Nonbaryonic dark matter and scalar field coupled with a transversal interaction plus decoupled radiation

Abstract

We analyze a universe filled with interacting dark matter, a scalar field accommodated as dark radiation along with dark energy plus a decoupled radiation term within the framework of spatially flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) spacetime. We work in a three-dimensional internal space spanned by the interaction vector and use a transversal interaction Qt for solving the source equation in order to find all the interacting component energy densities. We asymptotically reconstruct the scalar field and potential from an early radiation era to the late dominate dark energy one, passing through an intermediate epoch dominated by dark matter. We apply the χ 2 method to the updated observational Hubble data for constraining the cosmic parameters, contrast with the Union 2 sample of supernovae, and analyze the amount of dark energy in the radiation era. It turns out that our model fulfills the severe bound of Ω φ (z ≃ 1100) < 0.018 at 2σ level, is consistent with the recent analysis that includes cosmic microwave background anisotropy measurements from the Atacama Cosmology Telescope and the South Pole Telescope along with the future constraints achievable by Planck and CMBPol experiments, and satisfies the stringent bound Ω φ (z ≃ 10 10 ) < 0.04 at 2σ level in the big-bang nucleosynthesis epoch.

Hubble Parameter Measurement Constraints on the Redshift of the Deceleration–acceleration Transition, Dynamical Dark Energy, and Space Curvature

“…This has resulted in the first mapping out of the cosmological deceleration-acceleration transition, the epoch when dark energy took over from nonrelativistic matter, and the first measurement of the redshift of this transition (see, e.g., Moresco et al 2016). 4 H(z) measurements have also been used to constrain some more conventional cosmological parameters, such as the density of dark energy and the density of nonrelativistic matter (see, e.g., Samushia & Ratra 2006;Chen & Ratra 2011b;Chimento & Richarte 2013;Ferreira et al 2013;Akarsu et al 2014;Bamba et al 2014;Capozziello et al 2014;Dankiewicz et al 2014;Forte 2014;Gruber & Luongo 2014;Chen et al 2015;Meng et al 2015;Alam et al 2016;Guo & Zhang 2016;Mukherjee & Banerjee 2016), typically providing constraints comparable to or better than those provided by SN Ia data, but not as good as those from BAO or CMB anisotropy measurements. More recently, H(z) data have been used to measure the Hubble constant H 0 (Verde et al 2014;Chen et al 2016a), with the resulting H 0 value being more consistent with recent lower values determined from a median statistics analysis of Huchra's H 0 compilation (Chen & Ratra 2011a), from CMB anisotropy data (Hinshaw et al 2013;Sievers et al 2013;Ade et al 2015), from BAO measurements (Aubourg et al 2015;Ross et al 2015;L'Huillier & Shafieloo 2016), and from current cosmological data and the standard model of particle physics with only three light neutrino species (see, e.g., Calabrese et al 2012).…”

An Axially Symmetric Transitioning models with Observational Constraints

“…This redshift transition were discussed in [19,21,22]. Hubble H(z) data sets are also used to derive energy parameters Ω m and Ω de [23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30] and are comparable with the results with SNIa data, BAO and CMB observations. They estimated the present value of Hubble constant H 0 [31,32].…”

The extended holographic Dark Energy cosmological models

“…These disagreements have impelled to consider interactive models that generally only contain two components. In particular, two-component models have been developed where a holographic fluid plays the role of dark energy [20,21,[23][24][25] and has been shown to be intrinsically interactive [26].The next step has been to consider cosmological models of three interacting components with constant barotropic indices [27,28]. In this work, we present an analytical treatment of cosmological models commanded by three interactive fluids with arbitrary barotropic indexes, constant [29] or not.…”