REVIEW 5 cited by
Investigating Cosmic Discordance
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
abstract
We show that a combined analysis of CMB anisotropy power spectra obtained by the Planck satellite and luminosity distance data simultaneously excludes a flat universe and a cosmological constant at $99 \%$ CL. These results hold separately when combining Planck with three different datasets: the two determinations of the Hubble constant from Riess et al. 2019 and Freedman et al. 2020, and the Pantheon catalog of high redshift supernovae type-Ia. We conclude that either LCDM needs to be replaced by a different model, or else there are significant but still undetected systematics. Our result calls for new observations and stimulates the investigation of alternative theoretical models and solutions.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Quasar cosmology II: joint analyses with Cosmic Microwave Background
Quasar, supernova, BAO, DES, and CMB data are jointly compatible only in an interacting dark-energy model, not in Lambda-CDM, wCDM, or CPL.
-
Impact of DESI BAO Data on Inflationary Parameters: stability against late-time new physics
Using CMB, supernova, and DESI BAO data, this study finds that inflationary parameters n_s and A_s remain stable (shifts under 1%) when SDSS BAO data is replaced by DESI BAO data across several late-time models.
-
Alleviating cosmological tensions with a hybrid dark sector
A one-parameter interacting dark sector model can shift H0 upward and S8 downward when fit to Planck, DESI and supernova data, but the Bayesian evidence over LambdaCDM is inconclusive without SH0ES calibration.
-
Interacting Barrow Holographic Dark Energy in Non-flat Universe
Derives a non-flat interacting Barrow holographic dark energy model and fits it to CC and Pantheon data, but the statistical claim of preference is contradicted by the paper's own AIC/BIC/DIC table.
-
Modified gravity/Dynamical Dark Energy vs $\Lambda$CDM: is the game over?
An AIC/χ² comparison of exponential F(R) gravity, wCDM, and CPL models against Pantheon+, DESI DR1, cosmic chronometer, and Planck-compressed data claims ΛCDM is excluded at 4σ, but the significance conversion is not ...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.