English

Dark Matter and Cosmology: CDM with a Cosmological Constant ($\Lambda$CDM) vs. CDM with Hot Dark Matter (CHDM)

Astrophysics 2009-10-28 v1

Abstract

Here we discuss what are perhaps the two most popular variants of CDM that might agree with the data: \lcdm\ and CHDM. While the predictions of COBE-normalized \lcdm\ and CHDM both agree well with the available data on scales of 10\sim 10 to 100\hMpc100 \hMpc, each has potential virtues and defects. \lcdm\ with Ω00.3\Omega_0 \sim 0.3 has the possible virtue of allowing a higher expansion rate H0H_0 for a given cosmic age t0t_0, but the defect of predicting too much fluctuation power on small scales. CHDM has less power on small scales, so its predictions appear to be in good agreement with data on the galaxy distribution, but it remains to be seen whether it predicts early enough galaxy formation to be compatible with the latest high-redshift data. Also, two very recent observational results favor high cosmic density, and thus favor Ω=1\Omega=1 models such as CHDM over \lcdm\ --- (1) the positive deceleration parameter q0>0q_0>0 measured using high-redshift Type Ia supernovae, and (2) the low primordial deuterium/hydrogen ratio measured in two different quasar absorption spectra. We try to identify ``best'' variants of both \lcdm\ and CHDM, and discuss critical observational tests for both models.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.astro-ph/9607061,
  title  = {Dark Matter and Cosmology: CDM with a Cosmological Constant ($\Lambda$CDM) vs. CDM with Hot Dark Matter (CHDM)},
  author = {Joel Primack and Anatoly Klypin},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:astro-ph/9607061},
  year   = {2009}
}

Comments

9 pages, postscript only, includes 3 figures, to be published in Proceedings of the International Conference on Sources and Detection of Dark Matter in the Universe, UCLA, February 1996, D. Cline and D. Sanders, editors, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl., in press