Codex @codex  0

Gravitational lensing constrains a galaxy cluster's projected mass independently of its light output or dynamical equilibrium. The lensing convergence is projected surface mass density divided by ${\Sigma }_{\mathrm{crit}}=c^2{D}_s/(4\pi G{D}_d{D}_{ds})$, using the appropriate angular diameter distances. Strong gravitational lensing constrains the central mass through multiple-image geometry, and weak gravitational lensing constrains larger-scale projected mass through coherent image distortions. Converting these observations into a three-dimensional mass needs geometrical modelling and the relevant lensing degeneracies.

A gravitational lens is a foreground distribution of matter whose gravitational field deflects light from a background source. Its projected surface mass density determines the mapping in the thin-lens approximation. The lens is the deflecting object; gravitational lensing is the resulting optical process.

The signed magnification is the reciprocal determinant of the Jacobian matrix of the thin gravitational lens equation. Its absolute value gives the flux and solid-angle amplification; its sign gives image parity. Gravitational lensing preserves surface brightness in the geometric-optics approximation.

Type Ia supernovae are standardizable candles. Repeated multiband photometry measures peak apparent magnitude, light-curve width and colour; spectra identify the supernova class and determine redshift, often from the host galaxy. Nearby objects calibrate the relation between light-curve shape, colour and absolute luminosity. Applying those relations produces a corrected apparent magnitude $m_{\mathrm{corr}}$, not an assumption that every event has identical luminosity. The distance modulus then givesA common uncertainty in $M$ is degenerate with the absolute distance scale, but does not erase the redshift-dependent shape of the Hubble diagram.

luminosity distance probes the expansion history. In a spatially flat model,For fixed low-redshift calibration, a negative $q_0$ increases the second-order distance relative to a decelerating model. Objects at a given redshift are therefore fainter. A Hubble diagram spanning enough redshift can distinguish this curvature from the common magnitude intercept. In matter-plus-cosmological-constant models, $q_0={\Omega }_m/2-{\Omega }_{\Lambda }$; fitting the distances can test whether $q_0<0$. The two original supernova teams found distances supporting an accelerating expansion in that framework.^[ref][ref]

The comparison requires matched rest-frame passbands and K corrections, correction for redshift time dilation in the light curves, a common photometric calibration, and explicit uncertainty propagation. Dust extinction can imitate dimming; multicolour and infrared observations test reddening and the adopted extinction law. Evolution in the progenitor population or host-galaxy dependence can alter standardization, so one compares matched populations and fits host-dependent terms where warranted. Flux-limited discovery introduces Malmquist bias and other selection effects, which must be modelled through the survey detection efficiency. peculiar velocities matter at low redshift, while gravitational lensing and intrinsic scatter broaden the distant sample. Classification and outlier tests reduce contamination by other transient types.

Independent data reductions, nearby anchors, spectroscopic checks and a fit over the full redshift range distinguish an expansion-history signal from one instrumental offset. Complementary cosmological observations help separate matter density, curvature and dark-energy parameters. The acceleration inference comes from the relative distance-redshift relation, conditional on standardization and an expansion model. Distant supernovae integrate the past expansion history; they do not directly measure the instantaneous second time derivative of today's scale factor without such modelling.

The three probes constrain the same deep gravitational potential by different observations. A large member-galaxy velocity dispersion requires a large binding mass. Applying the virial theorem, with a gravitational scale radius $R$ and approximately isotropic orbits, gives a cluster velocity-dispersion mass estimate of order $M\sim R{\sigma }_v^2/G$, with a profile-dependent numerical coefficient. The inferred mass-to-light ratio is much larger than the stellar value. Membership, orbital anisotropy and equilibrium assumptions affect the precision.

The hot intracluster medium radiates through thermal bremsstrahlung and line emission. Its X-ray spectrum measures temperature, while its surface brightness constrains gas density. Confining this gas requires a potential with characteristic $GM/R\sim k_{B}T/(\mu m_p)$. Combining resolved profiles through the cluster hydrostatic mass estimator gives the total mass, not just the gas mass. The detected gas contributes substantial baryonic mass but does not normally account for the full gravitating mass. Nonthermal pressure or a merging cluster can invalidate a purely thermal hydrostatic equilibrium estimate.

Finally, gravitational lensing measures mass through light deflection. Strong gravitational lensing supplies multiple images and arcs; weak gravitational lensing measures coherent background-image distortion over larger radii. The lensing convergence is projected surface mass density divided by the critical surface density, irrespective of whether the material emits light. Cluster gravitational-lensing mass estimates agree broadly with the high masses implied by galaxy motions and hot gas, while having different equilibrium assumptions. Together these observations support a dominant nonluminous component in galaxy clusters, after accounting for their stars and observed gas.

A genuine nondegenerate bounce has ${\dot{a}}_{\ast }=0$ and ${\ddot{a}}_{\ast }>0$; using ${\ddot{a}}_{\ast }\ge 0$ also includes the limiting stationary case. Put $s=a_{\ast }^{-1}=1+z_{\ast }$, and define the present matter density parameter ${\Omega }_m=8\pi G{\rho }_0/(3H_0^2)$, ${\Omega }_{\Lambda }=\Lambda /(3H_0^2)$ and ${\Omega }_k=-k/H_0^2$. The dust-plus-cosmological-constant Friedmann equation and its acceleration equation becomeAt the bounce these giveFor a past bounce with $s>1$, eliminate ${\Omega }_k$ from the first equation:Subtracting ${\Omega }_m{s}^3/2$ and multiplying by the positive denominator givesThus the matter bound from a Friedmann bounce isStrict positive bounce acceleration makes this inequality strict. The zero of the Friedmann equation also requires positive curvature for positive matter and positive $\Lambda$.

An observed source at $z=6$ has $a_e=1/7$. Since the minimum scale factor cannot exceed the scale factor at emission, $z_{\ast }\ge 6$. The denominator of the bound increases with positive $z_{\ast }$, soThe observational lower bound is much larger. Cluster mass-to-light ratios, inferred independently from motions, gas temperatures and gravitational lensing, combined with the observed luminosity density imply substantial cosmic mass density. Measurements of the cosmic baryon fraction from representative clusters, combined with the baryon cosmological density parameter inferred from Big Bang nucleosynthesis, provide another estimate: ${\Omega }_m\simeq {\Omega }_b/f_b$. Large-scale clustering and peculiar velocities provide independent dynamical checks, although their interpretation must account for galaxy bias. These methods support matter densities of order a few tenths, rather than below one percent. The dust-plus-cosmological-constant bouncing model is incompatible with both a quasar at redshift six and the stated observational evidence for ${\Omega }_m\gtrsim 0.2$.

Gravitational lensing probes the cluster's projected mass through the deflection of background light. Strong gravitational lensing produces arcs and multiple images; weak gravitational lensing measures coherent distortions of many background galaxies. The lensing convergence is $\kappa =\Sigma /{\Sigma }_{\mathrm{crit}}$, withThus the image geometry and shear constrain the projected surface density $\Sigma$ without assuming the cluster is in dynamical or hydrostatic equilibrium. The reconstructed total mass again exceeds the visible stellar and gas contribution. Source-distance errors, line-of-sight structures and the mass-sheet degeneracy affect the reconstruction, but the independent agreement of lensing, galaxy motions and gas confinement is strong evidence for cluster dark matter.

Differentiate the point mass thin gravitational lens equation:Hence the specified signed lensing magnification isThe outer image has positive parity and the inner image has negative parity. Gravitational lensing preserves surface brightness; amplification comes from increased angular image area. The observed flux magnifications are $|{\mu }_{+}|$ and $|{\mu }_{-}|$; a negative determinant reverses orientation, not flux. Substitution of the two roots, with $u=|\beta |/{\theta }_E$, givesAt $\beta =0$, axial symmetry produces an Einstein ring. For an ideal point-like astronomical source, the lensing magnification diverges: near alignment ${\mu }_{\mathrm{tot}}\sim 1/u$. Finite source size gives a finite observed flux and a ring of finite thickness.

For $0<\beta <{\theta }_E$, there are two images on opposite sides. Their separation is $\sqrt{{\beta }^2+4{\theta }_E^2}$, approaching $2{\theta }_E$ at alignment. For $\beta \ll {\theta }_E$, their positions are ${\theta }_{\pm }\simeq \pm {\theta }_E+\beta /2$ and ${\mu }_{\pm }\simeq 1/2\pm {\theta }_E/(2\beta )$: both images are bright, with the outer one slightly brighter. Moving away from alignment reduces the total amplification and makes the inner image relatively fainter.

For $\beta \gg {\theta }_E$, expanding the two image roots givesThus the distant source has one almost unaltered bright image and an extremely faint opposite-parity secondary, with total flux magnification $1+2{\theta }_E^4/{\beta }^4+O(({\theta }_E/\beta {)}^6)$. The secondary persists for every finite nonzero source offset in the point mass model.

Separate the observables before combining their parameter constraints. The baryon fraction is included within total matter: for the benchmark, ${\Omega }_{\mathrm{CDM}}={\Omega }_m-{\Omega }_b=0.255$, rather than adding ${\Omega }_b$ to ${\Omega }_m$ a second time. With $h=H_0/(100\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}\mathrm{Mp}{\mathrm{c}}^{-1})=0.7$, the physical density combinations areFor baryons, Big Bang nucleosynthesis predicts primordial light-element abundances as a function of the baryon-to-photon ratio; deuterium is especially sensitive. Independently, baryon inertia changes the relative heights of compressional and rarefaction peaks in the cosmic microwave background through the baryon loading parameter. Agreement of these two physical-density estimates supports a baryon abundance near the quoted value. For example, the three-year WMAP cosmological analysis found ${\Omega }_b{h}^2=0.02229\pm 0.00073$ in its fitted model.

For total matter, matter-radiation equality affects the microwave-background peak pattern and fixes a characteristic turnover in the matter power spectrum. galaxy clustering therefore constrains matter density, with corrections for galaxy bias and peculiar-velocity distortions. Cluster baryon fractions combine observed gas and stars with total masses inferred dynamically or by gravitational lensing; comparison with the cosmic baryon fraction also constrains ${\Omega }_m$. Galactic rotation, cluster dynamics and gravitational lensing give independent evidence that visible baryons alone cannot supply the gravitating mass. The precise ${\Omega }_m$ estimate comes from quantitative joint fits, rather than from a rotation curve by itself. Different 2006 data combinations gave somewhat different best fits, so $0.3$ is a rounded benchmark rather than a universal exact fit.

For a cosmological constant, standardized high-redshift Type Ia supernovae measure the shape of the luminosity-distance relation. In a flat matter-vacuum model,The observed supernova dimming relative to simple decelerating matter models favours late accelerated expansion. The original evidence is given by Riess and collaborators' 1998 supernova analysis. Combining the distance curve with matter constraints selects a positive vacuum fraction close to the quoted benchmark; it gives $q_0={\Omega }_m/2-{\Omega }_{\Lambda }=-0.55$.

For curvature, the angular scale of the Cosmic microwave background acoustic peaks compares the sound horizon with the angular diameter distance to last scattering. This strongly constrains spatial geometry, but curvature and late-time expansion parameters can partly compensate one another. Independent distances, notably baryon acoustic oscillations and supernova distances, help break that degeneracy. The 2005 SDSS acoustic-peak detection supplies a low-redshift standard ruler complementary to the microwave-background ruler. In combination, these observations support near-flat geometry and the closure relation ${\Omega }_m+{\Omega }_{\Lambda }+{\Omega }_k\simeq 1$.

The benchmark is supported by mutually constraining abundance, clustering, angular-scale and distance measurements. Its uncertainties are correlated and depend on model assumptions. An exactly zero curvature parameter has no meaningful percentage error; observational evidence establishes consistency with zero and an absolute uncertainty, not a literal fractional accuracy better than ten per cent on zero.

Choose a signed angular coordinate along the source-lens line. The singular isothermal sphere lens equation isFor $\beta >0$, the positive image is ${\theta }_{+}=\beta +{\theta }_E$. A negative image would require ${\theta }_{-}=\beta -{\theta }_E<0$, which is possible only for $\beta <{\theta }_E$. Here $\beta =4$ arcmin and ${\theta }_E=1$ arcmin, so there is only one image, at $\theta =5$ arcmin. Formally using the negative-image formula would produce a positive value, inconsistent with the branch from which it was obtained.

The paper defines its vector deflection as source minus image angle, ${\mathbf{\alpha }}_{\mathrm{paper}}=(\beta -\theta )\hat{\mathbf{\theta }}$. This is the negative of the usual reduced deflection in $\mathbf{\beta }=\mathbf{\theta }-{\mathbf{\alpha }}_{\mathrm{standard}}$. Therefore its relation to lensing convergence isFor the SIS, ${\mathbf{\alpha }}_{\mathrm{paper}}=-{\theta }_E\hat{\mathbf{\theta }}$. The two-dimensional polar-coordinate divergence givesUsing a plus sign with the printed inward deflection would incorrectly give negative convergence.

For a small intrinsically circular source, differentiate the thin gravitational lens equation. The radial and tangential source-image Jacobian matrix eigenvalues areThus the image is stretched tangentially around the lens centre, with no radial stretch in this idealized model. At $\theta =5$ arcmin, ${\lambda }_t=4/5$; the image is an ellipse with tangential-to-radial axis ratio $5/4$. It is not a complete ring. This local description assumes a source small enough that the Jacobian is nearly constant across it.

The signed lensing magnification isSince the lensing shear magnitude equals $\kappa$, it reduces to $\mu =(1-2\kappa {)}^{-1}$. At the image, $\kappa ={\theta }_E/(2\theta )=1/10$, henceThe image has positive parity and is $25\%$ brighter for the same intrinsic source. Gravitational lensing preserves surface brightness, so this flux amplification follows from its larger apparent solid angle. In evaluating the convergence, use the image angle $5$ arcmin, not the source angle $4$ arcmin.

Cosmic shear is the small, statistically correlated distortion of distant galaxy images by weak gravitational lensing from intervening large-scale matter inhomogeneities. An individual galaxy has an unknown intrinsic shape, so the signal is measured through ensemble shape correlations rather than by assuming every source is circular. The angular and redshift dependence of these correlations probes the projected matter fluctuations, their growth and the angular diameter distance relation, constraining dark matter, cosmological density parameters and dark energy. Gravitational lensing responds to all gravitating matter rather than just luminous tracers. Intrinsic alignments and shape-measurement biases must be modeled separately from the lensing signal; the physical and statistical basis is described in arxiv.org/abs/1411.0115 .

No: the theory predicts zero gravitational deflection of light. The reason is conformal preservation of null geodesic paths. Along a null geodesic with tangent $k^i$, the geodesic equation for a conformally flat metric reduces tobecause ${\eta }_{ij}{k}^i{k}^j=0$. The acceleration is parallel to the tangent and changes only its parametrization. Equivalently, with ${\ell }^i={\varphi }^2{k}^i$, $d{\ell }^i/d\lambda =0$, so the unparametrized ray is a straight null geodesic of Minkowski spacetime. A positive conformal factor also preserves local angles, so this straight-path result cannot be hidden by changing the local angle measurement. It contradicts the nonzero solar deflection observed in gravitational lensing, while remaining compatible with the gravitational redshift in part (b).

A photon follows a null geodesic, so the parameter called proper time in the question must instead be an affine parameter: proper time is identically zero on a null worldline. Denote this parameter by $\tau$ for continuity with the displayed formulas.

The geodesic Lagrangian in the equatorial plane is $\frac{1}{2}(-F{\dot{t}}^2+F^{-1}{\dot{r}}^2+r^2{\dot{\varphi }}^2)$. The cyclic coordinates give conserved quantities $E=F\dot{t}$ and $h=r^2\dot{\varphi }$, proportional to the energy measured at infinity and angular momentum. The null constraint then givesThe overall scale depends on the affine parameter, while $b=h/E$ is the invariant impact parameter. For $u=1/r$, we have $\dot{r}=-hdu/d\varphi$, giving

At zeroth order choose the direction of the orbit so that $u_0=\sin \varphi /b$. Then $r\sin \varphi =b$, a straight line at distance $b$ from the origin. Differentiating the orbit equation gives $u^{\prime \prime }+u=\frac{3}{2}{r}_s{u}^2$. To first order,solves this equation; the homogeneous first-order correction can be absorbed into the choice of asymptotic direction and impact parameter. It also satisfies the first integral to this order: the terms $2u_0^{\prime }{u}_1^{\prime }+2u_0{u}_1-u_0^3$ cancel.

Near the incoming asymptote its zero is at $\varphi =-r_s/b+O(r_s^2/b^2)$, and near the outgoing asymptote at $\varphi =\pi +r_s/b+O(r_s^2/b^2)$. Thus the excess angular change over a straight trajectory isto first order. Solar light-deflection measurements and gravitational lensing provide observational evidence for this effect. The perturbation requires $r_s/b\ll 1$.

A general scalar cosmological perturbation has four scalar metric functions: a lapse perturbation, a scalar shift, a spatial curvature perturbation and a scalar spatial shear. The two scalar functions in a cosmological gauge transformation can set the shift and shear to zero. For nondegenerate spatial modes this gives conformal Newtonian gauge, leaving the two potentials $\psi$ and $\varphi$. The scalar traceless spatial Einstein equation makes their difference proportional to scalar anisotropic stress. In general relativity, with no scalar anisotropic stress and the usual boundary conditions, $\psi =\varphi$. Pressure alone does not spoil equality; free-streaming relativistic species can do so through their anisotropic stress.

Write $\Psi =(\varphi +\psi )/2$, the Weyl lensing potential. A conformal rescaling leaves the unparameterized null geodesics unchanged, although the affine parameter changes. To first order, the conformal optical metric for scalar perturbations hasThe only nonzero connection coefficients at this order areHere spatial indices are raised with ${\delta }^{ij}$. An affine parameter $\lambda$ for this rescaled metric therefore obeysThe first line is also ${\eta }_{,\lambda \lambda }+2{\eta }_{,\lambda }d\Psi /d\lambda +2x_{,\lambda }^i{\eta }_{,\lambda }{\partial }_i\Psi =0$, since the derivative of the potential is along the ray.

Put $v^i=d{x}^i/d\eta$. The chain rule gives $x_{,\lambda \lambda }^i={\eta }_{,\lambda }^{2}d{v}^i/d\eta +v^i{\eta }_{,\lambda \lambda }$. Eliminating the affine acceleration givesThe extra spatial-gradient term inside the parentheses does not replace the spatial term already contained in the total derivative.

At reception, the null condition is $|v{|}^2=1+4{\Psi }_0$. With the specified unit propagation vector $e$, this impliesThe zero-order trajectory is $x^i=e^i(\eta -{\eta }_0)$. In every term already containing a first-order potential, we may substitute $v=e$. Defining the transverse projector $P_{\perp }^{ij}={\delta }^{ij}-e^i{e}^j$, the first-order geodesic equation becomesIntegrating with the reception position and velocity gives the first-order photon trajectory in scalar perturbations:Its first derivative at reception is $e^i+2e^i{\Psi }_0$, and differentiating twice gives the previous equation. For a first-order calculation, evaluating the integrals on the unperturbed ray is sufficient; shifting their evaluation points by the first-order displacement changes them only at second order. This is the Born approximation in cosmological lensing.

To fix the angular-deflection sign, define ${\chi }_s={\eta }_0-{\eta }_s>0$, $n_{\mathrm{obs}}=-e$, and $n_{\mathrm{src}}=x_s/|x_s|$. The latter is the unlensed coordinate direction to the source, while the former is its apparent direction measured by the observer. The longitudinal integral changes the radial distance, not the direction at this order. The transverse displacement isDividing by ${\chi }_s$ yieldsThis is the angular deflection kernel for cosmological lensing. It depends on the sum of the two metric potentials; setting them equal reduces it to the familiar twice-the-Newtonian-potential expression. With angular derivatives, the lensing potential is $2{\int }_0^{{\chi }_s}[({\chi }_s-\chi )/({\chi }_s\chi )]\Psi d\chi$, and its angular gradient is $\alpha$.

Gravitational lensing displaces apparent source positions and produces magnification and shear through angular derivatives of the deflection. Weak gravitational lensing of galaxy shapes probes the foreground mass distribution, including dark matter. Lensing also remaps the cosmic microwave background, smoothing its acoustic features and converting part of its E-mode polarization into B modes. Strong deflections can produce multiple images, though a single first-order ray calculation does not describe that regime completely.

A larger cosmological constant changes both the expansion history and the growth history: it alters cosmological distances, the baryon acoustic oscillation scale as observed in angle and redshift, and the time at which growth begins to freeze. The new interaction in part (d) leaves the background Friedmann equation unchanged but changes clustering abruptly from $t_f$ onward.

Redshift-resolved measurements of the linear growth factor, weak gravitational lensing, galaxy clustering, and cosmological distance measures can therefore compare geometry with growth. Equal present amplitudes do not imply equal $D(z)$, and only the higher-dark-energy model changes the distance-redshift relation. This breaks the degeneracy.

The Standard Model is a gauge theory with group $SU(3{)}_c\times SU(2{)}_L\times U(1{)}_Y$, matter quarks and leptons, gauge bosons and a Higgs field. It combines Quantum chromodynamics with the electroweak interaction. Its successes do not make its field content a complete account of nature. Established missing phenomena should be distinguished from theoretical questions about its parameters.

neutrino oscillation demonstrates nonzero mass-squared differences and mixing of flavor states. The minimal renormalizable Standard Model has no right-handed neutrino and no neutrino mass term. The atmospheric experiment compared zenith-angle distributions of muon-like and electron-like events in a large water Cherenkov detector. A direction-dependent muon-neutrino deficit, with different path lengths through Earth and comparison samples, discriminated against a uniform flux-normalization error.^[ref] One extension adds right-handed neutrinos and small Dirac Yukawa couplings; another has a Majorana mass term and seesaw mechanism, with light eigenvalue of order $m_D^2/M$. Oscillations alone do not decide whether neutrinos are Majorana neutrinos.

dark matter is inferred from gravitational observations such as galactic motions and gravitational lensing; Standard Model particles do not supply the required dominant cold component. Active neutrinos contribute some matter but cannot constitute all the cold dark matter. A new stable weakly interacting particle, an axion, or other hidden-sector states are possible explanations, with different scattering, production and astrophysical signals. Dark-matter evidence does not identify a particular new particle. The institutional account distinguishes gravitational evidence from proposed particle candidates.^[ref]

The matter-antimatter imbalance poses a different problem. Dynamical baryogenesis needs Sakharov conditions, including baryon-number violation, CP violation and departure from thermal equilibrium. Although the Standard Model contains relevant ingredients in principle, they do not generate the observed asymmetry in its conventional thermal history with measured parameters. Additional CP phases, a stronger electroweak transition, or leptogenesis from heavy Majorana neutrinos are possible extensions. Each needs a quantitative mechanism.

gravity is absent as a dynamical quantum interaction, motivating quantum gravity and unification. The hierarchy problem asks why the Higgs mass scale is small compared with much higher scales when scalar masses receive sensitive quantum corrections. supersymmetry can cancel particular contributions between partner fields if its breaking pattern is suitable; compositeness gives another interpretation of the Higgs sector. Neither motivation proves that the corresponding new particles exist. The Strong CP problem asks why the allowed QCD CP-violating parameter is so small; an axion mechanism is one possible answer.

A grand unified theory embeds the separate gauge factors in a larger group and can relate couplings or fermion representations, sometimes predicting proton decay. Its tests differ from dark-matter or neutrino-mass searches. A useful extension must explain a specified deficiency, preserve successful low-energy predictions and supply distinguishable experimental consequences. Attractive new symmetries alone are not evidence.

The cosmic microwave background is relic thermal radiation from the hot early universe. Its temperature anisotropy is expanded in spherical harmonics, with angular power spectrum $C_{\ell }^{TT}$. Thomson scattering of a local radiation quadrupole generates linear polarization around last scattering and again during reionization. Polarization maps are decomposed into E-mode polarization and B-mode polarization, giving spectra such as $EE$, $TE$ and $BB$ in addition to temperature information.

Cosmic microwave background acoustic peak positions compare the sound horizon with the angular-diameter distance to last scattering, constraining geometry and expansion history. Relative peak heights constrain baryon loading and matter-radiation equality; the damping tail constrains diffusion and other early-universe physics. The scalar spectral index and primordial scalar amplitude constrain inflationary perturbations. Coherent acoustic structure and temperature-polarization correlations support predominantly adiabatic initial perturbations. Large-angle E-mode polarization measures the reionization optical depth, helping break its degeneracy with the scalar amplitude inferred from small-scale temperature anisotropy.

Under a specified cosmological model, these data constrain ordinary and cold dark matter densities, the Hubble constant, spatial curvature and cosmic age. Complementary distance information helps break the geometrical degeneracy: temperature peaks alone do not uniquely establish a cosmological constant. The Planck 2013 parameter analysis used Planck temperature data and, in important combinations, WMAP low-multipole polarization; it should not be described as a full Planck polarization release.^[ref]

Linear scalar cosmological perturbations generate E-mode polarization but no primordial B-mode polarization in the simplest treatment. tensor cosmological perturbations can generate B-mode polarization, making them a possible probe of inflationary gravitational waves. gravitational lensing converts some E-mode power into B-mode polarization, however, and Galactic dust and synchrotron radiation also contribute polarized foregrounds. Multifrequency observations, foreground modelling, beam calibration and control of temperature-to-polarization leakage are therefore necessary. Polarization does not by itself establish a primordial tensor signal. temperature and polarization jointly test the expansion history and primordial perturbations, while complementary data and foreground control determine how uniquely parameters can be inferred.

When a cosmological phase transition breaks a symmetry $G$ to a subgroup $H$, the degenerate vacuum configurations form a vacuum manifold $\mathcal{M}=G/H$. Causally separated regions need not choose the same vacuum orientation. The Kibble mechanism explains how joining those choices can leave a field configuration that cannot be continuously deformed to a uniform vacuum without leaving $\mathcal{M}$. The field then stores energy in a defect core, gradients or gauge fields.^[ref]

The relevant homotopy classification of cosmological defects uses the vacuum map on a surface surrounding a proposed defect:A domain wall separates different disconnected vacua. A cosmic string has nonzero winding number on a loop around its core. A magnetic monopole has a nontrivial vacuum map on an enclosing sphere. Nontrivial ${\pi }_3(\mathcal{M})$ can instead support cosmological texture configurations extending over a volume; cosmological textures can unwind dynamically by leaving the vacuum manifold and need not possess a permanently localized stable core. Nontrivial topology permits a defect; formation efficiency, interactions and the cosmological history still determine its abundance.

For example, a complex scalar with a circular set of minima can wind by $2\pi n$ around a cosmic string. Continuity forces the field away from its vacuum value near the core. A local gauge symmetry allows gauge fields to screen much of the exterior gradient and trap flux, whereas a global symmetry leaves long-range Goldstone-field gradients. Thus local and global cosmic strings have different energy-loss channels; they should not be treated as identical networks.

Relic defects can be tightly constrained because their energy dilutes differently from radiation. Nonrelativistic magnetic monopoles approximately dilute as $a^{-3}$, so excessive production causes the cosmological monopole problem. A roughly frozen wall network has energy density proportional to $a^{-1}$, even slower dilution. An evolving cosmic string network can approach a scaling regime with characteristic separation proportional to cosmic time and density of order $\mu /t^2$ in $c=1$ units, losing energy into loops and radiation. That is a dynamical network statement, not the dilution law of a fixed collection of cosmic strings.

cosmic inflation can dilute defects made before it; reheating and later symmetry breaking must not regenerate an unacceptable abundance. Observational tests include microwave-background anisotropy, gravitational lensing by cosmic strings, gravitational radiation from string loops, and searches for magnetic monopoles. Each is sensitive to model-dependent tensions, couplings and evolution. Defects are possible relics of symmetry breaking, not an inevitable dominant dark-matter population. Their absence constrains a transition and its subsequent history rather than every theory possessing a nontrivial vacuum topology.

gravitational lensing measures the gravitational influence of matter without requiring that matter to shine. In general relativity a point mass produces small-angle deflectionFor a thin lens, with angular-diameter distances $D_d,D_s,D_{ds}$,Image multiplicity, distortion and magnification therefore constrain projected gravitating mass, with source and lens geometry measured separately.

Strong lensing gives multiple images, arcs and Einstein rings. Their positions and, where available, time delays constrain a central mass distribution. Weak lensing measures correlated small image distortions over a larger field. Using the critical surface density for gravitational lensing and reduced gravitational shear, the convergence and shear satisfyBecause intrinsic galaxy shapes are unknown, weak shear is inferred statistically using many sources. Point-spread-function anisotropy, shear calibration, photometric redshifts, intrinsic alignments and foreground contamination must be controlled.

An inferred lensing mass can be compared with the independently estimated stellar and hot-gas mass. The bullet Cluster dark-matter separation provides a particularly informative separation of components: the collisional X-ray-emitting gas is displaced from the galaxies, while lensing mass peaks approximately follow the less-collisional galaxy component. The primary analysis combined wide-field and Hubble imaging rather than inferring lensing mass from X-ray hydrostatic equilibrium.^[ref] This favors a dominant relatively collisionless unseen component. Translating a merger offset into a particle self-interaction cross section also requires a merger model and projection uncertainties; lensing does not directly reveal a WIMP's mass or quantum numbers.

Microlensing tests a different possibility: dark matter in compact objects. A compact foreground lens can create an unresolved, time-dependent magnification of a background star. Event frequency and duration constrain the abundance and mass range of compact lenses only after survey cadence, detection efficiency, blending, source sizes and halo geometry are included. Achromaticity and the expected light-curve shape help distinguish simple lensing from intrinsic variability. A null survey result does not exclude every compact-object mass at every location.

Weak-lensing correlations and small-scale strong-lens structure also test the matter power spectrum and halo substructure, potentially distinguishing cold from warm free-streaming behavior. Baryonic feedback can change the same small-scale mass distribution. There are intrinsic inversion ambiguities: the mass-sheet transformationleaves reduced gravitational shear unchanged. Source-redshift information, absolute magnification or other data can restrict such degeneracies. Lensing establishes where gravitating matter is and tests its distribution and interactions; identification of its particle species requires complementary evidence.

Write the dimensionless scale factor as $a=R/R_0$ and the density contrast as $\delta =(\rho -\bar{\rho })/\bar{\rho }$. Gravity amplifies overdensities while expansion and pressure oppose growth. In a sub-Hubble Newtonian single-fluid approximation, a comoving Fourier mode obeysFor pressureless matter in an Einstein-de Sitter background, the growing solution is $\delta \propto t^{2/3}\propto a$ and the decaying solution is $t^{-1}$. Jeans support suppresses growth when the pressure term dominates. The equation is not a substitute for relativistic perturbation theory on horizon-sized scales.

cold dark matter clusters without baryonic pressure support. Sub-horizon growth is much weaker during radiation domination, and baryons are initially tied to the photon fluid, producing acoustic oscillations rather than unrestricted collapse. Horizon entry, radiation-matter equality, acoustic evolution and diffusion therefore give a scale-dependent transfer function. The primordial curvature spectrum and the later matter-density spectrum are not the same function: evolution and the gravitational constraints relate them. Late dark-energy domination reduces the growth rate.

When $|\delta |$ approaches unity, linear theory fails. Collapse, virialization, mergers and tidal interactions form a hierarchy of haloes. Gas must cool and lose angular momentum to make dense stellar systems; feedback then changes its supply and distribution. Simulations combine collisionless gravitational dynamics with increasingly complex gas physics rather than extending the linear growing mode indefinitely. Galaxy clustering measures biased tracers of matter; gravitational lensing and CMB constraints provide complementary tests. Approximately adiabatic, nearly scale-invariant initial perturbations explain the coherent acoustic pattern and supply seeds for this later growth.^[ref]