- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Constraining fifth forces using the local distance ladder: Implications for the Hubble tension

Marcus Högås1,2,*, Edvard Mörtsell1,†, Harry Desmond3,‡, and Adam Riess4,5,§

  • *Contact author: marcus.hogas@fysik.su.se
  • †Contact author: edvard@fysik.su.se
  • ‡Contact author: harry.desmond@port.ac.uk
  • §Contact author: ariess@stsci.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 023519 – Published 7 July, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/j4yp-9m6h

Abstract

We revisit the local distance ladder measurement of the Hubble constant in models where gravity is modified by a fifth force, an additional long-range interaction. In many such theories the force is screened—suppressed in dense environments but potentially active in galaxies used for distance calibration. We model this environmental dependence using three quantities that characterize each galaxy’s large-scale gravitational environment: the external gravitational potential Φ, acceleration a, and curvature K. Our baseline analysis recalibrates the SH0ES-team’s Cepheid-supernova distance ladder, incorporating the fifth force via its impact on the Cepheid period-luminosity relation. Across models, a fifth force is strongly constrained, with posteriors concentrated around a null result. The inferred Hubble constant is H0=73.1±1.0  km/s/Mpc, retaining the Hubble tension at >5σ. As an additional test, we incorporate four independent Tip of the Red Giant Branch (TRGB) distance datasets into a joint Cepheid-TRGB-supernova calibration. These combined analyses further constrain the magnitude of fifth-force effects. Taken together, our results show that, across the class of screened fifth-force models we analyze, the calibration of the local distance ladder remains essentially unchanged, leaving the Hubble tension intact.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (62)

  1. N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi, M. Ballardini, A. J. Banday, R. B. Barreiro, N. Bartolo et al., Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020).
  2. A. G. Riess et al., Astrophys. J. Lett. 934, L7 (2022).
  3. S. Casertano et al. (H0DN Collaboration), arXiv:2510.23823.
  4. H. Desmond, B. Jain, and J. Sakstein, Phys. Rev. D 100, 043537 (2019).
  5. J. Sakstein, H. Desmond, and B. Jain, Phys. Rev. D 100, 104035 (2019).
  6. H. Desmond and J. Sakstein, Phys. Rev. D 102, 023007 (2020).
  7. M. Högås and E. Mörtsell, Phys. Rev. D 108, 024007 (2023).
  8. M. Högås and E. Mörtsell, Phys. Rev. D 108, 124050 (2023).
  9. A. G. Riess et al., Astrophys. J. 699, 539 (2009).
  10. A. G. Riess, L. Macri, S. Casertano, H. Lampeitl, H. C. Ferguson, A. V. Filippenko, S. W. Jha, W. Li, and R. Chornock, Astrophys. J. 730, 119 (2011); 732, 129(E) (2011).
  11. A. G. Riess et al., Astrophys. J. 826, 56 (2016).
  12. C. M. Will, Living Rev. Relativity 17, 4 (2014).
  13. J. Khoury, arXiv:1312.2006.
  14. A. Joyce, B. Jain, J. Khoury, and M. Trodden, Phys. Rep. 568, 1 (2015).
  15. P. Brax, S. Casas, H. Desmond, and B. Elder, Universe 8, 11 (2021).
  16. T. Clifton, P. G. Ferreira, A. Padilla, and C. Skordis, Phys. Rep. 513, 1 (2012).
  17. T. Baker, A. Barreira, H. Desmond, P. Ferreira, B. Jain, K. Koyama, B. Li, L. Lombriser, A. Nicola, J. Sakstein, and F. Schmidt, arXiv:1908.03430.
  18. H. Desmond, P. G. Ferreira, G. Lavaux, and J. Jasche, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 474, 3152 (2017).
  19. G. Lavaux and J. Jasche, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 455, 3169 (2016).
  20. J. Jasche and G. Lavaux, Astron. Astrophys. 625, A64 (2019).
  21. Marcus Högås, Distance Ladder Fifth Force, https://github.com/marcushogas/Distance-Ladder-Fifth-Force (2025), GitHub repository.
  22. Pantheon+ Collaboration, Pantheon+ data release, https://github.com/PantheonPlusSH0ES/DataRelease (2022), GitHub repository, accessed 2025-10-31.
  23. M. Högås and E. Mörtsell, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 538, 883 (2025).
  24. Marcus Högås, Cepheid Distance Ladder Data, https://github.com/marcushogas/Cepheid-Distance-Ladder-Data (2024), GitHub repository.
  25. A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, J. B. Bowers, L. Macri, J. C. Zinn, and D. Scolnic, Astrophys. J. 908, L6 (2021).
  26. G. Pietrzyński, D. Graczyk, A. Gallenne, W. Gieren, I. B. Thompson, B. Pilecki, P. Karczmarek, M. Górski, K. Suchomska, M. Taormina et al., Nature (London) 567, 200 (2019).
  27. M. J. Reid, D. W. Pesce, and A. G. Riess, Astrophys. J. 886, L27 (2019).
  28. H. S. Leavitt, Ann. Harv. Coll. Obs. 60, 87 (1907).
  29. H. S. Leavitt and E. C. Pickering, Harv. Obs. Circ. 173, 1 (1912).
  30. B. F. Madore and W. L. Freedman, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 103, 933 (1991).
  31. D. Scolnic et al., Astrophys. J. 938, 113 (2022).
  32. W. L. Freedman, B. F. Madore, D. Hatt, T. J. Hoyt, I. S. Jang, R. L. Beaton, C. R. Burns, M. G. Lee, A. J. Monson, J. R. Neeley et al., Astrophys. J. 882, 34 (2019).
  33. W. L. Freedman, B. F. Madore, T. J. Hoyt, I. S. Jang, A. J. Lee, and K. A. Owens, Astrophys. J. 985, 203 (2025).
  34. G. S. Anand, R. B. Tully, L. Rizzi, A. G. Riess, and W. Yuan, Astrophys. J. 932, 15 (2022).
  35. S. Li, G. S. Anand, A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, L. Breuval, L. M. Macri, D. Scolnic, R. Beaton, and R. I. Anderson, Astrophys. J. 976, 177 (2024).
  36. H. Desmond, B. Jain, and J. Sakstein, Phys. Rev. D 101, 129901 (2020).
  37. B. S. Wright and B. Li, Phys. Rev. D 97, 083505 (2018).
  38. Ruchika, H. Rathore, S. Roy Choudhury, and V. Rentala, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2024) 056.
  39. R. I. Anderson, H. Saio, S. Ekström, C. Georgy, and G. Meynet, Astron. Astrophys. 591, A8 (2016).
  40. M. Högås and E. Mörtsell, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 548, stag791 (2026).
  41. D. Foreman-Mackey, D. W. Hogg, D. Lang, and J. Goodman, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 125, 306 (2013).
  42. A. E. Raftery, Sociol. Methodol. 25, 111 (1995).
  43. H. Desmond, J. Sakstein, and B. Jain, Phys. Rev. D 103, 024028 (2021).
  44. W. Hu and I. Sawicki, Phys. Rev. D 76, 064004 (2007).
  45. H. Desmond and P. G. Ferreira, Phys. Rev. D 102, 104060 (2020).
  46. R. G. Landim, H. Desmond, K. Koyama, and S. Penny, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 534, 349 (2024).
  47. L. Berezhiani, J. Khoury, and J. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 95, 123530 (2017).
  48. A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, J. Anderson, J. Mackenty, and A. V. Filippenko, Astrophys. J. 785, 161 (2014).
  49. A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, L. Macri, J. Anderson, J. W. MacKenty, J. B. Bowers, K. I. Clubb, A. V. Filippenko, D. O. Jones, and B. E. Tucker, Astrophys. J. 855, 136 (2018).
  50. A. G. Riess et al., Astrophys. J. 861, 126 (2018).
  51. D. Kato et al., Publ. Astron. Soc. Jpn. 59, 615 (2007).
  52. I. Soszynski, R. Poleski, A. Udalski, M. K. Szymanski, M. Kubiak, G. Pietrzynski, L. Wyrzykowski, O. Szewczyk, and K. Ulaczyk, Acta Astronaut. 58, 163 (2008).
  53. L. M. Macri, C.-C. Ngeow, S. M. Kanbur, S. Mahzooni, and M. T. Smitka, Astron. J. 149, 117 (2015).
  54. M. Kodric, A. Riffeser, S. Seitz, U. Hopp, J. Snigula, C. Goessl, J. Koppenhoefer, and R. Bender, Astrophys. J. 864, 59 (2018).
  55. A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, L. M. Macri, and D. Scolnic, Astrophys. J. 876, 85 (2019).
  56. S. Li, A. G. Riess, M. P. Busch, S. Casertano, L. M. Macri, and W. Yuan, Astrophys. J. 920, 84 (2021).
  57. A. G. Riess, G. Narayan, and A. Calamida, Calibration of the WFC3-IR count-rate nonlinearity, sub-percent accuracy for a factor of a million in flux, Space Telescope WFC Instrument Science Report (2019), https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019wfc..rept....1R.
  58. M. Romaniello, F. Primas, M. Mottini, S. Pedicelli, B. Lemasle, G. Bono, P. Francois, M. A. T. Groenewegen, and C. D. Laney, Astron. Astrophys. 488, 731 (2008).
  59. M. A. T. Groenewegen, Astron. Astrophys. 619, A8 (2018).
  60. M. Romaniello, A. Riess, S. Mancino, R. I. Anderson, W. Freudling, R.-P. Kudritzki, L. Macrì, A. Mucciarelli, and W. Yuan, Astron. Astrophys. 658, A29 (2022); 662, C1(E) (2022).
  61. H. Desmond, R. Stiskalek, J. A. Najera, and I. Banik, arXiv:2511.03394.
  62. M. Högås and E. Mörtsell, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 548, stag724 (2026).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 023519– Published 7 July, 2026
  • Received 24 January 2026
  • Accepted 5 June 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by Bibsam.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation