skip to main content

SciTech ConnectSciTech Connect

Title: Planck constraints on holographic dark energy

We perform a detailed investigation on the cosmological constraints on the holographic dark energy (HDE) model by using the Plank data. We find that HDE can provide a good fit to the Plank high-l (l ∼> 40) temperature power spectrum, while the discrepancy at l ≅ 20-40 found in the ΛCDM model remains unsolved in the HDE model. The Plank data alone can lead to strong and reliable constraint on the HDE parameter c. At the 68% confidence level (CL), we obtain c = 0.508 ± 0.207 with Plank+WP+lensing, favoring the present phantom behavior of HDE at the more than 2σ CL. By combining Plank+WP with the external astrophysical data sets, i.e. the BAO measurements from 6dFGS+SDSS DR7(R)+BOSS DR9, the direct Hubble constant measurement result (H{sub 0} = 73.8 ± 2.4 kms{sup −1}Mpc{sup −1}) from the HST, the SNLS3 supernovae data set, and Union2.1 supernovae data set, we get the 68% CL constraint results c = 0.484 ± 0.070, 0.474 ± 0.049, 0.594 ± 0.051, and 0.642 ± 0.066, respectively. The constraints can be improved by 2%-15% if we further add the Plank lensing data into the analysis. Compared with the WMAP-9 results, the Plank results reduce the error bymore » 30%-60%, and prefer a phantom-like HDE at higher significant level. We also investigate the tension between different data sets. We find no evident tension when we combine Plank data with BAO and HST. Especially, we find that the strong correlation between Ω{sub m}h{sup 3} and dark energy parameters is helpful in relieving the tension between the Plank and HST measurements. The residual value of χ{sup 2}{sub Plank+WP+HST}−χ{sup 2}{sub Plank+WP} is 7.8 in the ΛCDM model, and is reduced to 1.0 or 0.3 if we switch the dark energy to w model or the holographic model. When we introduce supernovae data sets into the analysis, some tension appears. We find that the SNLS3 data set is in tension with all other data sets; for example, for the Plank+WP, WMAP-9 and BAO+HST, the corresponding Δχ{sup 2} is equal to 6.4, 3.5 and 4.1, respectively. As a comparison, the Union2.1 data set is consistent with these three data sets, but the combination Union2.1+BAO+HST is in tension with Plank+WP+lensing, corresponding to a large Δχ{sup 2} that is equal to 8.6 (1.4% probability). Thus, combining internal inconsistent data sets (SNIa+BAO+HST with Plank+WP+lensing) can lead to ambiguous results, and it is necessary to perform the HDE data analysis for each independent data sets. Our tightest self-consistent constraint is c = 0.495 ± 0.039 obtained from Plank+WP+BAO+HST+lensing.« less
Authors:
;  [1] ;  [2] ;  [3] ;  [4]
  1. Institute of Theoretical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190 (China)
  2. Korea Institute for Advanced Study, Hoegiro 87, Dongdaemun-Gu, Seoul 130-722 (Korea, Republic of)
  3. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, V6T 1Z1, BC Canada (Canada)
  4. College of Sciences, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110004 (China)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22282677
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics; Journal Volume: 2013; Journal Issue: 09; Other Information: Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
79 ASTROPHYSICS, COSMOLOGY AND ASTRONOMY; ASTROPHYSICS; COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS; CORRELATIONS; COSMOLOGICAL CONSTANT; COSMOLOGY; DATA ANALYSIS; ENERGY SPECTRA; ERRORS; GRAVITATIONAL LENSES; LIMITING VALUES; NONLUMINOUS MATTER; PHANTOMS; SUPERNOVAE