- 56 Views
- Uploaded on
- Presentation posted in: General

Dark Energy: Hopes and Expectations

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- Mario Livio
- Space Telescope Science Institute

- Dark Energy?
- Standard General Relativity?
- Alternative Theories of Gravity?

Premise:Universe nothomogeneous today (fractal bubble model).

Result:Non-linear gravitational effects, averages, local time => distance-redshift relation as observed.

Strengths:1. No need for unseen stuff.

2. No need to change GR.

3. Could perhaps be resolved soon.

Problems: 1. Anti-Copernican (Milky Way in special place)? (Not necessarily, but different angular scales in CMB.)

2. Not clear if solution can match all observations (e.g. H0, peaks in CMB).

Dark Energy

- Vacuum energy (cosmological constant), w = const. = -1
- Scalar field,w can vary from w < -1 to w = 1

Alternative Gravity

- Modification of Friedmann equation (5D gravity).Analogous to: w = -½ in distant past,evolving to w = -1 in distant future.
- Purely phenomenological modifications to the GR Lagrangian.

Strengths: 1. Motivated by ideas from string theory.2. Testable in principle.

Weaknesses: 1. All but ruled out by lab and lunar ranging experiments

Inverse square law holds down to d = 56 m!

Measurements of lunar perihelion precession with an accuracy of δΦ = 1.4x10-12

2. Not clear if self-consistent model exists.

Yellow region excluded at 95% confidence level.

Strengths: 1. Clearly exists!2. If dark energy behaves like an ideal fluid:

Casimir Effect

This is unstable for any negative value of w, except w = -1, vacuum energy!

Problems: 1. Why so small and positive?

(But SUSY testable by LHC)

2. Why now?

Strengths:

- Motivated by inflation.
- The evolution of the fieldproduces different w(z) behavior for “freezing” or “thawing”Observations can distinguish.

Weaknesses:

- No convincing connections to inflation.
- Does not really explain why small and why now.
- Choice of potential, modifications to kinetic term, rather arbitrary. In thawing models M ~ V just reflects mass of scalar field.
- To produce acceleration, interaction of field with matter and with itself has to be extremely weak.

Cosmological constant (t) very slowly varying function, most time spent at small and positive value.

Landscape

scenario

String theory suggests that ~101000 vacua may exist.

Inflation may produce an ensemble of pocket universes.

Fundamental Theory

- All constants determined uniquely.
- Examples of past successes:
- Particle masses in QCD
- Electroweak theory

- Allows universes with an ensemble of values of at least some non-fundamental parameters.
- Examples of past non-fundamental quantities:
- Number of planets in the Solar System
- Shapes of snowflakes

If V can take a broad range of values in the multiverse, then complexity can arise only in some subuniverse. In generalV/3 is constrained.

For a flat probability distribution:

Principle of mediocrity: Is our universe typical?

By contrast, in cyclic model complexity can arise in almost every patch of space.

- Against the scientific method?Not everything should be observable or falsifiable.Rather, if the theory is testable in the observable universe, we should be prepared to accept its predictions in the unobservable parts.
- No predictions? Not exactly true, statistical predictions.
- End of physics? No. Rather, modification of expectations.E.g. in mathematics: Gödel’s theorem, computational complexity.
- Supports religion-like arguments? Absolutely not!

Dynamical and anthropic reasoning are not mutually exclusive!

What should we do if multiverse is predicted?