Next Article in Journal
Automated High-Precision Recognition of Solar Filaments Based on an Improved U2-Net
Previous Article in Journal
A Generic Analysis of Nucleon Decay Branching Fractions in Flipped SU(5) Grand Unification
Previous Article in Special Issue
Weak Coupling Regime in Dilatonic f(R,T) Cosmology
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Editorial to the Special Issue “Universe: Feature Papers 2023—Cosmology”

Faculty of Symbiotic Systems Science, Fukushima University, Fukushima 960-1296, Japan
Universe 2024, 10(10), 380; https://doi.org/10.3390/universe10100380
Submission received: 18 September 2024 / Accepted: 23 September 2024 / Published: 27 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Universe: Feature Papers 2023—Cosmology)
According to recent observational data, including Supernovae Ia (SNe Ia) [1,2], the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation [3,4,5,6,7,8], the large-scale structure (LSS) of the universe [9,10,11], baryon acoustic oscillations (BAOs) [12,13], and the weak lensing effect [14,15,16,17,18], not only in the early universe of the inflationary stage [19,20,21,22] but also in the late-time universe, the cosmic expansion is accelerating. Moreover, the recent Planck observations [7,8] suggest that if the universe is spatially flat, the energy density of the current universe consists of dark energy (about 70%) with negative pressure and dark matter (about 25%) with only a gravitational interaction and baryon acoustic oscillations (about 5%). The identities of dark energy have not yet been understood so clearly, although a large number of studies have been carried out very actively.
Through the future observations by the Euclid satellite [23] of the European Space Agency (ESA) [24,25,26,27,28,29,30], the Roman Space Telescope [31], the Simons Observatory [32,33], and the James Webb Space Telescope [34,35], a further understanding of modern cosmology will be developed in more precise and detail.
In addition, by the direct detection of gravitational waves [36,37], the era of gravitational wave cosmology has kicked off. It is expected that not only gravitational waves originated from astrophysical objects but also that primordial gravitational waves originated from the early universe, including the inflationary stage and cosmological first-order phase transitions, such as the electroweak phase transition (EWPT) and the QCD phase transition (QCDPT) [38,39,40,41,42,43,44].
Two main methods to explain the late-time accelerated expansion of the spatially flat universe have been proposed in the literature. One approach is to explore the unknown energy component with negative pressure, the so-called dark energy, in the framework of general relativity. The other is to investigate the extension of a theory of gravitation from general relativity at cosmological scales. Such a way can be regarded as geometrical dark energy. Regarding the latter approach, many extended theories of gravitation have been proposed (for reviews in terms of extended theories of gravitation, including their applications to astrophysics and the properties of gravitational theories, as well as the dark energy problem (see, for instance, refs. [45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85]).
Furthermore, there are various important subjects in modern cosmology, such as physics in the early universe [86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97], cosmological perturbation theory [98,99,100,101], the Swampland picture [102,103,104], cosmological constant [105], neutrino cosmology [106,107,108,109,110], axion cosmology [111], primordial black holes [112,113,114,115,116], dark matter [117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128], primordial magnetic fields [129,130,131,132,133], Big Bang nucleosynthesis (BBN) [134,135], the Hubble tension [136,137,138,139,140,141,142], 21 cm cosmology [143,144], gravitational lensing effects [145,146,147], and other related topics, including applications to astrophysical aspects [148,149,150,151,152,153,154,155].
In the present Special Issue, titled “Universe: Feature Papers 2023—Cosmology” of Universe, twenty-one original research manuscripts in terms of modern cosmology are collected. It was organized as follows. In the first part, the subjects of physics in the early universe [156,157] including inflationary cosmology [158] are explored. In the second part, the generic topics of observational cosmology [159,160,161] are studied. In the third part, the issues of dark energy [162,163,164,165,166,167,168] and extended theories of gravity from general relativity [169,170,171,172] are investigated. In the fourth part, the themes of gravitational waves [173] and physics of black holes [174,175] are given. As a kind of summary of this Special Issue, in the final part, a review on the cosmological recent problem of the Hubble tension [176] is presented. In the following, twenty research articles and one review are overviewed briefly.
In ref. [156], through a metric procedure, the so-called big bounce dynamics of an isotropic spacetime are studied by introducing a scalar field with its self-interaction. For the case that there is no potential, the cosmic expansion and collapse can occur along with the mode of positive and negative frequencies for the Wheeler–DeWitt equation. On the other hand, if there exists a potential, a transition from a state with a positive frequency to that with negative one can happen. It is demonstrated that the probability of a transition from the collapsing phase to the expanding one can be analyzed.
In ref. [157], a scenario to realize the de Sitter expansion of the early universe is proposed, which originated from stochastic gravitational waves based on the arguments of the Lorentzian and Euclidean spacetimes and the Wick rotation.
In ref. [158], through the Bayesian analysis, the cosmological evolution of the extrinsic energy density is numerically examined for the inflationary universe in the context of the five-dimensional spacetime. The effective potential leading to inflation is derived, originating from the extrinsic geometry. The possibility for a unified scenario of inflation with the late-time cosmic acceleration is also argued.
In ref. [159], the propagation of electromagnetic waves is studied for homogeneous and isotropic spacetimes. For plane and spherical electromagnetic waves, exact solutions are derived. Moreover, the redshift, the change in amplitude, and the dispersion of the electromagnetic waves are examined. Furthermore, the relation between the equation of electromagnetic waves and the Proca equation is argued. The importance of the relation is discussed for physics in the early universe.
In ref. [160], the methods of the number count are investigated in the context of observational cosmology, such as the number of galaxies. In particular, with the method of the so-called geodesic-light-cone gauge, the procedures to count the number are investigated.
In ref. [161], the basis of genetic algorithms and the way of parameter estimations for cosmological models are explained as a complementary technique with a conventional method of the Markov chain Monte Carlo. It is shown that the space of the parameter can be explored effectively by using models of dark energy.
In ref. [162], a possible origin of the cosmological constant is proposed from a boundary condition. The relation between the issue of the cosmological constant and the Hubble tension is investigated. It is argued that the cosmological constant represents a covariant integration constant arising from a spatial boundary condition, which is only applicable to a three-dimensional bounded subspace representing our universe.
In ref. [163], a fractional differential equation in a quantum K-essence scalar field is studied in homogeneous and isotropic spacetime. For the Wheeler–DeWitt equation of the scalar field in quantum cosmology, a fractional differential equation is found, and the solutions of the equation are examined.
In ref. [164], cosmology is studied in the Einstein–Newcomb–de Sitter space, where antipodal points are topologically identified. In particular, with the type Ia supernovae data of Pantheon+ and the sample data of gamma-ray bursts, the fitting analysis to this cosmological model is performed. As a result, it is reported that the minimum value of the χ 2 analysis for this model could be smaller than that for the Λ CDM model.
In ref. [165], with the autonomous system analysis, the phase-space diagram of the cosmological evolutions for a scalar field model is investigated. For two types of potentials, the stationary points of the phase-space are examined. It is demonstrated that for the case in which the potential is close to asymptotically constant, the de Sitter expansion of the universe can be realized, while for that with the exponential form of the potential, the de Sitter cosmic expansion can occur only in the infinity limit.
In ref. [166], a cosmological transition from the anti-de Sitter phase to the de Sitter one is analyzed based on a motivation to explain the so-called Hubble tension. It is assumed that there exist two kinds of fluids playing a role of the dark energy component. One of these two fluids can lead to the anti-de Sitter phase in the early universe. The self-interaction of these fluids may influence the energy density of the effective dark energy to realize late-time cosmic acceleration.
In ref. [167], a relation between a scalar field theory of K-essence and the Vaidya metric is discussed. Especially, a non-canonical action classified into a type of Dirac–Born–Infeld one is considered. The geodesics within a comoving plane are examined for certain forms of the mass function. In addition, for a kind of Vaidya spacetime, a solution of wormholes, the tunneling effect, the existence of (quasi-)circular orbits of the event horizon, and the central singularity of the spacetime are analyzed.
In ref. [168], the (im)possibility of the discrimination of the de Sitter phase of the cosmic expansion from the following stationary phase is examined. In relation with this issue, a signal (a kind of non-standard photons) related to dark energy is argued.
In ref. [169], as a possibility to avoid the initial singularity in the early universe, a context of Loop Quantum Cosmology is considered. In particular, the Friedmann equations for f ( R ) gravity in metric formalism are analyzed. As a result, the effective actions with covariance, in which a bounce can be realized, are derived through a reduction method.
In ref. [170], cosmological fluctuations for cosmic microwave background radiations are studied in delta gravity, which is proposed as an alternative theory of gravity to general relativity to explain the type Ia SN data. With a semi-analytic method, the temperature–temperature power spectrum of the scalar mode of the cosmological fluctuations is analyzed by using the gauge transformations of the spacetime metric as well as perfect fluid, so that observational constraints on delta gravity can be obtained.
In ref. [171], a homogeneous and anisotropic Bianchi type I universe is explored for the local limit in nonlocal gravity. In such a theory of gravity, there exists a function representing susceptibility, which vanishes in the limit of general relativity. The influence of the function of susceptibility is investigated on the accelerated anisotropic expansion of the universe.
In ref. [172], late-time cosmology is studied in dilaton gravity, which consists of the scalar curvature and the trace of the energy–momentum tensor of the dilatonic field. In particular, the issue of the Hubble tension is discussed by using cosmological observational data.
In ref. [173], through the Bayesian statistical analysis with the pulsar timing of the NANOGrav 12.5-year data, the curvature perturbations from inflation and the mass of primordial black holes are investigated. The possibility that primordial black holes play a role of a fraction of dark matter is also studied. Moreover, detectability with future experiments of gravitational waves is discussed.
In ref. [174], the existence of white holes is argued. In general relativity, a white hole is recognized as a reversed process of the solution of a collapsing black hole. This phenomenon leads to the crossing of the event horizon of the black hole, at which causality is broken. It is indicated that the Big Bang of our universe is a kind of black hole, and not a white hole. It is explained why the crossing of the event horizon can be realized from the inside to the outside if an event decelerates when the cosmic expansion accelerates by discussing that an apparent solution of a white hole has an exterior of a regular solution of a Schwarzschild black hole.
In ref. [175], for the Schwarzschild–Finsler–Randers spacetime, the equation of the geodesic deviation and the Raychaudhuri equation are explored. In this spacetime, there exist multiple curvature tensors, enabling the Raychaudhuri equation to have extra degrees of freedom. The astrophysical results of the limit of the weak field and the limit of Newtonian mechanics are also presented.
In ref. [176], the issue of the “Hubble tension” is reviewed in detail, including the history of the Hubble constant. The significance of the discovery of our universe’s expansion and the pioneering measurement of the cosmic expansion rate are explained. For the measurement, high-level technology and small uncertainties in terms of parameters are important. A review of various method to measure the Hubble constant is also necessary at the present time.
In conclusion, we believe that the twenty-one articles introduced above in the present Special Issue are useful for relevant future studies for various aspects of modern physics and cosmology.

Funding

This work was supported by the JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP21K03547 and 24KF0100.

Acknowledgments

Contributions of all the authors are highly appreciated by the Guest Editor (Kazuharu Bamba) of this Special Issue.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Perlmutter, S. et al. [SNCP Collaboration] Measurements of Omega and Lambda from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae. Astrophys. J. 1999, 517, 565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Riess, A.G. et al. [Supernova Search Team Collaboration] Observational Evidence from Supernovae for an Accelerating Universe and a Cosmological Constant. Astron. J. 1998, 116, 1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Spergel, D.N. et al. [WMAP Collaboration] First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Determination of Cosmological Parameters. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 2003, 148, 175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Spergel, D.N. et al. [WMAP Collaboration] Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) three year results: Implications for cosmology. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 2007, 170, 377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Komatsu, E. et al. [WMAP Collaboration] Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cosmological Interpretation. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 2009, 180, 330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Komatsu, E. et al. [WMAP Collaboration] Seven-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cosmological Interpretation. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 2011, 192, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Aghanim, N. et al. [Planck] Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters. Astron. Astrophys. 2020, 641, A6, Erratum in Astron. Astrophys. 2021, 652, C4. [Google Scholar]
  8. Akrami, Y. et al. [Planck] Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation. Astron. Astrophys. 2020, 641, A10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Tegmark, M. et al. [SDSS Collaboration] Cosmological parameters from SDSS and WMAP. Phys. Rev. D 2004, 69, 103501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Seljak, U. et al. [SDSS Collaboration] Cosmological parameter analysis including SDSS Ly-alpha forest and galaxy bias: Constraints on the primordial spectrum of fluctuations, neutrino mass, and dark energy. Phys. Rev. D 2005, 71, 103515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Tsagas, C.G.; Challinor, A.; Maartens, R. Relativistic cosmology and large-scale structure. Phys. Rept. 2008, 465, 61–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Eisenstein, D.J. et al. [SDSS Collaboration] Detection of the Baryon Acoustic Peak in the Large-Scale Correlation Function of SDSS Luminous Red Galaxies. Astrophys. J. 2005, 633, 560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Alam, S. et al. [eBOSS] Completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Cosmological implications from two decades of spectroscopic surveys at the Apache Point Observatory. Phys. Rev. D 2021, 103, 083533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Jain, B.; Taylor, A. Cross-correlation Tomography: Measuring Dark Energy Evolution with Weak Lensing. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2003, 91, 141302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Munshi, D.; Valageas, P.; Waerbeke, L.V.; Heavens, A. Cosmology with Weak Lensing Surveys. Phys. Rept. 2008, 462, 67–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Troxel, M.A.; Ishak, M. The Intrinsic Alignment of Galaxies and its Impact on Weak Gravitational Lensing in an Era of Precision Cosmology. Phys. Rept. 2014, 558, 1–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Abbott, T.M.C. et al. [DES] Dark Energy Survey year 1 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing. Phys. Rev. D 2018, 98, 043526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Abbott, T.M.C. et al. [DES] Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing. Phys. Rev. D 2022, 105, 023520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Guth, A.H. The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problems. Phys. Rev. D 1981, 23, 347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Sato, K. First Order Phase Transition of a Vacuum and Expansion of the Universe. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 1981, 195, 467–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Starobinsky, A.A. A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity. Phys. Lett. 1980, 91B, 99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Linde, A.D. A New Inflationary Universe Scenario: A Possible Solution of the Horizon, Flatness, Homogeneity, Isotropy and Primordial Monopole Problems. Phys. Lett. 1982, 108B, 389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Available online: https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Space_Science/Euclid (accessed on 16 September 2024).
  24. Laureijs, R. et al. [EUCLID] Euclid Definition Study Report. arXiv 2011, arXiv:1110.3193. [Google Scholar]
  25. Amendola, L. et al. [Euclid Theory Working Group] Cosmology and fundamental physics with the Euclid satellite. Living Rev. Rel. 2013, 16, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Amendola, L.; Appleby, S.; Avgoustidis, A.; Bacon, D.; Baker, T.; Baldi, M.; Bartolo, N.; Blanchard, A.; Bonvin, C.; Borgani, S.; et al. Cosmology and fundamental physics with the Euclid satellite. Living Rev. Rel. 2018, 21, 2. [Google Scholar]
  27. Blanchard, A. et al. [Euclid] Euclid preparation. VII. Forecast validation for Euclid cosmological probes. Astron. Astrophys. 2020, 642, A191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Nesseris, S. et al. [Euclid] Euclid: Forecast constraints on consistency tests of the ΛCDM model. Astron. Astrophys. 2022, 660, A67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Casas, S. et al. [Euclid] Euclid: Constraints on f(R) cosmologies from the spectroscopic and photometric primary probes. arXiv 2023, arXiv:2306.11053. [Google Scholar]
  30. Ballardini, M. et al. [Euclid] Euclid: The search for primordial features. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2309.17287. [Google Scholar]
  31. Eifler, T.; Miyatake, H.; Krause, E.; Heinrich, C.; Miranda, V.; Hirata, C.; Xu, J.; Hemmati, S.; Simet, M.; Capak, P.; et al. Cosmology with the Roman Space Telescope–multiprobe strategies. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2021, 507, 1746–1761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Available online: https://simonsobservatory.org/ (accessed on 16 September 2024).
  33. Ade, P. et al. [Simons Observatory] The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts. JCAP 2019, 2, 056. [Google Scholar]
  34. Available online: https://webbtelescope.org/home (accessed on 16 September 2024).
  35. Gardner, J.P.; Mather, J.C.; Clampin, M.; Doyon, R.; Greenhouse, M.A.; Hammel, H.B.; Hutchings, J.B.; Jakobsen, P.; Lilly, S.J.; Long, K.S.; et al. The James Webb Space Telescope. Space Sci. Rev. 2006, 123, 485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Abbott, B.P. et al. [LIGO Scientific and Virgo] Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016, 116, 061102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Abbott, B.P. et al. [LIGO Scientific and Virgo] GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspiral. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017, 119, 161101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Abbott, B.P. et al. [LIGO Scientific, Virgo, Fermi GBM, INTEGRAL, IceCube, AstroSat Cadmium Zinc Telluride Imager Team, IPN, Insight-Hxmt, ANTARES, Swift, AGILE Team, 1M2H Team, Dark Energy Camera GW-EM, DES, DLT40, GRAWITA, Fermi-LAT, ATCA, ASKAP, Las Cumbres Observatory Group, OzGrav, DWF (Deeper Wider Faster Program), AST3, CAASTRO, VINROUGE, MASTER, J-GEM, GROWTH, JAGWAR, CaltechNRAO, TTU-NRAO, NuSTAR, Pan-STARRS, MAXI Team, TZAC Consortium, KU, Nordic Optical Telescope, ePESSTO, GROND, Texas Tech University, SALT Group, TOROS, BOOTES, MWA, CALET, IKI-GW Follow-up, H.E.S.S., LOFAR, LWA, HAWC, Pierre Auger, ALMA, Euro VLBI Team, Pi of Sky, Chandra Team at McGill University, DFN, ATLAS Telescopes, High Time Resolution Universe Survey, RIMAS, RATIR and SKA South Africa/MeerKAT] Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neutron Star Merger. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2017, 848, L12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Barack, L.; Cardoso, V.; Nissanke, S.; Sotiriou, T.P.; Askar, A.; Belczynski, C.; Bertone, G.; Bon, E.; Blas, D.; Brito, R.; et al. Black holes, gravitational waves and fundamental physics: A roadmap. Class. Quant. Grav. 2019, 36, 143001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Nakar, E. The electromagnetic counterparts of compact binary mergers. Phys. Rept. 2020, 886, 1–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Yokoyama, J. Implication of pulsar timing array experiments on cosmological gravitational wave detection. AAPPS Bull. 2021, 31, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Domènech, G. Scalar Induced Gravitational Waves Review. Universe 2021, 7, 398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Mandel, I.; Farmer, A. Merging stellar-mass binary black holes. Phys. Rept. 2022, 955, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Agazie, G. et al. [NANOGrav] The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-wave Background. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2023, 951, L8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Nojiri, S.; Odintsov, S.D. Introduction to modified gravity and gravitational alternative for dark energy. Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 2007, 4, 115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lue, A. The phenomenology of dvali-gabadadze-porrati cosmologies. Phys. Rept. 2006, 423, 1–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Copeland, E.J.; Sami, M.; Tsujikawa, S. Dynamics of dark energy. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 2006, 15, 1753–1936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Fujii, Y.; Maeda, K. The Scalar-Tensor Theory of Gravitation; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  49. Padmanabhan, T. Dark energy and gravity. Gen. Rel. Grav. 2008, 40, 529–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Durrer, R.; Maartens, R. Dark energy and dark gravity: Theory overview. Gen. Rel. Grav. 2008, 40, 301–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Alexander, S.; Yunes, N. Chern-Simons Modified General Relativity. Phys. Rept. 2009, 480, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Sotiriou, T.P.; Faraoni, V. f(R) Theories of Gravity. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2010, 82, 451–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Cai, Y.F.; Saridakis, E.N.; Setare, M.R.; Xia, J.Q. Quintom Cosmology: Theoretical implications and observations. Phys. Rept. 2010, 493, 1–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Felice, A.D.; Tsujikawa, S. f(R) theories. Living Rev. Rel. 2010, 13, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Amendola, L.; Tsujikawa, S. Dark Energy; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  56. Faraoni, V.; Capozziello, S. Beyond Einstein Gravity; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  57. Nojiri, S.; Odintsov, S.D. Unified cosmic history in modified gravity: From F(R) theory to Lorentz non-invariant models. Phys. Rept. 2011, 505, 59–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Capozziello, S.; Laurentis, M.D. Extended Theories of Gravity. Phys. Rept. 2011, 509, 167–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Clifton, T.; Ferreira, P.G.; Padilla, A.; Skordis, C. Modified Gravity and Cosmology. Phys. Rept. 2012, 513, 1–189. [Google Scholar]
  60. Bamba, K.; Capozziello, S.; Nojiri, S.; Odintsov, S.D. Dark energy cosmology: The equivalent description via different theoretical models and cosmography tests. Astrophys. Space Sci. 2012, 342, 155–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Padmanabhan, T.; Kothawala, D. Lanczos-Lovelock models of gravity. Phys. Rept. 2013, 531, 115–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Weinberg, D.H.; Mortonson, M.J.; Eisenstein, D.J.; Hirata, C.; Riess, A.G.; Rozo, E. Observational Probes of Cosmic Acceleration. Phys. Rept. 2013, 530, 87–255. [Google Scholar]
  63. Will, C.M. The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment. Living Rev. Rel. 2014, 17, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Joyce, A.; Jain, B.; Khoury, J.; Trodden, M. Beyond the Cosmological Standard Model. Phys. Rept. 2015, 568, 1–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Bamba, K.; Odintsov, S.D. Inflationary cosmology in modified gravity theories. Symmetry 2015, 7, 220–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Cai, Y.F.; Capozziello, S.; Laurentis, M.D.; Saridakis, E.N. f(T) teleparallel gravity and cosmology. Rept. Prog. Phys. 2016, 79, 106901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Wang, S.; Wang, Y.; Li, M. Holographic Dark Energy. Phys. Rept. 2017, 696, 1–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Nojiri, S.; Odintsov, S.D.; Oikonomou, V.K. Modified Gravity Theories on a Nutshell: Inflation, Bounce and Late-time Evolution. Phys. Rept. 2017, 692, 1–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Jimenez, J.B.; Heisenberg, L.; Olmo, G.J.; Rubiera-Garcia, D. Born–Infeld inspired modifications of gravity. Phys. Rept. 2018, 727, 1–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Bahamonde, S.; Böhmer, C.G.; Carloni, S.; Copeland, E.J.; Fang, W.; Tamanini, N. Dynamical systems applied to cosmology: Dark energy and modified gravity. Phys. Rept. 2018, 775–777, 1–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Adami, H.; Setare, M.R.; Sisman, T.C.; Tekin, B. Conserved Charges in Extended Theories of Gravity. Phys. Rept. 2019, 834, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Heisenberg, L. A systematic approach to generalisations of General Relativity and their cosmological implications. Phys. Rept. 2019, 796, 1–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Langlois, D. Dark energy and modified gravity in degenerate higher-order scalar–tensor (DHOST) theories: A review. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 2019, 28, 1942006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Frusciante, N.; Perenon, L. Effective field theory of dark energy: A review. Phys. Rept. 2020, 857, 1–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Olmo, G.J.; Rubiera-Garcia, D.; Wojnar, A. Stellar structure models in modified theories of gravity: Lessons and challenges. Phys. Rept. 2020, 876, 1–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Saridakis, E.N.; Lazkoz, R.; Salzano, V.; Moniz, P.V.; Capozziello, S.; Jimenez, J.B.; Laurentis, M.D.; Olmo, G.J. Modified Gravity and Cosmology; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  77. Faraoni, V.; Giusti, A.; Fahim, B.H. Spherical inhomogeneous solutions of Einstein and scalar–tensor gravity: A map of the land. Phys. Rept. 2021, 925, 1–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Bamba, K. Review on Dark Energy Problem and Modified Gravity Theories. LHEP 2022, 2022, 352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Bahamonde, S.; Dialektopoulos, K.F.; Escamilla-Rivera, C.; Farrugia, G.; Gakis, V.; Hendry, M.; Hohmann, M.; Said, J.L.; Mifsud, J.; Valentino, E.D. Teleparallel gravity: From theory to cosmology. Rept. Prog. Phys. 2023, 86, 026901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Arai, S.; Aoki, K.; Chinone, Y.; Kimura, R.; Kobayashi, T.; Miyatake, H.; Yamauchi, D.; Yokoyama, S.; Akitsu, K.; Hiramatsu, T.; et al. Cosmological gravity probes: Connecting recent theoretical developments to forthcoming observations. PTEP 2023, 2023, 072E01. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Odintsov, S.D.; Oikonomou, V.K.; Giannakoudi, I.; Fronimos, F.P.; Lymperiadou, E.C. Recent Advances in Inflation. Symmetry 2023, 15, 1701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. de Haro, J.; Nojiri, S.; Odintsov, S.D.; Oikonomou, V.K.; Pan, S. Finite-time cosmological singularities and the possible fate of the Universe. Phys. Rept. 2023, 1034, 1–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Heisenberg, L. Review on f(Q) gravity. Phys. Rept. 2024, 1066, 1–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Avsajanishvili, O.; Chitov, G.Y.; Kahniashvili, T.; Mandal, S.; Samushia, L. Observational Constraints on Dynamical Dark Energy Models. Universe 2024, 10, 122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Yousaf, Z.; Bamba, K.; Bhatti, M.Z.; Farwa, U. Quasi-static evolution of axially and reflection symmetric large-scale configuration. Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 2024, 21, 2430005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Gasperini, M.; Veneziano, G. The Pre-big bang scenario in string cosmology. Phys. Rept. 2003, 373, 1–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Kiritsis, E. D-branes in standard model building, gravity and cosmology. Phys. Rept. 2005, 421, 105–190, Erratum in Phys. Rept. 2006, 429, 121–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Davidson, S.; Nardi, E.; Nir, Y. Leptogenesis. Phys. Rept. 2008, 466, 105–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Novello, M.; Bergliaffa, S.E.P. Bouncing Cosmologies. Phys. Rept. 2008, 463, 127–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Lehners, J.L. Ekpyrotic and Cyclic Cosmology. Phys. Rept. 2008, 465, 223–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Mazumdar, A.; Rocher, J. Particle physics models of inflation and curvaton scenarios. Phys. Rept. 2011, 497, 85–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Maleknejad, A.; Sheikh-Jabbari, M.M.; Soda, J. Gauge Fields and Inflation. Phys. Rept. 2013, 528, 161–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Battefeld, D.; Peter, P. A Critical Review of Classical Bouncing Cosmologies. Phys. Rept. 2015, 571, 1–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Sato, K.; Yokoyama, J. Inflationary cosmology: First 30+ years. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 2015, 24, 1530025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Asadi, P.; Bansal, S.; Berlin, A.; Co, R.T.; Croon, D.; Cui, Y.; Curtin, D.; Cyr-Racine, F.Y.; Davoudiasl, H.; Rose, L.D.; et al. Early-Universe Model Building. arXiv 2022, arXiv:2203.06680. [Google Scholar]
  96. Cicoli, M.; Conlon, J.P.; Maharana, A.; Parameswaran, S.; Quevedo, F.; Zavala, I. String cosmology: From the early universe to today. Phys. Rept. 2024, 1059, 1–155. [Google Scholar]
  97. Donnay, L. Celestial holography: An asymptotic symmetry perspective. Phys. Rept. 2024, 1073, 1–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Kodama, H.; Sasaki, M. Cosmological Perturbation Theory. Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 1984, 78, 1–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Mukhanov, V.F.; Feldman, H.A.; Brandenberger, R.H. Theory of cosmological perturbations. Part 1. Classical perturbations. Part 2. Quantum theory of perturbations. Part 3. Extensions. Phys. Rept. 1992, 215, 203–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Bernardeau, F.; Colombi, S.; Gaztanaga, E.; Scoccimarro, R. Large scale structure of the universe and cosmological perturbation theory. Phys. Rept. 2002, 367, 1–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Malik, K.A.; Wands, D. Cosmological perturbations. Phys. Rept. 2009, 475, 1–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Palti, E. The Swampland: Introduction and Review. Fortsch. Phys. 2019, 67, 1900037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. van Beest, M.; Calderón-Infante, J.; Mirfendereski, D.; Valenzuela, I. Lectures on the Swampland Program in String Compactifications. Phys. Rept. 2022, 989, 1–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Van Riet, T.; Zoccarato, G. Beginners lectures on flux compactifications and related Swampland topics. Phys. Rept. 2024, 1049, 1–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Padmanabhan, T. Cosmological constant: The Weight of the vacuum. Phys. Rept. 2003, 380, 235–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Dolgov, A.D. Neutrinos in cosmology. Phys. Rept. 2002, 370, 333–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Lesgourgues, J.; Pastor, S. Massive neutrinos and cosmology. Phys. Rept. 2006, 429, 307–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Kusenko, A. Sterile neutrinos: The Dark side of the light fermions. Phys. Rept. 2009, 481, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Abazajian, K.N. Sterile neutrinos in cosmology. Phys. Rept. 2017, 711–712, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Dasgupta, B.; Kopp, J. Sterile Neutrinos. Phys. Rept. 2021, 928, 1–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Marsh, D.J.E. Axion Cosmology. Phys. Rept. 2016, 643, 1–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Yokoyama, J. Formation of primordial black holes in the inflationary universe. Phys. Rept. 1998, 307, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Carr, B.; Kohri, K.; Sendouda, Y.; Yokoyama, J. Constraints on primordial black holes. Rept. Prog. Phys. 2021, 84, 116902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Özsoy, O.; Tasinato, G. Inflation and Primordial Black Holes. Universe 2023, 9, 203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Carr, B.; Clesse, S.; Garcia-Bellido, J.; Hawkins, M.; Kuhnel, F. Observational evidence for primordial black holes: A positivist perspective. Phys. Rept. 2024, 1054, 1–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Domènech, G. Lectures on Gravitational Wave Signatures of Primordial Black Holes. arXiv 2023, arXiv:2307.06964. [Google Scholar]
  117. Bertone, G.; Hooper, D.; Silk, J. Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints. Phys. Rept. 2005, 405, 279–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Hooper, D.; Profumo, S. Dark Matter and Collider Phenomenology of Universal Extra Dimensions. Phys. Rept. 2007, 453, 29–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Zurek, K.M. Asymmetric Dark Matter: Theories, Signatures, and Constraints. Phys. Rept. 2014, 537, 91–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Baer, H.; Choi, K.Y.; Kim, J.E.; Roszkowski, L. Dark matter production in the early Universe: Beyond the thermal WIMP paradigm. Phys. Rept. 2015, 555, 1–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Aramaki, T.; Boggs, S.; Bufalino, S.; Dal, L.; von Doetinchem, P.; Donato, F.; Fornengo, N.; Fuke, H.; Grefe, M.; Hailey, C.; et al. Review of the theoretical and experimental status of dark matter identification with cosmic-ray antideuterons. Phys. Rept. 2016, 618, 1–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Mayet, F.; Green, A.M.; Battat, J.B.R.; Billard, J.; Bozorgnia, N.; Gelmini, G.B.; Gondolo, P.; Kavanagh, B.J.; Lee, S.K.; Loomba, D.; et al. A review of the discovery reach of directional Dark Matter detection. Phys. Rept. 2016, 627, 1–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Tulin, S.; Yu, H.B. Dark Matter Self-interactions and Small Scale Structure. Phys. Rept. 2018, 730, 1–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Buckley, M.R.; Peter, A.H.G. Gravitational probes of dark matter physics. Phys. Rept. 2018, 761, 1–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Arcadi, G.; Djouadi, A.; Raidal, M. Dark Matter through the Higgs portal. Phys. Rept. 2020, 842, 1–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Buen-Abad, M.A.; Essig, R.; McKeen, D.; Zhong, Y.M. Cosmological constraints on dark matter interactions with ordinary matter. Phys. Rept. 2022, 961, 1–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Ahluwalia, D.V.; da Silva, J.M.H.; Lee, C.Y.; Liu, Y.X.; Pereira, S.H.; Sorkhi, M.M. Mass dimension one fermions: Constructing darkness. Phys. Rept. 2022, 967, 1–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Bramante, J.; Raj, N. Dark matter in compact stars. Phys. Rept. 2024, 1052, 1–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Grasso, D.; Rubinstein, H.R. Magnetic fields in the early universe. Phys. Rept. 2001, 348, 163–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Barrow, J.D.; Maartens, R.; Tsagas, C.G. Cosmology with inhomogeneous magnetic fields. Phys. Rept. 2007, 449, 131–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Subramanian, K. Magnetic fields in the early universe. Astron. Nachr. 2010, 331, 110–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Kandus, A.; Kunze, K.E.; Tsagas, C.G. Primordial magnetogenesis. Phys. Rept. 2011, 505, 1–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Yamazaki, D.G.; Kajino, T.; Mathew, G.J.; Ichiki, K. The Search for a Primordial Magnetic Field. Phys. Rept. 2012, 517, 141–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Iocco, F.; Mangano, G.; Miele, G.; Pisanti, O.; Serpico, P.D. Primordial Nucleosynthesis: From precision cosmology to fundamental physics. Phys. Rept. 2009, 472, 1–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Pitrou, C.; Coc, A.; Uzan, J.P.; Vangioni, E. Precision big bang nucleosynthesis with improved Helium-4 predictions. Phys. Rept. 2018, 754, 1–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Knox, L.; Millea, M. Hubble constant hunter’s guide. Phys. Rev. D 2020, 101, 043533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Asgari, M. et al. [KiDS] KiDS-1000 Cosmology: Cosmic shear constraints and comparison between two point statistics. Astron. Astrophys. 2021, 645, A104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Valentino, E.D.; Mena, O.; Pan, S.; Visinelli, L.; Yang, W.; Melchiorri, A.; Mota, D.F.; Riess, A.G.; Silk, J. In the realm of the Hubble tension—A review of solutions. Class. Quant. Grav. 2021, 38, 153001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Perivolaropoulos, L.; Skara, F. Challenges for ΛCDM: An update. New Astron. Rev. 2022, 95, 101659. [Google Scholar]
  140. Schöneberg, N.; Abellán, G.F.; Sánchez, A.P.; Witte, S.J.; Poulin, V.; Lesgourgues, J. The H0 Olympics: A fair ranking of proposed models. Phys. Rept. 2022, 984, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Abdalla, E.; Abellán, G.F.; Aboubrahim, A.; Agnello, A.; Akarsu, O.; Akrami, Y.; Alestas, G.; Aloni, D.; Amendola, L.; Anchordoqui, L.A.; et al. Cosmology intertwined: A review of the particle physics, astrophysics, and cosmology associated with the cosmological tensions and anomalies. J. High Energy Astrophys. 2022, 34, 49–211. [Google Scholar]
  142. Poulin, V.; Smith, T.L.; Karwal, T. The Ups and Downs of Early Dark Energy solutions to the Hubble tension: A review of models, hints and constraints circa 2023. Phys. Dark Univ. 2023, 42, 101348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Furlanetto, S.; Oh, S.P.; Briggs, F. Cosmology at Low Frequencies: The 21 cm Transition and the High-Redshift Universe. Phys. Rept. 2006, 433, 181–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Barkana, R. The Rise of the First Stars: Supersonic Streaming, Radiative Feedback, and 21-cm Cosmology. Phys. Rept. 2016, 645, 1–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Bartelmann, M.; Schneider, P. Weak gravitational lensing. Phys. Rept. 2001, 340, 291–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Lewis, A.; Challinor, A. Weak gravitational lensing of the CMB. Phys. Rept. 2006, 429, 1–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Barnacka, A. Gravitational Lenses as High-Resolution Telescopes. Phys. Rept. 2018, 778–779, 1–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Durrer, R.; Kunz, M.; Melchiorri, A. Cosmic structure formation with topological defects. Phys. Rept. 2002, 364, 1–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Padmanabhan, T. Gravity and the thermodynamics of horizons. Phys. Rept. 2005, 406, 49–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Hollands, S.; Wald, R.M. Quantum fields in curved spacetime. Phys. Rept. 2015, 574, 1–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Porto, R.A. The effective field theorist’s approach to gravitational dynamics. Phys. Rept. 2016, 633, 1–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Dayal, P.; Ferrara, A. Early galaxy formation and its large-scale effects. Phys. Rept. 2018, 780–782, 1–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Adams, F.C. The degree of fine-tuning in our universe—And others. Phys. Rept. 2019, 807, 1–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Perlick, V.; Tsupko, O.Y. Calculating black hole shadows: Review of analytical studies. Phys. Rept. 2022, 947, 1–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Brout, D.; Scolnic, D.; Popovic, B.; Riess, A.G.; Zuntz, J.; Kessler, R.; Carr, A.; Davis, T.M.; Hinton, S.; Jones, D.; et al. The Pantheon+ Analysis: Cosmological Constraints. Astrophys. J. 2022, 938, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Giovannetti, E.; Maione, F.; Montani, G. Quantum Big Bounce of the Isotropic Universe Using Relational Time. Universe 2023, 9, 373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Marochnik, L. Nothing into Something and Vice Versa: A Cosmological Scenario. Universe 2023, 9, 445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Capistrano, A.J.S.; Cabral, L.A. Effective Potential for Quintessential Inflation Driven by Extrinsic Gravity. Universe 2023, 9, 497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Staicova, D.; Stoilov, M. Electromagnetic Waves in Cosmological Spacetime. Universe 2023, 9, 292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Fanizza, G.; Gasperini, M.; Marozzi, G. A Simple, Exact Formulation of Number Counts in the Geodesic-Light-Cone Gauge. Universe 2023, 9, 327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Medel-Esquivel, R.; Gómez-Vargas, I.; Sánchez, A.A.M.; García-Salcedo, R.; Vázquez, J.A. Cosmological Parameter Estimation with Genetic Algorithms. Universe 2024, 10, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Stenflo, J.O. Cosmological Constant from Boundary Condition and Its Implications beyond the Standard Model. Universe 2023, 9, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Socorro, J.; Rosales, J.J. Quantum Fractionary Cosmology: K-Essence Theory. Universe 2023, 9, 185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Yershov, V.N. Fitting Type Ia Supernova Data to a Cosmological Model Based on Einstein-Newcomb-De Sitter Space. Universe 2023, 9, 204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Paliathanasis, A. Revise the Phase-Space Analysis of the Dynamical Spacetime Unified Dark Energy Cosmology. Universe 2023, 9, 406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Ong, Y.C. An Effective Sign Switching Dark Energy: Lotka–Volterra Model of Two Interacting Fluids. Universe 2023, 9, 437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Majumder, B.; Khlopov, M.; Ray, S.; Manna, G. Geodesic Structure of Generalized Vaidya Spacetime through the K-Essence. Universe 2023, 9, 510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Alcántara-Pérez, Y.B.; García-Aspeitia, M.A.; Martínez-Huerta, H.; Hernández-Almada, A. MeV Dark Energy Emission from a De Sitter Universe. Universe 2023, 9, 513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Ribeiro, A.R.; Vernieri, D.; Lobo, F.S.N. Effective f(R) Actions for Modified Loop Quantum Cosmologies via Order Reduction. Universe 2023, 9, 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Alfaro, J.; Rubio, C.; Martín, M.S. Cosmological Fluctuations in Delta Gravity. Universe 2023, 9, 315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Tabatabaei, J.; Banihashemi, A.; Baghram, S.; Mashhoon, B. Anisotropic Cosmology in the Local Limit of Nonlocal Gravity. Universe 2023, 9, 377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Brito, F.A.; Borges, C.H.A.B.; Campos, J.A.V.; Costa, F.G. Weak Coupling Regime in Dilatonic Cosmology. Universe 2024, 10, 134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Zhao, Z.C.; Wang, S. Bayesian Implications for the Primordial Black Holes from NANOGrav’s Pulsar-Timing Data Using the Scalar-Induced Gravitational Waves. Universe 2023, 9, 157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Gaztanaga, E. Do White Holes Exist? Universe 2023, 9, 194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Triantafyllopoulos, A.; Kapsabelis, E.; Stavrinos, P.C. Raychaudhuri Equations, Tidal Forces, and the Weak-Field Limit in Schwarzshild–Finsler–Randers Spacetime. Universe 2024, 10, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Cervantes-Cota, J.L.; Galindo-Uribarri, S.; Smoot, G.F. The Unsettled Number: Hubble’s Tension. Universe 2023, 9, 501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bamba, K. Editorial to the Special Issue “Universe: Feature Papers 2023—Cosmology”. Universe 2024, 10, 380. https://doi.org/10.3390/universe10100380

AMA Style

Bamba K. Editorial to the Special Issue “Universe: Feature Papers 2023—Cosmology”. Universe. 2024; 10(10):380. https://doi.org/10.3390/universe10100380

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bamba, Kazuharu. 2024. "Editorial to the Special Issue “Universe: Feature Papers 2023—Cosmology”" Universe 10, no. 10: 380. https://doi.org/10.3390/universe10100380

APA Style

Bamba, K. (2024). Editorial to the Special Issue “Universe: Feature Papers 2023—Cosmology”. Universe, 10(10), 380. https://doi.org/10.3390/universe10100380

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop