Paper detail

Using a phenomenological model to test the coincidence problem of dark energy

By assuming a phenomenological form for the ratio of the DE and DM densities $ρ_X\propto ρ_{m} a^ξ$ (Dalal et al.2001), we discuss the cosmic coincidence problem in light of current observational data. $ξ$ is a key parameter to denote the severity of the coincidence problem. In this scenario, $ξ=3$ and $ξ=0$ correspond to $Λ$CDM and the self-similar solution without coincidence problem, respectively. Hence, any solution with a scaling parameter $0<ξ<3$ makes the coincidence problem less severe. In addition, the standard cosmology without interaction between DE and DM is characterized by $ξ+3ω_X=0$, whereas the inequality $ξ+3ω_X\neq 0$ represents non-standard cosmology. We place observational constraints on the parameters $(Ω_{X,0},ω_{X},ξ)$ of this model, by using the Constitution Set, the CMB shift parameter from the 5-year WMAP and the SDSS baryon acoustic peak. Combining the three samples, we get $Ω_{X,0}=0.72\pm0.02$, $ω_{X}=-0.98\pm0.07$ and $ξ=3.06\pm0.35$ at 68.3% confidence level. The result shows that the $Λ$CDM model still remains a good fit to the recent observational data, as well as, the coincidence problem indeed exists and is quite severe, in the framework of this simple phenomenological model. We further constrain the model with the transition redshift (deceleration / acceleration). It shows that if the transition from deceleration to acceleration happens at the redshit $z > 0.73$, within the framework of this model, we can conclude that the interaction between DE and DM is necessary.

preprint2010arXivOpen 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.