a

r
X
i
v
:
1
0
0
7
.
3
0
0
5
v
1


[
g
r
-
q
c
]


1
8

J
u
l

2
0
1
0
Dissipative Future Universe without Big Rip
Anil Kumar Yadav
Department of Physics, Anand Engineering College,Keetham, Agra-282
007, India
E-mail: abanilyadav@yahoo.co.in, akyadav@imsc.res.in
Abstract
The present study deals with dissipative future universe without big
rip in context of Eckart formalism. The generalised chaplygin gas,
characterised by equaction of state p =
A

, has been considered as

a model for dark energy due to its dark-energy-like evolution at late
time. It is demonstrated that, if the cosmic dark energy behaves like a
uid as well as chaplygin gas simultaneously then the big rip problem
does not arise and the scale factor is found to be regular for all time.
PACS: 98.80Cq, 98.80 JK
Keywords : Dissipative eect; Phantom uid; Big rip; accelerated universe
Recent observations like CMB anisotropy, supernova and galaxy clustering
have strongly indicates that our universe is spatially at and there exists an
exotic cosmic uid called dark energy with negative pressure, which consti-
tutes about 70 percent of the total energy of universe. The dark energy is
usually described by an equation of state (EoS) parameter
p

, the ratio
of spatially homogeneous dark-energy pressure p to its energy density . A
value <
1
3
is required for cosmic acceleration. The simplest explanation
for dark energy is acosmological constant, for which = 1. The increas-
ing evidence from observational data indicates that lies in a narrow strip
around = 1 quite likely being less than this value [1][3]. The region
where EoS parameter < 1, is typically referred to as a phantom dark
energy universe. The existence of the region with < 1 opens up a num-
ber of fandamental questions. For instance, the entropy of such universe is
1
negative. The dominant energy condition (DEC) for phantom uid is vio-
lated, as a rule. The phantom dominated universe end up with a nite time
future singularity called big rip or cosmic doomsday [4, 5]. The last property
attracted much attention and brought the number of speculations upto the
explicit calculation of the rest of the life-time of our universe.
Soon after Caldwell [4] proposed phantom dark energy model with cos-
mic doomsday of future universe, cosmologists started making eorts to avoid
this problem using < 1 [6][8]. In the braneworld scenario, Sahni and
Shtanov has obtained well-behaved expansion for the future universe with-
out big rip problem with < 1. They have shown that acceleration is a
transient phenomenon in the current universe and the future universe will
re-enter matter dominated decelerated phase [9]. It is found that general rel-
ativity (GR) based phantom model encounters sudden future singularity
leading a divergent scale factor, energy density and pressure at nite time
t = t
s
. Thus the classical approach to phantom model exhibits big rip prob-
lem. For future singilarity model, curvature invariant becomes very strong
and energy density is very high near t = t
s
[10]. So, quantum eects should
be dominated for |t = t
s
| < one unit of time (Early universe) [11][13] and it
is shown that the an escape from the big rip is possible on making quantum
corrections to the energy density and pressure in Friedmann equations.
In the framework of Robertson-Walker cosmology, Chaplygin gas (CG) is
also considered as a good source of dark energy for having negative pressure,
given as
p =
A

(1)
where p and are, respectively, pressure and energy density in a comoving
reference frame, with > 0; A is a possitive constant.
Moreover, it is only gas having super-symmetry generalisation [14][16].
Bertolami et al [17] have found that generalised Chaplygin gas (GCG) is
better t for latest Supernova data. In case of GCG, equation (1) is modi-
ed as
p =
A

(2)
where 1 < .
For = 1, equation (2) corresponds to equation (1).
2
Other approaches have considered dissipative eects in GCG models, us-
ing the framework of Eckart theory [18]. Zhai et al [19], have investigated a
viscous GCG, assuming that there is a bulk viscosity in a linear borotropic
uid and GCG. It is found that the equation of state of GCG can cross the
boundary = 1. Also in Ref. [20], it is found that a dissipative chaplygin
gas can give rise to structurally stable evolutionnal scenarios. It is inter-
esting to note that the GCG itself can behave like a uid with viscosity in
the context of Eckart formalism [18]. Fabris et al [21], have investigated an
equivalence GCG and dust like uid. Recently Cruz et al [22], have studied
dissipative generalised chaplygin gas as phantom dark energy and found the
cosmological solutions for GCG with bulk viscosity.
The FRW metric for an homogeneous and isotropic at universe is given
by
ds
2
= dt
2
+ a(t)
2
_
dx
2
+ dy
2
+ dz
2
_
(3)
where a(t) is the scale factor and t represents the cosmic time.
The eld equations in the presence bulk viscous stresses are
a
2
4
a
2
= H
2
=

3
(4)
a
44
a
=
1
6
( + 3 p) (5)
where p is the eective pressure given by
p = p 3H (6)
Here p, are the isotropic pressure and bulk viscous coecient respectively.
The energy conservation equation is given by

4
+ 3H ( + p) = 0 (7)
Here, and in what follows the sub indices 4 an a, and elsewhere denote
dierentiation with respect to t.
Using equations (2), (4) and (6), Equation (7) leads to

4
+ 3
a
4
a
_

A

3H
_
= 0 (8)
3
In order to obtain solution of equation (8), we will assume that the viscosity
has a power-law dependence upon the density
=
0

n
(9)
where
0
and n are constant.
On using equation (9) in equation (8), we obtain
d
dt
+
3
a
da
dt
_

1+

A
_

= 3
n+1

0
(10)
To solve equation (10), we use the transformation
4
= f() =
n+1
, accord-
ingly equation (10) leads to

1+

(t) = A +
_

1+

0
A
_
_
a
0
a(t)
_
3(1+)
(13
0
)
(11)
where
0
= (t
0
) and a
0
= a(t
0
); t
0
is the present time.
In the present model, it is assumed that the dark energy behaves like GCG,
obeying equation (2) as well as uid with equation of state
p = (12)
with < 1 simultaneously.
From equations (2) and (12), we obtain
(t) =
A
(t)
1+

(13)
So, evolution of equation (13) at t = t
0
leads to
A =
0

1+

0
(14)
with
0
= (t
0
).
Using equation (14), equation (11) leads to
=
0
_

_
0
+ (1 +
0
)
_
a
0
a(t)
_
3(1+)
(13
0
)
_

1+
(15)
4
In the homogeneous model of universe, a scalar eld (t) with potential V ()
has energy density

=
1
2

2
4
+ V () (16)
and pressure
p

=
1
2

2
4
V () (17)
Equation (16) and (17) lead to

2
4
=

+ p

(18)
Using equations (2), (12) and (14), equation (18) reduces to

2
4
=

(1+)

+
(1+)

0

0

(19)
Equation (15) and (19) lead to

2
4
=
(1 +
0
)
0
_
a
0
a(t)
_
3(1+)
(13
0
)
_

0
+ (1 +
0
)
_
a
0
a
_
3(1+)
(13
0
)
_ 1
1+
(20)
From equation (20), it is clear that for 1 +
0
> 0,
2
4
> 0, giving positive
kinetic energy and for 1 +
0
< 0,
2
4
< 0, giving negative kinetic energy.
1 +
0
> 0 and 1 +
0
< 0 are representing the case of quintessence and
phantom uid dominated universe respectively. Similar result are obtained
by Hoyle and Narlikar in C -eld with negative kinetic energy for steady state
theory of universe [23].
Now, from equation (4) and (15), we obtain
a
2
4
a
2
=
0
H
2
0
_

_|
0
| + (1 |
0
|)
_
a
0
a(t)
_
3(1+)
(13
0
)
_

1+
(21)
where |
0
| = , H
0
= 100hkm/s Mpc, present value of the Hubbles pa-
rameter and
0
=

0

cr,0
with
cr,0
=
3H
2
0
8G
.
5
Equation (21) may be written as
a
4
a
=
_

0
H
0
|
0
|

2(1+)
_

_1 +
(1 |
0
|)
|
0
|
_
a
0
a(t)
_
3(1+)
(13
0
)
_

2(1+)
(22)
Neglecting the higher powers of
(1|
0
|)
|
0
|
_
a
0
a(t)
_
3(1+)
(13
0
)
, equation (22) leads to
a
4
a
=
_

0
H
0
|
0
|

2(1+)
_

_1 +
(1 |
0
|)
2(1 + )|
0
|
_
a
0
a(t)
_
3(1+)
(13
0
)
_

_ (23)
Integrating equation (23), we obtain
a(t) =
a
0
(2(1 + )|
0
|)
(13
0
)
3(1+)

_
( + 2(1 + )|
0
|)e
6H
0
|
0
|

2(1+)

0
(tt
0
)
(1 |
0
|)
_
(13
0
)
3(1+)
(24)
From equation (24), it is clear that as t , a(t) which is supported
by recent observation of Supernova Ia [24, 25] and WMAP [26, 27]. Therefore
the present model is free from nite time future singularuty.
Now the horizon distance is obtained as
d
H
(t) =
3(1 + )a(t)
(1 3
0
)a
0
_
2(1 + )|
0
|
+ ( + 2)|
0
|
_
(13
0
)
3(1+)

e
_
6H
0
|
0
|

2(1+)

(13
0
)t
3(1+)
_
(25)
From equation (24) and (25) it is clear that d
H
(t) > a(t) i. e. horizon grows
more rapidly than scale factor. In this case, the Hubble distance is given by
H
1
=
1

0
H
0
|
0
|

2(1+)
_

_1
(1 |
0
|)
2(1 + )|
0
|
_
a
0
a(t)
_
3(1+)
(13
0
)
_

_ (26)
Equaction (26) is showing the growth of Hubble distance with time such that
H
1

1
H
0

0
|
0
|

2(1+)
= 0 as t . Thus in present case, the galaxies will
6
not disappear when t , avoiding big rip singularity. It is observed that,
if phantom uid behaves like GCG and uid with p = simultaneously then
the accelerated growth of scale factor of future universe for time t
0
< t <
with no future singularity can be obtained.
Equation (15) may be written as
=
0
_

_|
0
| + (1 |
0
|)
_
a
0
a(t)
_
3(1+)
(13
0
)
_

1+
(27)
with |
0
| = .
From equation (27), it is clear that as t ,
0
|
0
|

1+
>
0
(since
t , a(t) ). Thus one can conclude that energy density increases
with time, contrary to other phantom models having future singularity at
t = t
s
[4, 11]. Based on Ia Supernova data, singh et al [28] have estimated

0
for model in the range 2.4 <
0
< 1.74 upto 95 percent condence
level. Taking this estimate as an example, with = 1,

is found in the
range 1.31
0
<

< 1.54
0
and with = 2,

is found in the range

1.44
0
<

< 1.78
0
and so on. This does not yields much increase in
energy density as t but if the future experiments supports large value
of |
0
| then

will be high. It is interesting to see here that present model is

derived by Bulk viscosity in the context of Eckart formalism [18]. We see that
big rip problem does arise in the present model. In Refs [10][13], for models
with future singularity escape from big rip, is demonstrated using quantum
corrections in the eld equations near t = t
s
. However the present study
deals phantom cosmology with accelerated expansion without catastrophic
situations using classical approach. It is also seen that the model of future
universe presented by Srivastava [29] is particular of our model.
Acknowledgements
Author would like to thanks The Institute of Mathematical Science (IMSc),
Chennai, India for providing facility and support where part of this work was
carried out.
References
[1] S. Hannestad, E. Mortsell, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 063508.
7
[2] J. Weller, A. M. Lewis, Mon. Not. Astron. Soc. 346 (2003) 987.
[3] P. S. Corasaniti, et al, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 083006.
[4] R. R. Caldwell, Phys. Lett. B 545 (2002) 23;
R. R. Caldwell et al Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (2003) 071301.
[5] S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 103522.
[6] B. McInnes, JHEP 0208 (2002) 029.
[7] P. F. Gonzalez-Diaz, Phys. rev. D 68 (2003) 021303(R)
[8] V. K. Onemli, et al, Class. Quant. Grav. 19 (2002) 4607;
V. K. Onemli, et al, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 107301;
E. O. Kahya, V. K. Onemli, R. P. Woodard, Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010)
023508.
[9] V. Sahni, Yu. V. shtanov, JCAP 0311 (2003) 014.
[10] E. Elizalde, S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 043539.
[11] S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Lett. B 595 (2004) 1;
S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 103522.
[12] S. K. Srivastava, Gen. Rel. Grav. 39 (2007) 241.
[13] S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov,S. Tsujikawa, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 063004.
[14] R. Jackiw, physics/0010042.
[15] M. C. Bento, O. Betrolami, A. A. Sen, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 043507.
[16] V. Gorini, A. Kamenshchik, U. Moschella, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003)
063509.
[17] O. Bertolami, et al Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 353 (2004) 329.
[18] C. Eckart, Phys. Rev. 58 (1940) 919.
[19] X. H. Zhai, Y. D. Xu, X. Z. Li, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 15 (2006) 1151.
[20] M. Szydlowsk, O. Hrycyna, Annals Phys. 322 (2007) 2745.
8
[21] J. C.Fabris, S. V. B. Goncalves, R. de Sa Ribeiro, astro-ph/0503362.
[22] N. Cruz, S. Lepe, F. Pena, Phys. Lett. B 646 (2007) 177.
[23] F. Hoyle, J. V. Narlikar, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 108 (1948) 372
F. Hoyle, J. V. Narlikar, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 155 (1972) 305
F. Hoyle, G. Burbidge, J. V. Narlikar, A Dierent Approach to Cos-
mology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000.
[24] S. Perlmutter, et al, Astrophys. J. 517 (1999) 565.
[25] A. G. Riess, et al, Astron. J. 116 (1998) 1009.
[26] D. N. Spergel, et al, Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 175.
[27] L. Page, et al, Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 233.
[28] P. Singh et al Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 023522.
[29] S. K. Srivastava, Phys. Lett. B 619 (2005) 1.
9