Paper detail

Cluster counts. II. Tensions, massive neutrinos, and modified gravity

The $Λ$CDM concordance model is very successful at describing our Universe with high accuracy and few parameters. Despite its successes, a few tensions persist; most notably, the best-fit $Λ$CDM model, as derived from the Planck CMB data, largely overpredicts the abundance of SZ clusters when using their standard mass calibration. Whether this is a sign of an incorrect calibration or the need for new physics remains a matter of debate. Here we examined two simple extensions of the standard model and their ability to release this tension: massive neutrinos and a simple modified gravity model via a non-standard growth index $γ$. We used both the Planck CMB and SZ cluster counts as datasets, with or without local X-ray clusters. In the case of massive neutrinos, the SZ calibration $(1-b)$ is constrained to $0.59^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$ (68\%), more than 5$σ$ away from its standard value $\sim0.8$. We found little correlation between $\sum m_ν$ and $(1-b)$, corroborating previous conclusions derived from X-ray clusters; massive neutrinos do not alleviate the cluster-CMB tension. With our simple $γ$ model, we found a large correlation between calibration and growth index but contrary to local X-ray clusters, SZ clusters are able to break the degeneracy between the two thanks to their extended $z$ range. The calibration $(1-b)$ was then constrained to $0.60^{+0.05}_{-0.07}$, leading to an interesting constraint on $γ=0.60\pm 0.13$. When both massive neutrinos and modified gravity were allowed, preferred values remained centred on standard $Λ$CDM values, but $(1-b)\sim0.8$ was allowed (though only at the $2σ$ level) provided $\sum m_ν\sim0.34 $ eV and $γ\sim0.8$. We conclude that massive neutrinos do not relieve the cluster-CMB tension and that a calibration close to the standard value $0.8$ would call for new physics in the gravitational sector.

preprint2019arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.