Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Diffusion in unimodular gravity can drive a Big Rip even for non-phantom fluids when Lambda is negative, but thermodynamics forbids that path when Lambda is positive.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-13 20:05 UTC pith:L5J4NQ62

load-bearing objection Clean analytic existence proof that thermodynamically allowed diffusion can drive a non-phantom Big Rip when Lambda is negative; the result is real but sits on a tuned initial-condition slice. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2603.22749 v2 pith:L5J4NQ62 submitted 2026-03-24 gr-qc

Thermodynamic constraints and future singularities in Unimodular Gravity driven by phantom and non-phantom fluids

Norman Cruz , Samuel Lepe , Guillermo Palma , Miguel Cruz This is my paper
classification gr-qc
keywords unimodular gravityfuture singularitiesBig Ripenergy diffusionentropy productionphantom fluidsbarotropic cosmology
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper studies future singularities of a flat expanding universe that contains one barotropic fluid and lives in unimodular gravity, where the energy-momentum tensor need not be conserved. The non-conservation is packaged into a single diffusion function Q. A constant Q merely renormalizes the cosmological constant and keeps the expansion adiabatic; a time-dependent Q makes the expansion non-adiabatic and produces entropy. By choosing a simple power-law form for Q and demanding that entropy production stay positive, the authors obtain sharp constraints on the allowed parameters. Inside that thermodynamically allowed region they prove that a genuine Big Rip cannot occur if the fluid is non-phantom and the cosmological constant is positive; the universe simply settles into de Sitter expansion. When the cosmological constant is negative, however, the same diffusion term can generate an effective phantom equation of state, so that a non-phantom fluid still ends in a Big Rip (or a Big Crunch). The result supplies an explicit mechanism, absent from ordinary general relativity, by which diffusion alone can force a future singularity without ever placing the bare fluid in the phantom regime.

Core claim

Within the sector of positive entropy production, non-negative energy density and real Hubble expansion, a time-dependent diffusion function alone can induce a Type-I Big Rip singularity for a fluid whose bare equation of state is non-phantom, provided the cosmological constant is negative; the same diffusion term cannot produce a Big Rip when the cosmological constant is positive.

What carries the argument

The energy diffusion function Q(z)=Q0(1+z)^beta, subject to the thermodynamic requirement dQ/dz>0, which forces the effective equation-of-state parameter gamma_eff to lie below the bare gamma and thereby opens (or closes) the path to future singularities.

Load-bearing premise

The entire analysis rests on a freely chosen power-law form for the diffusion function together with a special initial-density condition that makes one coefficient vanish; neither is derived from a microscopic model.

What would settle it

Construct (or rule out) an explicit analytic or numerical solution of the unimodular Friedmann equations with a non-phantom bare fluid, positive entropy production and positive Lambda that still reaches a Big Rip in finite time; any such solution would falsify the claimed no-go theorem.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies future singularities in flat FLRW unimodular gravity with a single barotropic fluid p=(\gamma-1)\rho and a power-law energy diffusion function Q(z)=Q0(1+z)^\beta. Positive entropy production (dQ/dz>0) together with \rho\ge0 and H^{2}\ge0 is used to restrict the parameter space. Within that sector the authors claim: (i) Big Rip is excluded for non-phantom fluids when \Lambda>0; (ii) phantom fluids produce the expected Big Rip (and Big Crunch for \Lambda<0); (iii) diffusion can induce an effective phantom regime, yielding an explicit Type-I Big Rip for a non-phantom fluid when \Lambda<0 (via the special choice A=0). The last claim is presented as a novel mechanism without direct GR analogue.

Significance. If correct, the thermodynamic no-go for diffusion-driven Big Rip with non-phantom matter and \Lambda>0 would be a useful structural result for unimodular cosmology, and an explicit non-phantom Big Rip would genuinely enlarge the singularity landscape relative to GR. The analytic integrations of the Friedmann equation for several exactly solvable cases (\beta=-2, 3\gamma=-1; \beta=-3, 3\gamma=-2; etc.) are carefully executed and the systematic imposition of \rho>0, H^{2}\ge0 and \beta Q0>0 is a strength. However, the central “novel mechanism” claim does not survive scrutiny of the sign of the late-time coefficient in H^{2}, so the paper’s main advertised advance is not established.

major comments (3)
  1. Sec. IV.B.1 (non-phantom Big Rip, Eqs. 49–52): the claimed Type-I solution for \gamma>0, \beta<0, \Lambda<0 with A=0 is algebraically inconsistent with the authors’ own Friedmann equation. From Eqs. (26)–(27) and (31), the late-time coefficient is B̃=B\gamma/\beta. Under the thermodynamic constraints \beta Q0>0 one has B>0 but B̃<0 whenever \gamma>0 and \beta<0. Consequently H^{2}=\Lambda/3+B̃ a^{-\beta} is strictly negative for all a when A=0 and \Lambda<0 (and becomes negative at finite a when A>0). The integral written in Eq. (49) incorrectly replaces B̃ by +B and therefore does not solve the model. There is in fact no real expanding solution that reaches a\to\infty, so the “explicit realization” of a non-phantom Big Rip does not exist inside the thermodynamically allowed sector.
  2. Abstract, Introduction and Sec. V: the paper’s principal novelty claim—“diffusion can induce an effective phantom regime even when the fundamental fluid is non-phantom” and “a novel mechanism \ldots with no direct analogue in standard General Relativity”—rests entirely on the incorrect solution of Sec. IV.B.1. Once the sign of B̃ is restored, the same thermodynamic constraints that the authors impose actually forbid Big Rip for every non-phantom fluid (\gamma>0), independently of the value of \Lambda and of the special initial condition A=0. The abstract, the “more importantly” paragraph of the introduction, and the final remarks must be rewritten to remove or correctly restate this claim.
  3. Sec. IV.A and IV.B.1: even if the sign error were absent, the non-phantom Big Rip is obtained only on the measure-zero hypersurface A=0 (\rho0=\beta Q0/(3\gamma-\beta)). The manuscript never shows that this surface is reachable from generic initial data already satisfying \rho>0, H^{2}\ge0 and \beta Q0>0, nor that small deviations \delta A still produce a finite-time singularity. After the algebraic correction the point is moot, but any residual existence claim should be clearly labelled as a tuned special case rather than a generic mechanism.
minor comments (4)
  1. Notation: the same symbol B is used for the coefficient in \rho (Eq. 26) and, without redefinition, as the positive coefficient of a^{|\beta|} in Eq. (49). Introducing and consistently using B̃=B\gamma/\beta (already defined in Eq. 27) would have made the sign error harder to miss.
  2. Sec. III, Eq. (15): the statement that dQ/dz>0 implies dS/dz<0 is correct from Eq. (14), but the subsequent claim that this “obeys the third law” is misleading; the third law concerns S\to0 as T\to0, not the sign of dS/dz. Rephrase as a second-law / positive-entropy-production condition.
  3. Several typos and awkward phrases: “particualar”, “guaranty”, “well-settled”, “the matter energy density remains positive, it is necessary to impose certain constraints” (repeated), and inconsistent spacing around equations. A careful copy-edit is needed.
  4. The classification of singularities (Type 0A–IV) is taken from Refs. [27,28] but Little-Rip (Type I_l) is listed and never used; either drop it or note why it is absent under the power-law Ansatz.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

No significant circularity: singularity classifications follow by direct integration of the Friedmann equation under an explicit phenomenological Ansatz and an openly special initial-condition choice; self-citations supply background thermodynamics but do not force the new results.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Sec. III, Eqs. 13–15 and surrounding text]
    "as shown in Ref. [16] within the framework of unimodular gravity, a time-dependent diffusion term (Q̇≠0) induces a non-adiabatic evolution at the background level… the Gibbs relation [25]: T dS=dU+pdV, and can be written in terms of the diffusion function as follows [16] T dS/dz=−V dQ/dz"

    The thermodynamic constraint that defines the “thermodynamically allowed sector” is taken from the authors’ own prior paper [16]. Although the same relation is briefly re-derived here, the citation is the sole external justification offered for the entropy-production condition that subsequently restricts the entire singularity analysis. The step is only mildly circular because the relation itself is elementary and is restated, not merely asserted.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The power-law Ansatz Q(z)=Q0(1+z)^β is introduced phenomenologically (Eq. 17) and is never claimed to be derived from first principles. The thermodynamic requirement dQ/dz>0 (hence βQ0>0) is re-derived from the Gibbs relation in Sec. III (Eqs. 13–15) before being used; the citation to the authors’ prior work [16] merely supplies the same relation and is not load-bearing for the singularity analysis. Energy density and Hubble parameter are obtained by elementary integration of the non-conservation equation (Eqs. 25–27). The no-go statement for Big Rip with non-phantom fluid and Λ>0 follows from the asymptotic divergence of the proper-time integral (Eq. 32). The positive existence claim for a non-phantom Big Rip with Λ<0 is obtained only after the authors explicitly set the free parameter combination ρ0=βQ0/(3γ−β) that forces the coefficient A≡0 (Sec. IV.B.1, Eqs. 49–52); this is an open special-case selection of initial data, not a redefinition or a fitted quantity renamed as a prediction. No uniqueness theorem is imported, no known empirical pattern is merely renamed, and no prediction reduces to its input by construction. The overall score is therefore 1 (minor self-citation that is not load-bearing).

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the unimodular field equations, the power-law diffusion Ansatz, the second-law requirement dQ/dz>0, and a barotropic equation of state. No free parameters are fitted to data; the free parameters are free model coefficients whose signs and ranges are constrained by thermodynamics and positivity. The only invented entity is the phenomenological Q itself, which is standard in the UG literature but still postulated rather than derived from a microscopic theory.

free parameters (4)
  • beta (power-law index of Q)
    Free exponent in the Ansatz Q(z)=Q0(1+z)^beta; its sign is fixed by entropy production but its magnitude is chosen by hand.
  • Q0 (amplitude of diffusion)
    Overall scale of the diffusion term; constrained only by positivity of entropy and energy density, not fitted to observations.
  • gamma (barotropic index)
    Constant equation-of-state parameter of the single fluid; free and scanned over phantom and non-phantom regimes.
  • Lambda (integration constant)
    Cosmological-constant-like term whose three sign choices are explored; not fitted.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Unimodular gravity field equations reduce to the trace-free Einstein equations plus an integration constant Lambda and a diffusion term Q (Eqs. 2-6).
    Standard starting point of the UG literature; assumed without re-derivation.
  • domain assumption Positive entropy production requires dQ/dz>0 (Eq. 15).
    Taken from the authors' earlier thermodynamic analysis of UG; used as a hard filter on parameter space.
  • ad hoc to paper The energy diffusion function admits a pure power-law form Q(z)=Q0(1+z)^beta.
    Phenomenological Ansatz introduced in Sec. III with only qualitative motivation from CSL models; no first-principles derivation.
  • domain assumption The cosmic fluid is a single perfect barotropic fluid with constant gamma.
    Standard late-time idealization used throughout the singularity literature.
invented entities (1)
  • Power-law energy diffusion function Q(z) no independent evidence
    purpose: Encodes non-conservation of the energy-momentum tensor and generates non-adiabatic entropy production.
    While diffusion terms appear in prior UG papers, the specific redshift power-law form is chosen here without independent microscopic evidence.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 22809 in / 2763 out tokens · 23738 ms · 2026-07-13T20:05:57.566534+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

This work investigates future cosmological singularities in a flat FLRW universe filled with a single barotropic fluid, ($p = (\gamma - 1)\rho$), within the framework of unimodular gravity. In this setting, the non-conservation of the energy-momentum tensor is encoded through an energy diffusion function $Q$. While a constant diffusion term leads to an effective cosmological constant and preserves adiabatic evolution, a time-dependent $Q(t)$ induces non-adiabatic dynamics. We consider a power-law Ansatz for $Q$ as a function of the redshift and impose the condition of positive entropy production. This requirement leads to non-trivial constraints on the model parameters, with direct implications for the admissible singularity structure. In particular, within the thermodynamically allowed sector, we show that Big Rip singularities are excluded for non-phantom fluids when the cosmological constant is positive. For phantom fluids, the model reproduces the expected Big Rip behavior, as well as Big Crunch solutions for negative cosmological constant. More importantly, we show that diffusion can induce an effective phantom regime even when the fundamental fluid is non-phantom. In particular, for a negative cosmological constant, we present an explicit realization of a Big Rip singularity in unimodular gravity driven by diffusion, while consistently preserving a non-phantom equation of state and positive entropy production. These results reveal a novel mechanism for the emergence of future singularities, with no direct analogue in standard General Relativity.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Comment on Cosmological constraints on unimodular gravity models with diffusion (arXiv:2211.07424): thermodynamic inadmissibility of the H0 tension resolution mechanism

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Diffusion-based unimodular gravity models for the H0 tension are thermodynamically inadmissible because they require a growing effective cosmological term incompatible with the second law.

  2. Spatial curvature in Unimodular Gravity

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Unimodular gravity with thermodynamically consistent power-law diffusion and spatial curvature is constrained by Pantheon+ and BAO data, producing H0 ≈ 73.35 km/s/Mpc and Ωk0 ≈ -0.109.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    We distinguish two cases •β >0

    Non -phantom fluid (γ >0). We distinguish two cases •β >0. This implies thatQ 0 >0due to the posi- tiveness of the entropy production. There are two further possibilities: –3γ > β, which constrains the first coefficient ofρto be non-negative, since the early-time regime is dominated by the first contribution, that is,ρ 0 ≥β Q 0/(3γ−β). –3γ < β, which lead...

  2. [2]

    As in the former case, we distinguish two cases: •β <0

    Phantom fluid (γ <0). As in the former case, we distinguish two cases: •β <0. This implies thatQ 0 <0due to the posi- tiveness of the entropy production. There are two further possibilities: 6 –3γ > β, which constrains the first coefficient ofρto be non-negative, since the early-time regime is dominated by the first contribution, that is,ρ 0 ≥β Q 0/(3γ−β)...

  3. [3]

    2|Λ| 3 √ D a− 3 ˜B 2|Λ| !# −(41) s 3 |Λ| sin−1

    Non phantom fluid,γ >0, and singularities CaseΛ>0 From conditionγ >0, it follows that the parameter region must satisfy3γ > β. It means that the leading contributions in the largearegime forβ >0correspond toΛ/3+ ˜Ba−β, and therefore, the asymptotic behavior of the above integral, i.e. for large scale-parameteravalues, is given by the expression t−t ∗ = 2 ...

  4. [4]

    Phantom fluids,γ <0, and singularities CaseΛ>0 In this case, Big Rip scenarios may occur in the region γ <0, as can be demonstrated as follows. We begin by introducing the scalesaphQ anda phΛ by aphQ = A B 1 (|β|−3|γ|) anda phΛ = Λ 3A 1/3|γ| .(53) As discussed above, forγ <0, the requirements of a non-negative energy density and a well-defined Hubble para...

  5. [5]

    ΛCDM is alive and well,

    A. Blanchard, J.-Y. Héloret, S. Ilić, B. Lamine, and I. Tu- tusaus, “ΛCDM is alive and well,”The Open Journal of Astrophysics, vol. 7, May 2024

    2024

  6. [6]

    Challenges to theΛCDM cosmol- ogy,

    G. Efstathiou, “Challenges to theΛCDM cosmol- ogy,”Philosophical Transactions A, vol. 383, no. 2290, p. 20240022, 2025

    2025

  7. [7]

    Hubble tension to- mography: BAO vs SN Ia distance tension,

    D. Bousis and L. Perivolaropoulos, “Hubble tension to- mography: BAO vs SN Ia distance tension,”Physical Review D, vol. 110, no. 10, p. 103546, 2024

    2024

  8. [8]

    Quintom cosmology and mod- ified gravity after DESI 2024,

    Y. Yang, X. Ren, Q. Wang, Z. Lu, D. Zhang, Y.-F. Cai, and E. N. Saridakis, “Quintom cosmology and mod- ified gravity after DESI 2024,”Science Bulletin, vol. 69, no. 17, pp. 2698–2704, 2024

    2024

  9. [9]

    Interacting dark energy after DESI baryon acoustic oscillation measurements,

    W. Giarè, M. A. Sabogal, R. C. Nunes, and E. Di Valentino, “Interacting dark energy after DESI baryon acoustic oscillation measurements,”Physical Re- view Letters, vol. 133, no. 25, p. 251003, 2024

    2024

  10. [10]

    Does DESI 2024 ConfirmΛCDM?,

    E. Ó. Colgáin, M. G. Dainotti, S. Capozziello, S. Pourojaghi, M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and D. Stojkovic, “Does DESI 2024 ConfirmΛCDM?,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.08633, 2024. 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  11. [11]

    Using non- DESI data to confirm and strengthen the DESI 2024 spatially flat w 0 wa CDM cosmological parametrization result,

    C.-G. Park, J. d. C. Pérez, and B. Ratra, “Using non- DESI data to confirm and strengthen the DESI 2024 spatially flat w 0 wa CDM cosmological parametrization result,”Physical Review D, vol. 110, no. 12, p. 123533, 2024

    2024

  12. [12]

    Unimodular theory of gravity and the cosmological constant,

    Y. J. Ng and H. van Dam, “Unimodular theory of gravity and the cosmological constant,”Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 32, pp. 1337–1340, 05 1991

    1991

  13. [13]

    Unimodularrelativityandcosmologicalconstant,

    D. R. Finkelstein, A. A. Galiautdinov, and J. E. Baugh, “Unimodularrelativityandcosmologicalconstant,”Jour- nal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 42, pp. 340–346, 01 2001

    2001

  14. [14]

    Diffusion in uni- modular gravity: Analytical solutions, late-time accel- eration, and cosmological constraints,

    C. Corral, N. Cruz, and E. González, “Diffusion in uni- modular gravity: Analytical solutions, late-time accel- eration, and cosmological constraints,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 102, p. 023508, 2020

    2020

  15. [15]

    Cosmic acceleration in unimodular gravity,

    García-Aspeitia, Miguel A., et al, “Cosmic acceleration in unimodular gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 99, p. 123525, Jun 2019

    2019

  16. [16]

    Resolving the h 0 tension with diffusion,

    A. Perez, D. Sudarsky, and E. Wilson-Ewing, “Resolving the h 0 tension with diffusion,”General Relativity and Gravitation, vol. 53, no. 1, p. 7, 2021

    2021

  17. [17]

    Revisiting cos- mological diffusion models in Unimodular Gravity and theH 0 tension,

    F. X. Linares Cedeño and U. Nucamendi, “Revisiting cos- mological diffusion models in Unimodular Gravity and theH 0 tension,”Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 32, p. 100807, 2021

    2021

  18. [18]

    New parallaxes of galactic cepheids from spatially scanning theHubble space telescope: Im- plications for the hubble constant,

    A. G. Riesset al., “New parallaxes of galactic cepheids from spatially scanning theHubble space telescope: Im- plications for the hubble constant,”The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 855, p. 136, mar 2018

    2018

  19. [19]

    Cosmological Constraints from the Hubble Diagram of Quasars at High Redshifts,

    G. Risaliti and E. Lusso, “Cosmological Constraints from the Hubble Diagram of Quasars at High Redshifts,”Na- ture Astronomy, vol. 3, pp. 272–277, Jan. 2019

    2019

  20. [20]

    Exploring thermody- namics inconsistencies in unimodular gravity: a compar- ative study of two energy diffusion functions,

    M. Cruz, N. Cruz, and S. Lepe, “Exploring thermody- namics inconsistencies in unimodular gravity: a compar- ative study of two energy diffusion functions,”The Euro- pean Physical Journal C, vol. 84, p. 1186, Nov. 2024

    2024

  21. [21]

    Spielen Gravitationsfelder im Aufbau der materiellen Elementarteilchen eine wesentliche Rolle?,

    A. Einstein, “Spielen Gravitationsfelder im Aufbau der materiellen Elementarteilchen eine wesentliche Rolle?,” Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin (Math. Phys. ), vol. 1919, pp. 349–356, 1919

    1919

  22. [22]

    Einstein gravity from restricted coordinate invariance,

    W. Buchmüller and N. Dragon, “Einstein gravity from restricted coordinate invariance,”Physics Letters B, vol. 207, no. 3, pp. 292–294, 1988

    1988

  23. [23]

    Unimodular theory of canonical quantum gravity,

    W. G. Unruh, “Unimodular theory of canonical quantum gravity,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 40, pp. 1048–1052, Aug 1989

    1989

  24. [24]

    On the trace-free Einstein equations as a viable alterna- tive to general relativity,

    G. F. R. Ellis, H. van Elst, J. Murugan, and J.-P. Uzan, “On the trace-free Einstein equations as a viable alterna- tive to general relativity,”Classical and Quantum Grav- ity, vol. 28, p. 225007, oct 2011

    2011

  25. [25]

    The trace-free Einstein equations and inflation,

    G. F. R. Ellis, “The trace-free Einstein equations and inflation,”General Relativity and Gravitation, vol. 46, p. 1619, Dec. 2013

    2013

  26. [26]

    Negative cosmological constant in the dark sector?,

    R. Calderón, R. Gannouji, B. L’Huillier, and D. Polarski, “Negative cosmological constant in the dark sector?,” Physical Review D, vol. 103, no. 2, p. 023526, 2021

    2021

  27. [27]

    Graduateddarkenergy: Observationalhintsof a spontaneous sign switch in the cosmological constant,

    Ö. Akarsu, J. D. Barrow, L. A. Escamilla, and J. A. Vazquez, “Graduateddarkenergy: Observationalhintsof a spontaneous sign switch in the cosmological constant,” Physical Review D, vol. 101, no. 6, p. 063528, 2020

    2020

  28. [28]

    Revisit- inga NegativeCosmologicalConstantfromLow-Redshift Data,

    L. Visinelli, S. Vagnozzi, and U. Danielsson, “Revisit- inga NegativeCosmologicalConstantfromLow-Redshift Data,”Symmetry, vol. 11:1035, Aug. 2019

    2019

  29. [29]

    H. B. Callen,Thermodynamics and an introduction to thermostatistics; 2nd ed.New York, NY: Wiley, 1985

    1985

  30. [30]

    Dark energy from violation of energy conservation,

    T. Josset, A. Perez, and D. Sudarsky, “Dark energy from violation of energy conservation,”Physical review letters, vol. 118, no. 2, p. 021102, 2017

    2017

  31. [31]

    Proper- ties of singularities in (phantom) dark energy universe,

    S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, and S. Tsujikawa, “Proper- ties of singularities in (phantom) dark energy universe,” Physical Review D, vol. 71, p. 063004, 2005

    2005

  32. [32]

    Phan- tom singularities and their quantum fate: general relativ- ity and beyond—a CANTATA COST action topic,

    P. M.-M. Mariam Bouhmadi-López, Claus Kiefer, “Phan- tom singularities and their quantum fate: general relativ- ity and beyond—a CANTATA COST action topic,”Gen- eral Relativity and Gravitation 51 (2019) 10, 135, vol. 51, p. 135, 2019

    2019

  33. [33]

    Phantom energy: dark energy withw <−1causes a cosmic doomsday,

    R. R. Caldwell, M. Kamionkowski, and N. N. Weinberg, “Phantom energy: dark energy withw <−1causes a cosmic doomsday,”Physical Review letters, vol. 91, no. 7, p. 071301, 2003

    2003

  34. [34]

    K-essential phantom energy: Doomsday around the corner?,

    P. F. González-Díaz, “K-essential phantom energy: Doomsday around the corner?,”Physics Letters B, vol. 586, no. 1-2, pp. 1–4, 2004

    2004

  35. [35]

    Singularities and soft-Big Bang in a viscousΛCDM model,

    N. Cruz, E. González, and J. Jovel, “Singularities and soft-Big Bang in a viscousΛCDM model,”Physical Re- view D, vol. 105, no. 2, p. 024047, 2022

    2022

  36. [36]

    The little rip,

    P. H. Frampton, K. J. Ludwick, and R. J. Scherrer, “The little rip,”Physical Review D—Particles, Fields, Gravi- tation, and Cosmology, vol. 84, no. 6, p. 063003, 2011

    2011

  37. [37]

    Models for little rip dark energy,

    P. H. Frampton, K. J. Ludwick, S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, and R. J. Scherrer, “Models for little rip dark energy,” Physics Letters B, vol. 708, no. 1, pp. 204–211, 2012

    2012

  38. [38]

    Vis- cous little rip cosmology,

    I. Brevik, E. Elizalde, S. Nojiri, and S. Odintsov, “Vis- cous little rip cosmology,”Physical Review D—Particles, Fields, Gravitation, and Cosmology, vol. 84, no. 10, p. 103508, 2011

    2011

  39. [39]

    Tradeoff between smoother and sooner “little rip

    M. Bouhmadi-López, P. Chen, and Y.-W. Liu, “Tradeoff between smoother and sooner “little rip”,”The European Physical Journal C, vol. 73, no. 9, p. 2546, 2013

    2013

  40. [40]

    Classical and quantum cosmology of the little rip abrupt event,

    I. Albarran, M. Bouhmadi-López, C. Kiefer, J. Marto, and P. Vargas Moniz, “Classical and quantum cosmology of the little rip abrupt event,”Physical Review D, vol. 94, no. 6, p. 063536, 2016

    2016