AG-2025.10-042·astro-ph.CO·cross-listed: gr-qchep-ph
BAO miscalibration cannot rescue late-time solutions to the Hubble tension
Authors
- Davide Pedrotti
- Luis A. Escamilla
- Valerio Marra
- Leandros Perivolaropoulos
- Sunny Vagnozzi
Abstract
Baryon Acoustic Oscillation (BAO) measurements play a key role in ruling out post-recombination solutions to the Hubble tension. However, because the data compression leading to these measurements assumes a fiducial $Λ$CDM cosmology, their reliability in testing late-time modifications to $Λ$CDM has at times been called into question. We play devil's advocate and posit that fiducial cosmology assumptions do indeed affect BAO measurements in such a way that low-redshift acoustic angular scales (proportional to the Hubble constant $H_0$) are biased low, and test whether such a rescaling can rescue post-recombination solutions. The answer is no. Firstly, strong constraints on the shape of the $z \lesssim 2$ expansion history from unanchored Type Ia Supernovae (SNeIa) prevent large deviations from $Λ$CDM. In addition, unless $Ω_m$ is significantly lower than $0.3$, the rescaled BAO measurements would be in strong tension with geometrical information from the Cosmic Microwave Background. We demonstrate this explicitly on several dark energy (DE) models ($w$CDM, CPL DE, phenomenologically emergent DE, holographic DE, $Λ_s$CDM, and the negative cosmological constant model), finding that none can address the Hubble tension once unanchored SNeIa are included. We argue that the $Λ_s$CDM sign-switching cosmological constant model possesses interesting features which make it the least unpromising one among those tested. Our results demonstrate that possible fiducial cosmology-induced BAO biases cannot be invoked as loopholes to the Hubble tension "no-go theorem", and highlight the extremely important but so far underappreciated role of unanchored SNeIa in ruling out post-recombination solutions.
Submitted
2 October 20256 months ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2510.01974
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.