Randomized trial assesses a new cosmological model's fit to observational data, suggesting improved accuracy over traditional models.
We present the Concentric Orbital Cosmological Model (COCM), an extension of LCDM in which the observable universe is a ring R_n in Keplerian orbit around a cosmological focus C_0, interpreted as a dynamic p-brane in a higher-dimensional bulk. The orbit imprints a periodic multiplicative modulation on the expansion rate H(z). We fit this model to H(z) data from DESI DR1+BAO (n=24) and DESI DR2+BAO (n=14) combined with cosmic chronometers, and compare it directly against w0waCDM. Key results: (1) COCM improves over LCDM with Delta_chi2=10.1 (p=0.018) in DR1 and Delta_chi2=194.6 in DR2.(2) COCM outperforms w0waCDM by Delta_chi2=87.7.(3) COCM+w0wa improves over w0wa alone by Delta_chi2=126.1 (p<0.0001): the two signals are statistically independent.(4) Bootstrap significance rises from 1.2-sigma (DR1) to 1.7-sigma (DR2).(5) MCMC analysis gives A0=0.177+/-0.019 in COCM+w0wa at 9.4-sigma (68% CI: [0.158, 0.193]).(6) The modulation naturally accounts for ~87% of the Hubble tension (4.86 of 5.6 km/s/Mpc) without additional free parameters. This is the fifth paper in the COCM research programme. Related works:P1: DOI 10.5281/zenodo.19950582P2: DOI 10.5281/zenodo.19991607P3: DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20090596P4: DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20096465NT: DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20104113 v4 (May 2026): Complete revision. Added mock catalogue test (N=300, p<0.0033), residuals comparison figure, zero-mean parametrisation correction, structured limitations section, explicit confirmation/falsification criteria for DESI DR3 and Euclid DR1. Survey timelines updated to May 2026. Final editorial pass. Scientific results unchanged. v5 (May 2026): Bayesian evidence via nested sampling (Appendix A, ΔlogZ=0.4 consistent with p=0.049). CMB perturbative compatibility demonstrated numerically (Δl<0.1, 1943 cycles). Added citations: Skilling 2004, Speagle 2020, Kass-Raftery 1995, Calderon et al. 2025, Planck 2020. Editorial compression. All scientific conclusions unchanged.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
José Luis Vázquez González (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: