One indicates that new physics in the dark sector at the two scales, the eV scale and a ULA scale, close to those inherent in the Cold NEDE solution to the Hubble tension, could be required by eBOSS Lyman-alpha data https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.16377.
And one that constrains a corner of NEDE parameter space in more detail from the microphysics of the phase transition https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.16222, emphasizing the requirement of a fast phase transition.
The ESA Euclid experiment will map around a billion galaxies in the next six years and give us new insights into the properties of Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Today, Euclid released its first pictures: Euclid’s first images.
Not all approaches to the Hubble tension are equally good or bad. Some recent discussion seems to ignore the fact that early-time approaches like New Early Dark Energy also fit the CMB better than Lambda-CDM independent of the Hubble tension ( https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.08895 ).
Nice informative result in today’s paper; the old Early Dark Energy model struggles to address the S8 tension (https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.00401). This singles out New Early Dark Energy, a triggered phase transition in the dark sector, as a possible minimal resolution to both the H0 and the S8 tensions — see f.ex. https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.08895.
Quote from today’s review of the local H0 measurements: JWST “observations provide the strongest evidence yet that systematic errors in HST Cepheid photometry do not play a significant role in the present Hubble Tension”: https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.10954
Groningen group with a new paper *not* finding evidence of unknown systematics being the source of the Hubble tension. This further strengthens the case for early times (pre-recombination) new physics, like New Early Dark Energy (NEDE): https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.05157