Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Probing for Lorentz Invariance Violation in Pantheon Plus Dominated Cosmology

Published 11 Jan 2024 in gr-qc | (2401.06068v2)

Abstract: The Hubble tension in cosmology is not showing signs of alleviation and thus, it is important to look for alternative approaches to it. One such example would be the eventual detection of a time delay between simultaneously emitted high-energy and low-energy photons in gamma-ray bursts (GRB). This would signal a possible Lorentz Invariance Violation (LIV) and in the case of non-zero quantum gravity time delay, it can be used to study cosmology as well. In this work, we use various astrophysical datasets (BAO, Pantheon Plus and the CMB distance priors), combined with two GRB time delay datasets with their respective models for the {\em {intrinsic time delay}}. Since the intrinsic time delay is considered the largest source of uncertainty in such studies, finding a better model is important. Our results yield as quantum gravity energy bound $E_{QG}\ge 10{17}$ GeV and $E_{QG}\ge 10{18}$ GeV respectively. The difference between standard approximation (constant intrinsic lag) and the extended (non-constant) approximations is minimal in most cases we coincide. However, the biggest effect on the results comes from the prior on the parameter $\frac{c}{H_0 r_d}$, emphasizing once again that at current precision, cosmological datasets are the dominant factor in determining the cosmology. We estimate the energies at which cosmology gets significantly affected by the time delay dataset

Authors (1)
Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (53)
  1. S. Vagnozzi, Seven Hints That Early-Time New Physics Alone Is Not Sufficient to Solve the Hubble Tension, Universe 9, 393 (2023), arXiv:2308.16628 [astro-ph.CO] .
  2. B. L. Dias, F. Avila, and A. Bernui, Probing cosmic homogeneity in the Local Universe, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 526, 3219 (2023), arXiv:2310.04594 [astro-ph.CO] .
  3. P. M. M. Alonso, C. Escamilla-Rivera, and R. Sandoval-Orozco, Constraining dark energy cosmologies with spatial curvature using Supernovae JWST forecasting,   (2023), arXiv:2309.12292 [astro-ph.CO] .
  4. D. Benisty, A.-C. Davis, and N. W. Evans, Constraining Dark Energy from the Local Group Dynamics, Astrophys. J. Lett. 953, L2 (2023b), arXiv:2306.14963 [astro-ph.CO] .
  5. D. Benisty, Is MBsubscript𝑀𝐵M_{B}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT really a constant?, PoS CORFU2022, 259 (2023).
  6. D. Colladay and V. A. Kostelecky, CPT violation and the standard model, Phys. Rev. D 55, 6760 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9703464 .
  7. D. Colladay and V. A. Kostelecky, Lorentz violating extension of the standard model, Phys. Rev. D 58, 116002 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9809521 .
  8. V. A. Kostelecky and S. Samuel, Spontaneous Breaking of Lorentz Symmetry in String Theory, Phys. Rev. D 39, 683 (1989).
  9. U. Jacob and T. Piran, Lorentz-violation-induced arrival delays of cosmological particles, JCAP 01, 031, arXiv:0712.2170 [astro-ph] .
  10. J. Magueijo and L. Smolin, Lorentz invariance with an invariant energy scale, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 190403 (2002), arXiv:hep-th/0112090 .
  11. G. Amelino-Camelia and T. Piran, Planck scale deformation of Lorentz symmetry as a solution to the UHECR and the TeV gamma paradoxes, Phys. Rev. D 64, 036005 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0008107 .
  12. G. Amelino-Camelia, Relativity in space-times with short distance structure governed by an observer independent (Planckian) length scale, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 11, 35 (2002a), arXiv:gr-qc/0012051 .
  13. G. Amelino-Camelia, Doubly special relativity, Nature 418, 34 (2002b), arXiv:gr-qc/0207049 .
  14. V. A. Kostelecky and N. Russell, Data Tables for Lorentz and CPT Violation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 11 (2011), arXiv:0801.0287 [hep-ph] .
  15. J.-J. Wei and X.-F. Wu, Tests of Lorentz Invariance, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, edited by C. Bambi and A. Santangelo (2021) arXiv:2111.02029 [astro-ph.HE] .
  16. J.-J. Wei and X.-F. Wu, Testing fundamental physics with astrophysical transients, Front. Phys. 16, 44300 (2021b), arXiv:2102.03724 [astro-ph.HE] .
  17. A. Addazi et al., Quantum gravity phenomenology at the dawn of the multi-messenger era—A review, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 125, 103948 (2022), arXiv:2111.05659 [hep-ph] .
  18. S. Desai, Astrophysical and Cosmological Searches for Lorentz Invariance Violation,  (2023), arXiv:2303.10643 [astro-ph.CO] .
  19. V. Pasumarti and S. Desai, Bayesian evidence for spectral lag transition due to Lorentz invariance violation for 32 Fermi/GBM Gamma-ray bursts, JHEAp 40, 41 (2023), arXiv:2307.02296 [astro-ph.HE] .
  20. I. P. Lobo, In-vacuo dispersion from κ𝜅\kappaitalic_κ-anti-de Sitter algebra,   (2024), arXiv:2401.03810 [gr-qc] .
  21. R. Alves Batista et al., White Paper and Roadmap for Quantum Gravity Phenomenology in the Multi-Messenger Era,   (2023), arXiv:2312.00409 [gr-qc] .
  22. A. Cucchiara et al., A Photometric Redshift of z ~ 9.4 for GRB 090429B, Astrophys. J. 736, 7 (2011), arXiv:1105.4915 [astro-ph.CO] .
  23. E. Burns et al., GRB 221009A: The BOAT, Astrophys. J. Lett. 946, L31 (2023), arXiv:2302.14037 [astro-ph.HE] .
  24. Z. Cao et al. (LHAASO), Very high energy gamma-ray emission beyond 10 TeV from GRB 221009A, Sci. Adv. 9, adj2778 (2023), arXiv:2310.08845 [astro-ph.HE] .
  25. F. Aharonian et al. (H.E.S.S.), H.E.S.S. Follow-up Observations of GRB 221009A, Astrophys. J. Lett. 946, L27 (2023), arXiv:2303.10558 [astro-ph.HE] .
  26. L. Shao, Z. Xiao, and B.-Q. Ma, Lorentz violation from cosmological objects with very high energy photon emissions, Astropart. Phys. 33, 312 (2010), arXiv:0911.2276 [hep-ph] .
  27. S.-S. Du et al., Lorentz Invariance Violation Limits from the Spectral-lag Transition of GRB 190114C, Astrophys. J. 906, 8 (2021), arXiv:2010.16029 [astro-ph.HE] .
  28. R. Agrawal, H. Singirikonda, and S. Desai, Search for Lorentz Invariance Violation from stacked Gamma-Ray Burst spectral lag data, JCAP 05, 029, arXiv:2102.11248 [astro-ph.HE] .
  29. S. Xiao et al., A Robust Estimation of Lorentz Invariance Violation and Intrinsic Spectral Lag of Short Gamma-Ray Bursts, Astrophys. J. Lett. 924, L29 (2022).
  30. Z. Chang, Y. Jiang, and H. Lin, A unified constraint on the Lorentz invariance violation from both short and long GRBs, Astropart. Phys. 36, 47 (2012), arXiv:1201.3413 [astro-ph.HE] .
  31. D. Staicova, Impact of cosmology on Lorentz Invariance Violation constraints from GRB time-delays, Class. Quant. Grav. 40, 195012 (2023), arXiv:2305.06504 [gr-qc] .
  32. M. Biesiada and A. Piorkowska, Gamma-ray burst neutrinos, Lorenz invariance violation and the influence of background cosmology, JCAP 05, 011, arXiv:0712.0937 [astro-ph] .
  33. M. Biesiada and A. Piorkowska, Lorentz invariance violation-induced time delays in GRBs in different cosmological models, Class. Quant. Grav. 26, 125007 (2009), arXiv:1008.2615 [astro-ph.CO] .
  34. H. Gao, X.-F. Wu, and P. Mészáros, Cosmic Transients Test Einstein’s Equivalence Principle out to GeV Energies, Astrophys. J. 810, 121 (2015), arXiv:1509.00150 [astro-ph.HE] .
  35. M. Chevallier and D. Polarski, Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 10, 213 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0009008 .
  36. E. V. Linder and D. Huterer, How many dark energy parameters?, Phys. Rev. D 72, 043509 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0505330 .
  37. E. M. Barboza, Jr. and J. S. Alcaniz, A parametric model for dark energy, Phys. Lett. B 666, 415 (2008), arXiv:0805.1713 [astro-ph] .
  38. C. Escamilla-Rivera and A. Nájera, Dynamical dark energy models in the light of gravitational-wave transient catalogues, JCAP 03 (03), 060, arXiv:2103.02097 [gr-qc] .
  39. L. Chen, Q.-G. Huang, and K. Wang, Distance Priors from Planck Final Release, JCAP 02, 028, arXiv:1808.05724 [astro-ph.CO] .
  40. E. Komatsu et al. (WMAP), Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cosmological Interpretation, Astrophys. J. Suppl. 180, 330 (2009), arXiv:0803.0547 [astro-ph] .
  41. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO] .
  42. D. Staicova and D. Benisty, Constraining the dark energy models using baryon acoustic oscillations: An approach independent of H0 ⋅⋅\cdot⋅ rd, Astron. Astrophys. 668, A135 (2022), arXiv:2107.14129 [astro-ph.CO] .
  43. E. Di Pietro and J.-F. Claeskens, Future supernovae data and quintessence models, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 341, 1299 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0207332 .
  44. S. Nesseris and L. Perivolaropoulos, A Comparison of cosmological models using recent supernova data, Phys. Rev. D 70, 043531 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0401556 .
  45. L. Perivolaropoulos, Constraints on linear negative potentials in quintessence and phantom models from recent supernova data, Phys. Rev. D 71, 063503 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0412308 .
  46. R. Lazkoz, S. Nesseris, and L. Perivolaropoulos, Exploring Cosmological Expansion Parametrizations with the Gold SnIa Dataset, JCAP 11, 010, arXiv:astro-ph/0503230 .
  47. D. Scolnic et al., The Pantheon+ Analysis: The Full Data Set and Light-curve Release, Astrophys. J. 938, 113 (2022), arXiv:2112.03863 [astro-ph.CO] .
  48. D. Brout et al., The Pantheon+ Analysis: Cosmological Constraints, Astrophys. J. 938, 110 (2022), arXiv:2202.04077 [astro-ph.CO] .
  49. A. G. Riess et al., A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km s−11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT Mpc−11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team, Astrophys. J. Lett. 934, L7 (2022), arXiv:2112.04510 [astro-ph.CO] .
  50. M. G. Bernardini et al., Comparing the spectral lag of short and long gamma-ray bursts and its relation with the luminosity, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 446, 1129 (2015), arXiv:1410.5216 [astro-ph.HE] .
  51. W. J. Handley, M. P. Hobson, and A. N. Lasenby, PolyChord: nested sampling for cosmology, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 450, L61 (2015), arXiv:1502.01856 [astro-ph.CO] .
  52. A. Lewis, GetDist: a Python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples,   (2019), arXiv:1910.13970 [astro-ph.IM] .
  53. D. Staicova, DE Models with Combined H00{}_{0}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT · rd𝑑{}_{d}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT from BAO and CMB Dataset and Friends, Universe 8, 631 (2022), arXiv:2211.08139 [astro-ph.CO] .
Citations (3)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 2 tweets with 3 likes about this paper.