How close to constraining DE to simply be Lambda?

  • Thread starter marcus
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Lambda
In summary, recent papers suggest that dark energy may simply be a constant rather than a dynamic entity, and alternative models are being proposed to explain the observed data.
  • #1
marcus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
24,775
792
what recent papers have you seen that deal with this question?

Here is one I found by Paolo Serra et al (2009)
http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.3186
No Evidence for Dark Energy Dynamics from a Global Analysis of Cosmological Data
Paolo Serra (UC Irvine), Asantha Cooray (UC Irvine), Daniel E. Holz (Los Alamos National Laboratory), Alessandro Melchiorri (University of Rome), Stefania Pandolfi (University of Rome), Devdeep Sarkar (UC Irvine, University of Michigan)
Physical Review D

Here is another by Tamara Davis et al (2007)
http://inspirehep.net/record/742618
Scrutinizing Exotic Cosmological Models Using ESSENCE Supernova Data Combined with Other Cosmological Probes
Astrophysical Journal

One by Wood-Vasey et al (2007)
http://inspirehep.net/record/741585?ln=en
Observational Constraints on the Nature of the Dark Energy: First Cosmological Results from the ESSENCE Supernova Survey
Astrophysical Journal

As time goes on the constraints on variation seem to tighten. I hear less and less about Lambda being a real "dark energy". I think we are getting closer to accepting it simply as another constant. A small constant amount of curvature. (Not even an energy.)

but this is just my impression from what I read and how I hear people talk. I would like to have some more recent papers that support this point of view with objective evidence.

Also if Lambda is simply a physical constant (a curvature) that appears naturally in the 1915 Einstein equation, along with the other physical constant Newton's G, then there seems to be no reason to relate it to the "vacuum energy" arising in conventional quantum field theory---the unrealistically high value of which is a problem for QFT, but not a concern of General Relativity.

There is also the "WMAP7" report (7-year data from the WMAP mission) of Komatsu et al.
Page 24 has some constraints on the equation of state w. In case Lambda is simply a constant, we would have w = -1. That is about what you get combining latest WMAP+BAO+SN data. The high-z supernova data is the most effective at constraining w. Here is the link.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1001.4538
For example on page 24 in section 5.1 you see:
"The high-z supernova data provide the most stringent limit on w. Using WMAP+BAO+SN, we find w = −0.980±0.053 (68% CL)..."
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2

Thank you for sharing these papers! I have also come across a recent study by Betoule et al. (2014) that uses data from the Supernova Legacy Survey to constrain the equation of state parameter w for dark energy. They find w = -1.023 ± 0.058, which is consistent with a cosmological constant. This further supports the idea that dark energy may simply be a constant rather than a dynamic entity.

Another interesting paper I came across is by Abdalla et al. (2018), which discusses the possibility of modifying general relativity on cosmological scales to explain the accelerated expansion of the universe. They propose a new model that can explain the observed data without the need for dark energy. This is an interesting alternative to the traditional cosmological constant model and highlights the ongoing research and debate in this field.

Overall, it seems that there is still much to be explored and understood about dark energy and its role in the universe. While there are some promising theories and models, more research and data are needed to fully understand this mysterious force.
 

Related to How close to constraining DE to simply be Lambda?

1. How is Dark Energy (DE) related to Lambda?

The current leading theory in cosmology suggests that Dark Energy and Lambda (represented by the Greek letter Λ) are essentially the same thing. Lambda is a constant term in Einstein's field equations that describes the energy density of the vacuum. Dark Energy is thought to be a type of energy that permeates all of space and is responsible for the accelerated expansion of the universe. Many scientists use the terms Dark Energy and Lambda interchangeably.

2. How close are we to constraining DE to simply be Lambda?

While the theory of Dark Energy being equivalent to Lambda is widely accepted, there is still ongoing research and debate in the scientific community to fully constrain and understand this concept. Some studies have suggested that Dark Energy may not be a constant and could potentially change over time, which would complicate the idea of it being simply Lambda. Further research and data are needed to fully constrain DE and understand its nature.

3. What evidence supports the theory that DE is equivalent to Lambda?

One of the main pieces of evidence for the theory of Dark Energy being equivalent to Lambda is the observation of the accelerated expansion of the universe. This was first discovered in the late 1990s through measurements of distant supernovae. Additionally, other observations such as the cosmic microwave background radiation and the large-scale structure of the universe are also consistent with the idea of Dark Energy being equivalent to Lambda.

4. Are there any alternative theories to Dark Energy being equivalent to Lambda?

While the majority of scientists support the theory of Dark Energy being equivalent to Lambda, there are alternative theories that have been proposed, such as modified gravity theories. These theories suggest that the observed accelerated expansion of the universe is not due to a mysterious energy, but rather a modification of Einstein's theory of general relativity. However, these alternative theories have not been widely accepted due to the lack of evidence and consistency with current observations.

5. How does constraining DE to simply be Lambda impact our understanding of the universe?

If Dark Energy is indeed equivalent to Lambda, it would have significant implications for our understanding of the universe. It would mean that the universe is not only expanding, but also accelerating at an increasing rate. This would also support the idea of a flat universe, as predicted by the theory of inflation. Additionally, it would provide a deeper understanding of the fundamental forces and laws that govern our universe.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
927
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Cosmology
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • Cosmology
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Back
Top