Graduate Instability of Cosmology with Quantum Corrections

[David Miller]

A good year ago, quantum corrections have been proposed to the very early Universe. It was concluded that these quantum corrections contain a precise estimation for the cosmological constant and the so-called radiation term. The authors even have interpreted the latter as evading the big-bang singularity and determining an infinite age of the Universe. This was mentioned in science and social media for instance http://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html

This proposal was sharply criticized in http://arxiv.org/pdf/1505.03070.pdf

Instead of struggling with the correctness of the given approach and to retry to rederive the mathematical equations as partly done in http://arxiv.org/pdf/1505.03070.pdf, Tawfik et al. wanted to check the so-called "perturbative instability", which based is on whether or not any added perturbation alters at a later time. The universe we live in and the one described by such world approach is apparently stable despite its accelerated expansion. Thus the claimed world model should absolve the
"stability check", http://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.03032.pdf and Physical Review D
https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.063526 show that the "Cosmology with quantum equation" is simply unstable.

 

[David Miller]

Thanks Admin! I ll reword the post

 

[David Miller]

The recent paper by Tawfik et al. entitled with "Perturbative Instability of Cosmology from Quantum Potential" https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.063526 shows that Ali and Das, "Cosmology from quantum potential," http://arxiv.org/abs/1404.3093 which was commented in https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/ali-and-das-cosmology-from-quantum-potential.797183/ describes an unstable Universe. The perturbative instability is nicely written in Tawfik et al.'s paper.

I'm not a quite familiar specialist on such "instabilities checks", but from a brief inspection it looks to me that the recent paper simply revises the earlier one. Should we now ignore "Cosmology from quantum potential," http://arxiv.org/abs/1404.3093?

Is this impression correct?