AG-2024.07-510·astro-ph.CO·cross-listed: gr-qchep-phhep-th
Neutrino cosmology after DESI: tightest mass upper limits, preference for the normal ordering, and tension with terrestrial observations
Authors
- Jun-Qian Jiang
- William Giarè
- Stefano Gariazzo
- Maria Giovanna Dainotti
- Eleonora Di Valentino
- Olga Mena
- Davide Pedrotti
- Simony Santos da Costa
- Sunny Vagnozzi
Abstract
The recent DESI Baryon Acoustic Oscillation measurements have led to tight upper limits on the neutrino mass sum, potentially in tension with oscillation constraints requiring $\sum m_ν \gtrsim 0.06\,{\text{eV}}$. Under the physically motivated assumption of positive $\sum m_ν$, we study the extent to which these limits are tightened by adding other available cosmological probes, and robustly quantify the preference for the normal mass ordering over the inverted one, as well as the tension between cosmological and terrestrial data. Combining DESI data with Cosmic Microwave Background measurements and several late-time background probes, the tightest $2σ$ limit we find without including a local $H_0$ prior is $\sum m_ν<0.05\,{\text{eV}}$. This leads to a strong preference for the normal ordering, with Bayes factor relative to the inverted one of $46.5$. Depending on the dataset combination and tension metric adopted, we quantify the tension between cosmological and terrestrial observations as ranging between $2.5σ$ and $5σ$. These results are strenghtened when allowing for a time-varying dark energy component with equation of state lying in the physically motivated non-phantom regime, $w(z) \geq -1$, highlighting an interesting synergy between the nature of dark energy and laboratory probes of the mass ordering. If these tensions persist and cannot be attributed to systematics, either or both standard neutrino (particle) physics or the underlying cosmological model will have to be questioned.
Submitted
25 July 20241 year ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2407.18047
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.