Experiments / V2.409
V2.409
Dynamical Selection COMPLETE

V2.409 - Cosmological Parameters from Lambda — The Framework's H_0 Prediction

V2.409: Cosmological Parameters from Lambda — The Framework’s H_0 Prediction

Key Result

The framework predicts Omega_Lambda = 0.6877 with zero free parameters. Combined with the CMB acoustic scale theta_*, this predicts H_0:

ParameterFrameworkPlanck LCDMDifference
H_0 (km/s/Mpc)67.6367.36 ± 0.54+0.27
Omega_Lambda0.6877 (predicted)0.6847 (fit)+0.003
Omega_M0.31220.3152−0.003
t_0 (Gyr)13.7813.80−0.02
w−1 (exact)−1 (assumed)

The framework has one fewer free parameter than LCDM (5 vs 6): Omega_Lambda is predicted, not fit, and H_0 becomes a derived quantity.

The Hubble Tension Verdict

  • Framework predicts H_0 = 67.63 km/s/Mpc (+0.5σ from Planck)
  • SH0ES measures H_0 = 73.04 ± 1.04 km/s/Mpc
  • Framework vs SH0ES: −5.2σ tension
  • The +0.27 km/s/Mpc shift is in the right direction but covers only 4.7% of the 5.7 km/s/Mpc gap

The framework does NOT resolve the Hubble tension. It predicts w = −1 exactly, giving standard late-time expansion. Reaching H_0 = 73 would require Omega_Lambda ≈ 0.749 — 9σ from the framework prediction.

This is honest and expected: the framework is a theory of Lambda, not a resolution of the Hubble tension. If the tension is real, both the framework and LCDM need additional physics (early dark energy, modified gravity, etc.).

Key Derivative: dH_0/dOmega_Lambda

The gradient dH_0/dOmega_Lambda ≈ 88.7 km/s/Mpc per unit Omega_Lambda. This means:

  • Euclid (σ = 0.002): H_0 uncertainty contribution ≈ 0.18 km/s/Mpc
  • Each BSM particle shifts H_0 by a calculable amount (via Omega_Lambda)
  • +1 vector (Z’): ΔH_0 ≈ +2.7 km/s/Mpc → immediately testable

Method

We use a calibrated solver: compute the SHIFT in H_0 when changing Omega_Lambda from Planck’s 0.6847 to the framework’s 0.6877, using a simplified Friedmann equation solver with numerical sound horizon integration. The relative shift is robust (independent of the sound horizon systematic). Absolute H_0 calibrated to Planck’s 67.36 km/s/Mpc.

Future Tests

ExperimentPrecisionCan it test?
DESI DR2 (2025)σ(H_0) ~ 1.5Yes — H_0 = 67.6 ± 1.5
Euclid (2025-2030)σ(Ω_Λ) = 0.002Yes — framework at +1.4σ
CMB-S4 (~2030)tightens θ_*Tightens H_0 further
Einstein Telescope (~2035)σ(H_0) = 0.1Decisive: 3σ between framework (67.6) and Planck (67.4)

What’s New

  1. H_0 as a prediction: In LCDM, H_0 is fit to data. Here it’s derived: H_0 = 67.63 km/s/Mpc.
  2. One fewer free parameter: The framework eliminates Omega_Lambda as a free parameter, reducing from 6 to 5 cosmological parameters.
  3. Hubble tension position: The framework is firmly on the CMB side. If SH0ES is right, the framework is falsified (−5.2σ) — but so is LCDM.
  4. dH_0/dOmega_Lambda = 88.7: Each BSM particle that shifts Omega_Lambda also shifts H_0 by a calculable amount. A single Z’ would push H_0 to ~70 km/s/Mpc.

Caveats

  • H_0 shift computed via calibrated simplified solver; full CAMB/CLASS would refine the absolute value
  • The +0.27 km/s/Mpc shift is small — the framework essentially agrees with Planck
  • The framework cannot accommodate the Hubble tension (w = −1 exactly)
  • If DESI confirms w ≠ −1, the entire framework is falsified regardless of H_0