Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 94 references

Using the CMB anisotropy power spectrum, this paper shows that a percent-level non-primordial dust contribution is consistent with current data, while a fully non-primordial CMB is excluded at 42σ.

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 02:45 UTC pith:RSLKNU2Z

load-bearing objection First anisotropy-based test of the GK25 non-primordial CMB scenario; the central conclusion is plausible but the quoted bounds rest on an inconsistent recombination treatment and an extrapolated 42σ claim. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.14211 v1 pith:RSLKNU2Z submitted 2026-07-15 astro-ph.CO

Non-Primordial Contribution to the Cosmic Microwave Background

Akshith Asundi , Vikram Khaire This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords cosmic microwave backgroundCMB anisotropiesdust emissiongrey-body radiationacoustic peakscosmological parameterssound horizonphoton energy density
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 sets out to test whether the cosmic microwave background could be partly non-primordial—specifically, whether dust-enshrouded star formation in the progenitors of massive early-type galaxies at z≈15–20 could contribute a small fraction of the CMB energy we see today. It introduces a single dimensionless parameter ε_CMB that rescales the primordial photon energy density above a transition redshift, and fits it to the full CMB anisotropy, lensing, and baryon-acoustic-oscillation data. The central result is that a 1.4 per cent dust contribution is fully consistent with the data: the 68 per cent lower bound allows up to about 3 per cent of the CMB energy density to be non-primordial, while a contribution approaching 100 per cent is excluded at 42σ. The standard cosmological parameters, including H0 and σ8, are recovered unchanged, so precision cosmology is insensitive to a non-primordial component at this level.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the CMB anisotropy power spectrum, which probes the radiation content through the sound horizon and acoustic-peak structure, is achromatically sensitive to any non-primordial energy component and therefore provides the first anisotropy-based test of the dust scenario. With ε_CMB free, the posterior is ε_CMB = 1.0104^{+0.025}_{-0.024}; with ε_CMB restricted below unity, the data give ε_CMB ≳ 0.971 at 68 per cent and ≳ 0.953 at 95 per cent, permitting up to ~3 and ~5 per cent non-primordial energy density. The paper therefore concludes that current data neither detect nor exclude the conservative 1.4 per cent estimate, while excluding a fully non-primordial CM

What carries the argument

The engine of the argument is a single dimensionless emissivity parameter ε_CMB that multiplies the standard photon energy density above the transition redshift zt (fiducially z = 17), a step-function rescaling implemented directly in the Boltzmann solver's background-expansion, perturbation-evolution, and sound-horizon routines. Because the photon energy density sets the sound horizon, the photon-baryon ratio, and matter-radiation equality, the acoustic-peak structure becomes a spectral-shape-independent dynamical probe of how much radiation is non-primordial. For comparison with the broader radiation-density literature, the model maps onto an effective neutrino-number shift ΔN_eff ≈ 4.4(ε_

Load-bearing premise

The analysis rescaled the photon energy density in the expansion and perturbation equations but left the recombination calculation on the unmodified photon temperature, so the acoustic-peak and damping-tail predictions are not fully self-consistent for ε_CMB ≠ 1.

What would settle it

Re-run the MCMC with the recombination temperature set to T_eff = ε^{1/4} T0(1+z) inside the recombination solver; if the best-fit ε_CMB shifts by more than roughly its quoted uncertainty, or the lower bound moves outside the quoted interval, the central bound is not robust.

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

If this is right

  • A dust contribution at the 1.4 per cent level lies inside the 1σ region, so the conservative estimate survives the anisotropy data.
  • A non-primordial contribution approaching the full CMB energy density is excluded at 42σ.
  • The standard six-parameter cosmological model, including H0 and σ8, is recovered without significant shifts, so an unseen few-per-cent foreground of this kind would not bias parameter inference.
  • The constraint applies equally for any transition epoch between z = 5 and z = 50, meaning current data bound the amplitude of a non-primordial component but not when it was produced.
  • Combined with the CMB monopole spectral bound, the scenario is bracketed: the monopole is tighter for chromatic dust, while the anisotropy spectrum closes the spectrally degenerate loophole.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The authors leave implicit that the same two-parameter test can be applied to any proposal in which part of the CMB is non-primordial; the framework would give a quantitative anisotropy-based verdict for those models too.
  • If the paper is right, next-generation small-scale CMB measurements should tighten ε_CMB through the Silk damping tail and could eventually constrain the transition epoch that current data cannot.
  • The main open modeling question is the use of the unscaled recombination temperature; a fully self-consistent treatment with T_eff = ε^{1/4} T0(1+z) might shift the quoted bounds, so the published numbers should be treated as provisional until that check is done.
  • The assumed isotropy of the dust foreground could hide a hemispherical component; testing a spatially modulated ε_CMB would connect this scenario to the observed large-scale CMB power asymmetry.

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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a one-parameter extension of flat ΛCDM in which the photon energy density is rescaled by a factor ε_CMB above a transition redshift z_t (fiducial value 17), motivated by the GK25 proposal that dust-enshrouded starbursts at z∼15–20 contribute a non-negligible fraction of the observed CMB. The authors implement this modification in CAMB and constrain ε_CMB and the other six ΛCDM parameters with Planck 2018 TT/TE/EE, low-ℓ polarization, lensing, and BAO data. They report that a few-percent non-primordial contribution is fully consistent with the data: a one-sided prior run gives ε_CMB≳0.971 (0.953) at 68% (95%) credibility, a free-parameter run gives ε_CMB=1.0104^{+0.025}_{-0.024}, and the GK25 1.4% estimate lies well within the 1σ region. A fully non-primordial CMB is excluded at very high significance, while the standard ΛCDM parameters are not significantly shifted. A run with z_t free yields a flat posterior for z_t, indicating insensitivity to the transition epoch.

Significance. If the quantitative results survive scrutiny, the paper provides a genuinely new, achromatic probe of non-primordial CMB contributions, complementary to the FIRAS monopole constraints. In the spectrally degenerate limit (β=0, σ_d=0) the monopole alone allows a fully dust-generated CMB; the anisotropy constraint closes this loophole. The analysis is carefully executed in several respects: the baseline ΛCDM run reproduces Planck 2018 values, the MCMC convergence criterion (R−1<0.005) is stringent, and the quoted Δχ² values are small and consistent across runs. The central quantitative claims, however, rest on a recombination treatment that is not rescaled with ε_CMB, and the one-sided bounds are statistically mislabelled. Both issues are fixable but require additional work.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.1 and §5.2] The recombination history is not rescaled with ε_CMB. Equation (1) reduces the photon energy density at all z>z_t, including the recombination epoch, but recfast is left with T_γ(z)=T0(1+z). If the primordial component is Planckian, its temperature is uniquely T_prim=ε_CMB^{1/4}T0(1+z); the statement in §5.2 that 'no unique effective temperature can be assigned' is incorrect. The ionisation history, z*, the sound horizon, and the Silk damping tail all depend on this temperature. The authors must either implement the rescaled recombination or quantify the resulting shift in the quoted ε_CMB bounds. Without this, the central claim that percent-level contributions are allowed is not yet established.
  2. [§4.2 and abstract] The '68 (95) per cent lower bound' is not a one-sided bound. The lower edge of the central 68% credible interval (the 16th percentile) corresponds to an 84% one-sided lower limit, and the 2.5th percentile used for the 95% statement gives a 97.5% one-sided limit. To quote a 68% (95%) lower bound, the 32nd (5th) percentile should be used. Because the Run 1 posterior rises monotonically to the prior boundary, these quantiles will shift the quoted numbers, likely to lower values of ε_CMB. The qualitative conclusion may survive, but the headline numbers in the abstract should be re-computed or rephrased as 'lower edge of the X% credible interval'.
  3. [Abstract and §3.1] The abstract states the model is implemented 'self-consistently', while §3.1 states that the ionisation history is unchanged 'by construction'. These statements are in direct tension. Since the recombination history is part of the CMB anisotropy prediction, the self-consistency claim is not supported. The authors should either extend the model to a consistent recombination calculation or explicitly qualify the claim as conditional on the unmodified recfast treatment.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§4.3] The 42σ exclusion of ε_CMB→0 is computed using the lower error bar (1.0104/0.024≈42); using the upper error bar gives ≈40σ. Please quote the significance consistently, e.g., using the mean of the asymmetric errors.
  2. [§2.2] The term 'grey-body' is used for the deficit. In radiative transfer, a grey body with emissivity ε has spectrum ε B_ν(T), not a Planckian at T_eff=ε^{1/4}T. Clarify which spectral model is intended; this ambiguity is directly relevant to the recombination issue in the major comments.
  3. [§5.1 and Table 5] The summary states that standard parameters are recovered without significant shifts; this is broadly true, but ω_b h² shifts by ~1.1σ in Run 1. A qualifier such as 'with the exception of a marginal ~1σ shift in ω_b h²' would be more precise.
  4. [§6] The modified CAMB code is 'available on request'. For reproducibility, please provide a persistent public repository (e.g., GitHub or Zenodo) with a version tag or commit hash.
  5. [Figure 9] The legend labels 'Emissivity 1' and 'Emissivity 1.5' are ambiguous. Label the curves as ΛCDM baseline, Run 1 (ε_CMB∈[0.5,1.0]), Run 2 (ε_CMB∈[0.5,1.5]), and Run 3 (z_t free) to match the text.
  6. [§4.3 footnote] The Hitchhiker's Guide footnote attached to the 42σ significance is entertaining but out of place in a journal article; consider removing it.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No load-bearing circularity: epsilon_CMB is constrained by a direct likelihood fit to Planck/BAO data; GK25's 1.4% enters only as an external comparison.

full rationale

Eq. (1) introduces epsilon_CMB as a free rescaling of the photon energy density above z_t, and the paper constrains it by sampling it together with the six LCDM parameters against Planck 2018 TT/TE/EE + low-ell + lensing + BAO likelihoods (Sections 3.2, 3.3). The reported bounds (Sections 4.2-4.3) are marginalised posteriors of that fitted parameter; the GK25 1.4% estimate is used only as an external prediction to be compared with the resulting posterior, not as an input to the fit or as a prior. Equation (5)'s mapping to Delta N_eff is explicitly labelled a 'convenient background-level correspondence' and not a physical equivalence, so it is a reparameterisation rather than a derivation of the result. The self-citations [18,19] support a peripheral statement about the CIB energy density in the introduction and do not carry any load-bearing step. The acknowledged internal inconsistency that recfast is left unmodified (Sections 3.1, 5.2) is a modelling limitation with a potentially unquantified effect on the bounds, but it does not make the constraint equivalent to its inputs; similarly, the step-function and isotropy assumptions flagged in Section 5.3 are approximations, not circular definitions. Therefore no step of the argument reduces by construction to its own input, and the low score reflects only the presence of peripheral self-citations and acknowledged modelling caveats.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

8 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis is a standard likelihood fit with one new parameter ε_CMB and (in Run 3) a second new parameter z_t. The central interpretation as a dust contribution relies on the GK25 scenario, the assumption of isotropy, and the step-function shape. The most fragile input is the inconsistent treatment of recombination, kept at the standard photon temperature while the photon energy density entering dynamics is rescaled.

free parameters (8)
  • ε_CMB = 1.0104^{+0.025}_{-0.024} (Run 2); priors [0.5,1.0] in Run 1, [0.5,1.5] in Run 2
    Dimensionless rescaling of photon energy density above z_t; the central free parameter of the test, fitted to Planck 2018 + BAO data.
  • z_t = 27.98^{+15.03}_{-15.63} (Run 3, flat posterior); fixed at 17 in Runs 1 and 2
    Transition redshift above which ε_CMB acts; treated as free in Run 3, where it is unconstrained.
  • θ_MC = 0.0104 (baseline)
    Standard ΛCDM acoustic scale parameter; fitted jointly with ε_CMB.
  • ω_b h^2 = 0.02243 (baseline)
    Standard ΛCDM baryon density parameter; fitted jointly with ε_CMB.
  • ω_c h^2 = 0.11932 (baseline)
    Standard ΛCDM cold dark matter density parameter; fitted jointly with ε_CMB.
  • ln(10^10 A_s) = 3.04688 (baseline)
    Standard ΛCDM primordial amplitude parameter; fitted jointly with ε_CMB.
  • n_s = 0.96657 (baseline)
    Standard ΛCDM spectral index; fitted jointly with ε_CMB.
  • τ = 0.05606 (baseline)
    Standard ΛCDM reionisation optical depth; fitted jointly with ε_CMB.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption The GK25 scenario: dust-enshrouded starbursts in ETG progenitors at z≈15–20 produce a smooth, isotropic, approximately Planckian component.
    Imported from GK25; the interpretation of the constraint as a 'dust contribution' depends on this. The paper notes GK25 themselves suggest a hemispherical asymmetry, which would violate isotropy.
  • ad hoc to paper The non-primordial component contributes only to the homogeneous photon energy density and has negligible anisotropies on Planck angular scales.
    Assumed in §2.2 and §5.3; not derived. If the dust is anisotropic, the TT power spectrum constraint changes.
  • ad hoc to paper The recombination calculation (recfast) may be left unchanged when the photon energy density is rescaled.
    Explicitly stated in §3.1 and §5.2. Physically, a Planckian rescaling implies T_eff = ε^{1/4} T0(1+z), which would alter recombination; this is not implemented or quantified.
  • standard math Standard spatially-flat ΛCDM and standard neutrino physics (N_eff≈3.044) provide the baseline.
    The likelihoods and CAMB implementation assume the standard cosmological model apart from the ε_CMB modification.
  • ad hoc to paper The sharp step-function transition at z_t is a representative approximation to a smooth dust formation history.
    The paper uses a step function and argues that z_t is unconstrained, so a smooth profile would not change conclusions, but this is not explicitly checked.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 37435 in / 16154 out tokens · 164871 ms · 2026-08-02T02:45:59.229078+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The cosmic microwave background is interpreted as relic thermal radiation from the epoch of recombination at z~1090. Recent work by Gjergo & Kroupa (GK25) have challenged this assumption proposing that dust-enshrouded starbursts in the progenitors of massive early-type galaxies at z~15-20 contribute to the CMB at the percent level of the present-day CMB energy density. Existing test of this scenario rely on CMB monopole; here we present the first test against the CMB anisotropy power spectrum, which probes the dynamical imprint of the radiation content on the sound horizon and acoustic peaks. We introduce a single parameter $\varepsilon_{\rm CMB}$ that rescales the primordial photon energy density above a redshift (z=17). Constraining the model with the Planck 2018, lensing likelihoods and BAO measurements, we find a percent-level dust contribution to be fully consistent with the data. When we restrict $\varepsilon_{\rm CMB}\leq1$, the data place a 68 (95) per cent lower bound $\varepsilon_{\rm CMB}\gtrsim 0.971$(0.953), permitting a non-primordial contribution of up to ~3 (~5) per cent of the CMB energy density. When sampled with $\varepsilon_{\rm CMB}$ as a free parameter, the data yield a well-resolved posterior with $\varepsilon_{\rm CMB} = 1.0104^{+0.025}_{-0.024}$. The 1.4 per cent contribution conservatively estimated by GK25 lies within the 1$\sigma$ region of both cases, whereas a contribution approaching the full CMB energy density is excluded at 42$\sigma$. Treating z as a free parameter returns a flat posterior across 5<z<50 indicating the anisotropy constrains the dust contribution, but not when it occurs. The standard LCDM parameters are recovered without significant shifts, showing that current CMB precision cosmology has sufficient room to accommodate a dust contribution at the level predicted by GK25 without detectable consequence for parameter inference.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.14211 by Akshith Asundi, Vikram Khaire.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic of the εCMB model (equation 1). The curve shows the ratio of the effective to the standard photon energy density, ρ eff γ /ργ, as a function of redshift for the fiducial transition redshift zt = 17 (vertical dashed line) and an illustrative deficit εCMB < 1 (shaded region). Above zt, the ratio is suppressed by the constant factor εCMB, representing an early epoch in which some of the photon energ… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Validation of the modified pipeline against standard ΛCDM: marginalised posterior distri￾butions for the baseline six-parameter flat ΛCDM model (εCMB fixed to unity), constrained using the Planck 2018 TT, TE, EE, low-ℓ, lensing, and BAO likelihoods described in Section 3.2. The diagonal panels show the one-dimensional marginalised posteriors of the six sampled ΛCDM parameters, θMC, ωbh 2 , ωch 2 , As, ns, … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Testing for a physical (deficit-only) dust contribution: marginalised posterior distributions for the ΛCDM + grey-body CMB model with the one-sided prior εCMB ∈ [0.5,1.0] (Run 1, fixed transition redshift zt = 17), constrained using the Planck 2018 TT, TE, EE + low-ℓ + BAO + lensing likelihoods. This prior range permits only a deficit of primordial photons relative to the observed blackbody, as expected in… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: One-dimensional marginalised posterior of εCMB for Run 1 (one-sided prior εCMB ∈ [0.5,1.0], fixed zt = 17; TT, TE, EE + low-ℓ + BAO + lensing likelihoods), extracted from the bottom-right panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Testing whether the Run 1 result is a prior-boundary artefact: marginalised posterior distributions for the same ΛCDM + εCMB model, but with the wider, two-sided prior εCMB ∈ [0.5,1.5] (Run 2, fixed zt = 17), which additionally permits a super-blackbody excess (εCMB > 1). Likelihoods and layout are identical to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: One-dimensional marginalised posterior of εCMB for Run 2 (two-sided prior εCMB ∈ [0.5,1.5], fixed zt = 17; TT, TE, EE + low-ℓ + BAO + lensing likelihoods), extracted from the bottom-right panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Testing sensitivity to the assumed transition epoch: marginalised posterior distributions for the ΛCDM + εCMB model with both the emissivity εCMB ∈ [0.5,1.5] and the transition redshift zt ∈ [5,50] left free (Run 3), constrained using the Planck 2018 TT, TE, EE + low-ℓ + BAO + lensing likelihoods. The diagonal panels show the one-dimensional marginalised posteriors of the six standard ΛCDM parameters toget… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The two one-dimensional posteriors extracted from Run 3 (both εCMB ∈ [0.5,1.5] and zt ∈ [5,50] free; TT, TE, EE + low-ℓ + BAO + lensing likelihoods), presented side by side to contrast the amplitude and epoch constraints directly. Left (blue): the marginalised posterior of εCMB is a well-resolved, closed distribution with median 1.0101 and 68 per cent credible interval [0.985,1.036]; the solid black line m… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Visual goodness-of-fit check: best-fit CMB TT angular power spectra, D TT ℓ = ℓ(ℓ+ 1)C TT ℓ /2π, for all four MCMC runs overlaid on the Planck 2018 band powers (black points with error bars), split into the cosmic-variance-dominated low-ℓ regime (2 ≤ ℓ ≤ 29, left panels, log multipole scale) and the acoustic-peak high-ℓ regime (ℓ ≥ 30, right panels, linear scale). The top panels show the spectra themselves… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

94 extracted references · 43 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    The Impact of Early Massive Galaxy Formation on the Cosmic Microwave Background

    E. Gjergo & P. Kroupa,“The Impact of Early Massive Galaxy Formation on the Cosmic Microwave Background”, Nuclear Physics B1017, 116931 (2025) 27

    2025

  2. [2]

    A Measurement of Excess Antenna Temperature at 4080 Mc/s

    A. A. Penzias & R. W. Wilson,“A Measurement of Excess Antenna Temperature at 4080 Mc/s”, ApJ142, 419 (1965)

    1965

  3. [3]

    Measurement of the Cosmic Microwave Background Spectrum by the COBE FIRAS Instrument

    J. C. Mather, E. S. Cheng, D. A. Cottingham, R. E. Eplee, D. J. Fixsen, T. Hewagama, R. B. Isaacman, K. A. Jensen, S. S. Meyer, P. D. Noerdlinger, S. M. Read, L. P. Rosen, R. A. Shafer, E. L. Wright, C. L. Bennett, N. W. Boggess, M. G. Hauser, T. Kelsall, S. H. Moseley, R. F. Silverberg, G. F. Smoot, R. Weiss & D. T. Wilkinson,“Measurement of the Cosmic M...

    1994

  4. [4]

    The Cosmic Microwave Background Spectrum from the Full COBE FIRAS Data Set

    D. J. Fixsen, E. S. Cheng, J. M. Gales, J. C. Mather, R. A. Shafer & E. L. Wright,“The Cosmic Microwave Background Spectrum from the Full COBE FIRAS Data Set”, ApJ473, 576 (1996)

    1996

  5. [5]

    The Temperature of the Cosmic Microwave Background

    D. J. Fixsen,“The Temperature of the Cosmic Microwave Background”, ApJ707, 916 (2009)

    2009

  6. [6]

    The cosmic microwave background radiation temperature at a redshift of 2.34

    R. Srianand, P. Petitjean & C. Ledoux,“The cosmic microwave background radiation temperature at a redshift of 2.34”, Nature408, 931 (2000),astro-ph/0012222 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  7. [7]

    The evolution of the cosmic microwave background temperature. Measurements of TCMB at high redshift from carbon monoxide excitation

    P. Noterdaeme, P. Petitjean, R. Srianand, C. Ledoux & S. López,“The evolution of the cosmic microwave background temperature. Measurements of TCMB at high redshift from carbon monoxide excitation”, Astronomy & Astrophysics526, L7 (2011),arXiv:1012.3164 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  8. [8]

    Nine-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observa- tions: Final Maps and Results

    C. L. Bennett et al.,“Nine-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observa- tions: Final Maps and Results”, ApJS208, 20 (2013)

    2013

  9. [9]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters

    Planck Collaboration,“Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters”, A&A641, A6 (2020)

    2018

  10. [10]

    Small-Scale Fluctuations of Relic Radiation

    R. A. Sunyaev & Y. B. Zel’dovich,“Small-Scale Fluctuations of Relic Radiation”, Ap&SS7, 3 (1970)

    1970

  11. [11]

    Primeval Adiabatic Perturbation in an Expanding Universe

    P. J. E. Peebles & J. T. Yu,“Primeval Adiabatic Perturbation in an Expanding Universe”, ApJ162, 815 (1970)

    1970

  12. [12]

    Planck 2018 results. IV. Diffuse component separation

    Planck Collaboration,“Planck 2018 results. IV. Diffuse component separation”, A&A641, A4 (2020)

    2018

  13. [13]

    Tentative detection of a cosmic far-infrared background with COBE

    J.-L. Puget, A. Abergel, J.-P. Bernard, F. Boulanger, W. B. Burton, F.-X. Désert & D. Hartmann,“Tentative detection of a cosmic far-infrared background with COBE”, A&A 308, L5 (1996)

    1996

  14. [14]

    The Spectrum of the Extragalactic Far-Infrared Background from the COBE FIRAS Observations

    D. J. Fixsen, E. Dwek, J. C. Mather, C. L. Bennett & R. A. Shafer,“The Spectrum of the Extragalactic Far-Infrared Background from the COBE FIRAS Observations”, ApJ508, 123 (1998)

    1998

  15. [15]

    The Cosmic Infrared Background: Measurements and Implica- tions

    M. G. Hauser & E. Dwek,“The Cosmic Infrared Background: Measurements and Implica- tions”, ARA&A39, 249 (2001)

    2001

  16. [16]

    A Unified Empirical Model for Infrared Galaxy Counts Based on the Observed Physical Evolution of Distant Galaxies

    M. Béthermin, E. Daddi, G. Magdis, M. T. Sargent, Y. Hezaveh, D. Elbaz, D. Le Borgne, J. Mullaney, M. Pannella, V. Buat, V. Charmandaris, G. Lagache & D. Scott,“A Unified Empirical Model for Infrared Galaxy Counts Based on the Observed Physical Evolution of Distant Galaxies”, ApJL757, L23 (2012), arXiv:1208.6512 28

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  17. [17]

    Dusty Star-Forming Galaxies at High Redshift

    C. M. Casey, D. Narayanan & A. Cooray,“Dusty Star-Forming Galaxies at High Redshift”, Physics Reports541, 45 (2014), arXiv:1402.1456

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  18. [18]

    Star Formation History, Dust Attenuation, and Extragalactic Background Light

    V. Khaire & R. Srianand,“Star Formation History, Dust Attenuation, and Extragalactic Background Light”, ApJ805, 33 (2015),arXiv:1405.7038 [astro-ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  19. [19]

    New synthesis models of consistent extragalactic background light over cosmic time

    V. Khaire & R. Srianand,“New synthesis models of consistent extragalactic background light over cosmic time”, MNRAS484, 4174 (2019)

    2019

  20. [20]

    Evidence from the motions of old stars that the Galaxy collapsed

    O. J. Eggen, D. Lynden-Bell & A. R. Sandage,“Evidence from the motions of old stars that the Galaxy collapsed”, ApJ136, 748 (1962)

    1962

  21. [21]

    Dynamical models for the formation and evolution of elliptical galaxies

    R. B. Larson,“Dynamical models for the formation and evolution of elliptical galaxies”, MNRAS166, 585 (1974)

    1974

  22. [22]

    A population of red candidate massive galaxies ∼600Myrafter the Big Bang

    I. Labbé, P. van Dokkum, E. Nelson et al.,“A population of red candidate massive galaxies ∼600Myrafter the Big Bang”, Nature616, 266 (2023)

    2023

  23. [23]

    Accelerated formation of ultra-massive galaxies in the first billion years

    M. Xiao, P. A. Oesch, D. Elbaz et al.,“Accelerated formation of ultra-massive galaxies in the first billion years”, Nature635, 311 (2024)

    2024

  24. [24]

    Stress testingΛCDM with high-redshift galaxy candidates

    M. Boylan-Kolchin,“Stress testingΛCDM with high-redshift galaxy candidates”, Nature As- tronomy7, 731 (2023)

    2023

  25. [25]

    The High Fraction of Thin Disk Galaxies Continues to ChallengeΛCDM Cosmology

    M. Haslbauer, I. Banik, P. Kroupa, N. Wittenburg & B. Javanmardi,“The High Fraction of Thin Disk Galaxies Continues to ChallengeΛCDM Cosmology”, ApJ925, 183 (2022)

    2022

  26. [26]

    Improved measurements of the age of JWST galaxies atz= 6–10

    M. López-Corredoira & C. M. Gutiérrez,“Improved measurements of the age of JWST galaxies atz= 6–10”, MNRAS546, stag089 (2026)

    2026

  27. [27]

    Early Galaxies and Early Dark Energy: A Unified Solution to the Hubble Tension and Puzzles of Massive Bright Galaxies revealed by JWST

    X. Shen, M. Vogelsberger, M. Boylan-Kolchin, S. Tacchella & R. P. Naidu,“Early Galaxies and Early Dark Energy: A Unified Solution to the Hubble Tension and Puzzles of Massive Bright Galaxies revealed by JWST”, MNRAS533, 3923 (2024), arXiv:2406.15548

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    Statistics Meet Systematics: Resolution of the Massive Early JWST Galaxy Tension

    J. R. Krishnan & K. N. Abazajian,“Statistics Meet Systematics: Resolution of the Massive Early JWST Galaxy Tension”, Phys. Rev. D113, 083007 (2026), arXiv:2511.13708

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  29. [29]

    JWST early Universe observations andΛCDM cosmology

    R. P. Gupta,“JWST early Universe observations andΛCDM cosmology”, MNRAS524, 3385 (2023)

    2023

  30. [30]

    Galaxy Formation in the Early Universe

    J. W. Moffat,“Galaxy Formation in the Early Universe”, arXiv:2412.03534

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  31. [31]

    The Fast and Furious in JWST high-z galaxies

    M. H. P. M. van Putten,“The Fast and Furious in JWST high-z galaxies”, arXiv:2312.16692

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  32. [32]

    Constraints on CMBR Flux due to High-z Dust Emission

    M. López-Corredoira,“Constraints on CMBR Flux due to High-z Dust Emission”, Re- search Notes of the American Astronomical Society10, 40 (2026), arXiv:2602.20916 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2026

  33. [33]

    A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km/s/Mpc Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team

    A. G. Riess et al.,“A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km/s/Mpc Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team”, ApJL 934, L7 (2022)

    2022

  34. [34]

    H0LiCOW XIII. A 2.4% measurement ofH0 from lensed quasars: 5.3σ tension between early- and late-Universe probes

    K. C. Wong et al.,“H0LiCOW XIII. A 2.4% measurement ofH0 from lensed quasars: 5.3σ tension between early- and late-Universe probes”, MNRAS498, 1420 (2020), arXiv:1907.04869 [astro-ph.CO] 29

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  35. [35]

    Tensions between the Early and the Late Universe

    L. Verde, T. Treu & A. G. Riess,“Tensions between the Early and the Late Universe”, Nature Astronomy3, 891 (2019)

    2019

  36. [36]

    In the Realm of the Hubble Tension — a Review of Solutions

    E. Di Valentino et al.,“In the Realm of the Hubble Tension — a Review of Solutions”, Classical and Quantum Gravity38, 153001 (2021)

    2021

  37. [37]

    KiDS-1000 Cosmology: Multi-probe weak gravitational lensing and spectroscopic galaxy clustering constraints

    C. Heymans et al.,“KiDS-1000 Cosmology: Multi-probe weak gravitational lensing and spectroscopic galaxy clustering constraints”, A&A646, A140 (2021),arXiv:2007.15632 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  38. [38]

    Dark Energy Survey Year 3 Results: Cosmological Constraints from Galaxy Clustering and Weak Lensing

    DES Collaboration,“Dark Energy Survey Year 3 Results: Cosmological Constraints from Galaxy Clustering and Weak Lensing”, Phys. Rev. D105, 023520 (2022),arXiv:2105.13549 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  39. [39]

    Cosmology Intertwined III: fσ8 and S8

    E. Di Valentino et al.,“Cosmology Intertwined III: fσ8 and S8”, Astroparticle Physics131, 102604 (2021),arXiv:2008.11285 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  40. [40]

    Efficient Computation of Cosmic Microwave Back- ground Anisotropies in Closed Friedmann-Robertson-Walker Models

    A. Lewis, A. Challinor & A. Lasenby,“Efficient Computation of Cosmic Microwave Back- ground Anisotropies in Closed Friedmann-Robertson-Walker Models”, ApJ538, 473 (2000)

    2000

  41. [41]

    CMB power spectrum parameter degeneracies in the era of precision cosmology

    C. Howlett, A. Lewis, A. Hall & A. Challinor,“CMB power spectrum parameter degeneracies in the era of precision cosmology”, JCAP04, 027 (2012)

    2012

  42. [42]

    Cobaya: Code for Bayesian Analysis in Cosmology

    J. Torrado & A. Lewis,“Cobaya: Code for Bayesian Analysis in Cosmology”, JCAP05, 057 (2021)

    2021

  43. [43]

    Planck 2018 results. V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods

    Planck Collaboration,“Planck 2018 results. V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods”, A&A 641, A5 (2020)

    2018

  44. [44]

    Planck 2018 results. VIII. Gravitational lensing

    Planck Collaboration,“Planck 2018 results. VIII. Gravitational lensing”, A&A641, A8 (2020)

    2018

  45. [45]

    The 6dF Galaxy Survey: baryon acoustic oscillations and the local Hubble constant

    F. Beutler et al.,“The 6dF Galaxy Survey: baryon acoustic oscillations and the local Hubble constant”, MNRAS416, 3017 (2011)

    2011

  46. [46]

    The clustering of the SDSS DR7 main Galaxy sample

    A. J. Ross et al.,“The clustering of the SDSS DR7 main Galaxy sample”, MNRAS449, 835 (2015)

    2015

  47. [47]

    The clustering of galaxies in the completed SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: cosmological analysis of the DR12 galaxy sample

    S. Alam et al.,“The clustering of galaxies in the completed SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: cosmological analysis of the DR12 galaxy sample”, MNRAS470, 2617 (2017)

    2017

  48. [48]

    On the Red Shift of Spectral Lines through Interstellar Space

    F. Zwicky,“On the Red Shift of Spectral Lines through Interstellar Space”, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.15, 773 (1929)

    1929

  49. [49]

    The Rh =ct Universe

    F. Melia & A. S. H. Shevchuk,“The Rh =ct Universe”, MNRAS419, 2579 (2012), arXiv:1109.5189 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  50. [50]

    A Quasi-Steady State Cosmological Model with Creation of Matter

    F. Hoyle, G. Burbidge & J. V. Narlikar,“A Quasi-Steady State Cosmological Model with Creation of Matter”, ApJ410, 437 (1993)

    1993

  51. [51]

    Perturbations of a Cosmological Model and Angular Variations of the Microwave Background

    R. K. Sachs & A. M. Wolfe,“Perturbations of a Cosmological Model and Angular Variations of the Microwave Background”, ApJ147, 73 (1967) 30

    1967

  52. [52]

    How Exactly Did the Universe Become Neutral?

    S. Seager, D. D. Sasselov & D. Scott,“How Exactly Did the Universe Become Neutral?”, ApJS128, 407 (2000)

    2000

  53. [53]

    Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences

    A. Gelman & D. B. Rubin,“Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences”, Statistical Science7, 457 (1992)

    1992

  54. [54]

    Array Programming with NumPy

    C. R. Harris, K. J. Millman, S. J. van der Walt, R. Gommers, P. Virtanen, D. Cournapeau, E. Wieser, J. Taylor, S. Berg, N. J. Smith, R. Kern, M. Picus, S. Hoyer, M. H. van Kerkwijk, M. Brett, A. Haldane, J. F. del Río, M. Wiebe, P. Peterson, P. Gérard-Marchant, K. Sheppard, T. Reddy, W. Weckesser, H. Abbasi, C. Gohlke & T. E. Oliphant,“Array Programming w...

    2020

  55. [55]

    SciPy 1.0: Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haberland, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Peterson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, S. J. van der Walt, M. Brett, J. Wilson, K. J. Millman, N. Mayorov, A. R. J. Nelson, E. Jones, R. Kern, E. Larson, C. J. Carey, İ. Polat, Y. Feng, E. W. Moore, J. VanderPlas, D. Laxalde, J. Perktold, R. Cimrman, I. Henriksen, ...

    2020

  56. [56]

    corner.py: Scatterplot matrices in Python

    D. Foreman-Mackey,“corner.py: Scatterplot matrices in Python”, Jour- nal of Open Source Software1, 24 (2016)

    2016

  57. [57]

    The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

    D. Adams,“The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”, Pan Books (1979), London

    1979

  58. [58]

    Constraining the Evolution of the Ionizing Background and the Epoch of Reionization with z∼6 Quasars. II. A Sample of 19 Quasars

    X. Fan, M. A. Strauss, R. H. Becker, R. L. White, J. E. Gunn, G. R. Knapp, G. T. Richards, D. P. Schneider, J. Brinkmann & M. Fukugita,“Constraining the Evolution of the Ionizing Background and the Epoch of Reionization with z∼6 Quasars. II. A Sample of 19 Quasars”, AJ132, 117 (2006),astro-ph/0512082 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  59. [59]

    Cosmic Reionization and Early Star-forming Galaxies: A Joint Analysis of new Constraints from Planck and the Hubble Space Telescope

    B. E. Robertson, R. S. Ellis, S. R. Furlanetto & J. S. Dunlop,“Cosmic Reionization and Early Star-forming Galaxies: A Joint Analysis of new Constraints from Planck and the Hubble Space Telescope”, ApJL802, L19 (2015),arXiv:1502.02024 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  60. [60]

    The Simons Observatory: Science Goals and Forecasts

    P. Ade et al.,“The Simons Observatory: Science Goals and Forecasts”, JCAP2019, 056 (2019), arXiv:1808.07445

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  61. [61]

    CMB-S4 Science Book, First Edition

    K. N. Abazajian et al.,“CMB-S4 Science Book, First Edition”, arXiv:1610.02743 [astro-ph.CO], arXiv:1610.02743

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  62. [62]

    Big Bang Nucleosynthesis: 2015

    R. H. Cyburt, B. D. Fields, K. A. Olive & T.-H. Yeh,“Big Bang Nucleosynthesis: 2015”, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 015004 (2016), arXiv:1505.01076

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  63. [63]

    Neutrino perturbations in CMB anisotropy and matter clustering

    S. Bashinsky & U. Seljak,“Neutrino perturbations in CMB anisotropy and matter clustering”, Phys. Rev. D69, 083002 (2004),astro-ph/0310198 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  64. [64]

    First Detection of the Acoustic Oscillation Phase Shift Expected from the Cosmic Neutrino Background

    B. Follin, L. Knox, M. Millea & Z. Pan,“First Detection of the Acoustic Oscillation Phase Shift Expected from the Cosmic Neutrino Background”, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 091301 (2015), arXiv:1503.07863 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  65. [65]

    New Target for Cosmic Axion Searches

    D. Baumann, D. Green & B. Wallisch,“New Target for Cosmic Axion Searches”, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 171301 (2016),arXiv:1604.08614 [astro-ph.CO] 31

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  66. [66]

    The blackness of the cosmic microwave background spectrum as a probe of the distance-duality relation

    G. F. R. Ellis, R. Poltis, J.-P. Uzan & A. Weltman,“The blackness of the cosmic microwave background spectrum as a probe of the distance-duality relation”, Phys. Rev. D87, 103530 (2013),arXiv:1301.1312 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  67. [67]

    The interrelationship between cosmic dust and the microwave background

    P. Wesson,“The interrelationship between cosmic dust and the microwave background”, Astrophysics and Space Science36, 363 (1975)

    1975

  68. [68]

    A dust model for the cosmic microwave background

    N. Wickramasinghe, M. Edmunds, S. Chitre, J. Narlikar & S. Ramadurai,“A dust model for the cosmic microwave background”, Astrophysics and Space Science35, L9 (1975)

    1975

  69. [69]

    Cosmological Constant or Intergalactic Dust? Constraints from the Cosmic Far-Infrared Background

    A. Aguirre & Z. Haiman,“Cosmological Constant or Intergalactic Dust? Constraints from the Cosmic Far-Infrared Background”, ApJ532, 28 (2000)

    2000

  70. [70]

    Non-standard models and the sociology of cosmology

    M. López-Corredoira,“Non-standard models and the sociology of cosmology”, Stud. Hist. Phi- los. Mod. Phys.46, 86 (2014), arXiv:1305.5844

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  71. [71]

    Alternative Explanations of the Cosmic Microwave Background: A Historical and an Epistemological Perspective

    M. M. Ćirković & S. Perović,“Alternative Explanations of the Cosmic Microwave Background: A Historical and an Epistemological Perspective”, Stud. Hist. Philos. Mod. Phys.62, 1 (2018), arXiv:1705.07721

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  72. [72]

    The evolution of CMB spectral distortions in the early Universe

    J. Chluba & R. A. Sunyaev,“The evolution of CMB spectral distortions in the early Universe”, MNRAS419, 1294 (2012), arXiv:1109.6552

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  73. [73]

    Creation of the CMB spectrum: precise analytic solutions for the blackbody photosphere

    R. Khatri & R. A. Sunyaev,“Creation of the CMB spectrum: precise analytic solutions for the blackbody photosphere”, JCAP06, 038 (2012), arXiv:1203.2601

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  74. [74]

    CMB at 2x2 order: the dissipation of primordial acoustic waves and the observable part of the associated energy release

    J. Chluba, R. Khatri & R. A. Sunyaev,“CMB at 2x2 order: the dissipation of primordial acoustic waves and the observable part of the associated energy release”, MNRAS425, 1129 (2012), arXiv:1202.0057

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  75. [75]

    Which spectral distortions doesΛCDM actually predict?

    J. Chluba,“Which spectral distortions doesΛCDM actually predict?”, MNRAS460, 227 (2016), arXiv:1603.02496

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  76. [76]

    A new constraint on they-distortion with FIRAS: implications for feedback models in galaxy formation and cosmic shear measurements

    G. Fabbian, F. Bianchini, A. Sabyr, J. C. Hill, C. C. Lovell, L. Thiele & D. N. Spergel, “A new constraint on they-distortion with FIRAS: implications for feedback models in galaxy formation and cosmic shear measurements”, arXiv:2512.03038 [astro-ph.CO], arXiv:2512.03038

    arXiv

  77. [77]

    The Primordial Inflation Explorer (PIXIE): A Nulling Polarimeter for Cosmic Microwave Background Observations

    A. Kogut et al.,“The Primordial Inflation Explorer (PIXIE): A Nulling Polarimeter for Cosmic Microwave Background Observations”, JCAP07, 025 (2011)

    2011

  78. [78]

    The Primordial Inflation Explorer (PIXIE): Mission Design and Science Goals

    A. Kogut, N. Aghanim, J. Chluba, D. T. Chuss, J. Delabrouille, C. Dvorkin, D. Fixsen, S. Ghosh, B. S. Hensley, J. C. Hill, B. Maffei, A. R. Pullen, A. Rotti, A. Sabyr, E. R. Switzer, L. Thiele, E. J. Wollack & I. Zelko,“The Primordial Inflation Explorer (PIXIE): Mission Design and Science Goals”, JCAP04, 020 (2025), arXiv:2405.20403

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  79. [79]

    New Horizons in Cosmology with Spectral Distortions of the Cosmic Microwave Background

    J. Chluba, M. H. Abitbol, N. Aghanim, Y. Ali-Haïmoud, M. Alvarez, K. Basu, B. Bolliet, C. Burigana, P. de Bernardis, J. Delabrouille, E. Dimastrogiovanni, F. Finelli, D. Fixsen, L. Hart, C. Hernández-Monteagudo, J. C. Hill, A. Kogut, K. Kohri, J. Lesgourgues, B. Maffei, J. Mather, S. Mukherjee, S. P. Patil, A. Ravenni, M. Remazeilles, A. Rotti, J. A. Rubi...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  80. [80]

    Spectral Distortions of the CMB as a Probe of Inflation, Recombination, Structure Formation and Particle Physics: Astro2020 Science White Paper

    J. Chluba, A. Kogut, S. P. Patil, M. H. Abitbol, N. Aghanim, Y. Ali-Haïmoud, M. A. Amin et al.,“Spectral Distortions of the CMB as a Probe of Inflation, Recombination, Structure Formation and Particle Physics: Astro2020 Science White Paper”, Bulletin of the AAS51, 184 (2019), arXiv:1903.04218

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

Showing first 80 references.