1: \documentclass[referee]{cjaa}
2:
3: \usepackage{graphicx}
4: \input{epsf.sty}
5: %\input{psfig.sty}
6:
7: \begin{document}
8: \title{Constraining Dark Energy and Cosmological Transition Redshift with Type Ia Supernovae}
9:
10: \setcounter{page}{1}
11: \author{Fa-Yin Wang
12: \and Zi-Gao Dai
13: \mailto{}}
14: \institute{Department of Astronomy, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093; China
15: \email{dzg@nju.edu.cn}}
16: \offprints{F.-Y. Wang}
17: % \date{Received~~; accepted~~}
18:
19: \abstract{The property of dark energy and the physical reason for
20: acceleration of the present universe are two of the most difficult
21: problems in modern cosmology. The dark energy contributes about
22: two-thirds of the critical density of the present universe from
23: the observations of type-Ia supernova (SNe Ia) and anisotropy of
24: cosmic microwave background (CMB).The SN Ia observations also
25: suggest that the universe expanded from a deceleration to an
26: acceleration phase at some redshift, implying the existence of a
27: nearly uniform component of dark energy with negative pressure. We
28: use the ``gold'' sample containing 157 SNe Ia and two recent
29: well-measured additions, SNe Ia 1994ae and 1998aq to explore the
30: properties of dark energy and the transition redshift. For a flat
31: universe with the cosmological constant, we measure
32: $\Omega_{M}=0.28_{-0.05}^{+0.04}$, which is consistent with Riess
33: et al. The transition redshift is $z_{T}=0.60_{-0.08}^{+0.06}$. We
34: also discuss several dark energy models that define the $w(z)$ of
35: the parameterized equation of state of dark energy including one
36: parameter and two parameters ($w(z)$ being the ratio of the
37: pressure to energy density). Our calculations show that the
38: accurately calculated transition redshift varies from
39: $z_{T}=0.29_{-0.06}^{+0.07}$ to $z_{T}=0.60_{-0.08}^{+0.06}$
40: across these models. We also calculate the minimum redshift
41: $z_{c}$ at which the current observations need the universe to
42: accelerate.
43: \keywords{cosmology: observations - distance scale
44: -supernovae: general}
45: }
46:
47: \authorrunning{F. Y. Wang, Z. G. Dai} %author_head in even pages
48: \titlerunning{Constraining Dark Energy and Cosmological Transition Redshift with SNe Ia}
49: \maketitle
50: %
51: %________________________________________________ sections below
52: %
53: \section{Introduction}
54: \label{sect:intro} Type Ia Supernovae (SNe Ia) have been
55: considered astronomical standard candles and used to measure the
56: geometry and dynamics of the universe. Kowal (1968) showed that
57: SNe Ia give a well-defined Hubble diagram whose intercept could
58: provide a good measurement of the Hubble constant. Colgate (1979)
59: suggested that the peak luminosity $L_{p}$ is a constant.
60: Subsequent observations showed that Type-I SNe should be split
61: (Uomoto \& Kirshier 1985; Porter \& Filippenko 1987). Theoretical
62: models suggested that SNe Ia arise from the thermonuclear
63: explosion of a carbon-oxygen white dwarf when its mass reaches the
64: Chandrasekhar mass (Colgate \& McKee 1969). Colgate (1979)
65: suggested that observations of SNe Ia around $z\simeq1$ could
66: measure the deceleration parameter $q_{0}$. Hansen, Jrgensen \&
67: N$\o$rgaard-Nielsen (1987) detected SN 1988U at $z=0.31$. At this
68: redshift 100 SNe Ia would have been needed to distinguish between
69: an open and a closed universe. Phillips (1993) discovered the
70: intrinsic relation in SNe Ia:
71: $L_{p}=a\times\bigtriangleup{m}_{15}^{b}$, where
72: $\bigtriangleup{m}_{15}$ is the decline rate in the optical band
73: 15 days after the peak luminosity. This relation could be used to
74: explore cosmology.
75:
76:
77: Using 16 high-redshift SNe and 34 nearby SNe, Riess
78: et al. (1998) found that our universe has been accelerating. Using
79: 42 SNe Ia, Perlmutter et al. (1999) obtained the same result. SN
80: Ia observations also provided evidence for a decelerating universe
81: at redshifts higher than the transition redshift $z_{T}\simeq0.5$
82: (Riess et al. 2001; Turner et al. 2002; Riess et al. 2004). Tonry
83: et al. (2003) found that $\Omega_{M}=0.28\pm0.05$ and
84: $-1.48<w<-0.72$ at the 95\% confidence level for a flat universe
85: from high-$z$ SNe. Daly \& Djorgovski (2003) derived that the
86: universe changed from deceleration to acceleration at $z_{T}=0.45$
87: using a model-independent method. Combining the constraints from
88: the recent Ly-¦Á forest analysis of Sloan Digital Sky Survey
89: (SDSS) and the SDSS galaxy bias analysis with previous constraints
90: from the SDSS galaxy clustering, the latest SNe, and first-year
91: WMAP cosmic microwave background anisotropies, Seljak et al.
92: (2004) found that $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.72\pm0.02$,
93: $w(z=0.3)=-0.98_{-0.12}^{+0.10}$. In the model of $w(z)=w_{0}$,
94: they found $w_{0}=-0.990_{-0.093-0.201-0.351}^{+0.086+0.160+0.222}
95: (1\sigma, 2\sigma, 3\sigma)$ . From their analysis they concluded
96: that the equation of state did not vary with redshift. Alam et al.
97: (2004) obtained the transition redshift $z_{T}=0.57\pm0.07$ from a
98: joint analysis of SNe Ia and CMB. Utilizing SNe Ia data, Bassett
99: et al. (2004) derived that the transition redshift varied from
100: $z_{T}=0.14$ to $z_{T}=0.59$, but Gong (2004) found
101: $z_{T}\simeq0.3$. Jarvis et al (2005) analysized the 75 square
102: degree CTIO lensing survey in conjunction with CMB and SN Ia data
103: and measured $w_{0}=-0.894_{-0.208}^{+0.156}(95\% confidence
104: level)$. When taking the dark energy model of
105: $w(a)=w_{0}+w_{a}(1-a)$, they found
106: $w_{0}=-1.19_{-1.74}^{+0.53},w_{a}=1.31_{-2.40}^{+3.04}(95\%
107: confidence level)$. Gong (2005) found the transition redshift was
108: $z_{T}\simeq0.6$ using one-parameter dark energy models. Chang et
109: al. (2005) gave $w_{0}=-1.29$, the deceleration parameter
110: $q_{0}=-0.97$ and $z_{T}=0.70$ by using the recent data of X-ray
111: cluster gas mass fraction. Clocchiatti et al. (2005) derived
112: $\Omega_M=0.79^{+0.15}_{-0.18}$ and $\Omega_\Lambda=
113: 1.57^{+0.24}_{-0.32}$ ($1\sigma$ confidence level) if no prior
114: assumption is made, or $\Omega_M =0.29^{+0.06}_{-0.05}$ if
115: $\Omega_M + \Omega_\Lambda= 1$ is assumed, from a sample of 75
116: low-redshift and 47 high-redshift SNe Ia with the MLCS2k2
117: luminosity calibration. For a different sample of 58 low-redshift
118: and 48 high-redshift SNe Ia with luminosity calibrations using the
119: PRES method, the results were $\Omega_M=0.43^{+0.17}_{-0.19}$ and
120: $\Omega_\Lambda= 1.18^{+0.27}_{-0.28}$ ($1\sigma$ confidence
121: level) on no prior assumptions, or $\Omega_M =
122: 0.18^{+0.05}_{-0.04}$ if $\Omega_M + \Omega_\Lambda= 1$ was
123: assumed. Virey et al. (2005) argued that the determi ation of the
124: present deceleration parameter $q_{0}$ through a simple
125: kinematical description could lead to wrong conclusions. A
126: dynamical dark energy model must be taken into account. Meng \&
127: Fan (2005) suggested that LAMOST redshift survey could help to
128: reduce the error bounds of dark energy parameters expected from
129: other observations. Zhang \& Wu (2005) derived a transition
130: redshift of $z_{T}=0.63$ using the CMB, LSS and SNe Ia data for
131: the holographic dark energy model.
132:
133:
134: Riess et al.(2004) selected a sample of 157 well-measured SNe Ia,
135: called the ``gold" sample. Assuming a flat universe, they
136: concluded: (1) Using the strong prior of $\Omega_{M}=0.27\pm0.04$,
137: fitting to a static dark energy equation of state yields
138: $-1.46<w<-0.78$ (95\% confidence level). (2) Assuming a possible
139: redshift dependence of $w(z)$ (e.g., using $w(z)=w_{0}+w_{1}z$),
140: the data with the strong prior indicate that the region $w_{1}< 0$
141: and especially the quadrant ($w_{0}>-1$ and $w_{1}<0$) are the
142: least favored. (3) Expand $q(z)$ into two terms:
143: $q(z)=q_{0}+zdq/dz$. If the transition redshift is defined through
144: $q(z_{T})=0$, they found $z_{T}=0.46\pm0.13$.
145:
146:
147: Currently SN Ia observations provide the most direct way to probe
148: the dark energy component at low redshifts. This is due to the
149: fact that SN data allows a direct measure of the luminosity
150: distance, which is directly related to the expansion law of the
151: universe. Since 1998, many dark energy models have been proposed
152: in the literature. The simplest one is that dark energy is
153: constant, $w(z)=w_{0}$. A linear parameterization is
154: $w(z)=w_{0}+w_{1}z$. Recently a simple two-parameter model
155: $w(z)=w_{0}+w_{1}z/(1+z)$ was discussed. By fitting the model to
156: SNe Ia data, $w_{0}+w_{1}>0$ was found. At high redshifts,
157: however, this model was not valid. In order to solve the problem,
158: Jassal, Bagla \& Padmanabhan (2004) modified this parameterization
159: to $w(z)=w_{0}+w_{1}z/(1+z)^{2}$. Hannestad \& M\"{o}rtsell (2004)
160: parameterized $w_{z}$ as
161: $w_{z}=[1+\big(\frac{1+z}{1+z_{s}}\big)^{q}]/[w_{o}^{-1}+w_{1}^{-1}(\frac{1+z}{1+z_{s}}\big)^{q}]$
162: . The equation of state $w(z)$ was parametrized by Lee (2005) as
163: $w_{z}=w_{r}\times[w_{0}\exp (qx)+\exp (qx_{c})]/[\exp (qx)+\exp
164: (qx_{c})]$, where $x=\ln a=-\ln (1+z)$. Johri \& Rath (2005) found
165: all the observational constraints are satisfied by the two above
166: parameterizations by the combined CMB, LSS and SN Ia data. The
167: Hannestad-M\"{o}rtsell model and the Lee four-parameter model for
168: the equation of state may be well-behaved representations of dark
169: energy evolution in a large range of redshifts. Here we examine
170: two phenomenological parametrizations for the variable dark energy
171: which were given by Wetterich (2004).
172:
173:
174: In our MNRAS paper, we used gamma-ray bursts and 157 SNe Ia to
175: constrain cosmological parameters and transition redshift in only
176: four dark energy models. In this paper, we systematically explore
177: the properties of dark energy and cosmological transition redshift
178: in several dark energy models. The structure of this paper is as
179: follows: In Section 2, we describe our analysis methods and
180: numerical results in a Friedmann-Robertson-Walker cosmology with
181: the cosmological constant. In Section 3, we present cosmological
182: constraints in the one-parameter dark-energy models. In Section 4,
183: we explore the cosmological constraints in two-parameter
184: dark-energy models. Conclusions and a brief discussion are
185: presented in Section 5.
186: \section{cosmology with the cosmological constant}
187: \label{sect:Cos} The SN Ia observations provide the currently most
188: direct way of probing the dark energy at low to medium redshifts
189: since the luminosity-distance relation is directly related to the
190: expansion history of the universe. The luminosity distance is
191: given by (Dicus \& Repko 2004)
192: \begin{equation}
193: d_{L}=\left\{
194: \begin{array}{l}
195: \displaystyle cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)(-\Omega_{k})^{-1/2}\sin((-\Omega_{k})^{1/2}I) \phantom{sssssssssssssssss} \Omega_{k}<0, \\
196: \displaystyle cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)I \phantom{ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss} \Omega_{k}=0,\\
197: \displaystyle cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)(\Omega_{k})^{-1/2}\sinh((\Omega_{k})^{1/2}I) \phantom{ssssssssssssssssssss}\, \Omega_{k}>0,\\
198: \end{array} \right.
199: \label{eqn:fc:SSC-spectrum}
200: \end{equation}
201: where
202: \begin{equation}
203: \Omega_{k}=1-\Omega_{M}-\Omega_{DE},
204: \end{equation}
205: \begin{equation}
206: I=\int_{0}^{z}dz/H(z),
207: \end{equation}
208: \begin{equation}
209: H(z)=((1+z)^{3}\Omega_{M}+f(z)\Omega_{DE}+(1+z)^{2}\Omega_{k})^{1/2},
210: \end{equation}
211: \begin{equation}
212: f(z)=\exp[3\int_{0}^{z}\frac{(1+w(z'))dz'}{(1+z')}],
213: \end{equation}
214: where $w(z)$ is the equation of state for dark energy and $d_{L}$
215: is the luminosity distance. The luminosity distance expected in a
216: Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) cosmology with mass density
217: $\Omega_{k}$ and vacuum energy density (i.e., the cosmological
218: constant) $\Omega_{\Lambda}$ is
219: \begin{eqnarray}
220: d_L & = & c(1+z)H_0^{-1}|\Omega_k|^{-1/2}{\rm
221: sinn}\{|\Omega_k|^{1/2}\nonumber \\ & & \times
222: \int_0^zdz[(1+z)^2(1+\Omega_Mz)-z(2+z)\Omega_\Lambda]^{-1/2}\},
223: \end{eqnarray}
224: where $\Omega_{k}=1-\Omega_{M}-\Omega_{\Lambda}$, and $\rm sinn$
225: is $\sinh$ for $\Omega_{k}>0$ and $\sin$ for $\Omega_{k}<0$
226: (Carroll et al. 1992). For $\Omega_{k}=0$, the luminosity distance
227: is $d_{L}=cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)$ times the integral. With $d_{L}$ in
228: units of megaparsecs, the predicted distance modulus is
229: \begin{equation}
230: \mu=5\log(d_{L})+25.
231: \end{equation}
232: We can plot the Hubble diagram for the Gold sample containing 157
233: SNe Ia and two recent, well-measured SNe Ia 1994ae and 1998aq
234: (Riess et al. 2005). The likelihood functions for the parameters
235: $\Omega_{M}$ and $\Omega_{\Lambda}$ can be determined from
236: $\chi^{2}$ statistic,
237: \begin{equation}
238: \chi^{2}(H_{0},\Omega_{M},\Omega_{\Lambda})=\sum_{i=1}^{N}
239: \frac{[\mu_{i}(z_{i},H_{0},\Omega_{M},\Omega_{\Lambda})-\mu_{0,i}]^{2}}{\sigma_{\mu_{0,i}}^{2}+\sigma_{\nu}^{2}},
240: \end{equation}
241: where $\sigma_{\nu}$ is the dispersion in the supernova redshift
242: (transformed to distance modulus) due to peculiar velocities, and
243: $\sigma_{\mu_{0,i}}$ is the uncertainty in the individual distance
244: moduli. The confidence regions in the
245: $\Omega_{M}-\Omega_{\Lambda}$ plane can be found through
246: marginalizing the likelihood functions over $H_{0}$ (i.e.,
247: integrating the probability density $p\propto\exp^{-\chi^{2}/2}$
248: for all values of $H_{0}$). The Friedmann equations are
249: \begin{equation}
250: H^{2}+\frac{k}{a^{2}}=\frac{8\pi G}{3}(\rho_{M}+\rho_{r}+\rho),
251: \end{equation}
252: \begin{equation}
253: \dot{\rho}+3H(\rho+p)=0.
254: \end{equation}
255: The Hubble constant $H=\dot{a}/a$, the dot representing time
256: derivative. Here $\rho$ is defined as
257: \begin{equation}
258: \rho=\rho_{0}\exp[3\int_{0}^{z}\frac{(1+w(z'))dz'}{(1+z')}].
259: \end{equation}
260: $\rho_{M}$ is the matter energy density, $\rho_{r}$ the radiation
261: energy density and $z=a_{0}/a-1$ is the redshift. Combining
262: equations (9) and (10), we can find the acceleration equation,
263: \begin{equation}
264: \frac{\ddot{a}}{a}=-\frac{4\pi G}{3}(\rho_{M}+2\rho_{r}+\rho+3p).
265: \end{equation}
266: At $\ddot{a}=0$, the universe changes from deceleration to
267: acceleration phase. So we can define the transition redshift. For
268: the cosmological-constant model we obtain the transition redshift,
269: \begin{equation}
270: z_{T}=(\frac{2\Omega_{\Lambda}}{\Omega_{M}})^{1/3}-1.
271: \end{equation}
272: In Figure 1 we plot the Hubble diagram for the 159 SNe Ia. We use
273: the 159 SNe Ia data to obtain the confidence regions and
274: transition redshift (see Fig.\,2). For a flat universe, we obtain
275: $\Omega_{M}=0.28_{-0.05}^{+0.04}$. This result is consistent with
276: Riess et al. (2004). The best value for the transition redshift is
277: $z_{T}=0.60_{-0.08}^{+0.06}$. Let $z_{c}$ be the minimum redshift
278: at which current observations require the universe to accelerate;
279: it is determined from the condition $d(t_{c},t_{0})=1/H(t_{c})$.
280: So we have
281: \begin{equation}
282: \int_{0}^{z_{c}}\frac{dz}{\sqrt{\Omega_{M}(1+z)^{3}+\Omega_{\Lambda}(1+z)^{3(1+w)}}}=\frac{1+z_{c}}{\sqrt{{\Omega_{M}(1+z_{c})^{3}+\Omega_{\Lambda}(1+z_{c})^{3(1+w)}}}}.
283: \end{equation}
284: With a prior of $\Omega_{M}=0.27\pm0.04$, we get $z_{c}=2.01 >
285: z_{T}=0.60$.
286: \section{One-parameter dark-energy model}
287: \subsection{Constant parameterization}
288: We consider an equation of state for dark energy,
289: \begin{equation}
290: w_{z}=w_{0}.
291: \end{equation}
292: In this dark energy model, the luminosity distance for a flat
293: universe is (Riess et al. 2004)
294: \begin{equation}
295: d_{L}=cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)\int_{0}^{z}dz[(1+z)^{3}\Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3(1+w_{0})}]^{-1/2}.
296: \end{equation}
297: Combining equations (11), (12) and (15), we calculate the
298: transition redshift through
299: \begin{equation}
300: \Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+3w_{0})\times(1+z)^{3w_{0}}=0.
301: \end{equation}
302: We use the 159 SNe Ia data to obtain the confidence regions and
303: transition redshift, and derive $w_{0}=-0.975_{-0.15}^{+0.12}$ at
304: the $1\sigma$ confidence level. See Figure~3. So if we assume
305: $w_{0}=\rm constant$, then the SN Ia data favor $w_{0}=-1$. At the
306: 95\% confidence level we have $-1.35<w_{0}<-0.75$. These results
307: are consistent with Tonry et al. (2003), Knop et al. (2003),
308: Bennett et al. (2003), Riess et al. (2004). The best value of the
309: transition redshift is $z_{T}=0.52_{-0.06}^{+0.05}(1\sigma)$. In
310: this dark energy model $z_{c}$ satisfies the following equation,
311: \begin{eqnarray}
312: \nonumber \\ & &
313: \int_{0}^{z_{c}}\frac{dz}{\sqrt{\Omega_{M}(1+z)^{3}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3(1+w_{0})}}}
314: \nonumber \\ & &
315: =\frac{1+z_{c}}{\sqrt{{\Omega_{M}(1+z_{c})^{3}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z_{c})^{3(1+w_{0})}}}}.
316: \end{eqnarray}
317: For $\Omega_{M}=0.27$ and $w_{0}=-0.975$, we get $z_{c}=2.02
318: > z_{T}=0.52$.
319:
320:
321: We now consider the second one-parameter dark energy equation
322: (Gong \& Zhang 2005),
323: \begin{equation}
324: w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{1+z}\exp(\frac{z}{1+z}).
325: \end{equation}
326: In this model the luminosity distance is given by
327: \begin{equation}
328: d_{L}=cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)\int_{0}^{z}dz[(1+z)^{3}\Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3}\exp(3w_{0}e^{\frac{z}{1+z}}-3w_{0})]^{-1/2}.
329: \end{equation}
330: Combining equations (11), (12) and (19), we can calculate the
331: transition redshift through
332: \begin{equation}
333: \Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+\frac{3w_{0}}{1+z}e^{z/(1+z)})\times\exp(3w_{0}(e^{z/(1+z)}-1))=0.
334: \end{equation}
335: Again we use the 159 SNe Ia data to obtain confidence regions and
336: transition redshift and derive $w_{0}=-1.10_{-0.11}^{+0.16}$ at
337: the $1\sigma$ confidence level, shown in Figure~3. We obtain
338: $-1.32<w_{0}<-0.76$ at the 95\% confidence level. The transition
339: redshift is found to be $z_{T}=0.47^{+0.07}_{-0.05}(1\sigma)$. In
340: this dark energy model. $z_{c}$ satisfies the following equation,
341: \begin{eqnarray}
342: \nonumber \\ & &
343: \int_{0}^{z_{c}}\frac{dz}{\sqrt{(1+z)^{3}\Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3}\exp(3w_{0}e^{\frac{z}{1+z}}-3w_{0})}}
344: \nonumber \\ & &
345: =\frac{1+z_{c}}{\sqrt{(1+z_{c})^{3}\Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z_{c})^{3}\exp(3w_{0}e^{\frac{z_{c}}{1+z_{c}}}-3w_{0})}}.
346: \end{eqnarray}
347: For $\Omega_{M}=0.27$ and $w_{0}=-1.10$, we get $z_{c}=1.90
348: > z_{T}=0.47$.
349:
350:
351: Our third one-parameter dark energy model (Gong \& Zhang 2005), is
352: \begin{equation}
353: w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{1+z}.
354: \end{equation}
355: Proceeding as before, we obtain the luminosity distance
356: \begin{equation}
357: d_{L}=cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)\int_{0}^{z}dz[(1+z)^{3}\Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3}e^{(\frac{3w_{0}z}{1+z})}]^{-1/2}.
358: \end{equation}
359: Combining equations (11), (12) and (23), we calculate the
360: transition redshift through
361: \begin{equation}
362: \Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+\frac{3w_{0}}{1+z})\times\exp{(\frac{3w_{0}z}{1+z})}=0.
363: \end{equation}
364: Again for the 159 SNe Ia data the confidence regions and
365: transition redshift are obtained. We have
366: $w_{0}=-1.15_{-0.17}^{+0.20}$ at the $1\sigma$ confidence level
367: shown in Figure~3 and derive $-1.37<w_{0}<-0.78$ at the 95\%
368: confidence level. The transition redshift is
369: $z_{T}=0.49^{+0.06}_{-0.05}(1\sigma)$. In this dark energy model
370: $z_{c}$ satisfies the following equation,
371: \begin{eqnarray}
372: \nonumber \\ & &
373: \int_{0}^{z_{c}}\frac{dz}{\sqrt{\Omega_{M}(1+z)^{3}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3}e^{(\frac{3w_{0}z}{1+z})}}}
374: \nonumber \\ & &
375: =\frac{1+z_{c}}{\sqrt{\Omega_{M}(1+z_{c})^{3}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3}e^{(\frac{3w_{0}z_{c}}{1+z_{c}})}}}.
376: \end{eqnarray}
377: For $\Omega_{M}=0.27$ and $w_{0}=-1.15$, we obtain $z_{c}=1.63
378: > z_{T}=0.49$.
379: \section{Two-parameter dark-energy model}
380: \subsection{Wetterich's parameterization}
381: In this section, we first consider the dark energy
382: parameterization proposed by Wetterich (Wetterich 2004):
383: \begin{equation}
384: w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{[1+b\ln(1+z)]^2}.
385: \end{equation}
386: In this model the luminosity distance is given by
387: \begin{equation}
388: d_{L}=cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)\int_{0}^{z}dz[(1+z)^{3}\Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3+3w_{0}/[1+b\ln(1+z)]}]^{-1/2}.
389: \end{equation}
390: Using the above method we calculate the transition redshift
391: through
392: \begin{equation}
393: \Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+\frac{3w_{0}}{[1+b\ln(1+z)]^2})\times(1+z)^{3+3w_{0}/[1+b\ln(1+z)]}=0.
394: \end{equation}
395: We consider a Gaussian prior of $\Omega_{M}=0.27\pm0.04$. We plot
396: the transition redshift probability curve. The transition redshift
397: is $z_{T}=0.39_{-0.05}^{+0.06}(1\sigma)$ in Figure~4, but Gong
398: (2004) obtained $z_{T}=0.26$, which is somewhat smaller than our
399: result. This may be caused by differences in the calculation
400: method and data.
401:
402:
403: Because the best fit for the above parameterization gives
404: $\Omega_{M}\sim0$ which is not physical, we apply a modified
405: Wetterich's parameterization (Gong 2004)
406: \begin{equation}
407: w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{1+b\ln(1+z)}.
408: \end{equation}
409: Combining Equations (1)--(5) and (30), the luminosity Distance is
410: calculated with,
411: \begin{equation}
412: d_{L}=cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)\int_{0}^{z}dz[(1+z)^{3}\Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3}[1+b\ln(1+z)]^{3w_{0}/b}]^{-1/2}.
413: \end{equation}
414: Following the above method, we calculate the transition redshift
415: through
416: \begin{equation}
417: \Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+\frac{3w_{0}}{[1+b\ln(1+z)]})\times[1+b\ln(1+z)]^{3w_{0}/b}=0.
418: \end{equation}
419: We use a Gaussian prior of $\Omega_{M}=0.27\pm0.04$. The
420: transition shift probability curve is plotted. The transition
421: redshift is $z_{T}=0.29_{-0.06}^{+0.07}(1\sigma)$ in Figure~4.
422: This result is consistent with Gong (2004).
423:
424:
425: We consider another modified Wetterich's parameterization:
426: \begin{equation}
427: w_{z}=w_{0}+\frac{w_{1}}{1+\ln(1+z)}.
428: \end{equation}
429: Combining equations (1)-(5) and (33), we can obtain the luminosity
430: distance with,
431: \begin{equation}
432: d_{L}=cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)\int_{0}^{z}dz[(1+z)^{3}\Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3+3w_{0}}[1+\ln(1+z)]^{3w_{1}}]^{-1/2}.
433: \end{equation}
434: Using the above method, we calculate the transition redshift
435: through
436: \begin{equation}
437: \Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+3w_{0}+\frac{3w_{1}}{1+\ln(1+z)})\times(1+z)^{3w_{0}}[1+\ln(1+z)]^{3w_{1}}=0.
438: \end{equation}
439: We use a Gaussian prior of $\Omega_{M}=0.27\pm0.04$. The
440: transition redshift probability curve is plotted. The transition
441: redshift is $z_{T}=0.42_{-0.07}^{+0.06}(1\sigma)$ in Figure~4, but
442: Gong (2004) obtained $z_{T}=0.34$, which is slightly smaller than
443: our result. This may be caused by differences in the calculation
444: method and data.
445: \subsection{Linder's parameterization}
446: The simplest parameterization including two parameters is (Maaor
447: et al. 2001; Weller \&Albrecht 2001; Weller \&Albrecht 2002; Riess
448: et al. 2004),
449: \begin{equation}
450: w_{z}=w_{0}+w_{1}z.
451: \end{equation}
452: This parameterization provides the minimum possible resolving
453: power to distinguish between the cosmological constant and
454: time-dependent dark energy. We again use the above method to
455: calculate the luminosity distance with,
456: \begin{equation}
457: d_{L}=cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)\int_{0}^{z}dz[(1+z)^{3}\Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3(1+w_{0}-w_{1})}e^{3w_{1}z}]^{-1/2}.
458: \end{equation}
459: Combining equations (11), (12) and (36), we calculate the
460: transition redshift through,
461: \begin{equation}
462: \Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+3w_{0}+3w_{1}z)\times(1+z)^{w_{0}-w_{1}}e^{3w_{1}z}=0.
463: \end{equation}
464: A Gaussian prior of $\Omega_{M}=0.27\pm0.04$ is applied here.
465: Using the 159 SNe Ia data to derive the confidence regions and
466: transition redshift, we obtain $w_{0}=-1.30_{-0.25}^{+0.18}$,
467: $w_{1}=1.42_{-0.83}^{+0.76}$ at the $1\sigma$ confidence level in
468: Figure 5. This result is consistent with Riess et al (2004). The
469: condition $w(0)<-1$ suggests that the dark energy is of phantom
470: origin. A cosmological constant lies at the $2\sigma$ confidence
471: level. The best value for transition redshift is
472: $z_{T}=0.41^{+0.06}_{-0.04}(1\sigma)$ in Figure 5. In this dark
473: energy model $z_{c}$ satisfies the following equation
474: \begin{eqnarray}
475: \nonumber \\ & &
476: \int_{0}^{z_{c}}\frac{dz}{\sqrt{\Omega_{M}(1+z)^{3}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3(1+w_{0}-w_{1})}e^{3w_{1}z}}}
477: \nonumber \\ & &
478: =\frac{1+z_{c}}{\sqrt{\Omega_{M}(1+z_{c})^{3}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z_{c})^{3(1+w_{0}-w_{1})}e^{3w_{1}z_{c}}}}.
479: \end{eqnarray}
480: For $\Omega_{M}=0.27$ , $w_{0}=-1.30$ and $w_{1}=1.42$, we obtain
481: $z_{c}=1.20 > z_{T}=0.41$.
482:
483:
484: The above model is not compatible with CMB data since it diverges
485: at high redshifts. Linder (2003) proposed an extended
486: parameterization which avoids this problem,
487: \begin{equation}
488: w_{z}=w_{0}+\frac{w_{1}z}{1+z}.
489: \end{equation}
490: We use again the above method to calculate the luminosity distance
491: with,
492: \begin{equation}
493: d_{L}=cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)\int_{0}^{z}dz[(1+z)^{3}\Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3(1+w_{0}+w_{1})}e^{-3w_{1}z/(1+z)}]^{-1/2}.
494: \end{equation}
495: Combining equations (11), (12) and (40), we calculate the
496: transition redshift through
497: \begin{equation}
498: \Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+3w_{0}+\frac{3w_{1}z}{1+z})\times(1+z)^{w_{0}+w_{1}}
499: e^{-3w_{1}z/(1+z)}=0.
500: \end{equation}
501: We obtain the confidence regions and transition redshift as
502: before, and obtain
503: $w_{0}=-1.35_{-0.28}^{+0.35}$,$w_{1}=2.02_{-1.85}^{+2.26}$ at the
504: $1\sigma$ confidence level in Figure 5. This result is consistent
505: with Riess et al. (2004). Here $w(0)<-1$ suggests that the dark
506: energy is of phantom origin. A cosmological constant lies at the
507: $2\sigma$ confidence level. We find the transition redshift to be
508: $z_{T}=0.31^{+0.04}_{-0.02}(1\sigma)$ in Figure~5. In this dark
509: energy model $z_{c}$ satisfies the following equation,
510: \begin{eqnarray}
511: \nonumber \\ & &
512: \int_{0}^{z_{c}}\frac{dz}{\sqrt{\Omega_{M}(1+z)^{3}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3(1+w_{0}+w_{1})}e^{-3w_{1}z/(1+z)}}}
513: \nonumber \\ & &
514: =\frac{1+z_{c}}{\sqrt{\Omega_{M}(1+z_{c})^{3}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z_{c})^{3(1+w_{0}+w_{1})}e^{-3w_{1}z_{c}/(1+z_{c})}}}.
515: \end{eqnarray}
516: For $\Omega_{M}=0.27$ , $w_{0}=-1.35$ and $w_{1}=2.02$, we obtain
517: $z_{c}=1.47 > z_{T}=0.31$.
518:
519:
520: By fitting the $w_{z}=w_{0}+\frac{w_{1}z}{1+z}$ model to SN Ia
521: data, $w_{0}+w_{1}>0$ was found, so at high redshifts this model
522: is not proper. In order to avoid this problem, Jassal, Bagla \&
523: Padmanabhan (2004) modified this parameterization to
524: \begin{equation}
525: w_{z}=w_{0}+\frac{w_{1}z}{(1+z)^2}.
526: \end{equation}
527: Proceeding as before we calculate the luminosity distance with
528: \begin{equation}
529: d_{L}=cH_{0}^{-1}(1+z)\int_{0}^{z}dz[(1+z)^{3}\Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3(1+w_{0})}e^{3w_{1}z^{2}/2(1+z)^{2}}]^{-1/2}.
530: \end{equation}
531: Combining equations (11), (12) and (44), we calculate the
532: transition redshift through
533: \begin{equation}
534: \Omega_{M}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+3w_{0}+\frac{3w_{1}z}{(1+z)^{2}})\times(1+z)^{3w_{0}}e^{3w_{1}z^{2}/2(1+z)^{2}}=0.
535: \end{equation}
536: Now we consider a Gaussian prior of $\Omega_{M}=0.27\pm0.04$. We
537: use the 159 SNe Ia data to obtain the following confidence regions
538: and transition redshift. The best values are
539: $w_{0}=-1.50_{-0.51}^{+0.82}$ and $w_{1}=5.02_{-4.05}^{+4.86}$ at
540: the $1\sigma$ confidence level in Figure~5. The dark energy is
541: also of phantom origin because of $w(0)<-1$. A cosmological
542: constant lies at the $2\sigma$ confidence level. The transition
543: redshift is $z_{T}=0.45^{+0.06}_{-0.05}(1\sigma)$ in Figure 5. In
544: this dark energy model $z_{c}$ satisfies the following equation
545: \begin{eqnarray}
546: \nonumber \\ & &
547: \int_{0}^{z_{c}}\frac{dz}{\sqrt{\Omega_{M}(1+z)^{3}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z)^{3(1+w_{0})}e^{3w_{1}z^{2}/2(1+z)^{2}}}}
548: \nonumber \\ & &
549: =\frac{1+z_{c}}{\sqrt{\Omega_{M}(1+z_{c})^{3}+(1-\Omega_{M})(1+z_{c})^{3(1+w_{0})}e^{3w_{1}z_{c}^{2}/2(1+z_{c})^{2}}}}.
550: \end{eqnarray}
551: For $\Omega_{M}=0.27\pm0.04$ , $w_{0}=-1.50_{-0.51}^{+0.82}$ and
552: $w_{1}=5.02_{-4.05}^{+4.86}$, we obtain $z_{c}=1.35 > z_{T}=0.45$.
553:
554: \section{DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS}
555: \label{con}In this paper we have used the Gold sample containing
556: 157 SNe Ia plus two recently well-measured SNe Ia, 1994ae and
557: 1998aq, to explore the property of dark energy and the transition
558: redshift. Our results are listed in Table 1. For a flat universe
559: with a cosmological constant, we measure
560: $\Omega_{M}=0.28_{-0.05}^{+0.04}$ and the transition redshift
561: $z_{T}=0.60_{-0.08}^{+0.06}$. Using accurate formulae of the
562: transition redshift in different dark energy models, we find that
563: the transition redshift varies from $z_{T}=0.29_{-0.06}^{+0.07}$
564: to $z_{T}=0.60_{-0.08}^{+0.06}$. The transition redshifts $z_{T}$
565: for all the tested parametrisations are less than that in the
566: $\Lambda$CDM model. From these results we can see that the
567: transition redshift is different in different dark energy models,
568: ---
569: it is model-dependent. In these models, the dark energy properties
570: are consistent with a cosmological constant, so we cannot exclude
571: that cosmological constant acts as dark energy. We find that
572: $w<-1$ is more favored. For all the dark energy models, we find
573: $z_{c}>z_{T}$. Although there exist many dark energy models, we
574: are still not able to decide which model gives us the right answer
575: and to find out the nature of dark energy. Higher order models are
576: more suitable for probing the nature of dark energy and its
577: evolution, such as the Hannestad-M\"{o}rtsell model and Lee's
578: four-parameter model. However, more parameters mean more degrees
579: of freedom, as well as more degeneracies in the determination of
580: the parameters. The CMB can break degeneracies between
581: cosmological parameters and the SNAP mission will use a two-meter
582: space telescope to obtain high accuracy observations of more than
583: 2000 SNe from $z=0.1$ to $z=1.7$. So the dark energy and the
584: transition redshift will hopefully be determined more accurately.
585: Dark energy may be a clue to new fundamental physics.
586:
587: \begin{acknowledgements}
588: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation
589: of China (grants 10233010 and 10221001).
590: \end{acknowledgements}
591:
592: %-------------------------------------------------------------------
593:
594: \begin{thebibliography}{}
595: \bibitem{} Alam U., Sahni V., Starobinsky A. A. 2004, JCAP, 0406, 008
596: \bibitem{} Carroll S. M., Press W. H., Turner E. L. 1992, ARA\&A, 30, 499
597: \bibitem{} Chang Zh., Wu, F, Q., Zhang X. 2005, Phys. Lett. B
598: \bibitem{} Chevallier M., Polarski D. 2001, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 10, 213
599: \bibitem{} Clocchiatti A. et al, 2006, ApJ, 642, 1
600: \bibitem{} Colgate S. 1979, ApJ, 232, 404
601: \bibitem{} Colgate S., McKee C. 1969, ApJ, 157, 623
602: \bibitem{} Daly R. A., Djorgovski S. G. 2003, ApJ, 597, 9
603: \bibitem{} Daly R. A., Djorgovski S. G. 2004, ApJ, 612,652
604: \bibitem{} Dicus D. A., Repko W. W. 2004, Phys. Rev. D, 70, 083527
605: \bibitem{} Garnavich P. M. et al, 1998, ApJ, 590, 74
606: \bibitem{} Gong Y. G. 2005, Class. Quant. Grav. 22, 2121
607: \bibitem{} Gong Y. G., Zhang Y. Z. 2005. Phys. Rev. D, 72, 043518
608: \bibitem{} Hannestad S., M\"{o}rtsell E. 2004, JCAP, 0409, 001.
609: \bibitem{} Jassal H. K., Bagla J. S., Padmanabhan T. 2004, MNRAS, 356, L11
610: \bibitem{} Jarvis M. et al. 2006, ApJ, 644, 71
611: \bibitem{} Johri V. B., Rath P. K. astro-ph/0510017
612: \bibitem{} Tonry J, L. et al. 2003, ApJ, 594, 1
613: \bibitem{} Kowal C. T. 1968, AJ, 73, 1021
614: \bibitem{} Knop R. A. et al. 2003, ApJ, 598, 102
615: \bibitem{} Lee S. 2005. Phys. Rev. D., 71, 123528
616: \bibitem{} Linder E. V., 2003, Phys. Rev. Lett., 90, 091301
617: \bibitem{} Linder E. V., to be published in 5th International Heidelberg Conference, astro-ph/0501057
618: \bibitem{} Maor I. et al. 2001, Phys. Rev. D., 65, 123003
619: \bibitem{} Meng L. S., Fan Z. H. 2005, Chin. Astron. Astrophys., 6, 155
620: \bibitem{} N$\o$gaard-Nielsen H. et al. 1989, Nature, 339, 523
621: \bibitem{} Perlmutter S. et al. 1999, ApJ. 517, 565
622: \bibitem{} Phillips M. M.1993, ApJ, 413, L105
623: \bibitem{} Porter A. C., Filippenko A. V. 1987, AJ, 93, 1372
624: \bibitem{} Riess A. G. et al. 1998, AJ, 116, 1009
625: \bibitem{} Riess A. G. et al. 2001, ApJ, 560, 49
626: \bibitem{} Riess A. G. et al. 2004, ApJ, 607, 665
627: \bibitem{} Riess A. G. et al. 2005, ApJ, 627, 579
628: \bibitem{} Seljak U. et al. 2005, Phys. Rev. D., 71, 103515
629: \bibitem{} Spergel D. N. et al. 2003, ApJS, 148, 175
630: \bibitem{} Uomoto, A., Kirshner R. P. 1985, A\&A, 149, L7
631: \bibitem{} Virey J. M. et al. 2005, Phys. Rev. D., 72, 061302
632: \bibitem{} Weller J., Albrecht A. 2001, Phys. Rev. Lett., 86, 1939
633: \bibitem{} Weller J., Albrecht A. 2002, Phys. Rev. D., 65, 103512
634: \bibitem{} Wetterich C. 2004, Phys. Lett. B., 594, 17
635: \bibitem{} Wheeler J. C. et al. 1986, PASP, 98, 1018
636: \bibitem{} Zhang X., Wu F.Q. 2005, Phys. Rev. D., 72, 043524
637: \end{thebibliography}
638:
639:
640:
641:
642: %--------------------------------------------------%figure
643: \newpage
644: \begin{table}
645: \begin{center}
646: \caption{Constraints on the cosmological parameters and transition
647: redshift in several dark energy models}
648: \begin{tabular}{lllll}
649: \hline\hline%
650: dark energy model & $w_{0}(1\sigma)$ & $w_{1}(1\sigma)$ & $z_{T}(1\sigma)$ & $z_{c}$ \\
651: \hline
652: $w_{z}=w_{0}$ & $-0.975_{-0.15}^{+0.12}$ & N/A & $0.52_{-0.06}^{+0.05}$ & 2.02 \\
653: $w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{1+z}$ & $-1.15_{-0.17}^{+0.20}$ & N/A & $0.49_{-0.05}^{+0.06}$ &1.63 \\
654: $w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{1+z}e^{z/(1+z)}$ & $-1.10_{-0.11}^{+0.16}$ & N/A & $0.47_{-0.05}^{+0.07}$ &1.90 \\
655: $w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{1+b\ln(z)}$ & N/A & N/A & $0.29_{-0.06}^{+0.07}$ & N/A\\
656: $w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{(1+b\ln(z))^2}$ & N/A & N/A & $0.39_{-0.05}^{+0.06}$ & N/A\\
657: $w_{z}=w_{0}+\frac{w_{1}}{1+\ln(z)}$ & N/A & N/A & $0.42_{-0.07}^{+0.06}$ & N/A\\
658: $w_{z}=w_{0}+w_{1}z$ & $-1.30_{-0.25}^{+0.18}$ & $1.42_{-0.83}^{+0.76}$ & $0.41_{-0.04}^{+0.06}$ &1.20\\
659: $w_{z}=w_{0}+\frac{w_{1}z}{1+z}$ & $-1.35_{-0.28}^{+0.35}$ & $2.02_{-1.85}^{+2.26}$ & $0.31_{-0.02}^{+0.04}$ &1.47\\
660: $w_{z}=w_{0}+\frac{w_{1}z}{(1+z)^2}$ & $-1.50_{-0.51}^{+0.82}$ & $5.02_{-4.05}^{+4.86}$ & $0.45_{-0.05}^{+0.06}$ &1.35\\
661: \hline
662: \end{tabular}
663: \end{center}
664: \end{table}
665:
666: \begin{figure}
667: \includegraphics[width=135mm,height=115mm]{hubble_e.EPS}
668: \caption{Hubble diagram of SNe Ia. Observed SNe Ia are shown as
669: dots. The solid line is the best fit for a flat cosmology:
670: $\Omega_{M}=0.29$ and $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.71$.
671: }
672: \label{Fig1}
673: \end{figure}
674: \newpage
675: %--------------------------------------------------%figure 1
676: \begin{figure}
677: \includegraphics[width=135mm,height=115mm]{ommomx.EPS}
678: \includegraphics[width=135mm,height=110mm]{ommomxtran.EPS}
679: \caption{Left panel shows the $1\sigma$, $2\sigma$, $3\sigma$
680: confidence levels in the $\Omega_{M}-\Omega_{\Lambda}$ plane. The
681: line represents the flat universe. Right panel shows the
682: transition redshift probability curve. The transition redshift can
683: be summarily expressed by $z_{T}=0.60_{-0.08}^{+0.06}$.}
684: \label{Fig2}
685: \end{figure}
686: %--------------------------------------------------%figure 2
687: \begin{figure}
688: \includegraphics[width=135mm,height=115mm]{ommw.EPS}
689: \includegraphics[width=135mm,height=110mm]{ommwtran.EPS}
690: \caption{Left panel shows
691: the $1\sigma$, $2\sigma$, $3\sigma$ confidence regions in the
692: $\Omega_{M}-w_{0}$ plane. Grey contours refer to the $w_{z}=w_{0}$
693: model; dashed contours, the
694: $w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{1+z}\exp(\frac{z}{1+z})$ model; dotted
695: contours, to the $w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{1+z}$ model. Right panel
696: shows the transition redshift probability curve. Dotted, dashed
697: and full lines refer respectively to the $w_{z}=w_{0}$ model the
698: $w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{1+z}\exp(\frac{z}{1+z})$ model, and the
699: $w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{1+z}$ model.}
700: \label{Fig3}
701: \end{figure}
702: %--------------------------------------------------%figure 3
703: \begin{figure}
704: \includegraphics[width=135mm,height=115mm]{ommw3tran.EPS}
705: \caption{The transition redshift probability curve. Full line
706: refers to the $w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{(1+b\ln(z))^2}$ model; dashed
707: line, the $w_{z}=\frac{w_{0}}{1+b\ln(z)}$ model; dotted line, the
708: $w_{z}=w_{0}+\frac{w_{1}}{1+\ln(z)}$ model.}
709: \label{Fig4}
710: \end{figure}
711: %--------------------------------------------------%figure 4
712:
713: \begin{figure}
714: \includegraphics[width=135mm,height=110mm]{w0w1.EPS}
715: \includegraphics[width=135mm,height=110mm]{w0w1tran.EPS}
716: \caption{Left panel shows confidence regions derived from 159 SNe
717: Ia. Solid contours refer to the
718: $w(z)=w_{0}+\frac{w_{1}z}{(1+z)^{2}}$ model; green contours, the
719: $w(z)=w_{0}+w_{1}z/(1+z)$ model; dashed contours, the
720: $w_{z}=w_{0}+w_{1}z$ model. The position of a cosmological
721: constant, $(-1,0)$, is marked by a large dot. Right panel shows
722: the transition redshift probability versus. Solid line refers to
723: the $w_{z}=w_{0}+w_{1}z$ model; dashed line, the
724: $w(z)=w_{0}+w_{1}z/(1+z)$ model; dotted line, the
725: $w(z)=w_{0}+w_{1}z/(1+z)^{2}$ model.}
726: \label{Fig5}
727: \end{figure}
728: %--------------------------------------------------%figure 5
729:
730:
731:
732: \end{document}
733: