Paper detail

Viability of the matter bounce scenario in Loop Quantum Cosmology from BICEP2 last data

The CMB map provided by the Planck project constrains the value of the ratio of tensor-to-scalar perturbations, namely $r$, to be smaller than $0.11$ (95% CL). This bound rules out the simplest models of inflation. However, recent data from BICEP2 is in strong tension with this constrain, as it finds a value $r=0.20^{+0.07}_{-0.05}$ with $r=0$ disfavored at $7.0 σ$, which allows these simplest inflationary models to survive. The remarkable fact is that, even though the BICEP2 experiment was conceived to search for evidence of inflation, its experimental data matches correctly theoretical results coming from the matter bounce scenario (the alternative model to the inflationary paradigm). More precisely, most bouncing cosmologies do not pass Planck's constrains due to the smallness of the value of the tensor/scalar ratio $r\leq 0.11$, but with new BICEP2 data some of them fit well with experimental data. This is the case with the matter bounce scenario in the teleparallel version of Loop Quantum Cosmology.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.