Does the newly measured expansion rate change the odds for Big Rip?

[DavidCummings]

Is the likelihood (or unlikelihood) of a Big Rip changed by the new findings of faster universe expansion (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/04/190425104128.htm).

In
https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...be-the-big-bang-for-the-next-universe.971039/, phinds says:
"The Big Rip is seen as an unlikely scenario under current conditions and there is no reason to believe conditions will change."

I think that statement expresses consensus science on the subject, but my question is:

Have conditions changed? (As a result of the new Hubble findings.)

Thanks in advance.

 

[phinds]

The discrepancy is, as I recall, something like 9%, so nowhere NEAR enough to make the Big Rip plausible.

 

[kimbyd]

Is the likelihood (or unlikelihood) of a Big Rip changed by the new findings of faster universe expansion (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/04/190425104128.htm).

In
https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...be-the-big-bang-for-the-next-universe.971039/, phinds says:
"The Big Rip is seen as an unlikely scenario under current conditions and there is no reason to believe conditions will change."

I think that statement expresses consensus science on the subject, but my question is:

Have conditions changed? (As a result of the new Hubble findings.)

Thanks in advance.

While it is true that having dark energy with ##w < -1## does seem to fit the CMB better* if we force ##H_0## to be larger based on near-universe measurements, there are strong theoretical reasons to believe this is fundamentally impossible.

* ##w < -1## is the condition required for the big rip scenario. There have been a number of papers produced which provide potential alternative explanations for a measurement of ##w < -1## without resulting in a big rip, such as interaction between dark energy and dark matter, or systematic bias due to inhomogeneities.