Journal of East China Normal University(Natural Science) >

2021 , Vol. 2021 >Issue 1: 67 - 81

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-5641.202022004

Physics and Electronics

Spatial flatness and large-scale Lorentz violation

  • Jing LI ,
  • Xun XUE
Expand
  • 1. School of Physics and Electronic Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai　200241, China
    2. Center for Theoretical Physics, Xinjiang University, Urumqi　830046, China

Received date: 2020-03-09

  Online published: 2021-01-28

Fold

Abstract

There is an inconsistency between the Hubble parameter obtained from local measurements and model-based parameters obtained from cosmic microwave background (CMB) measurements. This inconsistency motivated us to consider new cosmological models based on $\Lambda {\rm{CDM}}$ (Lambda Cold Dark Matter Model), such as a large-scale Lorentz violation model with non-vanishing spatial curvature. The degeneracy among the spatial curvature, cosmological constant, and cosmological contortion distribution makes the model viable for interpretation of the observation data. By comparing the luminosity distance modulus and redshift with the model prediction and calculating the change in matter density as well as the cosmological constant over time, we limit the spatial curvature density to a certain range. Accordingly, we discuss the performance of the large-scale Lorentz violation model with non-vanishing spatial curvature under these constraints.

Key words： Lorentz violation; spatial curvature; Hubble constant

Cite this article

Jing LI , Xun XUE . Spatial flatness and large-scale Lorentz violation[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Natural Science), 2021 , 2021(1) : 67 -81 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5641.202022004

References

1 AGHANIM N, AKRAMI Y, ASHDOWN M, et al. Planck 2018 results(VI): Cosmological parameters [EB/OL]. (2019-09-20)[2020-04-01]. https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.06209.
2 ADE P A R, AGHANIM N, ARMITAGE-CAPLAN C, et al. Astronomy and Astrophysics, Planck 2013 results(XVI): Cosmological parameters. 2014, 571, A16.
3 RIESS A G, CASERTANO S, YUAN W. The Astrophysical Journal, Milky Way Cepheid standards for measuring cosmic distances and application to Gaia DR2: Implications for the Hubble constant. 2018, 861 (2): 126.
4 VIREY J M, TALON-ESMIEU D, EALET A, et al. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, On the determination of curvature and dynamical dark energy. 2008, (12): 008.
5 WANG Y, MUKHERJEE P. Physical Review D, Observational constraints on dark energy and cosmic curvature. 2007, 76 (10): 103533.
6 CLARKSON C, CORTES M, BASSETT B. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, Dynamical dark energy or simply cosmic curvature?. 2007, (8): 11.
7 REST A, SCOLNIC D, FOLEY R J, et al. The Astrophysical Journal, Cosmological constraints from measurements of type Ia supernovae discovered during the first 1.5 yr of the Pan-STARRS1 survey. 2014, 795 (1): 44.
8 KUMAR S. Physical Review D, Consistency of the nonflat ΛCDM model with the new result from BOSS. 2015, 92 (10): 103512.
9 HUANG Q G, LI M. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, The holographic dark energy in a non-flat universe. 2004, 2004 (8): 13.
10 SHEN J, XUE X. Large-scale Lorentz violation gravity and dark energy [EB/OL]. (2018-10-13)[2020-04-01]. https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.03502.
11 ZHAI H, SHEN J, XUE X. The effective quintessence from string landscape [EB/OL]. (2019-07-01)[2020-04-01]. https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.11860.
12 LI Q, LI J, ZHOU Y X, et al. The effective potential originating from swampland and the non-trivial Brans-Dicke coupling [EB/OL]. (2020-03-20)[2020-04-01]. https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.09121.
13 SHANKS T, HOGARTH L, METCALFE N. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, Gaia Cepheid parallaxes and ‘Local Hole’relieve H0 tension . 2019, 484 (1): L64- L68.
14 RIESS A G, CASERTANO S, KENWORTHY D A, et al. Seven problems with the claims related to the Hubble tension in arXiv: 1810.02595 [EB/OL]. (2018-10-08)[2020-04-01]. https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.03526.
15 VON MARTTENS R, MARRA V, CASARINI L, et al. Physical Review D, Null test for interactions in the dark sector. 2019, 99 (4): 043521.
16 BENGALY C A P, ANDRADE U, ALCANIZ J S. The European Physical Journal C, How does an incomplete sky coverage affect the Hubble Constant variance?. 2019, 79 (9): 768.
17 ABBOTT B P, The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, The Virgo Collaboration, et al. Physical Review Letters, GW170817: Observation of gravitational waves from a binary neutron star inspiral. 2017, 119 (16): 161101.
18 The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, The Virgo Collaboration, The 1M2H Collaboration, et al. Nature, A gravitational-wave standard siren measurement of the Hubble constant. 2017, 551, 85- 88.
19 FISHBACH M, GRAY R, HERNANDEZ I M, et al. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, A standard siren measurement of the Hubble constant from GW170817 without the electromagnetic counterpart. 2019, 871 (1): L13.
20 MORTLOCK D J, FEENEY S M, PEIRIS H V, et al. Physical Review D, Unbiased Hubble constant estimation from binary neutron star mergers. 2019, 100 (10): 103523.
21 FEENEY S M, PEIRIS H V, WILLIAMSON A R, et al. Physical Review Letters, Prospects for resolving the Hubble constant tension with standard sirens. 2019, 122 (6): 061105.
22 HOTOKEZAKA K, NAKAR E, GOTTLIEB O, et al. Nature Astronomy, A Hubble constant measurement from superluminal motion of the jet in GW170817. 2019, (3): 940- 944.
23 CHEN H Y, FISHBACH M, HOLZ D E. Nature, A two per cent Hubble constant measurement from standard sirens within five years.. 2018, 562, 545- 547.
24 VITALE S, CHEN H Y. Physical Review Letters, Measuring the Hubble constant with neutron star black hole mergers. 2018, 121 (2): 021303.
25 MIAO H T, HUANG Z Q. The Astrophysical Journal, The H0 tension in non-flat QCDM cosmology . 2018, 868 (1): 20.
26 BOLEJKO K. Physical Review D, Emerging spatial curvature can resolve the tension between high-redshift CMB and low-redshift distance ladder measurements of the Hubble constant. 2018, 97 (10): 103529.
Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉