Cosmological constraints on dark energy via bulk viscosity from late decaying dark matter

Chia sẻ: Minh Minh | Ngày: | Loại File: PDF | Số trang:9

Thêm vào BST

Báo xấu

15
lượt xem 2
download

Download Vui lòng tải xuống để xem tài liệu đầy đủ

We find that this model can only fit the observational constraints if there is a cosmological constant and the presence of non-decaying cold dark matter in addition to decaying cold dark matter. Thus, although this remains a viable model, it is only able to partially explain the observed cosmic acceleration.

Chủ đề:

Bình luận(0) Đăng nhập để gửi bình luận!

Lưu

Nội dung Text: Cosmological constraints on dark energy via bulk viscosity from late decaying dark matter

JOURNAL OF SCIENCE OF HNUE Mathematical and Physical Sci., 2014, Vol. 59, No. 7, pp. 58-66 This paper is available online at http://stdb.hnue.edu.vn COSMOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS ON DARK ENERGY VIA BULK VISCOSITY FROM LATE DECAYING DARK MATTER Nguyen Quynh Lan and Nguyen Anh Vinh Faculty of Physics, Hanoi National University of Education Abstract. We analyze a cosmology in which cold dark matter begins to decay into relativistic particles at a recent epoch (z < 1). We evaluate the observational constraints on the possibility that the large entropy production and associated bulk viscosity from such decays leads to a recently accelerating cosmology. We investigate the effects of decaying cold dark matter in various models including a Λ = 0, flat, initially matter dominated cosmology and models with finite Λ. We utilize a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method and the combined observational data from the type Ia supernovae magnitude-redshift relation, the cosmic microwave background power spectrum, the present Hubble parameter H0 , baryon acoustic oscillations, and the matter power spectrum to deduce best-fit values and confidence limits on the cosmological parameters associated with such a model, i.e. the time that decay begins, td , the decay lifetime τd , and the present fraction of decaying dark matter ΩD . We find that this model can only fit the observational constraints if there is a cosmological constant and the presence of non-decaying cold dark matter in addition to decaying cold dark matter. Thus, although this remains a viable model, it is only able to partially explain the observed cosmic acceleration. Keywords: Dark matter, dark Energy, bulk viscosity. 1. Introduction Modern cosmology has for more than a decade been faced the dilemma that most of the mass-energy in the universe is attributed to material of which we know almost nothing about. It has been a conundrum to understand and explain the nature and origin of both the dark energy responsible for the present apparent acceleration and the cold dark matter responsible for most of the gravitational mass of galaxies and clusters. The simple coincidence that both of these unknown entities currently contribute comparable mass energy toward the closure of the universe begs the question as to whether they could Received October 7, 2014. Accepted October 28, 2014. Contact Nguyen Quynh Lan, e-mail address: nquynhlan@hnue.edu.vn 58
Cosmological constraints on dark energy via bulk viscosity from late decaying dark matter be different manifestations of the same physical phenomenon. Indeed, suggestions along this line have been made by many. In previous work [1] it was proposed that a unity of dark matter and dark energy might be explained if the dark energy could be produced from a delayed decaying dark-matter particle. That work demonstrated that dark-matter particles that begin to decay to relativistic particles near the present epoch will produce a cosmology consistent with the observed cosmic acceleration deduced from the type Ia supernova distance-redshift relation without the need for a cosmological constant. Hence, this paradigm could account for the apparent dark energy without the well known fine tuning and smallness problems associated with a cosmological constant. Also in this model, the apparent acceleration is a temporary phenomenon. This avoids some of the the difficulties in accommodating a cosmological constant in string theory. This model thus shifts the dilemma in modern cosmology from that of explaining dark energy to one of explaining how an otherwise stable heavy particle might begin to decay at a late epoch. Previous work, however, was limited in that it only dealt with the supernova-redshift constraint and the difference between the current content of dark matter content compared to that in the past. Previous work did not consider the broader set of available cosmological constraints obtainable from simultaneous fits to the cosmic microwave background (CMB) large scale structure (LSS), and baryon acoustic oscillations, limits to H0 , and the matter power spectrum, along with the SNIa redshift distance relation. Although our decaying dark matter scenario does not occur during the photon decoupling epoch and the early structure formation epoch, it does affect the CMB and LSS due to differences in the look back time from the changing dark matter/dark energy content at photon decoupling relative to the present epoch. Hence, in this work we consider a simultaneous fit to the CMB, as a means to constrain this paradigm to unify dark matter and dark energy. We deduce constraints on the parameters characterizing decaying the dark matter cosmology by using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo method applied to the 9 year CMB data from WMAP9 [2]. 2. Content 2.1. Cosmological model 2.1.1. Candidates for late decaying dark matter There are already strong observational constraints on the density of photons from any decaying dark matter. One example is their effect on the re-ionization epoch. To avoid these observational constraints, the decay products must not include photons or charged particles that would be easily detected [3]. Neutrinos or some other light weakly interacting particle are perhaps the most natural products from such decay. Admittedly it is a weak point of this paper that one must contrive both a decaying particle with the right decay products and lifetime, and also find a mechanism to delay the onset of decay. Nevertheless, in view of the many difficulties in accounting for dark energy [4], it 59
Nguyen Quynh Lan and Nguyen Anh Vinh is worthwhile pursuing any possible scenario until it is either confirmed or eliminated as a possibility. This is the motivation of this paper. In particular, in this paper we scrutinize this cosmological model on the basis of all observational constraints, not just the supernova data as in earlier works [1]. Although this model is a bit contrived, there are at least a few plausible candidates that come to mind. Possible candidates for late decaying dark matter have been discussed elsewhere [1] and need not be repeated here in detail. Nevertheless, for completeness, we provide a partial list of possible candidates. A good candidate [5] is that of a heavy sterile neutrino. For example, sterile neutrinos could decay into light νe , νµ , ντ "active" neutrinos [6]. Various models have been proposed in which singlet "sterile" neutrinos νs mix in vacuum with active neutrinos (νe , νµ , ντ ). Such models provide both warm and cold dark matter candidates. Because of this mixing, sterile neutrinos are not truly "sterile" and can decay. In most of these models, however, the sterile neutrinos are produced in the very early universe through active neutrino scattering-induced de-coherence and have a relatively low abundance. It is possible [5], however, that this production process could be augmented by medium enhancement stemming from a large lepton number. Here we speculate that a similar medium effect might also induce a late time enhancement of the decay rate. There are also other ways by which such a heavy neutrino might be delayed from decaying until the present epoch. One is that a cascade of intermediate decays prior to the final bulk-viscosity generating decay is possible but difficult to make consistent with observational constraints [5]. Fitting the supernova magnitude vs. redshift requires one of two other possibilities. One is a late low-temperature cosmic phase transition whereby a new ground state causes the previously stable dark matter to become stable. For example, a late decaying heavy neutrino could be obtained if the decay is caused by some horizontal interaction (e.g. as in the Majoron [7] or familion [8] models). Another possibility is that a time varying effective mass for either the decaying particle or its decay products could occur whereby a new ground state appears due to a level crossing at a late epoch. In the present context the self interaction of the neutrino could produce a time-dependent heavy neutrino mass such that the lifetime for decay of an initially unstable long-lived neutrino becomes significantly shorter at later times. Another possibility might be a more generic long-lived dark-matter particle ψ whose rest mass increases with time. This occurs, for example in scalar-tensor theories of gravity by having the rest mass relate to the expectation value of a scalar field ϕ. If the potential for ϕ depends upon the number density of ψ particles then the mass of the particles could change with the cosmic expansion leading to late-time decay. Finally, supersymmetric dark matter initially produced as a superWIMP has been studied as a means to obtain the correct relic density. In this scenario, the superWIMP then decays to a lighter stable dark-matter particle. In our context, a decaying superWIMP with time-dependent couplings might lead to late-time decay. Another possibility is that the light supersymmetric particle itself might be unstable with a variable decay lifetime. For 60
Cosmological constraints on dark energy via bulk viscosity from late decaying dark matter example [9], there are discrete gauge symmetries (e.g. Z10 ) which naturally protect heavy X gauge particles from decaying into ordinary light particles. Thus, the X particles are a candidate for long-lived dark matter. The lifetime of the X, however strongly depends on the ratio of the cutoff scale (M∗ ≈ 1018 GeV) to the mass of the X. ( )14 M∗ 1 τX ∼ = 102 − 1017 Gyr . (2.1) MX MX Hence, even a small variation in either MX or M∗ could lead to a change in the decay lifetime at a later time. 2.1.2. Cosmic evolution The time evolution of an homogeneous and isotropic expanding universe with late decaying dark matter and bulk viscosity can be written as a modified Friedmann equation in which we allow for non -flat k ̸= 0 and use the usual cosmological constant Λ. a˙ 2 8πG Λ k H2 = 2 = ρ+ − 2 (2.2) a 3 3 a where, ρ is now composed of several terms ρ = ρDM + ρb + ργ + ρh + ρr + ρBV (2.3) Here, ρDM , ρb , and ργ are the usual densities of stable dark matter, baryons, stable relativistic particles, and the standard cosmological constant vacuum energy density, respectively. In addition, we have added ρh to denote the energy density of heavy decaying dark matter particles, ρr to denote the energy density of light relativistic particles specifically produced by decaying dark matter, and ρBV as the contribution from the bulk viscosity. The quantities ρh and ρr and ρBV are given by a solution to the continuity equation [1] ρh = ρh (td )a−3 e−(t−td )/τd , (2.4) ∫ t −4 ′ ρr = a λρh (td ) e−(t −td )/τd a(t′ )dt′ , (2.5) td ∫ t −4 ρBV = a 9 H 2 a(t′ )4 ζ(t′ )dt′ , (2.6) td where we have denoted td as the time at which decay begins with a decay lifetime of τd , and have set ρr (td ) = 0 prior to the onset of decay. The integral term in the last equation gives the effective dissipated energy [10] due to the cosmic bulk viscosity coefficient ζ. This term induces the cosmic acceleration once a model is formulated for the bulk viscosity coefficient ζ as we now discuss. 61
Nguyen Quynh Lan and Nguyen Anh Vinh 2.1.3. Bulk viscosity coefficient The effect of the bulk viscosity is to replace the fluid pressure with an effective pressure. The first law of thermodynamics in an adiabatic expanding universe then gives [1, 10] a˙ pef f = p − ζ3 . (2.7) a Bulk viscosity can be thought of as a relaxation phenomenon. It derives from the fact that fluid requires time to restore its equilibrium pressure from a departure which occurs during expansion. The viscosity coefficient ζ depends upon the difference between the pressure p˜ of a fluid being compressed or expanded and the pressure p of a constant volume system in equilibrium. Of the several formulations in the literature, the basic non-equilibrium method is most consistent with Eq. (2.7). a˙ ζ3 = ∆p , (2.8) a where ∆p = p˜ − p is the difference between the constant volume equilibrium pressure and the actual fluid pressure. We adopt the derivation of Refs. [10] to obtain the bulk viscosity coefficient for a gas in thermodynamic equilibrium at a temperature TM into which radiation is injected with a temperature T with a mean pressure equilibration time τe . A linearized relativistic transport equation can then be used to infer the bulk viscosity coefficient. ( ) [ ( )] ∂p 4ργ τe 3∂p ∂U α ∆p ∼ (TM − T ) = 1− , (2.9) ∂T n 3 ∂ρ ∂xα where the subscript n denotes a partial derivative at fixed comoving number density. The factor of 4 on the r.h.s. comes from the derivative of the radiation pressure p ∼ T 4 of the injected relativistic particles, and the term in square brackets derives from a detailed solution to the linearized relativistic transport equation. The timescale τe to restore pressure equilibrium in an expanding cosmology from an initial pressure deficit of ∆p(0) can be determined [1] from, ∫ ∞ ∆p(t) Cτd τe = dt ≈ . (2.10) 0 ∆p(0) [1 + 3(a/a)τ ˙ d] where the coefficient C∼> 1 accounts for the possibility of higher corrections to the linearized transport equation. The final form for the bulk viscosity of the cosmic fluid is then [10], [ ]2 4ρh τe ρl + ργ ζ= 1− . (2.11) 3 ρ 62
Cosmological constraints on dark energy via bulk viscosity from late decaying dark matter 2.2. Statistical analysis with the observation data Based upon the above description, there are three new cosmological parameters associated with this paradigm. These are the delay time tD at which decay begins, the decay lifetime, τD , and the correction for nonlinear radiation transport C. These we now wish to constrain from observational data along with the rest of the standard cosmological variables. To do this we make use of the standard Bayesian Monte Carlo Markov Chain (MCMC) method as described in Ref. [11]. We have modified the publicly available CosmoMC package [11] to satisfy this decaying dark matter model as described above. Following the usual prescription we then determine the best-fit values using the maximum likelihood method. We take the total likelihood function χ2 = −2logL as the product of the separate likelihood functions of each data set and thus we write, χ2 = χ2SN + χ2CM B . (2.12) Then, one obtains the best fit values of all parameters by minimizing χ2 2.2.1. Type supernovae data and constraints We wish to consider the most general cosmology with both finite Λ, normal dark matter, and decaying dark matter. In this case the dependence of the luminosity distance on cosmological redshift is given by a slightly more complicated relation from the standard ΛCDM cosmology, i.e. we now have, {∫ z [ c(1 + z) DL = dz ′ ΩΛ + Ωγ (z ′ ) + ΩDM (z ′ ) H0 0 ]−1/2 } ′ ′ ′ ′ + Ωb (z ) + Ωh (z ) + Ωr (z ) + ΩBV (z ) , (2.13) where H0 is the present value of the Hubble constant. Now, in addition to the usual contributions to the closure density from the cosmological constant ΩΛ = Λ/3H02 , the relativistic particles initially and stable dark matter present 8πGρm0 /3H02 8πGρDM /3H02 Ωγ = , Ω DM = (2.14) (1 + z)4 1 + z)3 and baryons, Ωb = (8πGρb /3H02 )(1 + z)3 and one has contributions from the energy density in decaying cold dark matter particles Ωh (z), relativistic particles generated from decaying dark matter Ωr (z), and the cosmic bulk viscosity ΩBV (z). Note that Ωh , Ωr and ΩBV all have a non-trivial dependence on redshift corresponding to equations (2.4) - (2.6). This luminosity distance is related to the apparent magnitude of supernovae by the usual relation, △m(z) = m(z) − M = 5log10 [DL (z)/M pc] + 25 , (2.15) 63
Nguyen Quynh Lan and Nguyen Anh Vinh where △m(z) is the distance modulus and M is the absolute magnitude which is assumed to be constant for type Ia supernovae standard candles. The χ2 for type Ia supernovae is given by [12] χ2SN = ΣN i,j=1 [△m(zi ) obs − △m(zi )th )] −1 × (CSN )ij [△m(zi )obs − △m(zi )th ] (2.16) Here CSN is the covariance matrix with systematic errors. 2.2.2. CMB constraint The characteristic angular scale θA of the peaks of the angular power spectrum in CMB anisotropies is defined as [13] rs (z∗ ) π θA = = , (2.17) r(z∗ ) lA where lA is the acoustic scale, z∗ is the redshift at decoupling, and r(z∗ ) is the comoving distance at decoupling ∫ z c dz ′ r(z) = . (2.18) H0 0 H(z) In the present model the Hubble parameter H(z) is given by Eq. (2.2). The quantity rs (z∗ ) in Eq. (2.17) is the comoving sound horizon distance at decoupling. This is defined by ∫ z∗ (1 + z)2 R(z) rs (z∗ ) = dz , (2.19) 0 H(z) where the sound speed distance R(z) is given by [14] 3Ωb0 R(z) = [1 + (1 + z)−1 ]−1/2 , (2.20) 4Ωγ0 where Ω0 = 1 − Ωk is the total closure parameter. For our purposes we can use the fitting function to find the redshift at decoupling z∗ proposed by Hu and Sugiyama [15] z∗ = 1048[1 + 0.00124(Ωb0 h2 )−0.738][1 + g1 (Ω0 h2 )g2 ] , (2.21) where 0.0783(Ωb0 h2 )−0.238 0.56 g1 = 2 0.763 , g2 = , (2.22) 1 + 39.5(Ωb0 h ) 1 + 21.1(Ωb0 h2 )1 .81 The χ2 of the cosmic microwave background fit is constructed as χ2CM B = −2lnL = ΣX T (C −1 )ij X [2], where X T = (lA − lA W M AP , R − RA W M AP , z∗ − z∗W M AP ), (2.23) W M AP W M AP with lA = 302.09 , RA = 1.725, and z∗W M AP = 1091.3. Table 1 shows the the inverse covariance matrix used in our analysis. 64
Cosmological constraints on dark energy via bulk viscosity from late decaying dark matter Table 1. Inverse covariance matrix given by [2] Case lA R z∗ lA 2.305 29.698 -1.333 R 29.698 6825.27 -113.18 z∗ -1.333 -113.18 3.414 Table 2. Fitting results of the parameters with 1σ errors Parameter ΩD 0.112 ± 0.01 td 10.5 ± 2 Ωb 0.0225 ± 0.002 Ωm 0.235 ± 0.01 ns 0.0968 ± 0.001 h 0.71 ± 0.01 Figure 1. The constraints of the parameters ΩΛ h2 and Ωl h2 and the age of the Universe based upon the SN + CMB 3. Conclusion We performed a MCMC analysis of a cosmological model with bulk viscosity from decaying dark matter in the parameter space of (Ωb h2 , Ωm h2 , ΩΛ , h, ΩD h2 , τ, ωk , ns , nt , td , τD , C). All other parameters were fixed at values from the WMAP9 analysis. Table 2 summarizes the deduced cosmological parameters from this work. The associated likelihood contours are summarized in 65
Nguyen Quynh Lan and Nguyen Anh Vinh Figures 1. We find that this cosmology produces an equivalent fit to that of the standard ΛCDM model, but without a cosmological constant. Most parameters obtain values consistent with the WMAP9 analysis. An important test of this cosmology could therefore be a detection of an excess cosmic background in relativistic neutrinos. In summary, we have studied the evolution of the delayed decaying dark matter model with bulk viscosity by using a MCMC analysis to fit the SNIa and CMB data. We have shown that comparable fits to that of the ΛCDM cosmology can be obtained, but at the price of introducing a background in hidden relativistic particles. Acknowledgments. This research was supported in part by the Ministry of Education and Training grant No. B2014-17-45. REFERENCES [1] G. J. Mathews, N. Q. Lan and C. Kolda, 2008. Physical Review D 78, 043525. [2] E. Komatsu et al. [WMAP Collaboration], 2011. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 192, 18. [3] H. Yuksel, S. Horiuchi, J. F. Beacom, S. Ando, 2007. Phys. Rev. D 76, 123506. [4] S. M. Carroll, W. H. Press and E. L. Turner, 1992. Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 30, 499. [5] J. R. Wilson, G. J. Mathews and G. M. Fuller, 2007. Phys. Rev., D 75, 043521. [6] K. Abazajian, G. M. Fuller and M. Patel, 2001. Phys. Rev., D 64, 023501. [7] Y. Chikashige, R. N. Mohapatra and R. D. Peccei, 1980. Phys. Rev. Lett., 45, 1926. [8] F. Wilczek, 1982. Phys. Rev. Lett., 49, 1549. [9] K. Hamaguchi, Y. Nomura and T. Yanagida, 1998. Phys. Rev., D 58, 103503. [10] S. Weinberg, 1971. Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of the General Theory of Relativity, (John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York) (1972); Astrophys. J., 168, 175. [11] A. Lewis and S. Bridle, 2002. Phys. Rev. D 66, 103511. [12] R. Amanullah, C. Lidman, D. Rubin, G. Aldering, P. Astier, K. Barbary, M. S. Burns and A. Conley et al., 2010. Astrophys. J. 716, 712. [13] L. Page et al., 2003. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 148:233-241. [14] G. Mangano, G. Miele, S. Pastor and M. Peloso, 2002. Phys. Lett. B 534, 8. [15] W. Hu and N. Sugiyama, 1996. Astrophys. J. 471, 542. 66