Seven hints that early-time new physics alone is not sufficient to solve the Hubble tension
Sunny Vagnozzi

TL;DR
This paper argues that early-time new physics alone cannot resolve the Hubble tension, based on seven independent hints, and suggests combining early- and late-time modifications for a viable solution.
Contribution
It presents seven independent reasons why early-time modifications are insufficient and advocates for a combined approach involving both early- and late-time new physics.
Findings
Early-time physics alone cannot fully resolve the Hubble tension.
Multiple independent hints support the need for combined early- and late-time solutions.
A combined approach may also address the $S_8$ tension.
Abstract
The Hubble tension has now grown to a level of significance which can no longer be ignored and calls for a solution which, despite a huge number of attempts, has so far eluded us. Significant efforts in the literature have focused on early-time modifications of CDM, introducing new physics operating prior to recombination and reducing the sound horizon. In this opinion paper I argue that early-time new physics alone will always fall short of fully solving the Hubble tension. I base my arguments on seven independent hints, related to 1) the ages of the oldest astrophysical objects, 2) considerations on the sound horizon-Hubble constant degeneracy directions in cosmological data, 3) the important role of cosmic chronometers, 4) a number of ``descending trends'' observed in a wide variety of low-redshift datasets, 5) the early integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect as an early-time…
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.
