Can the big rip ever be ruled out?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Trollfaz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Big rip Rip
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of the Big Rip, which occurs if the dark energy equation of state parameter, w, is more negative than -1. Current observations indicate that w is very close to -1, but there is insufficient evidence to definitively rule out the Big Rip scenario. According to Katie Mack's book, "The End of Everything," while the earliest date for the Big Rip can be pushed further into the future, it cannot be eliminated indefinitely, with the latest data suggesting no rips for the next 200 billion years. The conversation also touches on the complexities of energy conservation in general relativity and the implications for dark energy density.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of dark energy and its role in cosmology
  • Familiarity with the dark energy equation of state parameter, w
  • Basic knowledge of general relativity and energy conservation laws
  • Awareness of current cosmological models and theories
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of dark energy density on cosmic expansion
  • Study the concept of the dark energy equation of state and its measurements
  • Explore theories of quantum gravity and their relation to cosmological models
  • Investigate the role of experimental error in cosmological measurements
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, cosmologists, physicists, and anyone interested in the future of the universe and the implications of dark energy on cosmic fate.

Trollfaz
Messages
144
Reaction score
16
In order for the big rip to happen, the dark energy equation of state w must be more negative than -1, allowing dark energy density to grow.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Rip
According to Wikipedia, the current observed w value is very close to -1 but it acknowledges that there is insufficient evidence to strictly disprove the big rip
I read Katie Macks book called The End of Everything and inside it, she mentioned that all experiments have an error therefore we cannot force the value of w to be exactly -1. So we can push the big rips earliest date further into the future but not indefinitely far. So far the latest data assures that there will be no rips for the next 200 billion years according to the book.
But doesn't increasing dark energy density violate the law of energy conservation. There is no mechanism we know of that allows this.
 
Space news on Phys.org
The actual value of ##w## might be greater than -1, in which case we might eventually exclude all ##w\leq-1## models. If the actual value of ##w## is exactly -1 then you are correct that we could not rule out the Big Rip from measurement of ##w## alone. Other discoveries could rule it out, of course. For example a working theory of quantum gravity might allow us to derive ##w## from more fundamental considerations.
Trollfaz said:
But doesn't increasing dark energy density violate the law of energy conservation. There is no mechanism we know of that allows this.
Conservation of energy is a complicated topic in general relativity. In the global sense that you are using it here, there's no way to state it - and since we can't state it no scenario violates it. And in the local sense where a conservation law can be stated quintessence doesn't violate it.

It's worth noting that there are ways of "kind of" stating a global energy conservation law in GR. Some physicists are convinced by these and some aren't - I don't know where your book stands on the topic. I don't understand the subject well enough to comment on whether the Big Rip violates any of these kinda-sorta-laws, but there are enough serious physicists who don't accept them at all that I'd say worrying about possible violations of global energy conservation is putting the cart before the horse. We need to agree (a) that there is such a law, and (b) what it is before we worry about whether a scenario violates it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
As @Ibix has mentioned, if w is exactly -1 then experimental error will never allow you to rule out ##w < -1## (except by statistical errors - either systematic or random). This is true for any measured quantity with a particular value. Take the photon mass for example. It is zero in our models because that works very very well. However, experiments cannot rule out a teeny tiny mass ##< 10^{-18}## eV (pdg.lbl.gov).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K