore w=O Non-relativistic matter Vacuum energy can be represented by would increase dramatically. So what the cosmological constant term in Albert could this phantom energy be? While w=l Relativistic matter Einstein's general theory of relativity vacuum energy comprises virtual par­ w=-l Cosmological constant, A; because both have an equation of state ticles, "phantom energy might be a per­ vacuum energy value of -1 and therefore have constant verse type of particle that relaxes by - - _ . density as the universe expands. Einstein vibrating faster and faster:' says Robert -Y!>w>-l Quintessence; the value of initially coined the term "cosmological Caldwell of Dartmouth College, lead wcan change with time - -.­ constant" to fit into his static universe author of a 2003 Physical Review Letters w<-l Phantom energy model. After Hubble discovered the uni­ article about phantom energy and its verse is expanding, Einstein retracted the implications for the universe's future. www.Astro nomy.com 37 The future of our universe depends on what dark energy is. If dark energy is phantom energy, the universe's accelerated expansion will increase dramatically and lead the universe to a Big Rip. This timeline shows both the universe's past (from observations and computations) and future (if we're is not too much different, but the energy heading for a Big Rip). In this case, the equation of state is -1.1, which places the Big Rip at roughly increase is just a little bigger:' 86 billion years in the future. ''',,,,,,,,,,y. Roen Kelly. afweakulation. by Roo." Caldwell Like all dark energy candidates, phan­ tom energy has not been directly In the cosmological constant scenario, is negative, and, says Kamionkowski, "so observed, and many questions remain the energy density stays constant; in the the energy per co-moving region in the unanswered. But also like the other dark phantom energy scenario, the energy universe actually increases. With a cosmo­ energy possibilities, cosmologists can density increases. Yet one would expect logical constant, the energy increase is just extrapolate to the universe's future and the energy density of dark energy to large enough to keep the energy density infer how each dark energy candidate decrease as the universe expands in the constant, but the energy per co-moving dictates the universe's end. same way a few drops of colored dye volume is still increasing. Phantom energy dilutes in a tub of water. How do modern Our ultimate fate cosmological theories argue the energy The poet Robert Frost wrote, "Some say density stays constant or even increases? GLOSSARY OF TERMS the world will end in fire / Some say in Marc Kamionkowski of the California ice:' But the universe might hold in store Observable universe Institute of Technology explains, a more violent end.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Cosmos - Before the Big Bang
    From issue 2601 of New Scientist magazine, 28 April 2007, page 28-33 The cosmos - before the big bang How did the universe begin? The question is as old as humanity. Sure, we know that something like the big bang happened, but the theory doesn't explain some of the most important bits: why it happened, what the conditions were at the time, and other imponderables. Many cosmologists think our standard picture of how the universe came to be is woefully incomplete or even plain wrong, and they have been dreaming up a host of strange alternatives to explain how we got here. For the first time, they are trying to pin down the initial conditions of the big bang. In particular, they want to solve the long-standing mystery of how the universe could have begun in such a well- ordered state, as fundamental physics implies, when it seems utter chaos should have reigned. Several models have emerged that propose intriguing answers to this question. One says the universe began as a dense sea of black holes. Another says the big bang was sparked by a collision between two membranes floating in higher-dimensional space. Yet another says our universe was originally ripped from a larger entity, and that in turn countless baby universes will be born from the wreckage of ours. Crucially, each scenario makes unique and testable predictions; observations coming online in the next few years should help us to decide which, if any, is correct. Not that modelling the origin of the universe is anything new.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Cosmology of the Big Rip: Within GR and in a Modified Theory of Gravity
    universe Conference Report Quantum Cosmology of the Big Rip: Within GR and in a Modified Theory of Gravity Mariam Bouhmadi-López 1,2,*, Imanol Albarran 3,4 and Che-Yu Chen 5,6 1 Department of Theoretical Physics, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, P.O. Box 644, 48080 Bilbao, Spain 2 IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, 48011 Bilbao, Spain 3 Departamento de Física, Universidade da Beira Interior, Rua Marquês D’Ávila e Bolama, 6201-001 Covilhã, Portugal; [email protected] 4 Centro de Matemática e Aplicações da Universidade da Beira Interior (CMA-UBI), Rua Marquês D’Ávila e Bolama, 6201-001 Covilhã, Portugal 5 Department of Physics, National Taiwan University, 10617 Taipei, Taiwan; [email protected] 6 LeCosPA, National Taiwan University, 10617 Taipei, Taiwan * Correspondence: [email protected] Academic Editors: Mariusz P. D ˛abrowski, Manuel Krämer and Vincenzo Salzano Received: 8 March 2017; Accepted: 12 April 2017; Published: 14 April 2017 Abstract: Quantum gravity is the theory that is expected to successfully describe systems that are under strong gravitational effects while at the same time being of an extreme quantum nature. When this principle is applied to the universe as a whole, we use what is commonly named “quantum cosmology”. So far we do not have a definite quantum theory of gravity or cosmology, but we have several promising approaches. Here we will review the application of the Wheeler–DeWitt formalism to the late-time universe, where it might face a Big Rip future singularity. The Big Rip singularity is the most virulent future dark energy singularity which can happen not only in general relativity but also in some modified theories of gravity.
    [Show full text]
  • Dark Matter and the Early Universe: a Review Arxiv:2104.11488V1 [Hep-Ph
    Dark matter and the early Universe: a review A. Arbey and F. Mahmoudi Univ Lyon, Univ Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS/IN2P3, Institut de Physique des 2 Infinis de Lyon, UMR 5822, 69622 Villeurbanne, France Theoretical Physics Department, CERN, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland Institut Universitaire de France, 103 boulevard Saint-Michel, 75005 Paris, France Abstract Dark matter represents currently an outstanding problem in both cosmology and particle physics. In this review we discuss the possible explanations for dark matter and the experimental observables which can eventually lead to the discovery of dark matter and its nature, and demonstrate the close interplay between the cosmological properties of the early Universe and the observables used to constrain dark matter models in the context of new physics beyond the Standard Model. arXiv:2104.11488v1 [hep-ph] 23 Apr 2021 1 Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Standard Cosmological Model 3 2.1 Friedmann-Lema^ıtre-Robertson-Walker model . 4 2.2 A quick story of the Universe . 5 2.3 Big-Bang nucleosynthesis . 8 3 Dark matter(s) 9 3.1 Observational evidences . 9 3.1.1 Galaxies . 9 3.1.2 Galaxy clusters . 10 3.1.3 Large and cosmological scales . 12 3.2 Generic types of dark matter . 14 4 Beyond the standard cosmological model 16 4.1 Dark energy . 17 4.2 Inflation and reheating . 19 4.3 Other models . 20 4.4 Phase transitions . 21 5 Dark matter in particle physics 21 5.1 Dark matter and new physics . 22 5.1.1 Thermal relics . 22 5.1.2 Non-thermal relics .
    [Show full text]
  • From Space, a New View of Doomsday
    Past 30 Days Welcome, kamion This page is print-ready, and this article will remain available for 90 days. Instructions for Saving | About this Service | Purchase History February 17, 2004, Tuesday SCIENCE DESK From Space, A New View Of Doomsday By DENNIS OVERBYE (NYT) 2646 words Once upon a time, if you wanted to talk about the end of the universe you had a choice, as Robert Frost put it, between fire and ice. Either the universe would collapse under its own weight one day, in a fiery ''big crunch,'' or the galaxies, now flying outward from each other, would go on coasting outward forever, forever slowing, but never stopping while the cosmos grew darker and darker, colder and colder, as the stars gradually burned out like tired bulbs. Now there is the Big Rip. Recent astronomical measurements, scientists say, cannot rule out the possibility that in a few billion years a mysterious force permeating space-time will be strong enough to blow everything apart, shred rocks, animals, molecules and finally even atoms in a last seemingly mad instant of cosmic self-abnegation. ''In some ways it sounds more like science fiction than fact,'' said Dr. Robert Caldwell, a Dartmouth physicist who described this apocalyptic possibility in a paper with Dr. Marc Kamionkowski and Dr. Nevin Weinberg, from the California Institute of Technology, last year. The Big Rip is only one of a constellation of doomsday possibilities resulting from the discovery by two teams of astronomers six years ago that a mysterious force called dark energy seems to be wrenching the universe apart.
    [Show full text]
  • Big Rip Singularity in 5D Viscous Cosmology
    Send Orders for Reprints to [email protected] The Open Astronomy Journal, 2014, 7, 7-11 7 Open Access Big Rip Singularity in 5D Viscous Cosmology 1,* 2 G.S. Khadekar and N.V. Gharad 1Department of Mathematics, Rashtrasant Tukadoji Maharaj Nagpur University, Mahatma Jyotiba Phule Educational Campus, Amravati Road, Nagpur-440033, India 2Department of Physics, Jawaharlal Nehru College, Wadi, Nagpur-440023, India Abstract: Dark energy of phantom or quintessence nature with an equation of state parameter almost equal to -1 often leads to a finite future singularity. The singularities in the dark energy universe, by assuming bulk viscosity in the frame- work of Kaluza-Klein theory of gravitation have been discussed. Particularly, it is proved, that the physically natural as- sumption of letting the bulk viscosity be proportional to the scalar expansion in a spatially 5D FRW universe, can derive the fluid into the phantom region ( < -1), even if it lies in the quintessence region ( >-1) in the non viscous case. It is also shown that influence of the viscosity term acts to shorten the singularity time but it does not change the nature of sin- gularity in the framework of higher dimensional space time. Keywords: Big Rip, dark energy, future singularity, viscous cosmology. 1. INTRODUCTION including a quintessence (Wang et al. [12]) and phantom (Caldwell [13]), and (ii) interacting dark energy models, by A revolutionary development seems to have taken place considering the interaction including Chaplygin gas (Ka- in cosmology during the last few years. The latest develop- menohehik et al [14]), generalized Chaplygin gas (Bento et ments of super-string theory and super-gravitational theory al.
    [Show full text]
  • Science Fiction Stories with Good Astronomy & Physics
    Science Fiction Stories with Good Astronomy & Physics: A Topical Index Compiled by Andrew Fraknoi (U. of San Francisco, Fromm Institute) Version 7 (2019) © copyright 2019 by Andrew Fraknoi. All rights reserved. Permission to use for any non-profit educational purpose, such as distribution in a classroom, is hereby granted. For any other use, please contact the author. (e-mail: fraknoi {at} fhda {dot} edu) This is a selective list of some short stories and novels that use reasonably accurate science and can be used for teaching or reinforcing astronomy or physics concepts. The titles of short stories are given in quotation marks; only short stories that have been published in book form or are available free on the Web are included. While one book source is given for each short story, note that some of the stories can be found in other collections as well. (See the Internet Speculative Fiction Database, cited at the end, for an easy way to find all the places a particular story has been published.) The author welcomes suggestions for additions to this list, especially if your favorite story with good science is left out. Gregory Benford Octavia Butler Geoff Landis J. Craig Wheeler TOPICS COVERED: Anti-matter Light & Radiation Solar System Archaeoastronomy Mars Space Flight Asteroids Mercury Space Travel Astronomers Meteorites Star Clusters Black Holes Moon Stars Comets Neptune Sun Cosmology Neutrinos Supernovae Dark Matter Neutron Stars Telescopes Exoplanets Physics, Particle Thermodynamics Galaxies Pluto Time Galaxy, The Quantum Mechanics Uranus Gravitational Lenses Quasars Venus Impacts Relativity, Special Interstellar Matter Saturn (and its Moons) Story Collections Jupiter (and its Moons) Science (in general) Life Elsewhere SETI Useful Websites 1 Anti-matter Davies, Paul Fireball.
    [Show full text]
  • Dark Energy with W < Ÿ1 Causes a Cosmic Doomsday
    PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS week ending VOLUME 91, N UMBER 7 15 AUGUST 2003 Phantom Energy: Dark Energy with w<ÿ1 Causes a Cosmic Doomsday Robert R. Caldwell,1 Marc Kamionkowski,2 and Nevin N. Weinberg2 1Department of Physics & Astronomy, Dartmouth College, 6127 Wilder Laboratory, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755, USA 2Mail Code 130-33, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, USA (Received 20 February 2003; published 13 August 2003) We explore the consequences that follow if the dark energy is phantom energy, in which the sum of the pressure and energy density is negative. The positive phantom-energy density becomes infinite in finite time, overcoming all other forms of matter, such that the gravitational repulsion rapidly brings our brief epoch of cosmic structure to a close. The phantom energy rips apart the Milky Way, solar system, Earth, and ultimately the molecules, atoms, nuclei, and nucleons of which we are composed, before the death of the Universe in a ‘‘big rip.’’ DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.071301 PACS numbers: 98.80.Cq Hubble’s discovery of the cosmological expansion, But what about w<ÿ1? Might the convergence to crossed with the mathematical predictions of Friedmann w ÿ1 actually be indicating that w<ÿ1? Why re- and others within Einstein’s general theory of relativity, strict our attention exclusively to w 1? Matter with has long sparked speculation on the ultimate fate of the w<ÿ1, dubbed ‘‘phantom energy’’ [19], has received Universe. In particular, it has been shown that if the increased attention among theorists recently. It certainly matter that fills the Universe can be treated as a pressure- has some strange properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Chaotic Universe Model Ekrem Aydiner
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Chaotic universe model Ekrem Aydiner In this study, we consider nonlinear interactions between components such as dark energy, dark matter, matter and radiation in the framework of the Friedman-Robertson-Walker space-time and propose a simple interaction model based on the time evolution of the densities of these components. Received: 28 July 2017 By using this model we show that these interactions can be given by Lotka-Volterra type equations. We numerically solve these coupling equations and show that interaction dynamics between dark Accepted: 15 December 2017 energy-dark matter-matter or dark energy-dark matter-matter-radiation has a strange attractor for Published: xx xx xxxx 0 > wde >−1, wdm ≥ 0, wm ≥ 0 and wr ≥ 0 values. These strange attractors with the positive Lyapunov exponent clearly show that chaotic dynamics appears in the time evolution of the densities. These results provide that the time evolution of the universe is chaotic. The present model may have potential to solve some of the cosmological problems such as the singularity, cosmic coincidence, big crunch, big rip, horizon, oscillation, the emergence of the galaxies, matter distribution and large-scale organization of the universe. The model also connects between dynamics of the competing species in biological systems and dynamics of the time evolution of the universe and ofers a new perspective and a new diferent scenario for the universe evolution. Te formation, structure, dynamics and evolution of the universe has always been of interest. It is commonly accepted that modern cosmology began with the publication of Einstein’s seminal article in 19171.
    [Show full text]
  • Death from the Skies!
    Death from the Skies! Kristi Schneck SLAC Association for Student Seminars 7/11/12 The universe is trying to kill us! Well, not actively... BUT • Near-Earth Asteroids • Solar Flares and Coronal Mass Ejections • Supernovae • Gamma Ray Bursts • Black Holes 2 of 18 Asteroids and Near-Earth Objects 3 of 18 Hollywood|Armageddon 4 of 18 Reality • The earth is pummeled by 20-40 tons of material every day • Chicxulub impact{extinction of dinosaurs • 1908 Tunguska event (air burst of ∼100 m asteroid above Siberia) 5 of 18 Reality|99942 Apophis 6 of 18 The Torino Scale 7 of 18 What can we do about this? • Blow it up, redirect it, etc... http://www.b612foundation.org/ 8 of 18 Death by Sun 9 of 18 Hollywood|Knowing 10 of 18 Hollywood (again)|2012 The neutrinos have mutated! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXqUcuE8fNo 11 of 18 Reality • Charged particles from CMEs mess with satellites and power grid ◦ March 1989|major power outages in NJ and Canada ◦ Damage only increases as we use more power • Depletion of ozone and production of NO2 in atmosphere • \Little Ice Age" in Europe (17th Century) correlated with very low sunspot activity ◦ Many other factors contributed to this.... 12 of 18 Supernovae • ∼20 stars within 1000 ly could potentially become supernovae • For 20 M star 10 ly away, 40 million tons of material would hit us ◦ < One ounce per square foot over Earth's surface ◦ Inverse-square law saves the day! • Other stuff: neutrinos, X-rays, gammas ◦ Earth-bound people are pretty safe safe, but astronauts? 13 of 18 Gamma Ray Bursts • Discovered while
    [Show full text]
  • The Physics of Cosmic Acceleration
    ANRV391-NS59-18 ARI 16 September 2009 14:37 The Physics of Cosmic Acceleration Robert R. Caldwell1 and Marc Kamionkowski2 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755; email: [email protected] 2Division of Physics, Mathematics, and Astronomy, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125; email: [email protected] Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 2009. 59:397–429 Key Words First published online as a Review in Advance on cosmology, dark energy, particle theory, gravitational theory June 23, 2009 The Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science Abstract is online at nucl.annualreviews.org The discovery that the cosmic expansion is accelerating has been followed by by California Institute of Technology on 10/28/09. For personal use only. This article’s doi: an intense theoretical and experimental response in physics and astronomy. 10.1146/annurev-nucl-010709-151330 The discovery implies that our most basic notions about how gravity works Copyright c 2009 by Annual Reviews. are violated on cosmological distance scales. A simple fix is to introduce Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 2009.59:397-429. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org All rights reserved a cosmological constant into the field equations for general relativity. 0163-8998/09/1123-0397$20.00 However, the extremely small value of the cosmological constant, relative to theoretical expectations, has led theorists to explore numerous alter- native explanations that involve the introduction of an exotic negative- pressure fluid or a modification of general relativity. Here we review the evidence for cosmic acceleration. We then survey some of the theoretical at- tempts to account for it, including the cosmological constant, quintessence and its variants, mass-varying neutrinos, and modifications of general relativity.
    [Show full text]
  • Phantom Dark Energy and Cosmological Solutions Without the Big Bang Singularity
    Phantom dark energy and cosmological solutions without the Big Bang singularity A. N. Baushev Bogoliubov Laboratory of Theoretical Physics Joint Institute for Nuclear Research 141980 Dubna, Moscow Region, Russia TAUP 2009, Italy, July, 2009. Introduction Equations of state p = ®½ Possible variants 1 ® = 3 Relativistic matter ® = 0 Non-relativistic matter 1 ¡ 3 > ® > ¡1 Quintessence ® = ¡1 Cosmological constant ® < ¡1 Phantom energy Figure: Caldwell, Kamionkowski, & Weinberg, 2003 Phantom energy models @ Á@»Á L = ¡ » ¡ V (Á) 2 ½ = ¡Á_2=2 + V (Á); p = ¡Á_2=2 ¡ V (Á) ³ ´ _2 p ¡Á =2 ¡ V (Á) ® ´ = ³ ´ ½ ¡Á_2=2 + V (Á) Phantom energy properties for various V (Á) I If the potential is not very steep (grows slower than V (Á) / Á4), then ® tends to ¡1, and the density becomes in¯nite only when t ! 1. I For steeper potentials a big rip singularity appears even if ® !¡1. I Even the parameter ® can tend to ¡1 for a very steep V (Á). I A very steep potential is necessary to provide a constant ® < ¡1: for any polynomial potential, for instance, ® tends to ¡1. The case of V (Á) = m2Á2=2 ÁÄ + 3HÁ_ ¡ m2Á = 0 r 2 m Á Á_ ' mMp ; H ' p 3 Mp 6 The inevitability of the phantom ¯eld decay Particle production in the cosmological gravitational ¯eld Batista, Fabris, & Houndjo, 2007 I The universe is ¯lled with a perfect fluid with ® = const < ¡1 I The influence of the 'normal' matter on the universe expansion was neglected. I the conformal time ´ is chosen so that ´ < 0, and the density becomes in¯nitive when ´ !¡0 4 ½ = C´¯; where ¯ = norm 1 + 3® The system of cosmological equations for ® = ¡4=3 We denote the phantom energy density by $ and its initial value by $0 ¡ 2 $ / ´ 3 µ ¶2 1 da 1 4 ¡ 3 2 = 2 ($ + C´ ) (1) a d´ 3Mp ¡ 4 d($ + C´ 3 ) 1 da ¡ 4 = ($ ¡ 4C´ 3 ) (2) d´ a d´ dt = ad´ (3) 1 da 1 da H ´ = a dt a2 d´ Time dependence of the Hubble constant H Time dependence of the Hubble of ® The universe properties after the phantom ¯eld decay I It has just passed through the stage of very rapid (at least, exponential) expansion.
    [Show full text]
  • Where the Complications Start
    4 P. Grang´eet al.: The fine-tuning problem revisited in the light of the Taylor-Lagrange renormalization scheme the necessary (ultra-soft) cut-o in the calculation of the integral. After an evident change of variable, we get 3M 4 X M 2 ⇥ = H dX f H X (16) 1b,H 32⌅2v2 X +1 Λ2 ↵0 ⌃ ⌥ 3M 4 1 M 2 = H dX 1 f H X . 32⌅2v2 − X +1 Λ2 ↵0 ⌃ ⌥ ⌃ ⌥ The first term under the integral can be reduced to a pseudo-function, using (11). Indeed, with Z =1/X,we have dZ M 2 1 dXf(X)= f H (17) Z2 Λ2 Z ↵0 ↵0 ⌃ ⌥ 1 = dZ Pf Z2 ↵0 ⌃ ⌥ 1 = =0. −Z ⇧ where the complications start ⇧ a ⇧ one explicit mass scale of the Standard Model is a mass-squared parameter The notation f(u) simply indicates⇧ that f(u) should be taken at the value |u = a, the lower limit of integration be- defining the leading orderFig. shape 1. Radiativeof the Mexican corrections Hat to the Higgs mass in the Stan- dard Model in second order of perturbation theory. For simplic- ing taken care of by the definition of the pseudo-function. V()ϕ D 2 n mass. The “cancellation” of massless bosons to give ity, we have not shown contributions from ghosts or Goldstone This result is reminiscent of the property d p(p ) = 0, a massive boson, as anticipated by Anderson and • to get the correct shape for electroweak developed in the 1964 papers, is the famous Higgs for any n, in DR [15].
    [Show full text]