- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

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
  • Letter
  • Open Access

5σ tension between Planck cosmic microwave background and eBOSS Lyman-alpha forest and constraints on physics beyond ΛCDM

Keir K. Rogers1,2,* and Vivian Poulin3,†

  • *Contact author: k.rogers24@imperial.ac.uk
  • †Contact author: vivian.poulin@umontpellier.fr
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 7, L012018 – Published 22 January, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.L012018

Abstract

We find that combined Planck cosmic microwave background, baryon acoustic oscillations, and supernovae data analyzed under Λ cold dark matter (ΛCDM) are in 4.9σ tension with the extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (eBOSS) Lyα forest in inference of the linear matter power spectrum at wave number ∼1hMpc−1 and redshift = 3. Model extensions can alleviate this tension: running in the tilt of the primordial power spectrum (αs∼−0.01); a fraction ∼(1−5)% of ultralight axion dark matter (DM) with particle mass ∼10−25 eV or warm DM with mass ∼10 eV. The new Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument survey, coupled with high-accuracy modeling, will help distinguish the source of this discrepancy.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (68)

  1. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron. Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)].
  2. R. L. Workman and Others (Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022, 083C01 (2022).
  3. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results, V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A5 (2020).
  4. M. S. Madhavacheril et al. (ACT Collaboration), The atacama cosmology telescope: DR6 gravitational lensing map and cosmological parameters, Astrophys. J. 962, 113 (2024).
  5. L. Balkenhol, D. Dutcher, A. Spurio Mancini, A. Doussot, K. Benabed, S. Galli, P. A. R. Ade, A. J. Anderson, B. Ansarinejad, M. Archipley, A. N. Bender, B. A. Benson, F. Bianchini, L. E. Bleem, F. R. Bouchet, L. Bryant, E. Camphuis, J. E. Carlstrom, T. W. Cecil, C. L. Chang et al. (SPT-3G Collaboration), Measurement of the CMB temperature power spectrum and constraints on cosmology from the SPT-3G 2018 II, TE, and EE dataset, Phys. Rev. D 108, 023510 (2023).
  6. J. E. Bautista et al., The Completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: measurement of the BAO and growth rate of structure of the luminous red galaxy sample from the anisotropic correlation function between redshifts 0.6 and 1, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 500, 736 (2020).
  7. D. Brout et al., The Pantheon+ analysis: Cosmological constraints, Astrophys. J. 938, 110 (2022).
  8. A. G. Riess et al., A comprehensive measurement of the local value of the Hubble constant with 1kms−1Mpc−1 uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SHOES Team, Astrophys. J. Lett. 934, L7 (2022).
  9. T. M. C. Abbott et al. (DES Collaboration), Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing, Phys. Rev. D 105, 023520 (2022).
  10. C. Heymans et al., KiDS-1000 Cosmology: Multi-probe weak gravitational lensing and spectroscopic galaxy clustering constraints, Astron. Astrophys. 646, A140 (2021).
  11. K. K. Rogers, R. Hložek, A. Laguë, M. M. Ivanov, O. H. E. Philcox, G. Cabass, K. Akitsu, and D. J. E. Marsh, Ultra-light axions and the S8 tension: Joint constraints from the cosmic microwave background and galaxy clustering, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2023) 023.
  12. R. Murgia, S. Gariazzo, and N. Fornengo, Constraints on the coupling between dark energy and dark matter from CMB data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2016) 014.
  13. M. Lucca, Dark energy–dark matter interactions as a solution to the S8 tension, Phys. Dark Univ. 34, 100899 (2021).
  14. V. Poulin, J. L. Bernal, E. D. Kovetz, and M. Kamionkowski, Sigma-8 tension is a drag, Phys. Rev. D 107, 123538 (2023).
  15. K. Enqvist, S. Nadathur, T. Sekiguchi, and T. Takahashi, Decaying dark matter and the tension in σ8, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2015) 067..
  16. K. L. Pandey, T. Karwal, and S. Das, Alleviating the H0 and σ8 anomalies with a decaying dark matter model, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2020) 026.
  17. G. F. Abellán, R. Murgia, V. Poulin, and J. Lavalle, Implications of the S8 tension for decaying dark matter with warm decay products, Phys. Rev. D 105, 063525 (2022).
  18. G. F. Abellán, R. Murgia, and V. Poulin, Linear cosmological constraints on two-body decaying dark matter scenarios and the S8 tension, Phys. Rev. D 104, 123533 (2021).
  19. T. Simon, G. F. Abellán, P. Du, V. Poulin, and Y. Tsai, Constraining decaying dark matter with BOSS data and the effective field theory of large-scale structures, Phys. Rev. D 106, 023516 (2022).
  20. A. Amon and G. Efstathiou, A non-linear solution to the S8 tension? Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 516, 5355 (2022).
  21. G. Aricò, R. E. Angulo, M. Zennaro, S. Contreras, A. Chen, and C. Hernández-Monteagudo, DES Y3 cosmic shear down to small scales: Constraints on cosmology and baryons, Astron. Astrophys. 678, A109 (2023).
  22. S. Chabanier, M. Millea, and N. Palanque-Delabrouille, Matter power spectrum: From Lyα forest to CMB scales, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 489, 2247 (2019).
  23. Z. Lukić, C. W. Stark, P. Nugent, M. White, A. A. Meiksin, and A. Almgren, The Lyman-α forest in optically thin hydrodynamical simulations, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 446, 3697 (2015).
  24. B. W. Lyke et al., The sloan digital sky survey quasar catalog: Sixteenth data release, Astrophys. J. Suppl. 250, 8 (2020).
  25. S. Chabanier et al., The one-dimensional power spectrum from the SDSS DR14 Lyα forests, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2019) 017.
  26. A. Borde, N. Palanque-Delabrouille, G. Rossi, M. Viel, J. S. Bolton, C. Yèche, J.-M. LeGoff, and J. Rich, New approach for precise computation of Lyman-α forest power spectrum with hydrodynamical simulations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2014) 005.
  27. N. Palanque-Delabrouille, C. Yèche, N. Schöneberg, J. Lesgourgues, M. Walther, S. Chabanier, and E. Armengaud, Hints, neutrino bounds and WDM constraints from SDSS DR14 Lyman-α and Planck full-survey data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2020) 038.
  28. C. Pedersen, A. Font-Ribera, K. K. Rogers, P. McDonald, H. V. Peiris, A. Pontzen, and A. Slosar, An emulator for the Lyman-α forest in beyond-ΛCDM cosmologies, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2021) 033.
  29. C. Pedersen, A. Font-Ribera, T. D. Kitching, P. McDonald, S. Bird, A. Slosar, K. K. Rogers, and A. Pontzen, Massive neutrinos and degeneracies in Lyman-alpha forest simulations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2020) 025.
  30. C. Pedersen, A. Font-Ribera, and N. Y. Gnedin, Compressing the cosmological information in one-dimensional correlations of the Lyα forest, Astrophys. J. 944, 223 (2023).
  31. P. McDonald, J. Miralda-Escudé, M. Rauch, W. L. W. Sargent, T. A. Barlow, R. Cen, and J. P. Ostriker, The observed probability distribution function, power spectrum, and correlation function of the transmitted flux in the Ly-alpha forest*, Astrophys. J. 543, 1 (2000).
  32. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.L012018 for details of the likelihoods, analysis details and full sets of marginalized posteriors.
  33. S. Goldstein, J. C. Hill, V. Iršič, and B. D. Sherwin, Canonical Hubble-tension-resolving early dark energy cosmologies are inconsistent with the Lyman-α forest, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 201001 (2023).
  34. S. Alam et al. (BOSS Collaboration), The clustering of galaxies in the completed SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Cosmological analysis of the DR12 galaxy sample, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 470, 2617 (2017).
  35. F. Beutler, C. Blake, M. Colless, D. H. Jones, L. Staveley-Smith, L. Campbell, Q. Parker, W. Saunders, and F. Watson, The 6dF Galaxy Survey: Baryon acoustic oscillations and the local Hubble constant, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 416, 3017 (2011).
  36. A. J. Ross, L. Samushia, C. Howlett, W. J. Percival, A. Burden, and M. Manera, The clustering of the SDSS DR7 main Galaxy sample–I. A 4 per cent distance measure at z=0.15, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 449, 835 (2015).
  37. V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, D. Grin, T. Karwal, and M. Kamionkowski, Cosmological implications of ultralight axionlike fields, Phys. Rev. D 98, 083525 (2018).
  38. T. L. Smith, V. Poulin, and M. A. Amin, Oscillating scalar fields and the Hubble tension: A resolution with novel signatures, Phys. Rev. D 101, 063523 (2020).
  39. M. Raveri and C. Doux, Non-Gaussian estimates of tensions in cosmological parameters, Phys. Rev. D 104, 043504 (2021).
  40. K. K. Rogers, S. Bird, H. V. Peiris, A. Pontzen, A. Font-Ribera, and B. Leistedt, Simulating the effect of high column density absorbers on the one-dimensional Lyman α forest flux power spectrum, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 474, 3032 (2018).
  41. K. K. Rogers, S. Bird, H. V. Peiris, A. Pontzen, A. Font-Ribera, and B. Leistedt, Correlations in the three-dimensional Lyman-alpha forest contaminated by high column density absorbers, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 476, 3716 (2018).
  42. M. Vogelsberger, S. Genel, V. Springel, P. Torrey, D. Sijacki, D. Xu, G. F. Snyder, S. Bird, D. Nelson, and L. Hernquist, Properties of galaxies reproduced by a hydrodynamic simulation, Nature (London) 509, 177 (2014).
  43. S. Bird, M. Vogelsberger, M. Haehnelt, D. Sijacki, S. Genel, P. Torrey, V. Springel, and L. Hernquist, Damped Lyman-α absorbers as a probe of stellar feedback, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 445, 2313 (2014).
  44. S. Chabanier, F. Bournaud, Y. Dubois, N. Palanque-Delabrouille, C. Yèche, E. Armengaud, S. Peirani, and R. Beckmann, The impact of AGN feedback on the 1D power spectra from the Ly-α forest using the Horizon-AGN suite of simulations, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 495, 1825 (2020).
  45. Y. Dubois, S. Peirani, C. Pichon, J. Devriendt, R. Gavazzi, C. Welker, and M. Volonteri, The Horizon-AGN simulation: Morphological diversity of galaxies promoted by AGN feedback, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 463, 3948 (2016).
  46. P. F. Hopkins et al., FIRE-2 simulations: Physics versus numerics in galaxy formation, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 480, 800 (2018).
  47. M. A. Fernandez, S. Bird, and M.-F. Ho, Cosmological constraints from the eBOSS Lyman-α Forest using the PRIYA simulations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2024) 029.
  48. S. Bird, M. Fernandez, M.-F. Ho, M. Qezlou, R. Monadi, Y. Ni, N. Chen, R. Croft, and T. Di Matteo, PRIYA: A new suite of Lyman-α forest simulations for cosmology, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2023) 037.
  49. P. Gaikwad, R. Srianand, M. G. Haehnelt, and T. R. Choudhury, A consistent and robust measurement of the thermal state of the IGM at 2 ≤ z ≤ 4 from a large sample of Ly α forest spectra: Evidence for late and rapid He II reionization, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 506, 4389 (2021).
  50. M. Walther, N. Schöneberg, S. Chabanier, E. Armengaud, J. Sexton, C. Yèche, J. Lesgourgues, M. R. Mosbech, C. Ravoux, N. Palanque-Delabrouille, and Z. Lukić, Emulating the Lyman-alpha forest 1D power spectrum from cosmological simulations: New models and constraints from the eBOSS measurement, arXiv:2412.05372.
  51. C. Ramirez-Perez et al. (DESI Collaboration), The Lyman-α forest catalog from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument Early Data Release, arXiv:2306.06312.
  52. A. Abate et al. (LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration), Large synoptic survey telescope: Dark energy science collaboration, arXiv:1211.0310.
  53. P. Ade et al. (Simons Observatory Collaboration), The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2019) 056.
  54. M. Archidiacono, D. C. Hooper, R. Murgia, S. Bohr, J. Lesgourgues, and M. Viel, Constraining dark matter-dark radiation interactions with CMB, BAO, and Lyman-α, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2019) 055.
  55. E. Boera, G. D. Becker, J. S. Bolton, and F. Nasir, Revealing reionization with the thermal history of the intergalactic medium: New constraints from the Lyα flux power spectrum, Astrophys. J. 872, 101 (2019).
  56. A. Day, D. Tytler, and B. Kambalur, Power spectrum of the flux in the Lyman-alpha forest from high-resolution spectra of 87 QSOs, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 489, 2536 (2019).
  57. N. G. Karaçaylı et al., Optimal 1D Ly α forest power spectrum estimation–II. KODIAQ, SQUAD, and XQ-100, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 509, 2842 (2021).
  58. V. Iršič et al., The Lyman α forest power spectrum from the XQ-100 Legacy Survey, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 466, 4332 (2017).
  59. K. K. Rogers and H. V. Peiris, Strong bound on canonical ultralight axion dark matter from the Lyman-alpha forest, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 071302 (2021).
  60. K. K. Rogers, C. Dvorkin, and H. V. Peiris, Limits on the light dark matter–proton cross section from cosmic large-scale structure, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 171301 (2022).
  61. K. K. Rogers and H. V. Peiris, General framework for cosmological dark matter bounds using N-body simulations, Phys. Rev. D 103, 043526 (2021).
  62. E. O. Nadler et al. (DES Collaboration), Milky way satellite census. III. Constraints on dark matter properties from observations of Milky Way satellite galaxies, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 091101 (2021).
  63. W. Enzi et al., Joint constraints on thermal relic dark matter from strong gravitational lensing, the Ly α forest, and Milky Way satellites, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 506, 5848 (2021).
  64. N. Banik, J. Bovy, G. Bertone, D. Erkal, and T. J. L. de Boer, Novel constraints on the particle nature of dark matter from stellar streams, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2021) 043.
  65. D. C. Hooper and M. Lucca, Hints of dark matter-neutrino interactions in Lyman-α data, Phys. Rev. D 105, 103504 (2022).
  66. D. C. Hooper, N. Schöneberg, R. Murgia, M. Archidiacono, J. Lesgourgues, and M. Viel, One likelihood to bind them all: Lyman-α constraints on non-standard dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2022) 032.
  67. M. Esposito, V. Iršič, M. Costanzi, S. Borgani, A. Saro, and M. Viel, Weighing cosmic structures with clusters of galaxies and the intergalactic medium, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 515, 857 (2022).
  68. L. E. Bleem, B. Stalder, T. de Haan, K. A. Aird, S. W. Allen, D. E. Applegate, M. L. N. Ashby, M. Bautz, M. Bayliss, B. A. Benson, S. Bocquet, M. Brodwin, J. E. Carlstrom, C. L. Chang, I. Chiu, H. M. Cho, A. Clocchiatti, T. M. Crawford, A. T. Crites, S. Desai et al., Galaxy clusters discovered via the Sunyaev–Zel'dovich effect in the 2500-square-degree SPT-SZ survey, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 216, 27 (2015).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 7, L012018– Published 22 January, 2025
  • Received 4 January 2024
  • Accepted 14 January 2025
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.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation