Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

The Glow of Axion Quark Nugget Dark Matter: (IV) CMB Spectral and Anisotropy Signatures

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that baryon annihilation on antimatter axion quark nuggets before recombination injects enough energy to imprint μ ≈ 6×10⁻⁸ and y ≈ 2×10⁻⁹ spectral distortions on the CMB, within reach of proposed experiments, while leavin

desk verdict A genuine forward prediction with a distinctive μ≫y hierarchy for AQN dark matter, but the amplitude is sensitive to an under-justified velocity choice and the text contains an irreconcilable internal inconsistency in §5.1.2. read the letter →

arxiv 2512.05401 v2 pith:SDHAOHBL submitted 2025-12-05 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.HEhep-ph

Fereshteh Majidi , Xunyu Liang , Michael Sekatchev , Ludovic Van Waerbeke , Ariel Zhitnitsky This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.COastro-ph.HEhep-ph
keywords axionquarknuggetsdarkmatterCMBspectraldistortionsμdistortionyenergyinjectionrecombinationbaryonannihilation
topics Dark Matter
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

This paper argues that if dark matter includes antimatter axion quark nuggets—macroscopic nuggets of quark matter formed in the early universe—then ordinary baryons annihilating on those nuggets before recombination inject enough X-ray energy to imprint spectral distortions on the cosmic microwave background. The predicted chemical-potential distortion is μ ≈ 6×10⁻⁸ and the Compton distortion y ≈ 2×10⁻⁹, values within reach of proposed spectral-distortion experiments, while the same energy injection leaves CMB anisotropies essentially unchanged and consistent with current data. The paper identifies the μ ≫ y ordering as a distinctive signature, opposite to what decaying or annihilating particle dark matter generically produces, because the nugget energy injection scales as the product of baryon and dark-matter densities. The calculation uses a cosmological Boltzmann solver modified to include this injection; the paper explicitly limits itself to high-energy photons and a frequency-independent treatment.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the effective Coulomb capture cross-section of an antimatter nugget in the pre-recombination plasma. Because the nugget carries a net charge, it attracts protons and helium ions; the effective capture radius R_eff exceeds the geometric radius by a squared factor of about 936 at recombination temperatures, and this enhancement multiplies the annihilation rate. The second piece is a weighted cross-section formula that interpolates between ionized species (capture-dominated, with annihilation probability near one) and neutral species (geometric cross-section, with annihilation probability about 0.1). Together these determine the energy injection rate Q̇ ∝ n_AQN · n_b,

What would settle it

A spectral-distortion experiment reaching a μ sensitivity around 10⁻⁹ that finds no μ distortion would rule out the fiducial AQN prediction; alternatively, measuring both distortions and finding y/μ ≳ 0.1 rather than the predicted ~0.03 would contradict the AQN redshift-scaling signature.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that baryon annihilation on antimatter AQNs before recombination generates a calculable energy injection rate large enough to create μ- and y-type CMB spectral distortions at μ ≈ 6×10⁻⁸ and y ≈ 2×10⁻⁹ for nugget masses in the allowed 10–100 g window, yet small enough to leave the CMB angular power spectrum and cosmological parameter posteriors essentially identical to ΛCDM. The distortion amplitudes are set by a Coulomb-enhanced capture cross-section, (R_eff/R)² ≈ 936 (kT/0.3 eV)^{1/2} (m/100 g)^{1/3}, so the injection rate scales as the product of baryon and nugget densities and grows roughly as (1+z)^6.5. This redshift scaling is what makes μ exceed y by about a factor

Load-bearing premise

The predicted distortion sizes assume a charged nugget captures nearly every ion it meets, that electrostatic shielding by the surrounding plasma is negligible over the relevant redshifts, and that the Coulomb enhancement factor computed in the paper applies; if any of these fails, μ and y shrink proportionally and could drop below detection thresholds.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The predicted μ distortion would be visible to proposed spectral-distortion missions, so the AQN model can be tested without waiting for indirect or exotic signatures.
  • AQN heating does not disturb the CMB anisotropy spectrum; current cosmological parameter constraints are unaffected, so the model is not ruled out by existing bounds on dark-matter energy injection.
  • The μ≫y ordering is a clean discriminator: decaying dark matter gives y≫μ and annihilating dark matter gives y~μ, so a future detection of μ≫y would point to an injection rate scaling as (1+z)^6 or steeper.
  • The predicted signal is essentially independent of nugget mass over 10–1000 g, so the same experiment constrains the model's single free parameter only weakly through the average mass.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial extension: if a future mission sees a μ distortion near 10⁻⁸ with y an order of magnitude smaller, the AQN mechanism would be a natural explanation, but any model with injection rate ∝(1+z)^6.5 would mimic it, so the distortion alone would not uniquely prove quark nuggets.
  • Editorial extension: the paper's explicit neglect of low-energy photon and atomic-transition processes (Section 5.1.1) leaves room for additional AQN signatures in the Rayleigh-Jeans tail and 21-cm cosmology; modelling those would sharpen or falsify the model.
  • Editorial extension: the μ amplitude scales linearly with the assumed Coulomb capture enhancement; if later plasma physics lowers the capture efficiency, the same AQN parameters would produce a μ below detectability, turning the proposed measurement into an upper limit on AQN abundance or capture cross-section.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper studies CMB spectral distortions and anisotropy signatures from baryon annihilation on antimatter axion quark nuggets (AQNs). It derives analytic estimates for the μ- and y-type distortions (Eqs. 3.15–3.16), reporting μ ≈ 6×10⁻⁸ and y ≈ 2×10⁻⁹ for fiducial inputs, and uses a modified CLASS code with Cobaya MCMC forecasts to argue that AQN energy injection leaves CMB anisotropies essentially unchanged, consistent with Planck. The paper further emphasizes a distinctive μ ≫ y ordering that differentiates AQNs from standard decaying or annihilating dark matter, and it claims the predicted μ distortion is within reach of PIXIE/Voyage-2050-class missions. The analytic estimates and appendices on Debye screening and recursive ionization are useful, but the central amplitude estimates rest on a questionable treatment of the relative velocity.

Significance. If the predictions were correct, this would be a notable, falsifiable signature: a specific macroscopic dark-matter candidate producing a μ-type distortion detectable by proposed CMB spectral-distortion missions, with a μ/y hierarchy opposite to that of conventional DM decay/annihilation models. The paper is transparent in its analytic estimates, and Appendices A and B provide concrete checks of Debye screening and recursive ionization. It does not fit model parameters to CMB spectral-distortion data; the μ and y values are forward predictions. The main weakness is that the predicted amplitudes scale linearly with inputs such as the X-ray fraction g, the neutral-species capture probability, and especially the assumed relative velocity Δv, and the treatment of that velocity is not physically justified.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.2, Eq. (2.9); §3.2.1, Eqs. (3.15)–(3.16)] The relative velocity Δv is set to 10⁻⁴ c and treated as redshift-independent, but this is not the relevant speed for the collision rate in a hot plasma. The capture-radius formula (2.7) is derived from the thermal energy k_B T, so the ion thermal speed should enter the flux. At z ≈ 10⁶ (the μ epoch) the proton thermal speed is ≈ 9×10⁻⁴ c; at z ≈ 5×10⁴ (the y epoch) it is ≈ 2×10⁻⁴ c. Replacing Δv by a thermal average (or quadrature sum with the bulk velocity) increases Q_dot by roughly factors of 8 and 2 at the μ and y epochs, and changes the redshift scaling in Eq. (3.15) from (1+z)^{1/2} toward (1+z). This directly changes the quoted μ and y values and the μ/y ratio. The paper neither derives Δv from perturbation theory nor justifies it as a thermal average; the numerical implementation should specify and use the correct velocity average.
  2. [§5.1.2] The text states 'typical values y ∼ 10⁻⁶–10⁻⁷ and μ ≲ 10⁻⁸'. This is irreconcilable with Eq. (3.16), which gives μ ≈ 6×10⁻⁸ and y ≈ 2×10⁻⁹, and with the amplitudes shown in Figure 2. The quoted y range is 2–4 orders of magnitude above the paper's own prediction, and the quoted μ bound is an order of magnitude below it. Since this passage is used to discuss BISOU sensitivity, it must be corrected; as written it misrepresents the model's predictions.
  3. [§4.2, after Eq. (3.20); §5] The claim that 'the only free parameter is the average mass of the nuggets' is an overstatement. The amplitude inputs g (X-ray fraction), Δv (or the velocity treatment), f_neutral ≈ 0.1, and the helium fraction Y_p are model inputs that are not varied in the MCMC forecasts. Equations (3.15) and (2.9) show that μ and y scale linearly with g and Δv, so the detectability claim is conditional on these choices. A parameter-sensitivity study or a clear statement of which inputs are considered fixed by microphysics is needed before claiming the model is testable with only m_AQN unspecified.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3.2.1, Eq. (3.15)] The sentence 'σ ≈ π R_eff' should read 'σ ≈ π R_eff²' (or more precisely σ/πR² ≈ (R_eff/R)²). The numerical estimate is consistent with the latter interpretation.
  2. [§3.2.1, Eqs. (3.9a) and (3.10)] The text says the y-distortion visibility is 'approximately flat and of order one' near z ≈ 5×10⁴, but Eq. (3.9a) gives J_y(5×10⁴) ≈ 0.17. The y estimate should either use this value or explain why an order-unity average is appropriate over the integration window.
  3. [§4.1, Figures 1–2] Figure 2 caption refers to PIXIE thresholds while the text refers to Super-PIXIE/Voyage 2050; please make the mission names and sensitivity values consistent in captions and body.
  4. [§4; reproducibility] The modified CLASS code is described but not released or versioned. For a numerical-claims paper, providing the modified code or a detailed input-file example would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: AQN μ/y amplitudes are forward predictions, not fits or renamed inputs.

full rationale

The central numerical predictions, eqs. (3.15)-(3.16), are genuine forward model outputs: the AQN energy-injection rate (2.8)-(2.11) is fixed by model parameters (g, Δv, m_AQN, f_i, R_eff) inherited from the AQN literature, and the μ/y values are then obtained by applying standard distortion visibility integrals and by integrating the injection in a modified CLASS code. No CMB spectral-distortion measurement is used to set g, Δv, m_AQN, or the cross section, so the claimed μ≈6e-8 and y≈2e-9 are not equivalent to an input by construction. The heavy self-citation to earlier AQN papers [18]-[21], [31]-[33] supplies the model and its plasma/annihilation parameters; this is model infrastructure rather than a uniqueness theorem invoked to exclude alternatives, and under the review rules self-citation alone is not circularity. The strongest concerns are correctness-level, not constructional: treating Δv as a constant 10^-4c bulk velocity in eq. (3.15) ignores the thermal ion velocities that should govern collision rates at the μ and y epochs, changing the amplitude and the (1+z)^n scaling; and Sec. 5.1.2 quotes 'typical values y∼10^-6–10^-7 and μ≲10^-8' that irreconcilably contradict eq. (3.16). These are substantive physics flags, but neither makes the derivation reduce to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new entity; AQNs and their X-ray emission channel are inherited from the authors' prior framework. The central calculation imports the abundance normalization, Coulomb capture radius, X-ray fraction, and neutral-species probabilities from earlier AQN papers. Those inputs are load-bearing but not independently verified within this paper.

free parameters (4)
  • m_AQN (average nugget mass) = 10–100 g fiducial window; 10–1000 g scanned in MCMC
    The paper calls this the only free parameter of the AQN model. It cancels in the spectral-distortion amplitude but enters p_ann,AQN ∼ m^{-1/3}; the window comes from prior IceCube and [19] constraints, not from fitting here.
  • g (X-ray fraction of annihilation energy) = 0.1 used for fiducial estimates; range 0.1–0.5
    Adopted from prior AQN work [33]. μ and y scale linearly with g, so it is load-bearing for the detectability claim.
  • Δv (relative DM–baryon speed) = 10⁻⁴ c, with redshift dependence neglected
    Chosen for analytic estimates and, implicitly, in the numerical runs. μ, y, and p_ann,AQN all scale linearly with Δv, so this is a free input.
  • f_neutral (annihilation probability for neutral species) = 0.1
    Neutral H and He are assigned f_i,neu≈0.1 per collision, from [33]. This affects the post-recombination cross section and the y-distortion.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption AQN formation, stability, and abundance normalization (eq. 2.2) with 2/3 electromagnetic and 3/5 antimatter fractions
    Inherited from prior AQN literature [18,28–31]; the entire injection rate and number density depend on it.
  • domain assumption Charge distribution n(r) ∝ (R/r)^6 and Coulomb capture radius (eqs. 2.4–2.7), with f_i≈1 for ionized species
    From [32]; sets the cross-section enhancement that fixes the μ,y amplitudes. Appendix A argues screening is negligible in the redshift range used.
  • domain assumption X-ray-dominated energy injection with g∈[0.1,0.5] and frequency-independent treatment in CLASS
    From [33]; the paper acknowledges in §5.1.1 that low-energy photons and atomic transitions are left to future work with CosmoTherm.
  • domain assumption Standard ΛCDM background and Planck 2018/PR4 likelihoods provide the reference cosmological model
    The MCMC forecasts use Cobaya with Planck likelihoods; the AQN injection is added on top of standard recombination.
  • ad hoc to paper Neglect of the redshift dependence of Δv in analytic estimates
    Introduced in eq. (3.15) 'for simplicity'; the numerical runs are not documented to use the same assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Glow of Axion Quark Nugget Dark Matter: (IV) CMB Spectral and Anisotropy Signatures." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SDHAOHBL

@misc{pith2026251205401,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Glow of Axion Quark Nugget Dark Matter: (IV) CMB Spectral and Anisotropy Signatures},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SDHAOHBL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.05401}
}
abstract

Axion quark nuggets (AQNs) are macroscopic dark-matter candidates, with masses of the order of a few grams to a kilogram and sub-micron radius, thought to form at the Quantum Chromo Dynamic era through axion-induced charge separation. This framework naturally links the dark and visible matter abundances ($\Omega_{\rm DM} \sim \Omega_{\rm visible}$) and provides a mechanism for generating the baryon-antibaryon asymmetry where dark matter is composed of matter AQNs and antimatter AQNs. Although behaving as cold dark matter on cosmological scales, baryons annihilate with antimatter AQNs, producing ionizing high-energy photons. The resulting energy injection may imprint spectral distortions on the cosmic microwave background (CMB) and modify the reionization history. Using a modified version of the \texttt{CLASS} Boltzmann code we compute the impact of this energy injection on the $\mu$ and $y$ spectral distortion parameters as well as on the optical depth. We find that (1) the CMB anisotropies remain essentially unaffected by baryon annihilation, and (2) the associated spectral distortion signatures lie within the sensitivity reach of proposed CMB spectral distortion missions. Finally, we discuss the similarities and differences between the AQN scenario and annihilating or decaying dark matter models.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Unidentified falling objects in the LHC as dark matter signals

    hep-ph 2026-02 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    A new mechanism linking LHC UFOs to axion quark nugget dark matter is proposed, predicting detectable correlated UFO bursts.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 67 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Fixsen, E.S

    D.J. Fixsen, E.S. Cheng, J.M. Gales, J.C. Mather, R.A. Shafer and E.L. Wright,The Cosmic Microwave Background spectrum from the full COBE FIRAS data set,Astrophys. J.473(1996) 576 [astro-ph/9605054]

    arXiv 1996

  2. [2]

    Chluba and R.A

    J. Chluba and R.A. Sunyaev,The evolution of CMB spectral distortions in the early Universe,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.419(2012) 1294 [1109.6552]

    arXiv 2012

  3. [3]

    Sunyaev and R

    R.A. Sunyaev and R. Khatri,Unavoidable CMB Spectral Features and Blackbody Photosphere of Our Universe,International Journal of Modern Physics D22(2013) 1330014 [1302.6553]

    arXiv 2013

  4. [4]

    Mather et al.,Measurement of the Cosmic Microwave Background spectrum by the COBE FIRAS instrument,Astrophys

    J.C. Mather et al.,Measurement of the Cosmic Microwave Background spectrum by the COBE FIRAS instrument,Astrophys. J.420(1994) 439

    1994

  5. [5]

    André, C

    P. André, C. Baccigalupi, A. Banday, D. Barbosa, B. Barreiro, J. Bartlett et al.,PRISM (Polarized Radiation Imaging and Spectroscopy Mission): an extended white paper,JCAP2014(2014) 006 [1310.1554]

    arXiv 2014

  6. [6]

    Chluba, M.H

    J. Chluba, M.H. Abitbol, N. Aghanim, Y. Ali-Haïmoud, M. Alvarez, K. Basu et al.,New horizons in cosmology with spectral distortions of the cosmic microwave background,Experimental Astronomy51 (2021) 1515 [1909.01593]

    arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    Kogut, D.J

    A. Kogut, D.J. Fixsen, D.T. Chuss, J. Dotson, E. Dwek, M. Halpern et al.,The Primordial Inflation Explorer (PIXIE): a nulling polarimeter for cosmic microwave background observations,JCAP2011 (2011) 025 [1105.2044]

    arXiv 2011

  8. [8]

    Kogut and D.J

    A. Kogut and D.J. Fixsen,Calibration method and uncertainty for the primordial inflation explorer (PIXIE),JCAP2020(2020) 041 [2002.00976]

    arXiv 2020

Show all 77 references
  1. [9]

    Kogut et al.,The Primordial Inflation Explorer (PIXIE): mission design and science goals,JCAP04 (2025) 020 [2405.20403]

    A. Kogut et al.,The Primordial Inflation Explorer (PIXIE): mission design and science goals,JCAP04 (2025) 020 [2405.20403]

    2025 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Fossil space mission proposal to the esa m7 call

    “Fossil space mission proposal to the esa m7 call.” https://www.ias.u-psud.fr/sites/default/files/FOSSIL-web_0.pdf, 2022

    2022

  3. [11]

    Coulon, B

    X. Coulon, B. Maffei and N. Aghanim,Towards measurements of CMB spectral distortions, inmm Universe 2023 - Observing the Universe at mm Wavelengths, vol. 293 ofEuropean Physical Journal Web of Conferences, p. 00012, EDP, June, 2024, DOI. – 22 –

    2023

  4. [12]

    Chluba,Distinguishing different scenarios of early energy release with spectral distortions of the cosmic microwave background,Mon

    J. Chluba,Distinguishing different scenarios of early energy release with spectral distortions of the cosmic microwave background,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.436(2013) 2232 [1304.6121]

    2013 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Ali-Haïmoud, J

    Y. Ali-Haïmoud, J. Chluba and M. Kamionkowski,Constraints on Dark Matter Interactions with Standard Model Particles from Cosmic Microwave Background Spectral Distortions,Phys. Rev. Letters 115(2015) 071304 [1506.04745]

    2015 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Li,Observability of CMB spectrum distortions from dark matter annihilation,JCAP2024(2024) 019 [2402.16708]

    S.-P. Li,Observability of CMB spectrum distortions from dark matter annihilation,JCAP2024(2024) 019 [2402.16708]

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Acharya and R

    S.K. Acharya and R. Khatri,New CMB spectral distortion constraints on decaying dark matter with full evolution of electromagnetic cascades before recombination,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 123510 [1903.04503]

    2019 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Ganguly, R

    A. Ganguly, R. Khatri and T.S. Roy,Signatures of composite dark matter in the cosmic microwave background spectral distortions,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 103516 [2407.14480]

    2025 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Kumar, E

    S. Kumar, E. Dimastrogiovanni, G.D. Starkman, C. Copi and B. Lynn,CMB Spectral Distortions from Cooling Macroscopic Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 023521 [1804.08601]

    2019 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Zhitnitsky,‘Nonbaryonic’ dark matter as baryonic colour superconductor,JCAP10(2003) 010 [hep-ph/0202161]

    A.R. Zhitnitsky,‘Nonbaryonic’ dark matter as baryonic colour superconductor,JCAP10(2003) 010 [hep-ph/0202161]

    2003 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Majidi, X

    F. Majidi, X. Liang, L. Van Waerbeke, A. Zhitnitsky, M. Sekatchev, J.S. Sommer et al.,The glow of axion quark nugget dark matter. Part I. Large scale structures,JCAP09(2024) 045 [2406.12122]

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Sommer et al.,The glow of axion quark nugget dark matter - II

    J.S. Sommer et al.,The glow of axion quark nugget dark matter - II. Galaxy clusters,Astron. Astrophys. 691(2024) A38 [2406.17946]

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Sekatchev, X

    M. Sekatchev, X. Liang, F. Majidi, B. Scully, L. Van Waerbeke and A. Zhitnitsky,The Glow of Axion Quark Nugget Dark Matter: (III) The Mysteries of the Milky Way UV Background,2504.15382

  14. [22]

    D. Blas, J. Lesgourgues and T. Tram,The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) II: Approximation schemes,JCAP07(2011) 034 [1104.2933]

    2011 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Lucca, N

    M. Lucca, N. Schöneberg, D.C. Hooper, J. Lesgourgues and J. Chluba,The synergy between cmb spectral distortions and anisotropies,JCAP02(2020) 026 [1910.04619]

    2020 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Zhitnitsky,Axion quark nuggets

    A. Zhitnitsky,Axion quark nuggets. Dark matter and matter-antimatter asymmetry: Theory, observations and future experiments,Modern Physics Letters A36(2021) 2130017 [2105.08719]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Tulin and H.-B

    S. Tulin and H.-B. Yu,Dark matter self-interactions and small scale structure,Physics Reports730 (2018) 1 [1705.02358]

    2018 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Dvorkin, K

    C. Dvorkin, K. Blum and M. Kamionkowski,Constraining dark matter-baryon scattering with linear cosmology,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 023519 [1311.2937]

    2014 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Wilkinson, J

    R.J. Wilkinson, J. Lesgourgues and C.é. Bœhm,Using the CMB angular power spectrum to study Dark Matter-photon interactions,JCAP2014(2014) 026 [1309.7588]

    2014 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Liang and A

    X. Liang and A. Zhitnitsky,Axion field and the quark nugget’s formation at the QCD phase transition, Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 083502 [1606.00435]

    2016 arXiv

  21. [29]

    S. Ge, X. Liang and A. Zhitnitsky,Cosmological C P -odd axion field as the coherent Berry’s phase of the Universe,Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 063514 [1702.04354]

    2017 arXiv

  22. [30]

    S. Ge, X. Liang and A. Zhitnitsky,Cosmological axion and a quark nugget dark matter model,Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 043008 [1711.06271]

    2018 arXiv

  23. [31]

    S. Ge, K. Lawson and A. Zhitnitsky,The Axion Quark Nugget Dark Matter Model: Size Distribution and Survival Pattern,Phys. Rev.D99(2019) 116017 [1903.05090]

    2019 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Flambaum and A.R

    V.V. Flambaum and A.R. Zhitnitsky,Primordial Lithium Puzzle and the Axion Quark Nugget Dark Matter Model,Phys. Rev.D99(2019) 023517 [1811.01965]. – 23 –

    2019 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Forbes and A.R

    M.M. Forbes and A.R. Zhitnitsky,Diffuse x-rays: Directly observing dark matter?,JCAP0801(2008) 023 [astro-ph/0611506]

    2008 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Forbes and A.R

    M.M. Forbes and A.R. Zhitnitsky,WMAP Haze: Directly Observing Dark Matter?,Phys. Rev.D78 (2008) 083505 [0802.3830]

    2008 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Lawson and A.R

    K. Lawson and A.R. Zhitnitsky,Quark (Anti) Nugget Dark Matter, inCosmic Frontier Workshop: Snowmass 2013 Menlo Park, USA, March 6-8, 2013, 2013, http://www.slac.stanford.edu/econf/C1307292/docs/submittedArxivFiles/1305.6318.pdf [1305.6318]

    2013 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Zeldovich and R

    Y.B. Zeldovich and R. Sunyaev,The interaction of matter and radiation in a hot-model universe, Astrophys. Space Sci.4(1969) 301

    1969

  29. [37]

    Sunyaev and Y.B

    R.A. Sunyaev and Y.B. Zeldovich,The interaction of matter and radiation in the hot model of the Universe, II,Astrophys. Space Sci.7(1970) 20

    1970

  30. [38]

    Zeldovich, A.F

    Y.B. Zeldovich, A.F. Illarionov and R.A. Syunyaev,Influence of Energy Release on the Spectrum of the Relic Radiation,Sov. Astron.14(1972) 1053

    1972

  31. [39]

    Chluba,Science with CMB spectral distortions, in49th Rencontres de Moriond on Cosmology, pp

    J. Chluba,Science with CMB spectral distortions, in49th Rencontres de Moriond on Cosmology, pp. 327–334, 2014 [1405.6938]

    2014 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Adams, S

    J.A. Adams, S. Sarkar and D.W. Sciama,CMB anisotropy in the decaying neutrino cosmology,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.301(1998) 210 [astro-ph/9805108]

    1998 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Chen and M

    X.-L. Chen and M. Kamionkowski,Particle decays during the cosmic dark ages,Phys. Rev. D70(2004) 043502 [astro-ph/0310473]

    2004 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Padmanabhan and D.P

    N. Padmanabhan and D.P. Finkbeiner,Detecting dark matter annihilation with CMB polarization: Signatures and experimental prospects,Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 023508 [astro-ph/0503486]

    2005 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Slatyer, N

    T.R. Slatyer, N. Padmanabhan and D.P. Finkbeiner,CMB Constraints on WIMP Annihilation: Energy Absorption During the Recombination Epoch,Phys. Rev. D80(2009) 043526 [0906.1197]

    2009 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Kanzaki, M

    T. Kanzaki, M. Kawasaki and K. Nakayama,Effects of Dark Matter Annihilation on the Cosmic Microwave Background,Prog. Theor. Phys.123(2010) 853 [0907.3985]

    2010 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Galli, F

    S. Galli, F. Iocco, G. Bertone and A. Melchiorri,CMB constraints on Dark Matter models with large annihilation cross-section,Phys. Rev. D80(2009) 023505 [0905.0003]

    2009 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Hisano, M

    J. Hisano, M. Kawasaki, K. Kohri, T. Moroi, K. Nakayama and T. Sekiguchi,Cosmological constraints on dark matter models with velocity-dependent annihilation cross section,Phys. Rev. D83(2011) 123511 [1102.4658]

    2011 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Astrophys.535(2011) A26 [1103.2766]

    G.Hutsi, J.Chluba, A.HektorandM.Raidal,WMAP7andfutureCMBconstraintsonannihilatingdark matter: implications on GeV-scale WIMPs,Astron. Astrophys.535(2011) A26 [1103.2766]

    2011 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Galli, F

    S. Galli, F. Iocco, G. Bertone and A. Melchiorri,Updated CMB constraints on Dark Matter annihilation cross-sections,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 027302 [1106.1528]

    2011 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Slatyer,Energy Injection And Absorption In The Cosmic Dark Ages,Phys

    T.R. Slatyer,Energy Injection And Absorption In The Cosmic Dark Ages,Phys. Rev. D87(2013) 123513 [1211.0283]

    2013 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Galli, T.R

    S. Galli, T.R. Slatyer, M. Valdes and F. Iocco,Systematic Uncertainties In Constraining Dark Matter Annihilation From The Cosmic Microwave Background,Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 063502 [1306.0563]

    2013 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Madhavacheril, N

    M.S. Madhavacheril, N. Sehgal and T.R. Slatyer,Current Dark Matter Annihilation Constraints from CMB and Low-Redshift Data,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 103508 [1310.3815]

    2014 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Slatyer,Indirect Dark Matter Signatures in the Cosmic Dark Ages II

    T.R. Slatyer,Indirect Dark Matter Signatures in the Cosmic Dark Ages II. Ionization, Heating and Photon Production from Arbitrary Energy Injections,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 023521 [1506.03812]

    2016 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Slatyer,Indirect dark matter signatures in the cosmic dark ages

    T.R. Slatyer,Indirect dark matter signatures in the cosmic dark ages. I. Generalizing the bound on s-wave dark matter annihilation from Planck results,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 023527 [1506.03811]. – 24 –

    2016 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Finkbeiner, S

    D.P. Finkbeiner, S. Galli, T. Lin and T.R. Slatyer,Searching for Dark Matter in the CMB: A Compact Parameterization of Energy Injection from New Physics,Phys. Rev. D85(2012) 043522 [1109.6322]

    2012 arXiv

  47. [55]

    J. Cang, Y. Gao and Y.-Z. Ma,Probing dark matter with future CMB measurements,Phys. Rev. D102 (2020) 103005 [2002.03380]

    2020 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Zhang, X

    L. Zhang, X. Chen, M. Kamionkowski, Z.-g. Si and Z. Zheng,Constraints on radiative dark-matter decay from the cosmic microwave background,Phys. Rev. D76(2007) 061301 [0704.2444]

    2007 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Slatyer and C.-L

    T.R. Slatyer and C.-L. Wu,General Constraints on Dark Matter Decay from the Cosmic Microwave Background,Phys. Rev. D95(2017) 023010 [1610.06933]

    2017 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Poulin, J

    V. Poulin, J. Lesgourgues and P.D. Serpico,Cosmological constraints on exotic injection of electromagnetic energy,JCAP03(2017) 043 [1610.10051]

    2017 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Acharya and R

    S.K. Acharya and R. Khatri,CMB anisotropy and BBN constraints on pre-recombination decay of dark matter to visible particles,JCAP12(2019) 046 [1910.06272]

    2019 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Capozzi, R.Z

    F. Capozzi, R.Z. Ferreira, L. Lopez-Honorez and O. Mena,CMB and Lyman-𝛼constraints on dark matter decays to photons,JCAP06(2023) 060 [2303.07426]

    2023 arXiv

  53. [61]

    H. Liu, W. Qin, G.W. Ridgway and T.R. Slatyer,Exotic energy injection in the early Universe. II. CMB spectral distortions and constraints on light dark matter,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 043531 [2303.07370]

    2023 arXiv

  54. [62]

    C. Xu, W. Qin and T.R. Slatyer,CMB limits on decaying dark matter beyond the ionization threshold, Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 123529 [2408.13305]. [63]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.641 (2020) A6 [1807.06209]. [64]Planckcollab...

    2024 arXiv

  55. [65]

    Chluba,Green’s function of the cosmological thermalization problem,Mon

    J. Chluba,Green’s function of the cosmological thermalization problem,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 434(2013) 352 [1304.6120]

    2013 arXiv

  56. [66]

    Chluba,Which spectral distortions doesΛCDM actually predict?,Mon

    J. Chluba,Which spectral distortions doesΛCDM actually predict?,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.460 (2016) 227 [1603.02496]

    2016 arXiv

  57. [67]

    Chluba,Future Steps in Cosmology using Spectral Distortions of the Cosmic Microwave Background, Proc

    J. Chluba,Future Steps in Cosmology using Spectral Distortions of the Cosmic Microwave Background, Proc. Int. Sch. Phys. Fermi200(2020) 265 [1806.02915]

    2020 arXiv

  58. [68]

    Torrado and J

    J. Torrado and J. Lesgourgues,Cobaya: Code for Bayesian Analysis of hierarchical physical models, JCAP12(2021) 001 [2005.05290]. [69]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2018 results. V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods,Astron. Astrophys. 641(2020) A5 [1907.12875]

    2021 arXiv

  59. [70]

    Carron, A

    J. Carron, A. Lewis and G. Fabbian,Planck integrated Sachs-Wolfe-lensing likelihood and the CMB temperature,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 103507 [2209.07395]

    2022 arXiv

  60. [71]

    Carron, M

    J. Carron, M. Mirmelstein and A. Lewis,CMB lensing from Planck PR4 maps,JCAP09(2022) 039 [2206.07773]

    2022 arXiv

  61. [72]

    Lawson, X

    K. Lawson, X. Liang, A. Mead, M.S.R. Siddiqui, L. Van Waerbeke and A. Zhitnitsky,Gravitationally trapped axions on Earth,Phys. Rev.D100(2019) 043531 [1905.00022]

    2019 arXiv

  62. [73]

    Henry, J

    R.C. Henry, J. Murthy, J. Overduin and J. Tyler,The Mystery of the cosmic diffuse ultraviolet background radiation,APJ798(2014) 14

    2014

  63. [74]

    Murthy, J.M

    J. Murthy, J.M. Shull, M. Postman, J.W. Parker, S. Redfield, N. Cunningham et al.,Excess ultraviolet emission at high galactic latitudes: A new horizons view,The Astronomical Journal169(2025) 103

    2025

  64. [75]

    N. Raza, L. Van Waerbeke and A. Zhitnitsky,Solar Corona Heating by the Axion Quark Nugget Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 103527 [1805.01897]. – 25 –

    2018 arXiv

  65. [76]

    Mukherjee, J

    S. Mukherjee, J. Silk and B.D. Wandelt,FSD: Frequency Space Differential measurement of CMB spectral distortions,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.477(2018) 4473 [1801.05120]

    2018 arXiv

  66. [77]

    Abitbol, J

    M.H. Abitbol, J. Chluba, J.C. Hill and B.R. Johnson,Prospects for Measuring Cosmic Microwave Background Spectral Distortions in the Presence of Foregrounds,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.471 (2017) 1126 [1705.01534]

    2017 arXiv

  67. [78]

    Maffei, M.H

    B. Maffei, M.H. Abitbol, N. Aghanim, J. Aumont, E. Battistelli, J. Chluba et al.,BISOU: a balloon project to measure the CMB spectral distortions,2111.00246

    arXiv

  68. [79]

    Seager, D.D

    S. Seager, D.D. Sasselov and D. Scott,A new calculation of the recombination epoch,Astrophys. J. Lett. 523(1999) L1 [astro-ph/9909275]

    1999 arXiv

  69. [80]

    Dodelson,Modern cosmology, Academic Press (2003)

    S. Dodelson,Modern cosmology, Academic Press (2003). – 26 –

    2003

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.