Paper detail

Quintessence versus phantom dark energy: the arbitrating power of current and future observations

We analyze the possibility to distinguish between quintessence and phantom scalar field models of dark energy using observations of luminosity distance moduli of SNe Ia, CMB anisotropies and polarization, matter density perturbations and baryon acoustic oscillations. Among the present observations only Planck data on CMB anisotropy and SDSS DR9 data on baryon acoustic oscillations may be able to decide between quintessence or phantom scalar field models, however for each model a set of best-fit parameters exists, which matches all data with similar goodness of fit. We compare the relative differences of best-fit model predictions with observational uncertainties for each type of data and we show that the accuracy of SNe Ia luminosity distance data is far from the one necessary to distinguish these types of dark energy models, while the CMB data (WMAP, ACT, SPT and especially Planck) are close to being able to reliably distinguish them. Also an improvement of the large-scale structure data (future releses of SDSS BOSS and e.g. Euclid or BigBOSS) will enable us to surely decide between quintessence and phantom dark energy.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.