Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Phantom boundary crossing and anomalous growth index of fluctuations in viable f(R) models of cosmic acceleration

Hayato Motohashi, Alexei A. Starobinsky, Jun'ichi Yokoyama

TL;DR

The paper investigates whether viable $f(R)$ gravity can explain cosmic acceleration while remaining consistent with structure formation. It numerically evolves the background expansion and sub-horizon density perturbations for a Starobinsky-type $f(R)$ model that includes an $R^2$ term to tame high-curvature behavior, under stability requirements. The results show a phantom crossing of the equation of state parameter $w_DE$ at $z \lesssim 1$ and a non-monotonic growth index caused by a time-varying effective gravitational constant $G_{eff}$, with density perturbations exhibiting a scale-dependent enhancement for large wavenumbers. These findings constrain the model parameters via deviations in the growth of structure (e.g., $\sigma_8$) and suggest that future measurements of the growth index $\gamma(z)$ and scale-dependent clustering can distinguish viable $f(R)$ scenarios from LCDM. Overall, the study provides concrete, testable predictions for upcoming large-scale structure surveys.

Abstract

Evolution of a background space-time metric and sub-horizon matter density perturbations in the Universe is numerically analyzed in viable $f(R)$ models of present dark energy and cosmic acceleration. It is found that viable models generically exhibit recent crossing of the phantom boundary $w_{\rm DE}=-1$. Furthermore, it is shown that, as a consequence of the anomalous growth of density perturbations during the end of the matter-dominated stage, their growth index evolves non-monotonically with time and may even become negative temporarily.

Phantom boundary crossing and anomalous growth index of fluctuations in viable f(R) models of cosmic acceleration

TL;DR

The paper investigates whether viable gravity can explain cosmic acceleration while remaining consistent with structure formation. It numerically evolves the background expansion and sub-horizon density perturbations for a Starobinsky-type model that includes an term to tame high-curvature behavior, under stability requirements. The results show a phantom crossing of the equation of state parameter at and a non-monotonic growth index caused by a time-varying effective gravitational constant , with density perturbations exhibiting a scale-dependent enhancement for large wavenumbers. These findings constrain the model parameters via deviations in the growth of structure (e.g., ) and suggest that future measurements of the growth index and scale-dependent clustering can distinguish viable scenarios from LCDM. Overall, the study provides concrete, testable predictions for upcoming large-scale structure surveys.

Abstract

Evolution of a background space-time metric and sub-horizon matter density perturbations in the Universe is numerically analyzed in viable models of present dark energy and cosmic acceleration. It is found that viable models generically exhibit recent crossing of the phantom boundary . Furthermore, it is shown that, as a consequence of the anomalous growth of density perturbations during the end of the matter-dominated stage, their growth index evolves non-monotonically with time and may even become negative temporarily.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 4 sections, 30 equations, 7 figures.

Figures (7)

  • Figure 1: Evolution of the equation-of-state parameter of effective dark energy.
  • Figure 2: The ratio of linear density perturbations $\delta_{{\rm fRG}}/\delta_{{\rm \Lambda CDM}}$ at present as a function of $k$ for three different values of $\lambda$ with $n=2$.
  • Figure 3: The ratio of linear density perturbations $\delta_{\rm fRG}/\delta_{{\rm \Lambda CDM}} (k=0.174h{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$) as a function of redshift for three different values of $\lambda$ with $n=2$.
  • Figure 4: The present ratio $(\delta_{{\rm fRG}}/\delta_{{\rm \Lambda CDM}})^2(k=0.174h{\rm Mpc}^{-1})$ as a function of $\lambda$ together with two fitting functions.
  • Figure 5: Constraints for parameter space.
  • ...and 2 more figures