A response to Rubin & Heitlauf: "Is the expansion of the universe accelerating? All signs still point to yes"

(2019)

Authors:

Jacques Colin, Roya Mohayaee, Mohamed Rameez, Subir Sarkar

A CMB Millikan Experiment with Cosmic Axiverse Strings

(2019)

Authors:

Prateek Agrawal, Anson Hook, Junwu Huang

NLO QCD predictions for tt¯bb¯¯ production in association with a light jet at the LHC

Journal of High Energy Physics Springer Verlag 2019:12 (2019) 15

Authors:

Federico Buccioni, S Kallweit, S Pozzorini, MF Zoller

Abstract:

Theoretical predictions for tt¯bb¯¯ production are of crucial importance for tt¯ H measurements in the H → b b¯¯ channel at the LHC. To address the large uncertainties associated with the modelling of extra QCD radiation in tt¯ bb¯¯ events, in this paper we present a calculation of pp → tt¯ bb¯¯ j at NLO QCD. The behaviour of NLO corrections is analysed in a variety of observables, and to assess theoretical uncertainties we use factor- two rescalings as well as different dynamic scales. In this context, we propose a systematic alignment of dynamic scales that makes it possible to disentangle normalisation and shape uncertainties in a transparent way. Scale uncertainties at NLO are typically at the level of 20–30% in integrated cross sections, and below 10% for the shapes of distributions. The kinematics of QCD radiation is investigated in detail, including the effects of its recoil on the objects of the tt¯ bb¯¯ system. In particular, we discuss various azimuthal correlations that allow one to characterise the QCD recoil pattern in a precise and transparent way. In general, the calculation at hand provides a variety of precise benchmarks that can be used to validate the modelling of QCD radiation in tt¯bb¯¯ generators. Moreover, as we will argue, pp → tt¯bb¯¯ j at NLO entails information that can be used to gain insights into the perturbative convergence of the inclusive tt¯bb¯¯ cross section beyond NLO. Based on this idea, we address the issue of the large NLO K-factor observed in σtt¯bb¯, and we provide evidence that supports the reduction of this K-factor through a mild adjustment of the QCD scales that are conventionally used for this process. The presented 2 → 5 NLO calculations have been carried out using OpenLoops 2 in combination with Sherpa and Munich.

AION: An Atom Interferometer Observatory and Network

(2019)

Authors:

L Badurina, E Bentine, D Blas, K Bongs, D Bortoletto, T Bowcock, K Bridges, W Bowden, O Buchmueller, C Burrage, J Coleman, G Elertas, J Ellis, C Foot, V Gibson, MG Haehnelt, T Harte, S Hedges, R Hobson, M Holynski, T Jones, M Langlois, S Lellouch, M Lewicki, R Maiolino, P Majewski, S Malik, J March-Russell, C McCabe, D Newbold, B Sauer, U Schneider, I Shipsey, Y Singh, MA Uchida, T Valenzuela, M van der Grinten, V Vaskonen, J Vossebeld, D Weatherill, I Wilmut

Evidence for anisotropy of cosmic acceleration

Astronomy and Astrophysics: a European journal EDP Sciences (2019)

Authors:

Jacques Colin, Roya Mohayaee, Mohamed Rameez, Subir Sarkar

Abstract:

Observations reveal a `bulk flow' in the local Universe which is faster and extends to much larger scales than is expected around a typical observer in the standard $\Lambda$CDM cosmology. This is expected to result in a scale-dependent dipolar modulation of the acceleration of the expansion rate inferred from observations of objects within the bulk flow. From a maximum-likelihood analysis of the Joint Lightcurve Analysis (JLA) catalogue of Type Ia supernovae we find that the deceleration parameter, in addition to a small monopole, indeed has a much bigger dipole component aligned with the CMB dipole which falls exponentially with redshift $z$: $q_0 = q_\mathrm{m} + \vec{q}_\mathrm{d}.\hat{n}\exp(-z/S)$. The best fit to data yields $q_\mathrm{d} = -8.03$ and $S = 0.0262~(\Rightarrow d \sim 100~\mathrm{Mpc})$, rejecting isotropy ($q_\mathrm{d} = 0$) with $3.9\sigma$ statistical significance, while $q_\mathrm{m} = -0.157$ and consistent with no acceleration ($q_\mathrm{m} = 0$) at $1.4\sigma$. Thus the cosmic acceleration deduced from supernovae may be an artefact of our being non-Copernican observers, rather than evidence for a dominant component of `dark energy' in the Universe.