arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 1809.08792gr-qcastro-ph.COhep-ph
收藏

全息暗能量模型能符合观测数据吗?

Can Holographic dark energy models fit the observational data?

Mohammad Malekjani, Mehdi Rezaei, Iman A. Akhlaghi

摘要:

本文研究了基于当前哈勃视界尺度定义的慢时变模型参数的全息暗能量模型。基于未来事件视界、Ricci尺度和Granda-Oliveros红外截止值定义的三种流行的全息暗能量模型的研究表明,这些模型不能拟合观测数据[1],而在这项工作中,我们表明,基于当前哈勃半径定义的具有时变模型参数的全息暗能量模型更受观测青睐。使用标准的$χ^2$最小化的背景下的马尔可夫链蒙特卡罗方法,我们比较了全息暗能量模型的能力与时变的$c^2$参数构建在当前的哈勃长度尺度对不同的观测数据集,即膨胀数据,增长率数据和膨胀+增长率数据分别。基于赤池和贝叶斯信息准则的值,我们发现,这些类型的全息暗能量模型是很好地拟合的膨胀和增长率的观测等于$Λ$ CDM宇宙学。我们还把宇宙学参数的约束,并表明从早期减速到当前的加速膨胀的过渡时期计算全息暗能量模型与时变模型参数定义的哈勃长度是一致的观测。

英文摘要:

In this work we investigate the holographic dark energy models with slowly time-varying model parameter defined based on the current Hubble horizon length scale. While the previous studies on the three popular holographic dark energy models defined based on the future event horizon, Ricci scale and Granda-Oliveros IR cutoffs showed that these models cannot fit the observational data [1], in this work we show that the holographic dark energy models with time-varying model parameter defined on the current Hubble radius are well favored by observations. Using the standard $χ^2$ minimization in the context of Markov Chain Monte Carlo method, we compare the ability of holographic dark energy models with time-varying $c^2$ parameter constructed on the current Hubble length scale against different sets of observational data namely expansion data, growth rate data and expansion+growth rate data respectively. Based on the values of Akaike and Bayesian information criteria, we find that these types of holographic dark energy models are well fitted to both expansion and growth rate observations as equal to $Λ$CDM cosmology. We also put constraints on the cosmological parameters and show that the transition epoch form early decelerated to current accelerated expansion calculated in holographic dark energy models with time-varying model parameter defined on the Hubble length is consistent with observations.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑