High $H_0$ Values from CMB E-mode Data: A Clue for Resolving the Hubble Tension?

Addison, Graeme E.

doi:10.48550/arxiv.2102.00028

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While Addison [48] use the SPTpol 500d bandpowers, their results are fairly similar to ours. Addison [48] report a combined constraint on H 0 of 68.7 ± 1.3 km s −1 Mpc −1 which is consistent with our result of 69.2 ± 1.2 km s −1 Mpc −1 . Note that the results are not independent, as they use the same data from Planck and ACT DR4.…”

Section: H0 From Temperature and Polarization Datasupporting

confidence: 78%

“…We note that the result from the combined EE data is lower than the value inferred from each individual dataset. As discussed by Addison [48] and shown by Figure 1 of that work, this is because the ground-based experiments are most consistent with the lower end of the Planck H 0 parameter ellipses. We conclude that the temperature and polarization constraints paint a consistent picture of a low expansion rate, and do not suggest possible explanations for the gap between the Cepheid and supernova distance-ladder measurements of R20 and CMB data.…”

Section: H0 From Temperature and Polarization Datamentioning

confidence: 58%

“…In the late stages of completing this work, Addison [48] published a similar, though more extensive, analysis investigating the H 0 constraints produced by combining EE power spectra of different experiments. While Addison [48] use the SPTpol 500d bandpowers, their results are fairly similar to ours. Addison [48] report a combined constraint on H 0 of 68.7 ± 1.3 km s −1 Mpc −1 which is consistent with our result of 69.2 ± 1.2 km s −1 Mpc −1 .…”

Section: H0 From Temperature and Polarization Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Constraints on $Λ$CDM Extensions from the SPT-3G 2018 $EE$ and $TE$ Power Spectra

Balkenhol,

Dutcher,

Ade

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present constraints on extensions to the ΛCDM cosmological model from measurements of the E-mode polarization auto-power spectrum and the temperature-E-mode cross-power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) made using 2018 SPT-3G data. The extensions considered vary the primordial helium abundance, the effective number of relativistic degrees of freedom, the sum of neutrino masses, the relativistic energy density and mass of a sterile neutrino, and the mean spatial curvature. We do not find clear evidence for any of these extensions, from either the SPT-3G 2018 dataset alone or in combination with baryon acoustic oscillation and Planck data. None of these model extensions significantly relax the tension between Hubble-constant, H0, constraints from the CMB and from distance-ladder measurements using Cepheids and supernovae. The addition of the SPT-3G 2018 data to Planck reduces the square-root of the determinants of the parameter covariance matrices by factors of 1.3 − 2.0 across these models, signaling a substantial reduction in the allowed parameter volume. We also explore CMB-based constraints on H0 from combined SPT, Planck , and ACT DR4 datasets. While individual experiments see some indications of different H0 values between the T T , TE, and EE spectra, the combined H0 constraints are consistent between the three spectra. For the full combined datasets, we report H0 = 67.49 ± 0.53 km s −1 Mpc −1 , which is the tightest constraint on H0 from CMB power spectra to date and in 4.1 σ tension with the most precise distance-ladder-based measurement of H0. The SPT-3G survey is planned to continue through at least 2023, with existing maps of combined 2019 and 2020 data already having ∼ 3.5× lower noise than the maps used in this analysis.

show abstract

Section: H0 From Temperature and Polarization Datasupporting

confidence: 78%

Section: H0 From Temperature and Polarization Datamentioning

confidence: 58%

Section: H0 From Temperature and Polarization Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Constraints on $Λ$CDM Extensions from the SPT-3G 2018 $EE$ and $TE$ Power Spectra

Balkenhol,

Dutcher,

Ade

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We may also consider less precise constraints that arise exclusively from measurements of the polarization of the CMB, i.e. from the EE CMB power spectra [29], always assuming a ΛCDM model: Planck EE gives H 0 = 70.0 ± 2.7 km s −1 Mpc −1 at 68% CL, ACTPol H 0 = 72.4 +3.9 −4.8 km s −1 Mpc −1 at 68% CL, and SPTPol H 0 = 73.1 +3.3 −3.9 km s −1 Mpc −1 at 68% CL, but their combination finds H 0 = 68.7 ± 1.3 km s −1 Mpc −1 at 68% CL for the different directions of correlations [29].…”

Section: Earlymentioning

confidence: 99%

In the Realm of the Hubble tension $-$ a Review of Solutions

Di Valentino,

Mena,

Pan

et al. 2021

Preprint

178

252

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The simplest ΛCDM model provides a good fit to a large span of cosmological data but harbors large areas of phenomenology and ignorance. With the improvement of the number and the accuracy of observations, discrepancies among key cosmological parameters of the model have emerged. The most statistically significant tension is the 4σ to 6σ disagreement between predictions of the Hubble constant, H 0 , made by the early time probes in concert with the "vanilla" ΛCDM Cosmological model, and a number of late time, model-independent determinations of H 0 from local measurements of distances and redshifts. The high precision and consistency of the data at both ends present strong challenges to the possible solution space and demands a hypothesis with enough rigor to explain multiple observations-whether these invoke new physics, unexpected large-scale structures or multiple, unrelated errors. A thorough review of the problem including a discussion of recent Hubble constant estimates and a summary of the proposed theoretical solutions is presented here. We include more than 850 references, indicating that the interest in this area has grown considerably just during the last few years. We classify the many proposals to resolve the tension in these categories: Early Dark Energy, Late Dark Energy, Dark energy models with 6 degrees of freedom and their extensions, Models with extra relativistic degrees of freedom, Models with Extra Interactions, Unified cosmologies, Modified gravity, Inflationary models, Modified recombination history, Physics of the critical Phenomena, and Alternative proposals. Some are formally successful, improving the fit to the data in light of their additional degrees of freedom, restoring agreement within 1 − 2σ between Planck 2018, using the Cosmic Microwave Background power spectra data, Baryon Acoustic Oscillations, Pantheon SN data, and R20, the latest SH0ES Team [2] measurement of the Hubble constant (H 0 = 73.2 ± 1.3 km s −1 Mpc −1 at 68% confidence level). However, there are many more unsuccessful models which leave the discrepancy well above the 3σ disagreement level. In many cases, reduced tension comes not simply from a change in the value of H 0 but also due to an increase in its uncertainty due to degeneracy with additional physics, complicating the picture and pointing to the need for additional probes. While no specific proposal makes a strong case for being highly likely or far better than all others, solutions involving early or dynamical dark energy, neutrino interactions, interacting cosmologies, primordial magnetic fields, and modified gravity provide the best options until a better alternative comes along.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the consistency of ΛCDM with respect to the early-Universe observations is also manifested in the consistency tests of the early integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect [13] and the sound horizon measured at the matter-radiation equality, recombination, and the end of the drag epoch [14,15] . Apart from some anomalies arisen in the high- [1,16,17] or EE-polarized [18,19] CMB data, the early-Universe observations could, at the very least, achieve a consensus on the Hubble constant H 0 70 km s −1 Mpc −1 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

No-go guide for the Hubble tension : Late-time solutions

Cai,

Guo,

Wang

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Hubble tension, if not caused by any systematics, could be relieved or even resolved from modifying either early-time or late-time Universe. The early-time modifications are usually in tension with either galaxy clustering or galaxy lensing constraints. The late-time modifications are also in conflict with the constraint from the inverse distance ladder, which, however, is weakened by the dependence on a sound-horizon prior and some particular approximation for the late-time expansion history. To achieve a more general no-go argument for the late-time scenarios, we propose to use a global parameterization based on the cosmic age (PAge) to consistently use the cosmic chronometers data beyond the Taylor expansion domain and without the input of a sound-horizon prior. Both the early-time and late-time scenarios are therefore largely ruled out, indicating the possible ways out of the Hubble tension from either exotic modifications of our concordance Universe or some unaccounted systematics.

show abstract

High $H_0$ Values from CMB E-mode Data: A Clue for Resolving the Hubble Tension?

Cited by 5 publications

References 35 publications

Constraints on $Λ$CDM Extensions from the SPT-3G 2018 $EE$ and $TE$ Power Spectra

Constraints on $Λ$CDM Extensions from the SPT-3G 2018 $EE$ and $TE$ Power Spectra

In the Realm of the Hubble tension $-$ a Review of Solutions

No-go guide for the Hubble tension : Late-time solutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About