http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.02846
We investigate whether the two cosmological discrepancies on the Hubble constant ($H_0$) and the matter fluctuation parameter ($\sigma_8$) could be traded by only one on the present value of the matter density ($\Omega_{\rm{M}}$). We combined different probes in an agnostic approach by, either relaxing the calibration parameters in each probe in order to be set by the data, or by only including priors with the condition that they are obtained independently from the discrepant parameters. We also compiled and used a dataset from previous direct measurements of $\Omega_{\rm{M}}$. We found when combining, as our baseline, galaxy clusters counts + cluster baryon fraction probe + cosmic chronometers + direct $\Omega_{\rm{M}}$ + priors from BBN and CMB, that both parameters, $H_0$ and $\sigma_8$, are consistent with those inferred with local probes, with $\sigma_8 = 0.745 \pm 0.05$ while $H_0 = 73.8 \pm 3.01$, and that for a value of $\Omega_{\rm{M}} = 0.22 \pm 0.01$ at more than 3$\sigma$ from that usually determined by CMB. We also found similar preferences when replacing cosmic chronometers (CC) by the Supernovae (SN) data while allowing its calibration parameter to vary. However discrepancies appeared when we combined SN in addition to CC suggesting either inconsistencies between the SN sample and the other probes used or a serious challenge to our hypothesis. We conclude that, either reconciling both tensions requires local inferred values of matter density at odd with those obtained by CMB, reviving by then an overlooked discrepancy, or simply that further evidences are indicating that $\Lambda$CDM model is facing more difficulties to accommodate simultaneously all the current available observations.(abridged)
Z. Sakr
Fri, 5 May 23
33/67
Comments: Comments and missing citation requests are welcomed. Abstract abridged for arxiv submission
You must be logged in to post a comment.