Cosmological Solutions to the Lithium Problem
G.J. Mathews, A. Kedia, N. Sasankan, M. Kusakabe, Y. Luo, T. Kajino,, D.G. Yamazaki, T. Makki, M. El Eid

TL;DR
This paper reviews various cosmological solutions to the primordial lithium abundance discrepancy, analyzing their potential and limitations, and concludes that current models cannot fully resolve the lithium problem.
Contribution
It provides a comprehensive overview of proposed cosmological models addressing the lithium problem and evaluates their effectiveness and shortcomings.
Findings
Modified particle velocity distributions are insufficient to solve the lithium problem.
Inhomogeneous magnetic fields and altered baryon distributions do not adequately resolve the discrepancy.
Hybrid models involving neutrino degeneracy, dark matter, axions, or supersymmetric particles face significant challenges.
Abstract
The abundance of primordial lithium is derived from the observed spectroscopy of metal-poor stars in the galactic halo. However, the observationally inferred abundance remains at about a factor of three below the abundance predicted by standard big bang nucleosynthesis (BBN). The resolution of this dilemma can be either astrophysical (stars destroy lithium after BBN), nuclear (reactions destroy lithium during BBN), or cosmological, i.e. new physics beyond the standard BBN is responsible for destroying lithium. Here, we overview a variety of possible cosmological solutions, and their shortcomings. On the one hand, we examine the possibility of physical processes that modify the velocity distribution of particles from the usually assumed Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics. A physical justification for this is an inhomogeneous spatial distribution of domains of primordial magnetic field strength…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
