A positive cosmological constant contributes a constant vacuum energy density and negative pressure. In the time-unit convention of Question 2,
It therefore causes accelerating expansion once its negative-pressure effect outweighs the decelerating components. Its density stays constant while matter dilutes, so a small early contribution can dominate late. For an isolated positive-vacuum component the scale factor grows exponentially. The cosmological constant problem is the mismatch between the small inferred vacuum density and generic quantum-field vacuum-energy expectations, rather than a failure of the background solution itself.
The key direct expansion evidence came from Type Ia supernova distance-redshift measurements. After light-curve and colour standardization, distant events were fainter than expected in simple decelerating matter-only models, indicating larger luminosity distances. Riess and collaborators' 1998 analysis and Perlmutter and collaborators' independent 42-supernova study favoured an accelerating low-matter-density cosmology with a positive vacuum contribution. Dust, source evolution, selection effects, photometric calibration and peculiar velocities must be controlled: faintness alone is not a model-independent measurement of .[ref][ref]
cosmic microwave background acoustic geometry and independent matter-density constraints help break the supernova parameter degeneracy: nearly flat geometry with substantially less than critical matter requires another component within the FLRW model. large-scale structure of the universe and distance measurements provide further consistency tests. The combined evidence supports a dark-energy contribution compatible with a constant; accelerating expansion by itself does not prove exactly constant vacuum energy or rule out every alternative gravity model.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.