<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>The Ups and Downs of Early Dark Energy solutions to the Hubble tension: a review of models, hints and constraints circa 2023 · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2302.09032/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2302.09032/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>The Ups and Downs of Early Dark Energy solutions to the Hubble tension: a review of models, hints and constraints circa 2023 — mentioned by astro-cosmo-q</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42503166</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2302.09032:42503166</guid><pubDate>Tue, 24 Dec 2024 17:05:25 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I am certainly not suggesting anything negative about the character or reputation of the authors of the work. I think that work on alternatives to the accepted concordance cosmology model (LCDM) should definitely be explored, and David Wiltshire et al. should pursue this if they deem it promising. As an aside: You may not find this compelling, which is understandable, but I will note that the vast majority of cosmologists (very conservatively 95%) do not question the FLRW aspect of the cosmological concordance model (which is what the paper here does away with in the alternative timescape…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2302.09032/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>astro-ph.CO</category></item></channel></rss>
