Paper detail

Non-Extensive Statistics, New Solution to the Cosmological Lithium Problem

In the primordial Big Bang nucleosynthesis (BBN), only the lightest nuclides (D, $^3$He, $^4$He, and $^7$Li) were synthesized in appreciable quantities, and these relics provide us a unique window on the early universe. Currently, BBN simulations give acceptable agreement between theoretical and observed abundances of D and $^4$He, but it is still difficult to reconcile the predicted $^7$Li abundance with the observation for the Galactic halo stars. The BBN model overestimates the primordial $^7$Li abundance by about a factor of three, so called the cosmological lithium problem, a long-lasting pending issue in BBN. Great efforts have been paid in the past decades, however, the conventional nuclear physics seems unable to resolve such problem. It is well-known that the classical Maxwell-Boltzmann (MB) velocity distribution has been usually assumed for nuclei in the Big-Bang plasma. In this work, we have thoroughly investigated the impact of non-extensive Tsallis statistics (deviating from the MB) on thermonuclear reaction rates involved in standard models of BBN. It shows that the predicted primordial abundances of D, $^4$He, and $^7$Li agree very well with those observed ones by introducing a non-extensive parameter $q$. It is discovered that the velocities of nuclei in a hot Big-Bang plasma indeed violate the classical Maxwell-Boltzmann (MB) distribution in a very small deviation of about 6.3--8.2%. Thus, we have for the first time found a new solution to the cosmological lithium problem without introducing any mysterious theories. Furthermore, the implications of non-extensive statistics in other exotic high-temperature and density astrophysical environments should be explored, which might offer new insight into the nucleosynthesis of heavy elements.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.