No Arabic abstract
Applying the distance sum rule in strong gravitational lensing (SGL) and type Ia supernova (SN Ia) observations, one can provide an interesting cosmological model-independent method to determine the cosmic curvature parameter $Omega_k$. In this paper, with the newly compiled data sets including 161 galactic-scale SGL systems and 1048 SN Ia data, we place constraints on $Omega_k$ within the framework of three types of lens models extensively used in SGL studies. Moreover, to investigate the effect of different mass lens samples on the results, we divide the SGL sample into three sub-samples based on the center velocity dispersion of intervening galaxies. In the singular isothermal sphere (SIS) and extended power-law lens models, a flat universe is supported with the uncertainty about 0.2, while a closed universe is preferred in the power-law lens model. We find that the choice of lens models and the classification of SGL data actually can influence the constraints on $Omega_k$ significantly.
An approach to estimate the spatial curvature $Omega_k$ from data independently of dynamical models is suggested, through kinematic parameterizations of the comoving distance ($D_{C}(z)$) with third degree polynomial, of the Hubble parameter ($H(z)$) with a second degree polynomial and of the deceleration parameter ($q(z)$) with first order polynomial. All these parameterizations were done as function of redshift $z$. We used SNe Ia dataset from Pantheon compilation with 1048 distance moduli estimated in the range $0.01<z<2.3$ with systematic and statistical errors and a compilation of 31 $H(z)$ data estimated from cosmic chronometers. The spatial curvature found for $D_C(z)$ parametrization was $Omega_{k}=-0.03^{+0.24+0.56}_{-0.30-0.53}$. The parametrization for deceleration parameter $q(z)$ resulted in $Omega_{k}=-0.08^{+0.21+0.54}_{-0.27-0.45}$. The $H(z)$ parametrization has shown incompatibilities between $H(z)$ and SNe Ia data constraints, so these analyses were not combined. The $D_C(z)$ and $q(z)$ parametrizations are compatible with the spatially flat Universe as predicted by many inflation models and data from CMB. This type of analysis is very appealing as it avoids any bias because it does not depend on assumptions about the matter content of the Universe for estimating $Omega_k$.
The effective anisotropic stress or gravitational slip $eta=-Phi/Psi$ is a key variable in the characterisation of the physical origin of the dark energy, as it allows to test for a non-minimal coupling of the dark sector to gravity in the Jordan frame. It is however important to use a fully model-independent approach when measuring $eta$ to avoid introducing a theoretical bias into the results. In this paper we forecast the precision with which future large surveys can determine $eta$ in a way that only relies on directly observable quantities. In particular, we do not assume anything concerning the initial spectrum of perturbations, nor on its evolution outside the observed redshift range, nor on the galaxy bias. We first leave $eta$ free to vary in space and time and then we model it as suggested in Horndeski models of dark energy. Among our results, we find that a future large scale lensing and clustering survey can constrain $eta$ to within 10% if $k$-independent, and to within 60% or better at $k=0.1 h/$Mpc if it is restricted to follow the Horndeski model.
The detection of an electromagnetic counterpart (GRB 170817A) to the gravitational wave signal (GW170817) from the merger of two neutron stars opens a completely new arena for testing theories of gravity. We show that this measurement allows us to place stringent constraints on general scalar-tensor and vector-tensor theories, while allowing us to place an independent bound on the graviton mass in bimetric theories of gravity. These constraints severely reduce the viable range of cosmological models that have been proposed as alternatives to general relativistic cosmology.
We present constraints on extensions of the minimal cosmological models dominated by dark matter and dark energy, $Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM, by using a combined analysis of galaxy clustering and weak gravitational lensing from the first-year data of the Dark Energy Survey (DES Y1) in combination with external data. We consider four extensions of the minimal dark energy-dominated scenarios: 1) nonzero curvature $Omega_k$, 2) number of relativistic species $N_{rm eff}$ different from the standard value of 3.046, 3) time-varying equation-of-state of dark energy described by the parameters $w_0$ and $w_a$ (alternatively quoted by the values at the pivot redshift, $w_p$, and $w_a$), and 4) modified gravity described by the parameters $mu_0$ and $Sigma_0$ that modify the metric potentials. We also consider external information from Planck CMB measurements; BAO measurements from SDSS, 6dF, and BOSS; RSD measurements from BOSS; and SNIa information from the Pantheon compilation. Constraints on curvature and the number of relativistic species are dominated by the external data; when these are combined with DES Y1, we find $Omega_k=0.0020^{+0.0037}_{-0.0032}$ at the 68% confidence level, and $N_{rm eff}<3.28, (3.55)$ at 68% (95%) confidence. For the time-varying equation-of-state, we find the pivot value $(w_p, w_a)=(-0.91^{+0.19}_{-0.23}, -0.57^{+0.93}_{-1.11})$ at pivot redshift $z_p=0.27$ from DES alone, and $(w_p, w_a)=(-1.01^{+0.04}_{-0.04}, -0.28^{+0.37}_{-0.48})$ at $z_p=0.20$ from DES Y1 combined with external data; in either case we find no evidence for the temporal variation of the equation of state. For modified gravity, we find the present-day value of the relevant parameters to be $Sigma_0= 0.43^{+0.28}_{-0.29}$ from DES Y1 alone, and $(Sigma_0, mu_0)=(0.06^{+0.08}_{-0.07}, -0.11^{+0.42}_{-0.46})$ from DES Y1 combined with external data, consistent with predictions from GR.
We derive a simple model-independent upper bound on the strength of magnetic fields obtained in inflationary and post-inflationary magnetogenesis taking into account the constraints imposed by the condition of weak coupling, back-reaction and Schwinger effect. This bound turns out to be rather low for cosmologically interesting spatial scales. Somewhat higher upper bound is obtained if one assumes that some unknown mechanism suppresses the Schwinger effect in the early universe. Incidentally, we correct our previous estimates for this case.