r
X
i
v
:
1
4
0
3
.
1
1
0
3
v
1
[
a
s
t
r
o

p
h
.
C
O
]
5
M
a
r
2
0
1
4
Cosmology with Riccitype dark energy
Cosmology with Riccitype dark energy
W. Zimdahl,
1
J.C. Fabris,
1
S. del Campo,
2
and R. Herrera
2
1)
Departamento de Fsica, Universidade Federal do Esprito Santo
Vit oria, Esprito Santo, Brazil
2)
Instituto de Fsica, Ponticia Universidad Catolica de Valparaso, Chile
(Dated: 6 March 2014)
We consider the dynamics of a cosmological substratum of pressureless matter and holographic dark energy
with a cuto length proportional to the Ricci scale. Stability requirements for the matter perturbations are
shown to single out a model with a xed relation between the present matter fraction
m0
and the present
value
0
of the equationofstate parameter of the dark energy. This model has the same number of free
parameters as the CDM model but it has no CDM limit. We discuss the consistency between background
observations and the mentioned stabilityguaranteeing parameter combination.
PACS numbers: 98.80.k, 95.35.+d, 95.36.+x, 98.65.Dx
Keywords: Cosmology, dark matter, holographic dark energy, cosmological perturbation theory
I. INTRODUCTION
Among the alternative approaches to describe the dark
cosmological sector, consisting of dark matter (DM) and
dark energy (DE), so called holographic DE models have
received considerable attention
1,2
. The underlying holo
graphic principle states that the number of degrees of
freedom in a bounded system should be nite and related
to the area of its boundary
3
. On this basis, a eld theo
retical relation between a short distance (ultraviolet) cut
o and a long distance (infrared) cuto was established
1
.
Such relation ensures that the energy in a box of size L
does not exceed the energy of a black hole of the same
size. If applied to the dynamics of the Universe, L has to
be a cosmological length scale. Dierent choices of this
cuto scale result in dierent DE models. For the most
obvious choice, the Hubble scale, only models in which
DM and DE are interacting with each other also nongrav
itationally, give rise to a suitable dynamics
4,5
. Following
Ref. 2, there has been a considerable number of investi
gations based on the future event horizon as cuto scale.
All models with a cuto at the future event horizon, how
ever, suer from the serious drawback that they cannot
describe a transition from decelerated to accelerated ex
pansion. A future event horizon does not exist during
the period of decelerated expansion. We are focussing
here on a further option that has received attention more
recently, a model based on a cuto length proportional
to the Ricci scale. A distance proportional to the Ricci
scale has been identied as a causal connection scale for
perturbations
6
. As a cuto length in DE models it was
rst used in Ref. 7. Subsequent investigations include
Ref. 8 and, for the perturbation dynamics, Refs. 911.
Here, we reconsider the dynamics of a twocomponent
system of pressureless DM and Riccitype DE both in
the homogeneous and isotropic background and on the
perturbative level
12,13
. Whereas most dynamic DE sce
narios start with an assumption for the equationofstate
(EoS) parameter for the DE, the starting point of holo
graphic models is an expression for the DE energy den
sity from which the EoS is then derived. As was pointed
out in Ref. 12, the mere denition of the holographic
DE density, independently of the choice of the specic
cuto length, implies an interaction with the DM com
ponent. Requiring this interaction to vanish is equiva
lent to impose an additional condition on the dynamics.
In the case of Riccitype DE this condition establishes
a simple relation between the matter fraction and the
necessarily timedependent EoS parameter. Of course,
a timevarying EoS parameter is not compatible with a
cosmological constant. Our main aim here is to perform
a gaugeinvariant perturbation analysis for this model.
It will turn out that the general perturbation dynam
ics suers from instabilities. There exists just one single
conguration without instabilities at nite values of the
scale factor a
10,13
. We also update previous tests of the
homogeneous and isotropic background dynamics using
recent results for the dierential age of old objects based
on the H(z) dependence, data from SNIa and from BAO.
II. HOLOGRAPHIC DARK ENERGY
A. General properties
The cosmic medium is assumed to consist of pressure
less DM with energy density
m
and a holographic DE
component with energy density
H
. In the spatially at
case Friedmanns equation is
3H
2
= 8 G(
m
+
H
) , (1)
where H =
a
a
is the Hubble rate and a is the scale factor
of the RobertsonWalker metric. In general, both compo
nents are not separately conserved but obey the balance
equations
m
+ 3H
m
= Q,
H
+ 3H(1 +)
H
= Q (2)
with a source (or loss) term Q, such that the total energy
=
m
+
H
is conserved. Here,
pH
H
=
p
H
is the EoS
Cosmology with Riccitype dark energy 2
parameter of the DE and p
H
is the pressure associated
with the holographic component. In terms of the scale
factor as independent variable, the acceleration equation
can be written
d ln H
d ln a
=
3
2
_
1 +
(a)
1 +r(a)
_
, (3)
where r
m
H
is the ratio of the energy densities. The
total eective EoS of the cosmic medium is
p
=
1 +r
. (4)
According to the balance equations (2), the ratio r
changes as
r = 3Hr (1 +r)
_
1 +r
+
Q
3H
m
_
. (5)
Following Refs. 1 and 2, we write the holographic energy
density as
H
=
3 c
2
M
2
p
L
2
. (6)
The quantity L is the infrared cuto scale and M
p
=
1/
H
M
2
Pl
L, (7)
which is at the heart of any holographic DE model. It
states that the energy in a box of size L should not exceed
the energy of a black hole of the same size
1
.
Dierentiation of the expression (6) for the holographic
DE density and use of the energy balances (2) yields
Q
H
= 2
L
L
3H (1 +) . (8)
In general, there is no reason for Q to vanish. Assuming
Q = 0 provides us with a specic relationship between
and the ratio of the rates
L
L
and H. Any nonvanishing Q
will modify this relationship.
With Q from (8), the general dynamics (5) of the
energydensity ratio r becomes
r = 3H (1 +r)
_
1 +
1 +r
2
3
L
HL
_
. (9)
The case without interaction is characterized by [cf.
Eq. (5)]
Q = 0 r = r
_
2
L
L
3H
_
= 3H r (10)
with a generally timedependent .
Dierent choices of the cuto scale L give rise to dif
ferent expressions for the total eective EoS parameter
in Eq. (4) and to dierent relations between and r. We
shall briey sketch the situations for the Hubble radius
and for the future event horizon as cuto lengths before
considering in detail the Ricci scale.
B. Hubblescale cuto
For L = H
1
the holographic DE density is
H
= 3 c
2
M
2
p
H
2
. (11)
For the deceleration parameter one has
q = 1
H
H
2
=
1
2
_
1
Q
H
m
_
. (12)
In the interactionfree case we recover the Einsteinde Sit
ter value q =
1
2
. The condition for accelerated expansion
is Q > H
m
. To describe a transition from decelerated to
accelerated expansion, Q has to change from Q < H
m
to Q > H
m
. A viable scenario can be realized, e.g., by
a choice
5
Q
3H
m
=
_
H
H
0
_
n
, (13)
where is an interaction constant. The resulting dynam
ics is that of a generalized Chaplygin gas with a Hubble
rate
H
H
0
=
_
1
3
_
1/n _
1 2q
0
+ 2 (1 +q
0
) a
3n/2
_
1/n
, (14)
where is related to the present value q
0
of the deceler
ation parameter q by
=
1
3
(1 2q
0
) . (15)
For n = 2 one reproduces the CDM dynamics.
C. Eventhorizon cuto
With L = R
E
, where
R
E
(t) = a(t)
_
t
dt
a(t
)
= a
_
a
da
a
2
(16)
is the future event horizon, the holographic DE density
(6) is
H
=
3 c
2
M
2
p
R
2
E
. (17)
The DE balance (2) can be written as
H
+ 3H(1 +
E
eff
)
H
= 0 (18)
with an eective EoS (the superscript E denotes the event
horizon)
E
eff
= +
Q
3H
H
=
1
3
_
1 +
2
R
E
H
_
. (19)
This eective EoS does not directly depend on . How
ever, the ratio r that enters R
E
H is determined by via
Cosmology with Riccitype dark energy 3
Eq. (9). Notice also, that this eective EoS for the DE
component is dierent from the total eective EoS of the
cosmic medium which is
1+r
. In the previous Hubble
scalecuto case both these quantities were identical.
Dierent from the previous Hubblescale cuto, there
exists a noninteracting limit with accelerated expansion
in the present case. In this special situation
=
1
3
_
1 +
2
c
1 +r
_
and R
E
H =
2
1 + 3
(20)
are valid. Explicitly, the relation between and r is
=
1
3
+
1
3
(1 + 3
0
)
_
1 +r
0
1 +r
. (21)
It is obvious, that for any
0
1, the parameter
remains always smaller than
1
3
, demonstrating the im
possibility of a matterdominated period in this context.
D. Ricciscale cuto
Our interest in the present paper will be the Ricciscale
cuto. The role of a distance proportional to the Ricci
scale as a causal connection scale for perturbations was
noticed in Ref. 6. In Ref. 7 it was used for the rst time as
a DE cuto scale. The Ricci scalar is R = 6
_
2H
2
+
H
_
.
For the corresponding cuto scale one has L
2
= 6/R, i.e.,
H
= 3 c
2
M
2
p
R
6
=
_
2H
2
+
H
_
, (22)
where =
3c
2
8G
. Upon using (3) we obtain
H
=
2
H
2
_
1 3
1 +r
_
(23)
for the holographic DE density. Notice that the (not
yet known) EoS parameter explicitly enters
H
. Use of
Friedmanns equation provides us with
1 =
c
2
2
(1 +r 3) =
1
3
(1 +r)
2
3c
2
, (24)
which coincides with the result in Ref. 10. Obviously, a
constant value of necessarily implies a constant r and
vice versa. For the source term we have
12
Q =
3H
1 +r
_
r
H
_
H
. (25)
It is obvious that a constant EoS parameter is com
patible with Q = 0 only for = 0, i.e., if
H
behaves as
dust. For a timevarying EoS parameter = 0, however,
there exists a non trivial case Q = 0:
Q = 0 r =
H
r =
d ln
d ln a
. (26)
In the remainder of the paper we shall consider this case,
for which the EoS parameter is explicitly given by
=
0
r
0
3
0
r
0
a
(r030)
3
0
. (27)
At high redshift we have
0 , r r
0
3
0
, (a 1) . (28)
The property that noninteracting RicciDE behaves as
dust at high redshift was rst pointed out in Ref. 7. This
model naturally reproduces an early matterdominated
era. For r
0
1
3
and
0
1, the ratio r approaches
r
10
3
for a 1. This value is only roughly ten times
larger than the present value r
0
. For the CDM model
the corresponding dierence is about nine orders of mag
nitude. In this sense, the coincidence problem is consid
erably alleviated for our Ricci CDM model for which the
Hubble rate becomes
H
H
0
= a
3/2
3
0
a
(r030)
r
0
[1 +r
0
3
0
]
3
0
r
0
[1 +r
0
3
0
]
. (29)
III. PERTURBATION DYNAMICS
A. The twocomponent system
Generally, the twocomponent model is described by
an energymomentum tensor
T
ik
= u
i
u
k
+ph
ik
, T
ik
;k
= 0 (30)
with h
ik
= g
ik
+u
i
u
k
and g
ik
u
i
u
k
= 1. The quantity u
i
denotes the total fourvelocity of the cosmic substratum.
Latin indices run from 0 to 3. The total T
ik
splits into a
matter component and a holographic DE component,
T
ik
= T
ik
m
+T
ik
H
, (31)
with (A = m, H)
T
ik
A
=
A
u
i
A
u
k
A
+p
A
h
ik
A
, h
ik
A
= g
ik
+u
i
A
u
k
A
. (32)
For separately conserved uids we have T
ik
m ;k
= 0 and
T
ik
H ;k
= 0. In general, each component has its own four
velocity, with g
ik
u
i
A
u
k
A
= 1. For the homogeneous and
isotropic background we assume u
a
m
= u
a
H
= u
a
.
Indicating rstorder perturbations about the homo
geneous and isotropic background by a hat symbol, the
perturbed time components of the fourvelocities are
u
0
= u
0
= u
0
m
= u
0
H
=
1
2
g
00
. (33)
Restricting ourselves to scalar perturbations, we dene
the (three) scalar quantities v, v
m
and v
H
by
u
v
,
, u
m
v
m,
u
H
v
H,
. (34)
Cosmology with Riccitype dark energy 4
B. Basic gaugeinvariant set of equations
Introducing fractional energydensity perturbations
c
= +
v ,
c
=
+
v , p
c
= p + pv , (35)
energy and momentum conservations for the cosmic
medium as a whole reduce to
14
c
+
_
1 +
p
c
= 0 . (36)
The superscript c indicates that the corresponding vari
ables are dened with respect to a comoving observer.
The perturbation
c
has to be determined from the per
turbed Raychaudhuri equation for . In our context one
nds at linear order
c
+
2
3
c
+ 4G
c
u
a
:a
= 0 (37)
with
u
m
;m
=
1
a
2
p
c
+p
, (38)
where is the threedimensional Laplacian. Combing
Eqs. (36) and (37) and specifying the pressure perturba
tions will result in a secondorder equation for
c
. On
the other hand, with
H
H
H
and
D
H
H
H
+p
H
=
H
1 +
(39)
it will be useful to consider the combination S
mH
m
D
H
, where
m
m
m
. Our aim is to obtain an equa
tion also for S
mH
. To this purpose we have to introduce
a further ingredient. So far the pressure perturbations
are not suciently specied. In general, pressure per
turbations in twocomponent systems are nonadiabatic.
Firstly, because of the twocomponent nature itself, sec
ondly because each of the components may be nonadia
batic on its own. The relevant combination for our DE
component is
p
H
p
H
H
H
=
H
_
+
3
rD
H
_
, (40)
which is a gaugeinvariant expression. Now an assump
tion for the perturbed EoS parameter is necessary to
proceed. We shall restrict ourselves here to adiabatic in
ternal perturbations of the DE component, equivalent to
a vanishing of the combination (40):
p
H
=
p
H
H
H
=
r
3
D
H
. (41)
This assumption of an adiabatic DE component allows
us to relate the otherwise undetermined perturbation
of the EoS parameter to the DE energy perturbation
D
H
. We emphasize that the total perturbation dynamics
remains nonadiabatic due to the twocomponent nature
of the medium. The resulting coupled equations for
c
and S
mH
in the k space then are
13
(the prime denotes a
derivative with respect to a)
c
+
_
3
2
15
2
p
+ 3
p
_
c
a
_
3
2
+ 12
p
9
2
p
2
2
9
p
k
2
a
2
H
2
p
_
c
a
2
=
k
2
a
2
H
2
p
S
mH
a
2
(42)
and
S
mH
+
_
3
2
3
r
1 +
p
3
2
p
_
S
mH
a
+
r
1 +
p
k
2
a
2
H
2
S
mH
a
2
=
1 +r
1 +
p
k
2
a
2
H
2
c
a
2
, (43)
respectively, where we have to exclude the case = 1.
C. Matter perturbations
To obtain the matterenergy perturbations, we decom
pose the total energydensity perturbation
c
according
to
c
=
m
c
m
+
H
c
H
. (44)
Combination with S
mH
=
m
H
1+
leads to
c
m
=
1
1 +
1+r
_
c
+
1 +
1 +r
S
mH
_
, (45)
which describes the matterenergy perturbations as a
combination of
c
and S
mH
. To obtain its dynamics one
has to solve the coupled system of equations (42) and
(43).
The matter density perturbation
c
m
in relation (45) is
dened with respect to the total comoving gauge. To ob
tain the matter density perturbation, comoving with the
matter velocity,
cm
m
=
m
+
m
m
v
m
, we have to consider
c
m
=
m
+
m
m
v =
cm
m
+
m
m
(v v
m
) . (46)
Since
13
v v
m
=
H
+p
H
+p
a
2
k
2
S
mH
, (47)
the quantity of interest is
cm
m
=
c
m
3
1 +
r
1+
a
2
H
2
k
2
aS
mH
. (48)
Obviously,
c
m
and
cm
m
dier by the last term in relation
(48). Because of the factor
a
2
H
2
k
2
(assuming = 1) one
expects that on scales smaller than the Hubble scale the
dierences between
c
m
and
cm
m
are small.
Cosmology with Riccitype dark energy 5
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
10
0
10
20
30
a
FIG. 1. Evolution of the perturbation quantities SmH (dotted
line),
c
(dashdotted line),
c
m
(dashed line) and
c
m
m (thin
solid line) for 0 = 0.9, r0 = 0.4 and k = 0.1. For compari
son the CDM result (thick solid line) is also included.
D. A holographic model for the cosmic dynamics
In Fig. 1 we show the behavior of the quantities S
mH
,
c
,
c
m
and
c
m
m
for
0
= 0.9 with k = 0.1. While this
gure conrms that dierences between
c
m
and
cm
m
are
indeed small on the chosen scale, there appear oscillations
of all the perturbation quantities very close to the present
time. This reminds of a similar feature in (generalized)
Chaplygingas models which apparently have jeopardized
these models
14
. Still more serious is the existence of in
stabilities at future values a > 1 of the scale factor, re
lated to a crossing of the phantom divide = 1. Insta
bilities occur if the denominator 1 + in (43) vanishes,
i.e., if approaches 1. From Eq. (27) one nds the
condition for 1 + = 0,
r
0
=
0
(3 (r
0
3
0
)) a
r030
i
, (49)
which determines the value a
i
of the scale factor at which
the instability occurs. Solving for a
i
yields
a
r030
i
=
r
0
0
(3 (1 +
0
) r
0
)
. (50)
Now we assume
0
= 1 + and consider the cases
0
> 1 and
0
< 1 separately. For =
r0
3
and = 1
we have
a
r030
i
=
r
0
(r
0
3) (1 )
. (51)
For > 0 we nd a
i
> 1, i.e., the instability sets in at a
nite value of the scale factor in the future. For < 0,
i.e. for a phantom EoS, there appears an instability in
the past at a
i
< 1. Since such kind of instability has
not been observed, a present phantom EoS is denitely
excluded in the context of our model. The limit between
the two regimes is just = 0 where we have a
i
= 1, i.e.,
an instability at the present epoch.
The only case without instabilities at nite values of
the scale factor is a xed relation r
0
3
0
= 3 between the
initially independent values of r
0
and
0
. Since r
0
> 0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
a
FIG. 2. Evolution of the perturbation quantities SmH (dotted
line),
c
(dashdotted line),
c
m
(dashed line) and
c
m
m
(thin
solid line) for r0 = 0.4 and k = 0.1 on the basis of (53) and
(54). The CDM result is represented by the thick solid line.
The relative density perturbations SmH are negligible during
the entire evolution. The results for
c
m
and
c
m
m are almost
identical.
necessarily, this implies
0
> 1. Consequently, the only
physically acceptable case is
0
= 1 +
r
0
3
m0
= 3
1 +
0
1 + 3 (1 +
0
)
. (52)
The parameters
0
and r
0
are necessarily related to each
other and cannot be chosen independently. In a sense,
r
0
quanties the deviation of
0
from
0
= 1. Under
this condition we have c
2
=
1
2
. This is exactly the result
found by Karwan and Thitapura in their study of insta
bilities through nonadiabatic perturbations in a system
of matter and Ricci DE
10
.
The solutions for and r then simplify to
=
0
(1 +
0
) a
3
0
and r = 3
r
0
(3 r
0
) a
3
+r
0
,
(53)
respectively. Combination of both solutions has the im
portant consequence
r
1 +
= 3
p
= 0 . (54)
This makes all the coupling terms (and some others) in
the coupled system (42) and (43) vanish. Also the pres
sure perturbations p
c
vanish. The square of the Hubble
rate turns out to be
H
2
H
2
0
=
m0
a
3
+ 1 +
1
3
m0
_
a
3
4
_
. (55)
Notice that we have the same number of free parameters
as in the CDM model, but there is no CDM limit
of (55). The behavior of the perturbation quantities on
the basis of (53) and (54) is visualized in Fig. 2. This
gure conrms that for the chosen conguration there
are neither oscillations nor instabilities. From this point
of view the model appears acceptable.
Cosmology with Riccitype dark energy 6
1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0
r
0
FIG. 3. Twodimensional PDF for 0 and r0 resulting from
a combination of the three tests. The straight line represents
the instabilityavoiding conguration r0 = 3 (1 + 0).
We have tested this model by the dierential age of old
objects based on the H(z) dependence
15,16
as well as by
the data from SNIa
17
and from BAO
18
. The details of the
analysis are given in Ref. 13. The results are presented
in Fig. 3 which shows the twodimensional probability
distribution function (PDF) at 1 (68% of condence
level), 2 (95% of condence level) and 3 (99% of con
dence level). The estimation for
0
, based on a combina
tion of the three tests at 2, is
0
= 0.987
+0.083
0.100
, while
for r
0
we nd r
0
= 0.406
+0.073
0.061
. The straight line rep
resents the combination r
0
= 3 (1 +
0
) which is singled
out by the stability analysis of the perturbation dynam
ics. The tension to the results for the background dy
namics is obvious, an agreement is possible only at the
3 level.
IV. SUMMARY
Noninteracting Riccitype DE is characterized by a
necessarily timedependent EoS parameter. This makes
it an observationally testable alternative to the CDM
model. There exists a a relationship between this EoS
parameter and the matter content of the Universe. The
ratio of the energy densities of DM and DE varies con
siderably less than for the CDM model. Since the time
of radiation decoupling it has changed by about one or
der of magnitude compared with roughly nine orders of
magnitude for the CDM model. This amounts to a re
markable alleviation of the coincidence problem. Ricci
type DE behaves almost as dust at high redshift. Our
statistical analysis, based on recent observational data
from SNIa, BAO and H(z), results in a preferred value of
c
2
0.46 for the RicciDE parameter which conrms ear
lier studies in the literature
7
. Within a gaugeinvariant
analysis we calculated the matter perturbations as a com
bination of the total energy perturbations of the cosmic
medium and the relative perturbations of the compo
nents. The perturbation dynamics suers from insta
bilities that exclude a present phantomtype EoS. It is
only for a specic relation between the values
m0
of the
present matter density and the present EoS parameter
0
that the dynamics remains stable for any nite scale
factor value. This relation corresponds to a RicciDE
parameter c
2
= 0.5
10
. Holographic Riccitype DE repre
sents a theoretically appealing scenario which does not
need additional parameters except H
0
and
m0
. Despite
of its attractive features, the stable conguration is only
marginally consistent with the observationally preferred
background values of
m0
and
0
.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by the Comisi on Nacional
de Ciencias y Tecnologa (Chile) through the FONDE
CYT Grants No. 1110230 and No. 1130628 (R.H.
and S.d.C). J.C.F and W.Z acknowledge support by
FONDECYTConcurso incentivo a la Cooperaci on In
ternacional No. 1130628 as well as by CNPq (Brazil)
and FAPES (Brazil). We thank Alonso Romero for care
fully checking our calculations.
1
A. G. Cohen, D.B. Kaplan and A. E. Nelson, Phys. Rev. Lett.
82, 4971 (1999).
2
M. Li, Phys. Lett. B603, 1 (2004).
3
G. t Hooft, arXiv: grqc/9310026; L. Susskind, J. Math. Phys.
36, 6377 (1995).
4
D. Pav on and W. Zimdahl, Phys. Lett. B628, 206 (2005).
5
W. Zimdahl and D. Pav on, Class. Quantum Grav. 24, 5641
(2007); W. Zimdahl, IJMPD 17, 651 (2008).
6
R. Brustein and G. Veneziano, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 5695 (2000).
7
C. Gao, F. Q. Wu, X. Chen and Y. G. Shen, Phys. Rev. D 79,
043511 (2009).
8
RG. Cai, B. Hu and Y. Zhang, Commun. Theor. Phys. 51, 954
(2009).
9
ChaoJun Feng and XinZhou Li, Phys. Lett. B 680, 184 (2009);
arXiv:0904.2972.
10
K. Karwan and T. Thitapura, JCAP 1201, 017 (2012);
arXiv:1110.2451.
11
Yuting Wang, Lixin Xu and Yuanxing Gui, Phys. Rev. D 84,
063513 (2011); arXiv:1110.4401.
12
S. del Campo, J. C. Fabris, R. Herrera and W. Zimdahl, Phys.
Rev. D 83, 123006 (2011).
13
S. del Campo, J. C. Fabris, R. Herrera and W. Zimdahl, Phys.
Rev. D 87, 123002 (2013).
14
W. S. Hip olitoRicaldi, H. E. S. Velten and W. Zimdahl, JCAP
0906 016 (2009); W. S. Hip olitoRicaldi, H. E. S. Velten and W.
Zimdahl, Phys. Rev. D82, 063507 (2010).
15
M. Moresco, A. Cimatti, R. Jimenez et al. JCAP 1208, 006
(2012), arXiv:1201.3609.
16
O. Farooq, D. Mania and B. Ratra, Astrophys. J. 764, 712
(2013), arXiv:1211.4253.
17
R. Amanullah et al., Astrophys. J. 716, 712( 2010).
18
C. Blake et al., MNRAS 418, 1707 (2011), arXiv:1108.2635.