a

r
X
i
v
:
0
7
0
5
.
0
3
3
2
v
1


[
a
s
t
r
o
-
p
h
]


2

M
a
y

2
0
0
7
Nontrivial Geometries:
Bounds on the Curvature of the Universe
Laura Mersini-Houghton

, Yun Wang

, Pia Mukherjee
a
, and Ervin Kafexhiu
b

UNC-Chapel Hill, CB#3255, Phillips Hall,

Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA,

Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, Univ. of Oklahoma,

440 W. Brooks St., Norman, OK 73019
a
Department of Physics & Astronomy,
Univ. of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9QH, UK
b
Department of Physics and Astronomy,
Physics Department,
University of Tirana, Tirana, Albania
Probing the geometry of the universe is one of the most important endevours in cosmology.
Current observational data from the Cosmic Microwave Background anisotropy (CMB), galaxy
surveys and type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) strongly constrain the curvature of the universe to be close
to zero for a universe dominated by a cosmological constant or dark energy with a constant equation
of state. Here we investigate the role of cosmic priors on deriving these tight bounds on geometry,
by considering a landscape motivated scenario with an oscillating curvature term. We perform
a likelihood analysis of current data under such a model of non-trivial geometry and nd that
the uncertainties on curvature, and correspondingly on parameters of the matter and dark energy
sectors, are larger. Future dark energy experiments together with CMB data from experiments
like Planck could dramatically improve our ability to constrain cosmic curvature under such models
enabling us to probe possible imprints of quantum gravity.
I. INTRODUCTION
Exquisite measurements of the Cosmic Microwave
Background (CMB) spectra, Large Scale Structure
(LSS) and of the expansion history of the universe,
by various experiments including WMAP, SDSS, 2dF
survey, and SN1a surveys [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] have pinned
down the spatial curvature of the universe to 0.01
[6, 7] in a universe with a cosmological constant .
Energy content and geometry both contribute to
the Hubble expansion rate H. The three are so closely
intertwined that no independent measurement of H
versus
m
,

, or can yet be performed. In inter-

preting the data for any of these components, we have
to be aware of the prior assumptions in our models re-
garding the other components. That is to say that our
interpretation of data is not model independent.
What conclusion can be made about the geometry
of the universe, on the basis of current data? The
answer to this question depends on the cosmological
model and on the dependence of the constraints on the
spatial geometry of the universe on prior assumptions
regarding other relevant energy components. Here we
explore this issue by considering a model of nontrivial
geometry, where the curvature does not take a con-
stant value, but rather is a function of time. In our
model the curvature is given by an oscillating function
with a Hubble time period. Such models can be moti-
vated by the dissipative dynamics of the wavefunction
of the universe on its classical path on the background
of the landscape of string theory.
II. MOTIVATING THE CLASS OF
OSCILLATING CURVATURE MODELS
The discovery of the acceleration of the universe has
become one of the central themes of current investiga-
tion in physics. Unfortunately due to the degeneracy
among cosmic parameters, determining its nature and
equation of state from astrophysical data depends cru-
cially on our assumptions for the matter content and
curvature of the universe. Recent analysis of SDSS[2]
and WMAP [6] has been reported to indicate that the
geometry of our universe is extremely close to at to
within 1% in an LCDM universe [7].
Here we would like to investigate the robustness of
these conclusions about the curvature of the universe
by presenting a highly nontrivial model where the cur-
vature term is not a constant but a function of time,
oscillating every Hubble time. This model is inspired
and motivated from the proposal for a dynamic selec-
tion of the initial conditions for our universe from the
landscape phase space [8, 9] as summarized below.
In [8, 9] we included the backreaction of superhori-
zon massive perturbations on the initial wavepacket
for our universe. Solving a Master Equation we stud-
ied role of the backreaction term on the decoherence
of our initial patch from the other WKB branches on
the landscape. The time evolved nonlocal entangle-
ment of our patch with others outside the horizon at
late times [10, 11] were then investigated in [12] with
the conclusion that some of those traces imprinted on
CMB and LSS are within observational reach. Within
this formalism, we now allow for an initial curvature
2
term in the Friedman equation, = 1 and consider the
eect that the backreaction term has on closed geome-
tries. Backreaction shifts the energy of the wavepacket
therefore its classical trajectory on the landscape. The
shifting of the classical path for our wavefunction can
be seen by integrating out the Master Equation pre-
sented for this case as was described in [8, 10, 12].
H(a) +H
m
=

n
H
n
(1)
where H(a) = a( a
2
+ ) is the hamiltonian cor-
responding to gravitational degrees of freedom (ob-
tained from the Einstein-Hilbert action), with a the
scale factor, and is the initial curvature for that
classical trajectory. H
m
is the matter hamiltonian
corresponding for example to the inaton energy and,
H
n
is the backreaction energy corresponding to the
superhorizon matter perturbations labelled by the
wavenumber n.
To get a rough idea of the shifting of the trajec-
tory, let us assume that = a
3
[

2
+ m
2

2
] is a con-
stant of motion and thus integrate out Eqn.1. When
the backreaction term is not included, Eqn.1 in the
case of closed universes = 1, gives a turning point
when a = 0 at a = a
n
where a
n
= . The rst
term in the backreaction energy H
n
n
2
/a
2
has the
same dependence on the scale factor a as the cur-
vature. Including the backreaction term when in-
tegrating out Eqn.1 results in a lower energy since
H(a) H(a)

H
n
, thereby shifting the classical
trajectory of the wavepacket of our universe. This re-
sult of the shifting of the classical trajectory of our
universes wavepacket by interaction with a eld, (in
this case the entanglement of gravitational and matter
degrees of freedom through the term

H
n
), is well
known in particle physics where the energy of a quan-
tum particle gets shifted by interaction with a classical
eld which results in a shifts of the particles trajec-
tory and momenta. The details of the calculations for
the strength of this interaction in the case of quan-
tum cosmology can be found for example in [11] or
when applied to the landscape of string theory in [12].
The result is that everytime a closed universe goes
through its turning point given by Eqn.1 by putting
a = 0, that is every Hubble time, then it will emerge
through a shifted trajectory, due to the correction of
H(a) by the backreaction term

H
n
described here.
The modication in energy corresponding to this shift
can be absorbed into the curvature term since the time
dependence of H
n
is similar to that of the term.
Therefore, to local observers bound to our visible uni-
verse, the eect of the shifting of the classical trajec-
tory for our universe in the phase space, appears as an
induced oscillating curvature with a period of Hubble
time. Of course no observers would survive the emer-
gence through the turning point in the cycles of the
trajectory. However the reduced oscillation of the cur-
vature in the previous cycle may leave its imprints on
astrophysical observables of the current cycle, which
we aim to study here. Based on the integration of
Eqn.1, we expect the curvature term motivated by
this scenario, to be a function of the total energy con-
tent of the universe H
m
and oscillate, in each cycle
between the two turning points in the trajectory, with
a Hubble period.
While there are dierent ways of phenomenolog-
ically implementing the oscillating curvature model
described above, there are constraints based on the
considerations of observables in the model. In order
to make predictions that can be compared with data,
we need to compute the coordinate distance r(z) and
the age of the universe t(z) as functions of redshift.
These functions, r(z) and t(z), are found by consid-
ering the radial, null geodesic of the Robertson-Walker
metric. But now the curvature constant is replaced
by a function x(a) that oscillates with cosmic time:
ds
2
= dt
2
a
2
(t)
dr
2
1 +x(a) r
2
= 0, (2)
where a(t) is the cosmic scale factor, and the scaled
coordinate distance r H
0
r/c. Hence we have
(r

)
2
=
1 +x(a) r
2
a
4
E
2
(a)
, (3)
where denotes dierentiation with respect to a, and
E
2
(a)
_
H(z)
H
0
_
2
=

r
a
4
+

m
a
3
+

+
x(a)
a
2
. (4)
For closed universes, r(z) is not a monotonic function
of a. Dierentiating Eq.(3) with respect to a gives
r

=
x

r
2
+r

_
2rx r

m
+ 4a
3

+x

a
2
+ 2ax
_
2a
4
E
2
(a) r

.
(5)
In a closed universe, the coordinate distance r reaches
its maximum value at r

= 0. Note that r

is only
nite at r

= 0 if and only if x

= 0 at r

= 0. This can
only be satised if x =constant (the usual constant
curvature case), or x = x(r).
Based on the dissipative dynamics of the shifted
cycles of the universe described above, we consider
the following heuristic model that captures the desired
features and satises the above constraint
x(a)

k
(z)
(1 +z)
2
=
k
Asin(Br), (6)
where
k

k
(0) = 1
r

,
r
,
m
,

denote the present day density fractions of radiation,

matter, and vacuum energy, and r denotes the coordi-
nate distance from the observer at z = 0 to redshift z.
A and B are dimensionless constants. Note that the
3
FIG. 1: Oscillating curvature models with B = 0.5, 1, and
2.
conventional model with constant curvature is recov-
ered for A = 0, x(a) =
k
(z)/(1+z)
2
=
k
= /H
2
0
,
where is the curvature constant.
Except for the special case of constant curvature
(A = 0), r(z) is found by numerically solving the sec-
ond order dierential equation in Eq.(5), with the ini-
tial condition that at a = 1, r = 0, r

= 1.
Fig.1 shows models with B = 0.5, 1, and 2 respec-
tively. Fig.2 shows r(z) for the models in Fig.1, with
the same line types.
The age of the universe is given by
t(a) = H
1
0
_
a
0
da
a E(a)
, (7)
once
k
(z), which now depends on z through r(z),
has been found numerically.
III. OBSERVATIONAL CONSTRAINTS ON
OSCILLATING CURVATURE AND THE
ENERGY CONTENT
We use current observational data to constrain the
oscillating curvature model given by Eq.(6). Follow-
ing the approach of [13], we assume the HST prior of
H
0
= 72 8 (km/s)Mpc
1
[14], use 182 SNe Ia (from
the HST/GOODS program [15], the rst year Super-
nova Legacy Survey [16], and nearby SN Ia surveys)
[15], CMB data [6], and the SDSS measurement of the
baryon acoustic oscillation scale [17]. We use the CMB
data in the form of the CMB shift parameters R
FIG. 2: The coordinate distance r(z) for oscillating cur-
vature models in Fig.1, with the same line types.
_

m
H
2
0
r(z
CMB
) and l
a
r(z
CMB
)/r
s
(z
CMB
) de-
rived from WMAP three year data by [13].
We run a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) [18]
to obtain O(10
6
) samples for each set of results pre-
sented in this paper. The chains are subsequently ap-
propriately thinned.
Due to the degeneracies between A, B, and
k
, (A,
B,
k
) are not well constrained when they are all al-
lowed to vary. To illustrate the eect of oscillating
curvature, let us study the class of models given by
Eq.(6) for xed representative values of B, while al-
lowing A and
k
to vary, along with
m
,
b
h
2
, and
h (see [13]). The parameters estimated from data are
(
m
,
b
h
2
, h,
k
, A). It should be noted that A
aects the overall amplitude of the curvature term,
while B plays the role of its oscillating frequency. The
case B = 1 would correspond to
k
oscillating every
Hubble time.
Figs.3-6 show the joint condence contours in the
plane (
m
,
k
) and (
k
, A) for B = 0.5, 1, 2, and 5
respectively. The inner and outer contours correspond
to 68% and 95% condence levels respectively.
As can be seen from the plots given in Figs.3-6,
current data allow models in which the curvature of
the universe oscillates with cosmic time. The allowed
range of the current curvature density ratio
k
is sig-
nicantly increased compared to the case of constant
curvature.
The bounds derived from the WMAP three year
data and galaxy survey data from the SDSS [2] give for
4

k
B=0.5
0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6

k
A
B=0.5
0.4 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
FIG. 3: Joint condence contour plots for (m,
k
) and
(
k
, A) for B = 0.5. The inner and outer contours corre-
spond to 68% and 95% condence levels respectively.
the case of constant curvature,
k
= 0.005 0.006,
(2dF data [3] also give similar results) [6]. Compar-
ing these bounds to the case of oscillating curvature
models, we nd that the constraints on the geome-
try of the universe change signicantly, now we have

k
= 0.097 0.210 for B = 0.5,
k
= 0.037 0.092
for B = 1,
k
= 0.014 0.035 for B = 2, and

k
= 0.000 0.017 for B = 5. The constraints on
the
k
and A become more stringent as B increases.
This is as expected, since B is the curvature oscilla-
tion frequency. For large B, the cumulative eect of
the oscillating curvature decreases. It is very interest-
ing that when the period of the curvature oscillation
B
1
becomes larger than a Hubble time, the range
of the allowed values for
k
and
m
, at 95% con-
dence level in agreement with data, shows a drastic

k
B=1
0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
0.2
0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3

k
A
B=1
0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
FIG. 4: Joint condence contour plots for (m,
k
) and
(
k
, A) for B = 1. The inner and outer contours corre-
spond to 68% and 95% condence levels respectively.
increase. An oscillation in the curvature with a pe-
riod larger than the age of the universe, a case which
locally would appear as nearly a constant while being
globally notrivial, the time dependence of which would
otherwise not be captured by data, does in fact con-
tain a signicant deviation from the priors of a simple
LCDM model with constant or zero curvature. This
is one of our important results: a highly nontrivial ge-
ometry on scales larger than the horizon can lead to
a very dierent interpretation of data.
Let us now investigate the implications of the oscil-
lating curvature for the dark energy equation of state
w. This is done by conducting a likelihood analy-
sis using MCMC of the oscillating curvature model,
Eq.(6), assuming a constant dark energy equation of
state w
X
(z) = w. The parameters estimated from
5

k
B=2
0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
0.1
0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2

k
A
B=2
0.1 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
FIG. 5: Joint condence contour plots for (m,
k
) and
(
k
, A) for B = 2. The inner and outer contours corre-
spond to 68% and 95% condence levels respectively.
data are (
m
,
b
h
2
, h,
k
, A, w). Fig.7 shows the
joint condence contours of (
m
,
k
) and (
k
, A),
and Fig.8 shows the joint condence contour of (
k
,
w), for B = 5. As expected, adding w as an addi-
tional parameter to be estimated from data notably
increase the uncertainties on estimated parameters,
especially (
k
, A, w). For example, for B = 5,

k
= 0.0740.068 when w is included as an estimated
parameter, compared with
k
= 0.000 0.017 for set-
ting w = 1 (a cosmological constant). For larger
values of the period B
1
, the uncertainties on (
k
, A,
w) increase signicantly. Notice that the bounds on
w, as shown in Fig.8 for the case B = 5 can be as
large as 1.04 w 0.71 at 95% condence level.
These bounds on w should be contrasted to the con-
straints derived in [19] where a prior of
k
= 0 was

k
B=5
0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1

k
A
B=5
0.1 0.05 0 0.05 0.1
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
FIG. 6: Joint condence contour plots for (m,
k
) and
(
k
, A) for B = 5. The inner and outer contours corre-
spond to 68% and 95% condence levels respectively.
assumed. Clearly, current precision cosmology data is
not sucient in pinning down the equation of state
for dark energy when the geometry of the universe is
nontrivial.
IV. DISCUSSION
We have studied constraints on the parameters of a
landscape motivated cosmological model in which the
curvature of the universe oscillates with cosmic time
(see Eq.(6)). Such a model is motivated from the pro-
posal for a dynamic selection of the initial conditions
for our universe from the landscape phase space. Thus
an analysis of the kind performed here could lead to
the implicit detection of quantum gravity eects.
6

k
B=5
0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
0.1
0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35

k
A
B=5
0.1 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
FIG. 7: Joint condence contour plots for (m,
k
) and
(
k
, A) for B = 5. The inner and outer contours corre-
spond to 68% and 95% condence levels respectively.
We have used CMB data in the form of the shift
parameters R and l
a
extracted from WMAP three
year data by [13], together with the SDSS measure-
ment of baryon acoustic oscillation scale [17], and
SN Ia data from HST and ground-based observations
[15, 16]. From the bounds derived on the parame-
ters of this model we nd that currently a simple at
model, which is a special case of the above model, re-
mains a good bet; such a conclusion will be supported
further by model selection arguments [25]. Allowing
for nontrivial geometry leads to greater uncertainties
in our knowledge of the present day curvature and
matter density ratios
k
and
m
, as can be seen in
Figs.3-8). An oscillating curvature term also signi-
cantly changes the bounds on the dark energy equa-
tion of state w, as seen in Fig.8.

k
w
B=5
0.1 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
FIG. 8: Joint condence contour plots for (
k
, w) for
B = 5. The inner and outer contours correspond to 68%
and 95% condence levels respectively.
It would be interesting to look for the imprints of
such a model as data get better. Future dark energy
experiments from both ground and space [21, 22, 23,
24], together with CMB data from Planck [20], should
dramatically improve our ability to constrain cosmic
curvature, and probe possible imprints of quantum
gravity.
Acknowledgements L.M.H is supported in part by
DOE grant DE-FG02-06ER41418 and NSF grant
PHY-0553312. Y.W is supported in part by NSF CA-
REER grant AST-0094335 (YW). PM is supported by
PPARC, UK.
[1] C.L.Bennett et al., First Year Wilkinson Microwave
Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Prelimi-
nary Maps and Basic Results, Astrophys. J. Suppl.
148, 1 (2003),[arXiv:astro-ph/0302207]
[2] Tegmark, M., et al. 2004, ApJ, 606, 702
[3] Percival, W., et al., MNRAS, 327, 1297 (2001); Verde,
L., et al., 2002, MNRAS, 335, 432; Hawkins, E., et al.
2003, MNRAS, 346, 78
[4] Riess, A.G., et al., astro-ph/0611572; A. G. Riess et
al. [Supernova Search Team Collaboration], Astron.
J. 116, 1009 (1998) [arXiv:astro-ph/9805201]
[5] S. Perlmutter et al. [Supernova Cosmology Project
Collaboration], Astrophys. J. 517, 565 (1999)
[arXiv:astro-ph/9812133]
[6] D.N. Spergel, et al. 2006, astro-ph/0603449, ApJ, in
press
[7] M. Tegmark, et al., Phys.Rev. D74 (2006) 123507
[8] R. Holman and L. Mersini-Houghton, arXiv/hep-th
7
0511102, in press, Phys. Rev. D (2006).
[9] R. Holman and L. Mersini-Houghton, arXiv/hep-
th 0512070, submitted to Class. Quantum Gravity
(2006); L. Mersini-Houghton, Einsteins Jury: The
Race to Test Relativity, Princeton. Univ.. Press,
[arXiv:hep-th/0512304], [arXiv:hep-ph/0609157].
[10] L. Mersini- Houghton, [arXiv: gr-qc/0609006]
[11] C. Kiefer, Clas. Quant. Grav. 4 (1987) 1369; J. J. Hal-
liwell and S. W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D. bf 31 (1985)
8
[12] R. Holman, L. Mersini-Houghton and T. Takahashi,
arXiv:hep-th/0611223,(2006);R. Holman, L. Mersini-
Houghton and T. Takahashi, arXiv:hep-th/0612142,
(2006)
[13] Y. Wang and P. Mukherjee, [arXiv:astro-ph/0703780]
[14] W. L. Freedman, et al. 2001, ApJ, 553, 47
[15] A.G. Riess, et al., astro-ph/0611572
[16] Astier, P., et al. 2005, astro-ph/0510447, Astron. As-
trophys. 447 (2006) 31
[17] D. Eisenstein, et al., ApJ, 633, 560
[18] A. Lewis and S. Bridle, 2002, PRD, 66, 103511
[19] Melchiorri,A.,Mersini,L.,Odman,C.,Trodden,M.
(2003), Phys.Rev.D68,43509,
[arXiv:astro-ph/0211522]
[20] Planck Bluebook, http://www.rssd.esa.int/index.php?project=PLANCK
[21] Wang, Y. 2000, ApJ 531, 676
[22] Albrecht, A.; Bernstein, G.; Cahn, R.; Freedman,
W. L.; Hewitt, J.; Hu, W.; Huth, J.; Kamionkowski,
M.; Kolb, E.W.; Knox, L.; Mather, J.C.; Staggs, S.;
Suntze, N.B., Report of the Dark Energy Task Force,
astro-ph/0609591
[23] See for example, http://www.astro.ubc.ca/LMT/alpaca/;
http://www.lsst.org/; http://www.as.utexas.edu/hetdex/.
[22] contains a more complete list of future dark
energy experiments.
[24] Wang, Y., et al., BAAS, v36, n5, 1560 (2004); Crotts,
A., et al. (2005), astro-ph/0507043; Cheng, E.; Wang,
Y.; et al., Proc. of SPIE, Vol. 6265, 626529 (2006);
http://jedi.nhn.ou.edu/
[25] P. Mukherjee, D. Parkinson and A.R. Liddle, ApJ,
638, 51 (2006); D. Parkinson, P. Mukherjee and A.R.
Liddle, Phys.Rev. D73 (2006) 123523