Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 6 minor 107 references

Quintessence and false vacuum: Two sides of the same coin?

T0 review · 5 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read False-vacuum decay explains today's dark energy

desk verdict The paper's headline constraints come from an asserted, dimensionally inconsistent equation of state, and the data it claims to fit are marked 'Not applicable'; the idea is interesting but the quantitative core does not hold up. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.18611 v1 pith:36LTMIFT submitted 2025-04-25 gr-qc

Pradosh Keshav M.V. , Arun Kenath (Christ University , Bangalore) This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qc PACS 95.36.+x98.80.-k
keywords QuintessenceFalsevacuumDarkenergySwamplandcriteriaEquationofstatedecayLate-timeaccelerationCosmologicalconstant
topics Dark EnergyQuantum Gravity
open problems Dark EnergyQuantum Gravity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper argues that today's accelerated expansion could be the observable tail of a metastable vacuum decay rather than an arbitrary cosmological constant. A quintessence field released from a false vacuum—a metastable local minimum that decays by tunnelling—develops an effective potential that rolls slowly, with coupling in the narrow band $-0.04<\lambda<0.1$ and an effective dark-energy equation of state $-0.8

What carries the argument

The central object is the effective potential $V_{\rm eff}(\phi)=V(\phi)+\hbar\lambda\langle\phi^2\rangle/2$, built from an exponential quintessence potential and the bounce solution $\phi_B(t)=\phi_0\exp(-\int\lambda\,dt)$ that interpolates between the local and global minima. The paper keeps the quantum correction term by assuming the pressure bound $\Delta p/p_f\gtrsim\mathcal{O}(\hbar)$, interpreted as the ratio of kinetic to potential energy of the scalar, and this assumption is what turns vacuum decay into slow roll. Dark-energy density is then parameterized in Breit-Wigner form, $\rho_{de}=\Lambda(t)+E_R[1+\alpha/(1-\alpha)R(J/I)]$, and the effective equation of state is $w_{\rm eff}(t)=-\ln\left[(2\pi/\epsilon\alpha)\Gamma/(A\exp(\lambda\phi)\exp(E_0-E_R)\rho_{de})\right]$. The bounce action $B=-\hbar[w_{\rm eff}(t)+M_p^2/2]$ ties the tunnelling rate to the observed equation of state.

What would settle it

A precision measurement of the dark-energy equation of state at $z<1$ that returns $w$ within roughly 0.05 of $-1$ would sit outside the predicted window $-0.8<w_{\rm eff}<-0.4$ and would falsify the central claim. An independent constraint forcing $\lambda$ outside $(-0.04,0.1)$ would likewise rule out the stabilization window.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that a scalar field trapped in a false vacuum, when released by semiclassical decay, settles into a slow-roll effective potential rather than running away or collapsing. The effective potential $V_{\rm eff}(\phi)=V(\phi)+\hbar\lambda\langle\phi^2\rangle/2$ exhibits slow roll for $-0.04<\lambda<0.1$, corresponding to $-0.8<w_{\rm eff}<-0.4$, and stabilizes for $1<A<e$, with maximum stabilization when the normalized bubble volume is $V_{\rm Bub}\sim1.31$. With these parameters the swampland gradient bound $|\nabla V|\gtrsim cV/M_p$ is respected, so late-time acceleration can coexist with quantum-gravity constraints without an eternally stable de Sitter vacuum. The effective equation of state is derived through a Breit-Wigner-inspired dark-energy density and compared with combined supernova, baryon-acoustic-oscillation, and cosmic-chronometer observations; the fit gives $A\approx2.41$, $\alpha\approx0.32$, $w_{\rm eff}\approx-0.7$, $\lambda\approx-0.03$, and $E_0-E_R\approx19\,{\rm GeV}$.

Load-bearing premise

The whole semiclassical construction rests on the assumed bound $\Delta p/p_f\gtrsim\mathcal{O}(\hbar)$ on the fractional pressure change during vacuum decay; the paper states this bound rather than deriving it, and if it fails at late times the effective potential and fitted parameter ranges lose their basis.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The dark-energy equation of state should be measurably different from $-1$ at late times, in the window $-0.8<w_{\rm eff}<-0.4$, with the combined-data best fit near $-0.7$.
  • The scalar coupling should lie in $-0.04<\lambda<0.1$; a future constraint outside this window would rule out the stabilization mechanism.
  • Swampland gradient bounds can coexist with late-time acceleration: a metastable false vacuum decays into a slow-rolling scalar rather than settling into an eternally stable de Sitter vacuum.
  • Stability of the late-time field is controlled by the interaction $Q$ balancing $-V_f'(\phi_f)$; depending on $Q$, the Hubble parameter declines smoothly, oscillates, or stalls, giving distinctive observational signatures.
  • The present dark-energy density would result from a finely tuned slow evolution from a higher past value, not an arbitrary constant, so the current vacuum configuration is tied to the false-vacuum decay history.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper itself: a precision measurement of $w(z)$ at $z\lesssim1$ that resolves time variation would discriminate this false-vacuum picture from a pure cosmological constant; a value indistinguishable from $-1$ with tight errors would weaken the $w_{\rm eff}\approx-0.7$ claim.
  • Beyond the paper itself: the same pressure-bound machinery could be applied to a metastable dark-matter sector, where a phase transition could leave substructure or annihilation signatures; the paper gestures at this but does not develop it.
  • Beyond the paper itself: the assumed bound $\Delta p/p_f\gtrsim\mathcal{O}(\hbar)$ carries the whole slow-roll window, so deriving it from an underlying theory, or showing it fails at late times, is the most direct next step.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

5 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies a quintessence field initially trapped in a metastable false vacuum, assuming a semiclassical pressure bound Δp/p_f ≥ O(ℏ). It proposes an effective potential Veff, imposes swampland gradient constraints, and parameterizes the dark-energy density through a Breit-Wigner-inspired form. Using MCMC with Pantheon+SH0ES, BAO, and CC data, it reports slow-roll stabilization of Veff for -0.04 < λ < 0.1 and -0.8 < weff < -0.4 with A between 1 and e, and quotes maximum-likelihood values A ≈ 2.41, α ≈ 0.32, weff ≈ -0.7, λ ≈ -0.03, and E0 - ER ≈ 19 GeV. The paper concludes that late-time acceleration can arise from a slowly varying scalar released from a false vacuum while satisfying swampland conditions.

Significance. The proposed connection between false-vacuum decay, quintessence, and swampland constraints is conceptually appealing and would be significant if established, since it would make late-time acceleration the observable tail of a metastable vacuum transition. The paper is explicit that the pressure bound is assumed and acknowledges several limitations in Section 9, which is commendable. However, no machine-checkable proofs, public code, or data products accompany the manuscript; the central equation of state is asserted rather than derived; and the reported MCMC constraints are not reproducible. In its present form the paper's quantitative core cannot support the headline claims.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 7, Eq. (50)] The effective equation of state weff(t) = -ln[ (2π/(ϵα)) Γ / (A exp(λϕ) exp(E0-ER) ρde) ] is introduced without derivation. The text states that Eq. (47) is followed and Λ'(ϕ) ∼ E0-ER is substituted, but Eq. (47) is an inequality on a gradient and no algebraic chain connects it to a logarithmic equation of state. In addition, the argument of the logarithm contains Γ/ρde, which has mass dimension -3 in natural units, while A, exp(λϕ), and exp(E0-ER) are dimensionless; the logarithm of a dimensionful quantity is undefined. The same dimensional inconsistency affects Eqs. (48) and (49), where a dimensionless weff is added to terms of dimension M_p^2. Because Eq. (50) is the likelihood used for the MCMC fits that yield the paper's headline ranges, this is a load-bearing error.
  2. [Section 6, Eq. (38)] The Breit-Wigner-inspired dark-energy density ρde depends on an unspecified function R(J/I) and unspecified time-dependent functions J(t) and I(t). The text only points to Ref. [80] for the explicit form of the intervals. Without definitions of these objects, Eq. (45) and the gradient criterion in Eq. (47) cannot be evaluated; the swampland constraint and the subsequent equation of state are therefore formal rather than derived.
  3. [Section 2] The bound Δp/p_f ≥ O(ℏ) is stated as an assumption ('we assume a bound') and is used to justify keeping quantum corrections in the effective potential and equation of state. The paper never derives this bound from the semiclassical expansion in Eq. (9) or from the concrete estimates in Eqs. (10)-(11). Since the stability ranges reported in Sections 5 and 7 depend on this bound, a derivation or a quantitative justification valid at late times is needed before the central claim can be assessed.
  4. [Section 10, Data Availability Statement] The statement 'Not applicable' conflicts with the MCMC analysis reported in Figs. 2 and 3, which claim to use Pantheon+SH0ES, BAO, and CC data. No catalog versions, redshift ranges, likelihood definitions, or analysis code are provided, so the quoted maximum-likelihood values (A ≈ 2.41, α ≈ 0.32, weff ≈ -0.7, λ ≈ -0.03, E0-ER ≈ 19 GeV) cannot be checked or reproduced.
  5. [Section 5, Eqs. (36)-(37)] The ratio |∇Vtot|/Veff is quoted as 3.6 × 10^36 GeV and 0.222 GeV, but a ratio of two quantities of the same engineering dimension should be dimensionless; the stated units indicate that Veff or ∇Vtot has been assigned inconsistent dimensions. Table 1 lists nominal ranges and 'Correction factor' values without explaining what is corrected or how the ranges are obtained, so the fine-tuning claim is not supported.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The range '0 .1 > λ > -0.04' contains a spurious space; elsewhere it is written as '0.1 > λ > -0.04'. Use a consistent notation.
  2. [Section 3, first paragraph] The word 'Rater' should be 'Rather'.
  3. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption refers to 'Fig. 5b' but the figure is presented as a single panel; clarify the panel labeling.
  4. [Eq. (12)] Placing Λ(t) inside the exponential of the decay rate makes the exponent dimensionful if Λ(t) has units of cm^-2 as used elsewhere; please clarify the units or the intended dimensionless combination.
  5. [Section 6 and Eq. (45)] The notation for the Planck mass switches between M_p and M_p^2 in nearby equations; please use consistent units throughout.
  6. [Fig. 6 caption] The dataset is written as 'Panthen+SHOES' in the caption; the standard name is Pantheon+SH0ES.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged · score 8.0 of 10

The headline lambda, weff, and A ranges are imported from citations, imposed as MCMC constraints, or restated from definitions, so the central 'predictions' reduce to the paper's own inputs.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract; Section 7, Eq. (50) and Fig. 5a; Section 9 Conclusion]
    "Further analysis revealed that Veff shows a slow-roll behavior for 0.1 > λ > −0.04 in the effective dark energy equation of state (EoS) −0.8 < w0 < −0.4, stabilizing at points between 1 < A < 2.718. ... With constraints that set the lower bound at λ< 0.1 and 0.3<α< 0.4, Veff slow roll in the range −0.8<w eff < −0.4 shown in Fig. 5b. ... We obtained maximum likelihood parameters of A≈ 2.41, α≈ 0.32, weff≈− 0.7, λ≈− 0.03, and (E0−ER)≈ 19 GeV."

    The abstract presents these ranges as revealed behavior, but the text shows they are inputs to or outputs of the MCMC fit of Eq. (50): the lambda interval is explicitly adopted from refs. [53,54], the weff range is generated only after imposing constraints lambda<0.1 and 0.3<alpha<0.4, and the quoted best-fit values are the maximum-likelihood parameters of Eq. (50) fitted to Pantheon+SH0ES, BAO, and CC data. Eq. (50) is a likelihood containing free parameters (A, alpha, lambda, Gamma, E0-ER); quoting its fitted and constrained values as the predicted stabilization range is a fitted-input-called-prediction. The claimed result is therefore the fit output by construction.

  2. self definitional [Section 5, Eq. (32); Section 9 Conclusion]
    "VBub≈A exp(−λϕ(t)) (32) where A = exp(c1−c2/ℏ) encapsulates the initial conditions ... In this context, we set a bound c1−c2≥ ℏ ... When A is in the range 1 to exp(1), c1−c2 are nearly balanced so that the bubble volume is tuned to be near a critical value below which quantum effects are significant. ... This result is significant as it aligns with the behaviour of a slow-rolling effective potential Veff within the range 0.1 > λ >−0.04, spanning from A∼ 1 to A = 2.718, with maximum stabilization occurring when VBub∼ 1.31."

    A is defined as exp((c1−c2)/ℏ) in Eq. (32), and the paper itself states that the range 1<A<exp(1) corresponds to c1−c2 being 'nearly balanced' while 'we set a bound c1−c2≥ ℏ'. The conclusion's stabilization interval 1<A<2.718 is exactly the definitional statement 0≤c1−c2≤ℏ under that imposed bound. No independent dynamics select this interval; the result is a restatement of the model's own definition and initial-condition assumption, so the prediction reduces to the definition by construction.

1 more flagged steps
  1. renaming known result [Abstract; Section 1 Introduction]
    "We then derived the effective potential of the scalar with an upper bound on the coupling constant λ < 0.6. ... with a lower bound on the coupling constant λ >0.1 (against the expected λ <0.6 [53]), we follow [54] with a slowly evolving effective potential Veff between−0.04 < λ <0.1"

    The abstract claims lambda<0.6 was 'derived', but the introduction credits the same bound to ref. [53] and obtains the working interval −0.04<lambda<0.1 by 'follow[ing] [54]'. The paper's headline lambda range is therefore a literature value imported by citation and then re-labeled as a derived result. Because the abstract presents this imported interval as the paper's finding ('revealed'), the derivation claim reduces to the cited input rather than to any calculation in the paper.

full rationale

The central quantitative claims of this paper — the interval −0.04<lambda<0.1, the equation-of-state range −0.8<weff<−0.4, the stabilization window 1<A<2.718, and the best-fit values (A≈2.41, alpha≈0.32, weff≈−0.7, lambda≈−0.03, E0−ER≈19 GeV) — are not derived from an independent first-principles chain. The lambda interval is explicitly taken from refs. [53,54]; the weff range appears only after the MCMC analysis of Eq. (50) is run with imposed constraints lambda<0.1 and 0.3<alpha<0.4; and the A interval is the definitional consequence of A=exp((c1−c2)/ℏ) together with the assumed near-balance c1−c2∼ℏ. Eq. (50), which is the likelihood generating the MCMC results, is introduced by assertion ('we follow equation (47) and substitute Λ′(ϕ)∼E0−ER') without an algebraic connection to Eq. (47), and it is dimensionally inconsistent (log of Gamma/rho_de with Gamma dimensionful), so the fitted values do not follow from the stated formalism. The paper's own data-availability statement ('Not applicable') conflicts with the claimed use of Pantheon+SH0ES, BAO, and CC catalogs, making the fits independently uncheckable. The paper contains two self-citations to work by one of the authors (refs. [74] and [82]), but these are contextual (slow-roll analogy and a comparison case) rather than load-bearing, so they do not by themselves raise the score. The circularity is concentrated in the reporting of fitted, adopted, or defined parameters as predicted ranges: by the paper's own equations, those outputs equal the inputs. Score 8 reflects that the central claim is largely assembled from its own inputs, even though the assumed pressure bound Delta p/p ≥ O(hbar) is an explicit assumption rather than a circular step.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The paper's central claim depends on several inputs it does not derive: the string swampland criterion, the semiclassical vacuum-decay picture, the pressure-ratio bound Delta p/p_f >= O(hbar), exponential potential and bounce forms, a Breit-Wigner-inspired parameterization of rho_de, and hand-tuned Table 1 values. The independent support for these inputs is partial at best; the swampland criterion is a conjecture, and the Breit-Wigner functions are not defined. The fitted parameters listed above carry most of the quantitative content.

free parameters (8)
  • lambda (quintessence coupling) = lambda ≈ -0.03 (best fit); claimed range -0.04 < lambda < 0.1
    Appears in the bounce solution Eq. (16), effective potential Eq. (25), and EoS Eq. (50). It is tuned and fit, then quoted as the paper's main result.
  • alpha (Breit-Wigner weighting) = alpha ≈ 0.32
    Dimensionless parameter in the rho_de parameterization Eq. (38) and weff Eq. (50); fitted by MCMC.
  • A (bubble volume factor and steepness bound) = A ≈ 2.41; range 1 < A < e
    Defined in Eq. (32) as exp(c1-c2/hbar) and also used as the gradient bound in Eqs. (34) and (41); the overlap is a source of confusion and the value is fitted.
  • Gamma (false-vacuum decay rate) = not reported in text; appears in Eq. (50) and Fig. 6
    Dominates the numerator of the argument of the logarithm in weff; no physical model for its scale is given.
  • E0 - ER (source-term difference) = ≈ 19 GeV
    Appears in Lambda'(phi)=E0-ER and in Eq. (50); fitted by MCMC.
  • Lambda0 = ~10^56 cm^-2 (input)
    Used in V = Lambda0 M0/(8 pi G) and Eq. (22); an input normalization, not derived.
  • M0 (scalar mass/energy scale) = > 10^-13 eV (assumed lower bound)
    Sets the scalar mass scale in Section 4; assumed lower bound, not independently calibrated.
  • Table 1 hand-tuned parameter set (H, lambda_H, V0, M, phi_f) = H: 0.001-0.004 GeV; lambda_H: 0.001-0.01; V0: 0.55-0.84 GeV; M: 0-1 GeV; phi_f: 1-2 GeV
    Hand-chosen ranges in Table 1 are used to make the gradient condition |nabla Vtot| > A hold; there is no derivation for these ranges.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Swampland distance and de Sitter conjecctures impose |nabla V| >= c V / M_p and |nabla V| > A.
    Section 5 invokes these conjectures as constraints on the scalar potential; they are not established theorems and their applicability to this model is asserted.
  • domain assumption Coleman-Callan semiclassical false-vacuum decay formalism and bounce action describe the transition.
    The paper builds on Coleman-de Luccia tunneling and bounce solutions without revisiting their assumptions; if gravity or quantum fluctuations modify the bounce, the derivation changes.
  • ad hoc to paper Delta p / p_f >= O(hbar) pressure-ratio bound holds at late times.
    Introduced in Section 2 and the abstract as an assumption; no derivation is provided, and the entire effective-potential argument depends on it.
  • ad hoc to paper Exponential forms for the bounce solution and (Peebles-Ratra-style) potential.
    Eqs. (14) and (16) fix exponential forms; the paper itself notes that other potential forms would suppress the bounce and change the decay rate.
  • ad hoc to paper Breit-Wigner-inspired parameterization of rho_de in Eq. (38).
    The parameterization is asserted with a pointer to [80], but the functions R(J/I), J(t), I(t) are undefined, so it cannot be checked or independently derived.
  • domain assumption Flat FLRW cosmology with the scalar field described as a perfect fluid.
    Standard Friedmann dynamics and homogeneity are assumed throughout, which is a conventional but nontrivial modeling choice for dark energy.
  • ad hoc to paper V = Lambda0 M0 / (8 pi G) with specified Lambda0 and M0 scales.
    Section 4 introduces this relation to fix the potential scale; it is not derived from a more fundamental theory.
invented entities (1)
  • Q (interaction term between dark energy and the false vacuum)
    purpose: Counterbalances the false-vacuum potential gradient in Eq. (67), stabilizing the field; enters the continuity equations in Eq. (68).
    Q is introduced phenomenologically to make the force balance work; Table 2 gives only qualitative behaviors and no observational signature is predicted.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quintessence and false vacuum: Two sides of the same coin?." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/36LTMIFT

@misc{pith2026250418611,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quintessence and false vacuum: Two sides of the same coin?},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/36LTMIFT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.18611}
}
abstract

We study late-time acceleration scenarios using a quintessence field initially trapped in a metastable false vacuum state. The false vacuum has non-zero vacuum energy and could drive exponential expansion if not coupled with gravity. Upon decay of the false vacuum, the quintessence field is released and begins to evolve. We assumed conditions where the effective scalar potential gradient must satisfy \(\nabla V_{\text{eff}} > A\), characterized by a pressure term approximately \(\Delta p / p > \mathcal {O} (\hbar)\) invoking the recently proposed string swampland criteria. We then derived the effective potential of the scalar with an upper bound on the coupling constant \(\lambda < 0.6\). Further analysis revealed that \(V_{\text{eff}}\) shows a slow-roll behavior for \(0.1 > \lambda > -0.04\) in the effective dark energy equation of state (EoS) \(-0.8 < w_0 < -0.4\), stabilizing at points between \(1 < A < 2.718\). Our results suggest a stable scalar decoupled from its initial meta-stable state, could indeed lead to a more stable universe at late times. However, slight deviations in parameter orders could potentially violate the swampland criteria if \(V_{\text{eff}}\) grows too rapidly. Since this is not something we expect, it opens up the possibility that the current dark energy configuration might be a result of a slowly varying scalar rather than being arbitrary. \

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.18611 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Evolution of scalar field between true and false vacuum: The red curve represents the potential V (ϕ) in the false vacuum, and the field oscillates until it tunnels to the true vacuum represented by the blue curve. 3 False Vacuum and Running Cosmological constant Recent studies, particularly those by Urbanowski [63, 64], have investigated metastable false vac￾uum, proposing that the energy of such a state reflects t… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) analysis of model parameters following equation (50). The corner plot shows marginalized posterior distributions with contours representing 68% and 95% confidence levels, with the maximum likelihood parameters marked in red. The dataset combines Baryon Acoustic Oscillation (BAO), Cosmic Chronometers (CC), and Pantheon+SH0ES Supernova Type Ia data. Prior constraints were set, and likel… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. KDE plot showing the marginalized distributions and pairwise correlations of cosmolog [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The relationship between ρde and E0−ER. As ρde decreases, E0−ER shifts from negative to positive, indicating a transition to a more stable energy configuration. The conservation equation of a system involving both true and false vacuum states in a cosmo￾logical context…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Compares the joint and marginal posterior distributions of Γ0 and ρ0 for three cosmological models with contours representing 68% and 95% confidence levels using combined Panthen+SHOES and BAO+CC data. The marginal distributions of Γ0 (top) and ρ0 (right) are visualize…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

107 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages

  1. [80]

    Cosmological implications of quantum mechanics parametrization of dark energy

    Marek Szyd lowski et al. Cosmological implications of quantum mechanics parametrization of dark energy. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. , 880:012022, 2017. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/880/1/012022

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-6596/880/1/012022 2017

  2. [1]

    Perlmutter and et al

    S. Perlmutter and et al. Measurements of ω and λ from 42 high redshift supernovae. Astro- physical Journal, 517:565–586, 1999

    1999

  3. [2]

    Riess and et al

    Adam G. Riess and et al. Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant. The Astronomical Journal, 116(3):1009, 1998

    1998

  4. [3]

    Del Popolo and M

    A. Del Popolo and M. Le Delliou. Small scale problems of the λcdm model: A short review. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.07790 , 2016

    arXiv 2016

  5. [4]

    M. S. Turner. λcdm: Much more than we expected, but now less than what we want. Found Phys, 48:1261–1278, 2018. doi: 10.1007/s10701-018-0178-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s10701-018-0178-8 2018

  6. [5]

    Weinberg

    S. Weinberg. The cosmological constant problems. In D. B. Cline, editor, Sources and Detection of Dark Matter and Dark Energy in the Universe . Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg,

  7. [6]

    On the cosmological constant problem

    Lucas Lombriser. On the cosmological constant problem. Physics Letters B, 797:134804, 2019

    2019

  8. [7]

    Lectures on the cosmological constant problem

    Antonio Padilla. Lectures on the cosmological constant problem. arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.05296, 2015

    arXiv 2015

Show all 107 references
  1. [8]

    The cosmological constant problem

    Y Jack Ng. The cosmological constant problem. International Journal of Modern Physics D , 1(01):145–160, 1992. 24

    1992

  2. [9]

    New solution of the cosmological constant problems

    John D Barrow and Douglas J Shaw. New solution of the cosmological constant problems. Physical Review Letters, 106(10):101302, 2011

    2011

  3. [10]

    Solutions to the cosmological constant problems

    J Garriga and Alexander Vilenkin. Solutions to the cosmological constant problems. Physical Review D, 64(2):023517, 2001

    2001

  4. [11]

    The cosmological constant

    Sean M Carroll. The cosmological constant. Living reviews in relativity , 4(1):1–56, 2001

    2001

  5. [12]

    Cosmological constant—the weight of the vacuum

    Thanu Padmanabhan. Cosmological constant—the weight of the vacuum. Physics reports, 380(5-6):235–320, 2003

    2003

  6. [13]

    The cosmological constant problem and quintessence

    Varun Sahni. The cosmological constant problem and quintessence. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 19(13):3435, 2002

    2002

  7. [14]

    Cosmological constant, false vacua, and axions

    Stephen M Barr and D Seckel. Cosmological constant, false vacua, and axions. Physical Review D, 64(12):123513, 2001

    2001

  8. [15]

    Inflation after false vacuum decay: observational prospects after planck

    Raphael Bousso, Daniel Harlow, and Leonardo Senatore. Inflation after false vacuum decay: observational prospects after planck. Physical Review D, 91(8):083527, 2015

    2015

  9. [16]

    Dynamics of false-vacuum bubbles

    Steven K Blau, Eduardo I Guendelman, and Alan H Guth. Dynamics of false-vacuum bubbles. Physical Review D, 35(6):1747, 1987

    1987

  10. [17]

    Late time behavior of false vacuum decay: Possible im- plications for cosmology¡? format?¿ and metastable inflating states

    Lawrence M Krauss and James Dent. Late time behavior of false vacuum decay: Possible im- plications for cosmology¡? format?¿ and metastable inflating states. Physical Review Letters, 100(17):171301, 2008

    2008

  11. [18]

    Dynamical emergence of the universe into the false vacuum

    Johann Rafelski and Jeremiah Birrell. Dynamical emergence of the universe into the false vacuum. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics , 2015(11):035, 2015

    2015

  12. [19]

    Quantization of false-vacuum bubbles: A hamiltonian treatment of gravitational tunneling

    Willy Fischler, Daniel Morgan, and Joseph Polchinski. Quantization of false-vacuum bubbles: A hamiltonian treatment of gravitational tunneling. Physical Review D, 42(12):4042, 1990

    1990

  13. [20]

    Spherically symmetric false vacuum: no-go theorems and global structure

    Kirill A Bronnikov. Spherically symmetric false vacuum: no-go theorems and global structure. Physical Review D, 64(6):064013, 2001

    2001

  14. [21]

    Massless preheating and electroweak vacuum metastability

    Jeff Kost, Chang Sub Shin, and Takahiro Terada. Massless preheating and electroweak vacuum metastability. Physical Review D, 105(4):043508, 2022

    2022

  15. [22]

    False vacuum: Early universe cosmology and the development of inflation

    Chris Smeenk. False vacuum: Early universe cosmology and the development of inflation. In The universe of general relativity , pages 223–257. Springer, 2005

    2005

  16. [23]

    First-order phase transition of a vacuum and the expansion of the universe

    Katsuhiko Sato. First-order phase transition of a vacuum and the expansion of the universe. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , 195(3):467–479, 1981

    1981

  17. [24]

    The arrow of time forbids a positive cosmological constant Λ

    Laura Mersini-Houghton. The arrow of time forbids a positive cosmological constant Λ. arXiv: General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology , 2006

    2006

  18. [25]

    The absolute swampland

    Astrid Eichhorn, Arthur Hebecker, Jan M Pawlowski, and Johannes Walcher. The absolute swampland. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.20386 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  19. [26]

    The swampland: introduction and review

    Eran Palti. The swampland: introduction and review. Fortschritte der Physik, 67(6):1900037, 2019. 25

    2019

  20. [27]

    Obied, H

    G. Obied, H. Ooguri, L. Spodyneiko, and C. Vafa. de sitter space and the swampland. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.08362, 2018

    2018 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Stable de sitter vacua in n= 2, d= 5 supergravity

    Bert Cosemans and Geert Smet. Stable de sitter vacua in n= 2, d= 5 supergravity. Classical and Quantum Gravity , 22(12):2359, 2005

    2005

  22. [29]

    The stabilizing effect of gravity made simple

    JR Espinosa. The stabilizing effect of gravity made simple. Journal of Cosmology and As- troparticle Physics, 2020(07):061, 2020

    2020

  23. [30]

    Non-perturbative stability of supergravity and superstring vacua

    Mirjam Cvetiˇ c, Stephen Griffies, and Soo-Jong Rey. Non-perturbative stability of supergravity and superstring vacua. Nuclear Physics B , 389(1):3–24, 1993

    1993

  24. [31]

    E. B. Gliner. Algebraic properties of the energy-momentum tensor and vacuum-like states of matter. ZhTF, 49:542–548, 1965. In Russian. English transl.: Sov. Phys. JETP 1966, 22, 378

    1965

  25. [32]

    E. B. Gliner. Vacuum-like state of medium and friedmann’s cosmology. Akademiia Nauk SSSR Doklady, 192:771–774, 1970. In Russian. Engl. transl: Sov. Phys. Dokl. 1970, 15, 559

    1970

  26. [33]

    E. B. Gliner and I. G. Dymnikova. A nonsingular friedmann cosmology. Pisma Astron. Zhurnal, 1:7, 1975. In Russian. Engl. transl.: Sov. Astron. Lett. 1975, 1, 93

    1975

  27. [34]

    A. A. Starobinsky. Spectrum of gravitational background radiation and initial state of the universe. ZhTF Pisma , 30:719–723, 1979. In Russian. Engl. Transl.: JETP Lett. 1979, 30, 682

    1979

  28. [35]

    A. H. Guth. Inflationary universe: A possible solution to the horizon flatness problems. Physical Review D, 23:347–356, 1981

    1981

  29. [36]

    R. M. Wald. Asymptotic behavior of homogeneous cosmological models in the presence of a positive cosmological constant. Phys. Rev. D , 28:2118–2120, 1983

    1983

  30. [37]

    B. A. Ju´ arez-Aubry. Semi-classical gravity in de sitter spacetime and the cosmological con- stant. Phys. Lett. B , 797:134912, 2019

    2019

  31. [38]

    S. R. Coleman. Fate of the false vacuum: Semiclassical theory. Phys. Rev. D , 15:2929, 1977. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.15.2929

    1977 doi

  32. [39]

    S. R. Coleman and F. De Luccia. Gravitational effects on and of vacuum decay. Phys. Rev. D, 21:3305, 1980. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.21.3305

    1980 doi

  33. [40]

    C. G. Callan Jr. and S. R. Coleman. Fate of the false vacuum. ii. first quantum corrections. Phys. Rev. D , 16:1762, 1977. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.16.1762

    1977 doi

  34. [41]

    Wetterich

    C. Wetterich. Cosmology with variable cosmological constant. Nuclear Physics B , 302(4): 668–696, 1988

    1988

  35. [42]

    Wetterich

    C. Wetterich. Phenomenological parameterization of quintessence. Physics Letters B , 594 (1-2):17–22, 2004. doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2004.04.080

    2004 doi

  36. [43]

    Cosmological impli- cations of the transition from the false vacuum to the true vacuum state

    Aleksander Stachowski, Marek Szydlowski, and Krzysztof Urbanowski. Cosmological impli- cations of the transition from the false vacuum to the true vacuum state. European Physical Journal C, 77, 2016. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4934-2. 26

    2016 doi

  37. [44]

    Calmet and B

    X. Calmet and B. K. El-Menoufi. Quantum corrections to schwarzschild black hole. Eur. Phys. J. C , 77(4):243, 2017. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4802-0

    2017 doi

  38. [45]

    Masina and A

    I. Masina and A. Notari. The higgs mass range from standard model false vacuum inflation in scalar-tensor gravity. Phys. Rev. D , 85:123506, 2012

    2012

  39. [46]

    Masina and A

    I. Masina and A. Notari. Inflation from the higgs field false vacuum with hybrid potential. arXiv preprint arXiv:1204.4155 , 2012

    2012 arXiv

  40. [47]

    T. D. Brennan, F. Carta, and C. Vafa. The string landscape, the swampland, and the missing corner. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.00864 , 2017

    2017 arXiv

  41. [48]

    van Beest, J

    M. van Beest, J. Calder´ on-Infante, D. Mirfendereski, and I. Valenzuela. Phys. rept. 989 (2022) 1–50. arXiv, 2022

    2022

  42. [49]

    N. B. Agmon, A. Bedroya, M. J. Kang, and C. Vafa. Lectures on the string landscape and the swampland. arXiv, 2022

    2022

  43. [50]

    Heisenberg, M

    L. Heisenberg, M. Bartelmann, R. Brandenberger, and A. Refregier. Dark energy in the swampland. Physical Review D, 98(12):123502, 2018

    2018

  44. [51]

    M. P. Hertzberg, M. Sandora, and M. Trodden. Quantum fine-tuning in stringy quintessence models. Physics Letters B , 797:134878, 2019

    2019

  45. [52]

    Fran¸ ca and R

    U. Fran¸ ca and R. Rosenfeld. Fine tuning in quintessence models with exponential potentials. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2002(10):015, 2002

    2002

  46. [53]

    C. Han, S. Pi, and M. Sasaki. Quintessence saves higgs instability. Physics Letters B , 791: 314–318, 2019

    2019

  47. [54]

    Axenides and K

    M. Axenides and K. Dimopoulos. Hybrid dark sector: Locked quintessence and dark matter. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics , 2004(07):010, 2004

    2004

  48. [55]

    Agrawal, G

    P. Agrawal, G. Obied, P. J. Steinhardt, and C. Vafa. On the cosmological implications of the string swampland. Phys. Lett. B , 784:271, 2018

    2018

  49. [56]

    Lee, and Chanyong Park

    Wonwoo Lee, Bum-Hoon Lee, Chul H. Lee, and Chanyong Park. False vacuum bubble nucle- ation due to a nonminimally coupled scalar field. Physical Review D , 74:123520, 2006. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.74.123520

    2006 doi

  50. [57]

    Real-time dynamics of false vacuum decay

    Laura Batini, Aleksandr Chatrchyan, and J¨ urgen Berges. Real-time dynamics of false vacuum decay. Physical Review D, 109:023502, 2024. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.109.023502

    2024 doi

  51. [58]

    False vacuum inflation with einstein gravity

    Edmund J Copeland, Andrew R Liddle, David H Lyth, Ewan D Stewart, and David Wands. False vacuum inflation with einstein gravity. Physical Review D, 49(12):6410, 1994

    1994

  52. [59]

    X. Calmet. Vanishing of quantum gravitational corrections to vacuum solutions of general relativity at second order in curvature. Phys. Lett. B , 787:36–38, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j. physletb.2018.10.040

    2018 doi

  53. [60]

    Naturally small yukawa couplings from trans-planckian asymptotic safety

    Kamila Kowalska, Soumita Pramanick, and Enrico Maria Sessolo. Naturally small yukawa couplings from trans-planckian asymptotic safety. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2022(8): 1–30, 2022. 27

    2022

  54. [61]

    Impact of generalized yukawa interactions on the lower higgs-mass bound

    Holger Gies, Ren´ e Sondenheimer, and Matthias Warschinke. Impact of generalized yukawa interactions on the lower higgs-mass bound. The European Physical Journal C, 77:1–19, 2017

    2017

  55. [62]

    Higgs vacuum metastability in primordial inflation, pre- heating, and reheating

    Kazunori Kohri and Hiroki Matsui. Higgs vacuum metastability in primordial inflation, pre- heating, and reheating. Physical Review D, 94(10):103509, 2016

    2016

  56. [63]

    Urbanowski

    K. Urbanowski. Cosmological ”constant” in a universe born in the metastable false vacuum state. The European Physical Journal C , 82(3):242, 2022

    2022

  57. [64]

    Urbanowski

    K. Urbanowski. A universe born in a metastable false vacuum state needs not die. The European Physical Journal C, 83(1):55, 2023

    2023

  58. [65]

    Quantum fields in curved spacetime

    Stefan Hollands and Robert M Wald. Quantum fields in curved spacetime. Physics Reports, 574:1–35, 2015

    2015

  59. [66]

    Quantum field theory in curved spacetime

    Bernard S Kay. Quantum field theory in curved spacetime. In Mathematical Physics X: Proceedings of the Xth Congress on Mathematical Physics, Held at Leipzig, Germany, 30 July–9 August, 1991 , pages 383–387. Springer, 1992

    1991

  60. [67]

    Kiselev and Konstantin G

    Valerij G. Kiselev and Konstantin G. Selivanov. Calculation of the functional determinant in the vacuum-explosion problem. 1984

    1984

  61. [68]

    Devoto, S

    F. Devoto, S. Devoto, L. Di Luzio, and G. Ridolfi. False vacuum decay: an introductory review. Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics , 2022

    2022

  62. [69]

    Higgs mass and vacuum stability in the standard model at nnlo

    Giuseppe Degrassi and et al. Higgs mass and vacuum stability in the standard model at nnlo. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2012(8):1–33, 2012

    2012

  63. [70]

    The cosmological constant and dark energy

    P James E Peebles and Bharat Ratra. The cosmological constant and dark energy. Reviews of modern physics , 75(2):559, 2003

    2003

  64. [71]

    Armendariz-Picon, V

    C. Armendariz-Picon, V. Mukhanov, and P. J. Steinhardt. A dynamical solution to the problem of a small cosmological constant and late-time cosmic acceleration. Physical Review Letters, 85(21):4438–4441, 2000

    2000

  65. [72]

    Liddle and D

    Andrew R. Liddle and D. H. Lyth. Cosmological inflation and large scale structure. Cambridge University Press, 2000. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139175180

    2000 doi

  66. [73]

    Properties of the false vacuum as a quantum unstable state

    K Urbanowski. Properties of the false vacuum as a quantum unstable state. Theoretical and Mathematical Physics, 190(3):458–469, 2017

    2017

  67. [74]

    Sivaram, L

    C. Sivaram, L. Rebecca, and A. Kenath. Planckian pre big bang phase of the universe. Astrophysics and Space Science, 365:17, 2020

    2020

  68. [75]

    Inflation in f (r, ϕ) f (r, ϕ)- theories and mimetic gravity scenario

    Ratbay Myrzakulov, Lorenzo Sebastiani, and Sunny Vagnozzi. Inflation in f (r, ϕ) f (r, ϕ)- theories and mimetic gravity scenario. The European Physical Journal C , 75:1–11, 2015

    2015

  69. [76]

    O (3)-invariant tunneling in general relativity

    VA Berezin, VA Kuzmin, and II Tkachev. O (3)-invariant tunneling in general relativity. Physics Letters B , 207(4):397–403, 1988

    1988

  70. [77]

    Lectures on inflation

    Leonardo Senatore. Lectures on inflation. Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: new frontiers in fields and strings , pages 447–543, 2016. 28

    2016

  71. [78]

    Semi-classical approximations based on bohmian mechanics

    Ward Struyve. Semi-classical approximations based on bohmian mechanics. International Journal of Modern Physics A , 35, 07 2015. doi: 10.1142/S0217751X20500700

    2015 doi

  72. [79]

    On the geometry of the string landscape and the swampland

    Hirosi Ooguri and Cumrun Vafa. On the geometry of the string landscape and the swampland. Nuclear physics B , 766(1-3):21–33, 2007

    2007

  73. [81]

    Particle production induced by vacuum decay in real time dynamics

    Soichiro Hashiba, Yusuke Yamada, and Jun’ichi Yokoyama. Particle production induced by vacuum decay in real time dynamics. Physical Review D, 103(4):045006, 2021

    2021

  74. [82]

    Sivaram, K

    C. Sivaram, K. Arun, and R. Nagaraja. Dieterici gas as a unified model for dark matter and dark energy. 335:599–602, 2011. doi: 10.1007/s10509-011-0770-2

    2011 doi

  75. [83]

    Steinhardt

    Andreas Albrecht and Paul J. Steinhardt. Cosmology for grand unified theories with radia- tively induced symmetry breaking. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 48:1220–1223, 4 1982. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.48.1220. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.48.1220

    1982 doi

  76. [84]

    New early dark energy as a solution to the h 0 and s 8 tensions

    Florian Niedermann and Martin S Sloth. New early dark energy as a solution to the h 0 and s 8 tensions. In The Hubble Constant Tension , pages 431–456. Springer, 2024

    2024

  77. [85]

    New early dark energy

    Florian Niedermann and Martin S Sloth. New early dark energy. Physical Review D, 103(4): L041303, 2021

    2021

  78. [86]

    Resolving the hubble tension with early dark energy

    Laura Herold and Elisa GM Ferreira. Resolving the hubble tension with early dark energy. Physical Review D, 108(4):043513, 2023

    2023

  79. [87]

    Early dark energy does not restore cosmological concordance

    J Colin Hill, Evan McDonough, Michael W Toomey, and Stephon Alexander. Early dark energy does not restore cosmological concordance. Physical Review D, 102(4):043507, 2020

    2020

  80. [88]

    The hubble tension and early dark energy

    Marc Kamionkowski and Adam G Riess. The hubble tension and early dark energy. Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science , 73(1):153–180, 2023

    2023

  81. [89]

    M. Sher. Electroweak higgs potentials and vacuum stability. Physics Reports, 179:273–418,

  82. [90]

    P. B. Arnold and S. Vokos. Instability of hot electroweak theory: bounds on m(h) and m(t). Physical Review D, 44(11):3620–3627, 1991. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.44.3620

    1991 doi

  83. [91]

    J. R. Espinosa and M. Quiros. Improved metastability bounds on the standard model higgs mass. Physics Letters B , 353:257–266, 1995. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(95)00693-6

    1995 doi

  84. [92]

    Mathias Garny, McCullen Sandora, and Martin S. Sloth. Planckian interacting massive par- ticles as dark matter. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 116:101302, 3 2016. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116. 101302. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.101302

    2016 doi

  85. [93]

    Can interacting dark energy solve the h 0 tension? Physical Review D, 96(4):043503, 2017

    Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, and Olga Mena. Can interacting dark energy solve the h 0 tension? Physical Review D, 96(4):043503, 2017

    2017

  86. [94]

    Interacting dark energy in the early 2020s: A promising solution to the h0 and cosmic shear tensions

    Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, Olga Mena, and Sunny Vagnozzi. Interacting dark energy in the early 2020s: A promising solution to the h0 and cosmic shear tensions. Physics of the Dark Universe , 30:100666, 2020. 29

    2020

  87. [95]

    Nonminimal dark sector physics and cosmological tensions

    Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, Olga Mena, and Sunny Vagnozzi. Nonminimal dark sector physics and cosmological tensions. Physical Review D, 101(6):063502, 2020

    2020

  88. [96]

    H. Baer, K. Y. Choi, J. E. Kim, and L. Roszkowski. Dark matter production in the early universe: beyond the thermal wimp paradigm. Physics Reports, 555:1–60, 2015

    2015

  89. [97]

    Wang and et al

    Y. Wang and et al. Probing the interaction between dark energy and dark matter with the parameterized post-friedmann approach. Physical Review D, 94(8):083521, 2016

    2016

  90. [98]

    B. Wang, E. Abdalla, F. Atrio-Barandela, and D. Pav´ on. Dark matter and dark energy interactions: theoretical challenges, cosmological implications and observational signatures. Rep. Prog. Phys., 79:096901, 2016

    2016

  91. [99]

    Mukaida and M

    K. Mukaida and M. Yamada. False vacuum decay catalyzed by black holes. Physical Review D, 96, 2017. doi: 10.1103/physrevd.96.103514

    2017 doi

  92. [100]

    Interacting cosmic fluids and phase transitions under a holographic modeling for dark energy

    Samuel Lepe and Francisco Pe˜ na. Interacting cosmic fluids and phase transitions under a holographic modeling for dark energy. The European Physical Journal C , 76(9):507, 2016

    2016

  93. [101]

    Phase transition in the dark sector as a proposal to lessen cosmological tensions

    Abdolali Banihashemi, Nima Khosravi, and Amir H Shirazi. Phase transition in the dark sector as a proposal to lessen cosmological tensions. Physical Review D , 101(12):123521, 2020

    2020

  94. [102]

    cosmological wetting transition

    Robert Brandenberger, J¨ urg Fr¨ ohlich, and Ryo Namba. Unified dark matter, dark energy and baryogenesis via a “cosmological wetting transition”. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2019(09):069, 2019

    2019

  95. [103]

    Status, challenges and directions in indirect dark matter searches

    Carlos P´ erez de los Heros. Status, challenges and directions in indirect dark matter searches. Symmetry, 12(10):1648, 2020

    2020

  96. [104]

    Indirect and direct search for dark matter

    Michael Klasen, Martin Pohl, and G¨ unter Sigl. Indirect and direct search for dark matter. Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics , 85:1–32, 2015

    2015

  97. [105]

    Indirect detection of dark matter

    Tracy R Slatyer. Indirect detection of dark matter. Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: anticipating the next discoveries in particle physics , pages 297–353, 2018. 12 Declaration of Generative AI and AI-assisted technolo- gies in the writing p...

    2018

  98. [1989]

    doi: 10.1016/0370-1573(89)90001-3

    doi

  99. [2001]

    doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-04587-9 2

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.