New physics in light of the H0 tension: An alternative view
By S. Vagnozzi. 2019
324 citations recorded by the source corpus.
The strong discrepancy between local and early-time (inverse distance ladder) estimates of the Hubble constant H0 could be pointing towards new physics beyond the concordance ΛCDM model. Several attempts to address this tension through new physics rely on extended cosmological models, featuring extra free parameters beyond the six ΛCDM parameters. However, marginalizing over additional parameters has the effect of broadening the uncertainties on the inferred parameters (including H0), and it is often the case that within these models the H0 tension is addressed due to larger uncertainties rather than a genuine shift in the central value of H0. In this paper I consider an alternative viewpoint: what happens if a physical theory is able to fix the extra parameters to a specific set of nonstandard values? In this case, the degrees of freedom of the model are reduced with respect to the standard case where the extra parameters are free to vary. Focusing on the dark energy equation of state w and the effective number of relativistic species Neff, I find that physical theories able to fix w≈-1.3 or Neff≈3.95 would lead to an estimate of H0 from cosmic microwave background, baryon acoustic oscillation, and type Ia supernovae data in perfect agreement with the local distance ladder estimate, without broadening the uncertainty on the former. These two nonstandard models are, from a model-selection perspective, strongly disfavored with respect to the baseline ΛCDM model. However, models that predict Neff≈3.45 would be able to bring the tension down to 1.5σ while only being weakly disfavored with respect to ΛCDM, whereas models that predict w≈-1.1 would be able to bring the tension down to 2σ (at the cost of the preference for ΛCDM being definite). Finally, I estimate dimensionless multipliers relating variations in H0 to variations in w and Neff, which can be used to swiftly repeat the analysis of this paper in light of future more precise local distance ladder estimates of H0, should the tension persist. As a caveat, these results were obtained from the 2015 Planck data release, but these findings would be qualitatively largely unaffected were I to use more recent data.
Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f38fb75264489caf0ef4519cc893888cc27b74ef
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Astronomy and Astrophysics
In Nuclear and High Energy Physics
Citations in the corpus
- A buyer’s guide to the Hubble constant (2021, background): “This can be avoided if the extra parameters have some preferred values – for example, a range that is predicted by microphysics (Vagnozzi 2020).”
- Cosmology Intertwined II: The Hubble Constant Tension (2020, unknown): “[74] S.”
- Hubble Tension: The Evidence of New Physics (2023, background): “Hence, many researchers prefer to believe that the Hubble tension may be caused by new physics beyond the ΛCDM model [201].”