COSMOLOGY

Notes on Historical Papers

DANIEL BAUMANN
 Contents

Preface page 1

2 The Expanding Universe 3

3 The Hot Big Bang 8

4 Cosmological Inflation 12

5 Structure Formation 16

6 Relativistic Perturbation Theory 20

7 Cosmic Microwave Background 22

8 Quantum Initial Conditions 27

Appendix A A Cosmic Chronology 29

References 34

i
 Preface

The following are notes on papers of historical importance to the field of cosmology.
It is not a rigorous treatment of the history of cosmology, which I am completely
unqualified to write. Instead, I have just collected some key papers and put them
in a chronological order. The text is arranged according to the chapters of my book
Cosmology.
Given that I am not an expert on the topic, I very much welcome feedback
and corrections. Please let me know if I am missing key references and/or if I am
mischaracterizing anything.

I am very grateful to Malcolm Longair for his generous advice and correspondence
on the history of cosmology. I have also been privileged to learn about the history
of inflation from some of its main participants, especially Alan Guth, Andrei Linde
and Paul Steinhardt. Finally, I have received helpful comments and corrections on a
draft version of these notes from Daniel Green, Phillip Helbig, Soren Larsen, Eugene
Lim, Andrei Linde, Alessandro Melchiorri, Antonio Padilla, Markus Pössel, Anze
Slosar, Jaco de Swart and Roberto Trotta. Any remaining mistakes and inaccuracies
are of course my fault.

Daniel Baumann
Amsterdam and Taipei, 2022

Further Reading

There are a number excellent books on the history of cosmology. I have found the
following references particularly useful when preparing these notes:

• H. Kragh, Cosmology and Controversy: The Historical Development of Two

Theories of the Universe. Princeton University Press, 1999.
• M. Longair, The Cosmic Century: A History of Astrophysics and Cosmology.
Cambridge University Press, 2006.
• P.J.E. Peebles, Cosmology’s Century: An Inside History of our Modern Under-
standing of the Universe. Princeton University Press, 2020.
• P.J.E. Peebles, L. Page, and B. Partridge, Finding the Big Bang. Cambridge
University Press, 2009.
1
2 Preface

• M. Bartusiak, Archives of the Universe: 100 Discoveries That Transformed Our

Understanding of the Cosmos. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2006.
• B. Jones, Precision Cosmology. Cambridge University Press, 2017.
• H. Nussbaumer and L. Bieri, Discovering the Expanding Universe. Cambridge
University Press, 2009.
• H. Kragh and M. Longair, The Oxford Handbook of the History of Modern
Cosmology. Oxford University Press, 2019.
• H. Kragh, Conceptions of Cosmos: From Myths to the Accelerating Universe: A
History of Cosmology. Oxford University Press, 2013.
• E. Harrison, Cosmology. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
• A. Lightman and R. Brawer, Origins: The Lives and Worlds of Modern Cos-
mologists. Harvard University Press, 1990.
• J. Bernstein and G. Feinberg, Cosmological Constants: Papers in Modern Cos-
mology. Columbia University Press, 1986.

Popular books that cover the history of cosmology are:

• S. Weinberg, The First Three Minutes. Basic Books, 1993.
• D. Overbye, Lonely Hearts of the Cosmos. Back Bay Books,1999.
• S. Singh, Big Bang: The Origin of the Universe. Harper Perennial, 2005.
• M. Bartusiak, The Day We Found the Universe. Vintage Books, 2010.
• J. Barrow, The Book of Universe. W. W. Norton & Company, 2012.
• P. Halpern, Flashes of Creation. Basic Books, 2021.
• A. Guth, The Inflationary Universe. Basic Books, 1998.
• D. Hooper, At the Edge of Time. Princeton University Press, 2019.
• W. Kinney, An Infinity of Worlds. MIT Press, 2022.
• G. Schilling, The Elephant in the Universe. Harvard University Press, 2022.
2 The Expanding Universe

The discovery of the expanding universe has an interesting history. In the following,
I list some important milestones:1
• 1915: On November 25, Einstein presents the field equations of general relativity
(GR) at the Prussian Academy of Sciences in Berlin. These equations became the
foundation of modern cosmology.
Vesto Slipher of the Lowell Observatory publishes the spectra of 15 spiral neb-
ulae [4]. The measure redshifts imply large radial velocities, exceeding the typical
velocities of stars by a factor of 25.
• 1917: Einstein applies GR to a homogeneous universe [5]. According to Einstein,
“the most important fact that we draw from experience as to the distribution
of matter is that the relative velocities of the stars are very small.” This leads
him to conclude that “there is a system of reference relatively to which matter
may be looked upon as being permanently at rest.” He further assumes that the
universe if finite and finds the metric (and the energy-momentum tensor) for a
static spherically symmetric space. He also notices, however, that this metric doesn’t
solve his field equations unless a cosmological constant is introduced to balance the
gravitational attraction of the matter. This solution became known as the “Einstein
static universe.”
Shortly thereafter, de Sitter finds a second solution to the Einstein equation
corresponding to an empty universe dominated by the cosmological constant [6, 7].
De Sitter shows that the light emitted from particles at rest in the spacetime is
redshifted,2 as suggested by Slipher’s observations of extra-galactic nebulae [4].
In his own words, “the frequency of light-vibrations diminishes with increasing
distance from the origin of co-ordinates. The lines in the spectra of very distant
stars or nebulae must therefore be systematically displaced towards the red, giving
rise to a spurious radial velocity.” Using the redshifts of three nebulae from Slipher’s
sample, de Sitter estimates the radius of (spacetime) curvature of his solution to
be Rc = 1.5 Mpc.
• 1922: Friedmann finds a solution of the Einstein equations for an expanding
universe with matter and positive spatial curvature [11]. In this paper, he derives

1 More detailed descriptions can by found in [1–3].

2 De Sitter, in fact, found a quadratic relation between velocity and distance. The correct linear
relationship was first derived by Weyl [8], and later rediscovered by Lemaître [9] and Robert-
son [10].

3
4 The Expanding Universe

the famous equation which now bears his name. He also realizes that the expansion
would imply a finite age for the universe. Unfortunately, Friedmann’s work was
dismissed by Einstein, so it did not receive much attention at the time. (Einstein
later apologized for this.) Friedmann died three years later, before his work got the
recognition it deserved.
Wirtz shows that their radial velocities of 29 galaxies increase with decreasing
apparent brightness of the galaxies [12].
• 1924: Friedmann presents a new solution of the field equations with constant
negative curvature [13].
Lundmark [14] plots the radial velocities of the spiral nebulae versus their dis-
tances (as inferred from their apparent magnitudes). The plot suggests “that there
may be a relation between these two quantities, although not a very definite one.”
In [15], Lundmark tries to fit a quadratic function to the data. A similar analysis
was carried out independently by Stromberg [16].
• 1925: Lemaître shows that de Sitter’s solution corresponds an exponentially ex-
panding universe [9] (which was not manifest in the coordinates used by de Sitter).
He also derives the linear distance–redshift relation for the de Sitter universe.
• 1927: Independently from Friedmann, Lemaître applies the Einstein equations
to an expanding universe with matter and curvature [17]. Lemaître’s remarkable
paper also includes a derivation of Hubble’s law and a measurement of Hubble’s
constant (two years before Hubble).3 Unfortunately, Lemaître published his work
in a rather obscure Belgian journal, so it did not receive much attention either.
• 1928: Unaware of Lemaître’s 1925 and 1927 papers, Robertson shows again that
de Sitter’s solution describes an exponentially expanding universe and derives the
linear distance–redshift relation [10]. Combining distance measurements by Hubble
with Slipher’s redshifts, Robertson verifies the linear distance–redshift relation and
provides an estimate of Hubble’s constant.
• 1929: Hubble’s paper on the expansion of the universe is arguable one of the
most important papers in the history of science [18]. Using the period–luminosity
relationship of Cepheid variable stars [19], Hubble and Humason determine the
distances to extra-galactic nebulae (galaxies) and finds a correlation with their
redshifts (as measured by Slipher). This correlation is a key feature of the expansion
of the universe, although Hubble himself resisted that interpretation for a long
time and instead preferred to think of it in terms of the de Sitter effect. While
Hubble’s result established the correlation between distances and recession speeds,
the measurements came with large systematic errors and the inferred value of the
Hubble constant was off by a factor of 7.

3 In the English translation of his article (published in 1931), Lemaître omitted the paragraph
including his estimate of the Hubble constant, noting in his letter to the editor that “I did not
find advisable to reprint the provisional discussion of radial velocities which is clearly of no
actual interest.”
5 The Expanding Universe

• 1930: Eddington points out that the Einstein static universe is unstable to small
fluctuations in the matter density [20].
Lemaître sends his 1927 paper to Eddington who realizes its significance and
begins to promote it more widely (with the help of de Sitter). The importance of
Lemaître’s work (and also that of Friedmann) is finally appreciated and Hubble’s
redshift–distance measurements are interpreted as the expansion of space.
• 1931: Adding 46 new radial velocity measurements by Humason [21] (extend-
ing to larger distances), Hubble and Humason provide a much more convincing
measurement of the linear distance–redshift relation [22].
Tolman [23] and Eddington [24] point out that the second law of thermodynam-
ics (the increase in entropy) implies a finite age for the universe. They hesitate,
however, to formulate the Big Bang hypothesis.
Lemaître publishes a short letter [25] describing his vision for the beginning of
the universe from a “primeval atom” on “a day without yesterday.” Here is a short
passage from the letter:

If the world had begun with a simple quantum, the notions of space and time would
altogether fail to have any meaning at the beginning: they would only begin to have a
sensible meaning when the original quantum had been divided into a sufficient number of
quanta. If this suggestion is correct, the beginning of the world happened a little before
the beginning of space and time. [...] We could conceive the beginning of the universe in
the form of a unique atom, the atomic weight of which is the total mass of the universe.
This highly unstable atom would divide in smaller and smaller atoms by a kind of super-
radioactive process.

Shortly after, Lemaître provides a more detailed account of his Big Bang hypoth-
esis [26]. This paper includes an explicit solution of the Friedmann equations for
a universe with matter and a cosmological constant. The initial singularity of the
solution is identified with the beginning of the universe. (The name Big Bang had
not been introduced yet.). The paper also emphasizes that the addition of the cos-
mological constant leads to a phase of stagnated expansion at intermediate times,
which alleviates the age problem of the matter-only universe.
Einstein dispenses with the cosmological constant in his field equations [27].
• 1932: Einstein and de Sitter write an influential two-page paper describing the
evolution of a flat matter-dominated universe [28].4 For a long time, this Einstein–de
Sitter universe was the standard cosmological model. It is still a good approximation
to the long matter-dominated period in the history of our universe.
• 1933: Zwicky argues for the presence of dark matter in the Coma cluster [29, 30].
It took over 40 years until the rest of the community also got convinced of the
4 Apparently, neither Einstein nor de Sitter were very enthusiastic about the paper. In a conver-
sation with Eddington, Einstein remarked “I did not think the paper very important myself,
but de Sitter was keen on it.” On the other hand, de Sitter told Eddington that “I do not myself
consider the result of much importance, but Einstein seemed to think it was.”
6 The Expanding Universe

existence of dark matter (mostly through measurements of galactic rotation curves

by Vera Rubin and others [31–33]).
Robertson publishes an influential review on relativistic cosmology [34].
• 1934: Lemaître identifies the cosmological constant with the energy density of
empty space [35] (see also [36]).5
• 1935: Robertson [39] and Walker [40] derive the FRW metric on the basis of
homogeneity and isotropy alone. A few years earlier, Milne had shown that Hubble’s
law is a consequence of the cosmological principle [41].
• 1946: Gamow initiates the study of Big Bang nucleosynthesis (BBN) [42] (more
on this in Chapter 3).
• 1947: Lemaître and Einstein exchange letters discussing the need for introducing
a cosmological constant to solve the age problem of the Einstein–de Sitter universe.
While Lemaître finds the cosmological constant a necessity, Einstein objects to it
on aesthetic grounds (“I am unable to believe that such an ugly thing should be
realized in nature”).
• 1948: Alpher and Herman provide important refinements of Gamow’s theory of
BBN [43]. The paper contains the first prediction of a left-over radiation from the
hot Big Bang, and estimates its present temperature. Unfortunately, the prediction
of the CMB is presented as a side remark and largely ignored.
Hoyle [44] and Bondi and Gold [45] introduce the “Steady State Theory” as an
alternative to the hot Big Bang. The fascinating history of the Big Bang vs. Steady
State controversy is reviewed in [1, 46].
• 1949: Fred Hoyle coins the term “Big Bang” in a BBC radio programme.
• 1955: Ryle and Scheuer show that there are more radio galaxies at large distances
than there are nearby [47], thus indicating that the universe had evolved over time,
in conflict with the expectation from the steady-state theory of Hoyle, Bondi and
Gold. The robustness of these observations is a topic of active debate.
• 1963: Maarten Schmidt discovers the first “quasi-stellar object” (quasar) [48].
More and more of the extremely luminous quasars are soon detected at large red-
shifts. The distant quasars are another sign that the universe was evolving and not
in a steady state.
• 1965: Penzias and Wilson make one of the biggest discoveries in the history of
science. You wouldn’t know it from their one-page paper with the modest title “A
Measurement of Excess Antenna Temperature at 4080 Mc/s” [49]. The interpre-
tation of the signal as relic radiation from the Big Bang is given in a companion
paper by Dicke, Peebles, Roll and Wilkinson [50]. The discovery of the CMB put
the nail in the coffin of the steady-state cosmology.

5 That empty space is filled with quantum zero-point energy was first suggested by Walther
Nernst in 1916 (one year before Einstein introduced the cosmological constant) [37]. This early
history of dark energy is reviewed by Helge Kragh in [38].
7 The Expanding Universe

• 1970: For a long time, it was unclear whether the singularity of the FRW universe
was just an artefact of assuming homogeneity and isotropy. Then, Hawking and
Penrose prove their famous singularity theorem [51] (see also [52]): a universe filled
with “ordinary matter” must have started with an initial singularity. Their theorem
assumes the strong energy condition, and therefore doesn’t apply to inflation.
• 1981: Guth shows that a period of exponential expansion (“inflation”) solves the
horizon, flatness and monopole problems of the standard Big Bang cosmology [53].
• 1987: Weinberg provides an anthropic explanation for the smallness of the cos-
mological constant [54], which, at this point, had not been observed yet.
• 1992: The COBE satellite measures the blackbody spectrum of the CMB [55]
and provides the first detection of its anisotropies [56].
• 1998: Two teams of astronomers—the Supernova Cosmology Project [57] and the
High-Z Supernova Search Team [58]—make a striking discovery. By measuring the
redshifts and apparent brightnesses of type Ia supernovae, they show that the rate
of expansion is accelerating, rather than decelerating.
• 1999: Turner introduces the term “dark energy” for the mysterious energy density
driving the accelerated expansion of the universe [59].
• 2000: BOOMERanG (a ballon-borne CMB experiment) measures enhanced CMB
fluctuations on degree angular scales [60], thereby confirming that the geometry of
the universe is close to spatially flat.
• 2003: The WMAP satellite measures the power spectrum of CMB anisotropies
to unprecedented accuracy [61]. The measurement initiates the era of precision
cosmology and establishes the ΛCDM model.
• 2013: The Planck satellite provides improved measurements of the CMB spec-
trum, yielding precise measurements of the parameters of the ΛCDM concordance
cosmology [62].
• 2018: The International Astronomical Union (IAU) votes to rename Hubble’s
law the Hubble-Lemaître law.
3 The Hot Big Bang

I have also enjoyed reading some of the pioneering papers establishing the hot Big
Bang cosmology. The following is a brief sketch of key milestones in the subject:
• 1921: Meghnad Saha develops a theory for the thermodynamic equilibrium of
chemical reactions [1, 2], mostly to apply it to the ionization of elements in stellar
atmospheres. The work culminates in the famous Saha equation.
• 1925: Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin publishes a seminal PhD thesis on the chemical
composition of stars [3]. She discovers that stars are made mostly of hydrogen and
helium, contrary to the conventional wisdom at the time which held that stars have
approximately the same elemental composition as the Earth.
• 1926: Eddington emphasizes in his classic book The Internal Constitution of the
Stars [4] that the formation of helium from hydrogen inside of stars requires very
high temperatures (to overcome the electric repulsion of the hydrogen nuclei). The
book includes the following prophetic statement:

The helium which we handle must have been put together at some time and some place.
We do not argue with the critic who urges us that the stars are not hot enough for this
process; we tell him to go and find a hotter place.

• 1929: Atkinson and Houtermans show how quantum mechanical tunneling helps
nuclei to overcome the energy barrier due to their electric repulsion and hence
increases the efficiency of nuclear fusion inside stars [5].
• 1930: In a letter to Lise Meitner, Pauli proposes the existence of neutrinos to
explain how beta decay conserves energy and momentum [6].
• 1932: Chadwick discovers the neutron [7].
Anderson discovers the positron (which he called “easily deflectable positives”) [8],
and hence establishes the existence of antimatter (as predicted by Dirac [9]).
• 1934: Tolman publishes his influential book Relativity, Thermodynamics and
Cosmology [10]. He is also one of the first to apply thermodynamics to the expanding
universe.
• 1936: Anderson and Neddermeyer discover the muon in high-altitude observations
of cosmic rays [11, 12] (see also [13]). The existence of the muon was so surprising
that Rabi famously asked “Who ordered that?”.
• 1938: Bethe explains why stars shine (through the fusion of protons with carbon
and nitrogen in the CN cycle) [14]. He points out, however, that “no elements
8
9 The Hot Big Bang

heavier than helium can be built up to any appreciable extent,” so that “we must
assume that the heavier elements were built up before the stars reached their present
state of temperature and density.”
Weizsäcker provides a sketch how the chemical elements might have been pro-
duced in the early universe [15]. He did not, however, incorporate the idea into the
relativistic cosmologies of Friedmann and Lemaître.
• 1942: Chandrasekhar and Henrich [16] apply equilibrium thermodynamics to
estimate the relative abundances of the chemical elements produced in the hot
beginnings of the universe. They fail to account for any appreciable amounts of the
heavy elements.
• 1946: Gamow, for the first time, includes the expansion of the universe and the
associate non-equilibrium physics to describe the fusion of the nuclei in the early
universe [17]. Although the paper still got many details wrong, it was foundational
in developing the modern theory of Big Bang nucleosynthesis (BBN).
• 1947: Powell discovers the pion [18] (predicted in 1935 by Hideki Yukawa [19]).
The observational methods that led to this discovery were developed by Bibha
Chowdhuri and Debendra Mohan Bose.
• 1948: Gamow, together with Alpher and Herman, wrote no less than 11 papers
studying BBN this year. The convoluted back-and-forth in these papers is reviewed
by Peebles in [20] (see also [21, 22]). The papers at the beginning of the year—
including the (in)famous1 Alpher, Bethe, and Gamow paper [23]—were incomplete
(and incorrect) in a number of way. In particular, the universe was taken to be
matter-dominated during BBN. This was corrected in an important paper by Alpher
and Herman [24]. The latter paper also includes the first prediction of the CMB
and an estimate of its present temperature (5 K).2
• 1950: The work of Alpher, Herman and Gamow, assumed that the universe was
initially made up of mostly neutrons. These neutrons would decay into protons and
electrons, and the heavier elements would then be built up by neutron capture.
1 Although Bethe didn’t contribute to this work, Gamow added his name to the paper because
he liked the sound of the author list. Herman was not included because “he stubbornly refused
to change his name to Delter.”
2 It is interesting to ask why this dramatic prediction of the Big Bang theory wasn’t picked
up by the astronomy community and didn’t lead to a search for the CMB in the 1950s. This
question is discussed in the books by Weinberg [25] and Kragh [21]. At a practical level, most
astronomers simply weren’t familiar with the work of Gamow, Alpher and Herman, since it
wasn’t published in one of their main journals like the Astrophysical Journal. Even if they
had come across their work, the Big Bang theory was still new and according to Weinberg
“it was extraordinary difficult for physicists to take seriously any theory of the early universe.
... [The] first three minutes are so remote from us in time, the conditions of temperature
and density are so unfamiliar, that we feel uncomfortable in applying our ordinary theories of
statistical mechanics and nuclear physics.” Even the authors themselves didn’t try to convince
radio astronomers to look for the microwave background radiation. Weinberg concludes that
“this is often the way it is in physics—our mistake is not that we take our theories too seriously,
but that we don’t take them seriously enough. It is always hard to realize that these numbers
and equations we play with at our desks have something to do with the real world.”
10 The Hot Big Bang

Chushiro Hayashi was the first to realize that at high temperatures neutron decay
wasn’t the only relevant process. He showed that reactions like n + e+ ↔ p + ν̄ and
n + ν ↔ p + e− would create a significant proton-to-neutron ratio [26]. The paper
predicts the correct neutron freeze-out and includes an essentially correct estimate
of the final helium abundance.
• 1953: The seminal paper by Alpher, Follin and Herman [27] establishes the mod-
ern theory of primordial nucleosynthesis. It was realized that BBN produces hardly
any elements above helium (because of the absence of stable nuclei with mass num-
bers A = 5 and 8). At the time, this was viewed as a problem for the Big Bang
theory and motivated the Steady State model of Hoyle, Bondi and Gold [28, 29].
The paper also states that the universe at the time consisted of many causally dis-
connected parts because the horizon size was much smaller that the radius of the
universe. This fact later became the “horizon problem.”
• 1954: Fred Hoyle predicts the existence of an excited state in the carbon-12
nucleus, arguing that such a state is necessary for the production of carbon in
stars [30]. This excited state was observed three years later by Willie Fowler’s
research group at Caltech [31].
• 1956: Cowan and Reines discover the neutrino [32].
• 1957: Margaret and Geoffrey Burbidge, Fowler and Hoyle (B2 FH) [33] show that
the heavy elements (up to iron) can be synthesized inside of stars. This resolves the
problem of the heavy elements that was the original motivation for BBN. Stellar
nucleosynthesis, however, still failed to account for the cosmic helium abundance,
which observationally was known to comprise 25% (by mass) of the baryonic matter
in the universe.
• 1961: Osterbrock and Rogerson provide an estimate of the primordial helium
abundance using measurements of HII regions, the Sun and planetary nebulae [34].
• 1964: Hoyle and Tayler show that the correct helium abundance can be produced
in the hot Big Bang [35].
• 1965: Penzias and Wilson serendipitously discover the cosmic background radia-
tion [36]. Dicke, Peebles, Roll and Wilkinson explain the cosmological origin of the
signal [37].
Zel’dovich shows that a universe with baryon-symmetric initial conditions cannot
produce the observed baryon-to-photon ratio [38]. Specifically, he derives that the
freeze-out of particle–antiparticle annihilations leads to η ∼ 10−18 , almost 10 orders
of magnitude smaller than the required value. This motivates the search for an
alternative mechanism of baryogenesis.
• 1966: Peebles revisits the predictions of BBN (especially helium and deuterium)
in light of the measurements of the CMB temperature and the mean mass density
of the universe [39].
Gerstein and Zel’dovich derive the decoupling of neutrinos and predict their relic
11 The Hot Big Bang

abundance [40]. The paper also provides a cosmological upper bound on the electron
and muon neutrinos of 400 eV (tau neutrinos had not been discovered yet). A similar
bound is derived a few years later by Cowsik and McClelland [41].
• 1967: Wagoner, Fowler and Hoyle write the first detailed BBN code [42] (later
developed further by Wagoner [43]). The code is used to predict the correct deu-
terium and lithium abundances. In essence, this code is still used to perform modern
computations in BBN.
Sakharov presents his three conditions for successful baryogenesis [44].
• 1968: Peebles develops his theory of recombination [45] (see also Zel’dovich, Kurt
and Sunyaev [46]). These papers show that recombination did not proceed in Saha
equilibrium. They also introduce the effective three-level atom and show that two-
photon decays are important in the recombination dynamics.
• 1977: Peccei and Quinn introduce a spontaneously broken U (1) symmetry as a
solution to the strong CP problem [47, 48]. Weinberg [49] and Wilczek [50] point
out that this implies the existence of a Nambu–Goldstone boson, called the “axion.”
This axion becomes a popular dark matter candidate.
Steigman, Schramm and Gunn use the BBN prediction for primordial helium to
derive an upper limit to the number of light neutrino species [51].
Lee and Weinberg use an estimate of the mass density of the universe to place a
lower limit to the mass of a hypothetical heavy neutrino species [52, 53].
• 1979: Yoshimura [54] and Weinberg [55] propose the first models of baryogenesis.
• 1981: Dimopoulos and Georgi introduce the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard
Model (MSSM) [56]. The lightest superpartners (neutralinos) become a popular
dark matter candidate [57, 58].
• 1990: The FIRAS detector on the COBE satellite measures the blackbody spec-
trum of the CMB [59]. This solidified the cosmological origin of the microwave
background, making it a key observation of the Big Bang cosmology.
• 1999: Seager, Sasselov and Scott develop the recombination code RecFast [60].
By modelling the non-equilibrium behaviour of the higher excited states, they pre-
dict the ionization history of the universe at the accuracy required for the era of
CMB precision observations.
• 2003: WMAP measures the CMB anisotropy spectrum to unprecedented accuracy
and establishes the ΛCDM concordance cosmology [61].
• 2010: Several advances were made between 2006 and 2010 that increased both
the numerical efficiency and the precision of recombination codes, culminating in
the new state-of-the art codes HyRec [62] and CosmoRec [63].
4 Cosmological Inflation

The following is a very incomplete survey of papers that have been important in
the development of inflationary cosmology:1
• 1966: Gliner shows that the energy-momentum tensor of a vacuum-dominated
universe with a positive energy density leads to a de Sitter universe [2], but doesn’t
consider the origin of this energy density (see also related work by Zel’dovich [3]).
• 1968: Misner formulates the “horizon problem” of the Big Bang cosmology [4].
• 1969: Dicke describes the “flatness problem” in a lecture [5].
• 1974: Linde shows that a symmetry breaking potential can act like an effective
time-dependent cosmological constant [6] (see also the independent work of Dre-
itlein [7]). Years later, this will become an important element of slow-roll inflation.
• 1975: Gliner and Dymnikova study the transition from a vacuum-dominated uni-
verse to a radiation-dominated universe, showing that it produces a large increase
in the scale factor [8]. Their motivation for introducing an initial de Sitter phase
was to remove the initial singularity of the Big Bang theory.
• 1979: Dicke and Peebles point out [9] that the universe must have been flat to
better than one part in 1015 around t = 1 sec.
Preskill estimates [10] that the density of magnetic monopoles in Grand Unified
Theories (GUTs) would be larger than the critical density by a factor of 1012 ,
reducing the age of the universe to just 30 000 years.
Various groups start to investigate the dynamical effects of phase transitions
in the early universe [11]. Kolb and Wolfram show that can be dominated by a
positive energy density during a first-order phase transition and that this would
lead to an exponential expansion of the universe [12]. They also speculate that the
phase transition might lead to density perturbations, but don’t study this further.
• 1980: Starobinsky shows that higher-derivative corrections to Einstein gravity
can lead to a de Sitter solution [13], but doesn’t relate it to the problems of the
hot Big Bang. Instead Starobinsky’s motivation was to find a way to avoid the Big
Bang singularity.
Guth and Tye study the production of magnetic monopoles in GUTs and argue

1 The early history of inflation is reviewed compresensively in [1]. My summary of “inflation

before inflation” closely follows the treatment there.

12
13 Cosmological Inflation

that their abundance can be suppressed if the phase transition occurs after a long
period of supercooling [14].
Kazanas explores the effects of a first-order phase transition on the expansion of
the universe [15]. He suggests that a long period of exponential expansion could
explain the large-scale isotropy of the universe.
• 1981: Guth realizes that a universe dominated by a false vacuum expands ex-
ponentially and that this would solve the horizon, flatness and monopole problems
of the standard Big Bang cosmology [16]. The paper ends with the admission that
models of false vacuum inflation don’t end smoothly, but instead produce large
inhomogeneities after the tunneling to the true vacuum. This is the “graceful exit
problem” of old inflation.
Independently, Sato studies first-order phase transitions in GUTs and shows that
this would lead to an exponential increase in the particle horizon [17]. He also
realizes the graceful exit problem in these scenarios [18].
• 1982: Linde [19], and independently Albrecht and Steinhardt [20], solve the grace-
ful exit problem by introducing the first models of slow-roll inflation (also called
“new inflation” in contrast to Guth’s old inflation).
There was concern that inflation would be too efficient, leading to an empty uni-
verse without any fluctuations in its matter density. It was therefore with some re-
lief that is was realized that quantum zero-point fluctuations provide an inevitable
source of perturbations (see Chapter 8). These primordial fluctuations were dis-
cussed at the famous “Nuffield meeting” in Cambridge and subsequently computed
by several groups [21–25]. It was shown that the inflationary fluctuations have pre-
cisely the nearly scale-invariant form suggested by observations.
In a talk at the Nuffield meeting, Steinhardt points out that if inflation starts at
the top of a flat potential, there may be regions of space where it doesn’t stop and in-
stead globally becomes eternal. The concept of “eternal inflation” is also mentioned
in Steinhardt’s contribution to the proceedings of the Nuffield meeting [26]. In the
same proceedings, Linde explains that eternal inflation could lead to a “multiverse”
with different regions of space having different physical properties.2
Albrecht, Steinhardt, Turner and Wilczek provide a first account of the “reheat-
ing” of the universe after inflation [28].
• 1983: Vilenkin shows that eternal inflation is a generic feature of all new infla-
tionary models [29].
Linde develops a variation of slow-roll inflation called “chaotic inflation” [30].
While both old and new inflation assumed thermal equilibrium of the pre-inflationary
universe, chaotic inflation relaxes this constraint on the initial conditions.
• 1986: Linde shows that models of chaotic inflation are typically also eternal [31].
The term “eternal inflation” is introduced in this paper.
2 A brief history of eternal inflation and the inflationary multiverse can be found in [27].
14 Cosmological Inflation

• 1989: Goldwirth and Piran study the problem of the inflationary initial conditions
with numerical simulations in 1+1 dimensions [32, 33].
• 1990: Freese, Frieman and Olinto develop “natural inflation” [34], a model in
which the role of the inflaton is played by a pseudo-Nambu–Goldstone boson whose
shift symmetry makes the flatness of the potential technically natural.
• 1997: Kofman, Linde and Starobinsky provide a comprehensive treatment of
perturbative reheating [35].
Armendariz-Picon, Damour and Mukhanov propose “k-inflation” [36] where the
inflationary dynamics is driven not by a flat potential, but by a nontrivial kinetic
term.
• 2000: The BOOMERanG satellite measures the position of the first peak in the
CMB anisotropy spectrum, confirming that the universe is spatially flat as predicted
by inflation [37].
• 2001: Khoury, Ovrut, Steinhardt, and Turok propose the “Ekpyrotic Universe”
as an alternative to inflationary cosmology [38]. In this scenario, the primordial per-
turbations are created in a phase of slow contraction before the universe “bounces”
and transitions to the expanding hot Big Bang cosmology.
• 2002: Steinhardt and Turok introduce the “Cyclic Universe” as version of the
ekpyrotic scenario with periodically repeating bounces separating phases of con-
traction and expansion [39].
• 2003: WMAP detects a small deviation from scale-invariance in the primordial
density fluctuation [40], as predicted by all inflationary models.
Kachru, Kallosh, Linde and Trivedi (KKLT) introduce a compactification of
string theory with de Sitter vacua [41]. Together with Maldacena and McAllis-
ter, they further argue that a moving D3-brane can lead to slow-roll inflation in
this setting [42] (see also [43]). Silverstein and Tong show that inflation can even
occur if the brane moves relativistically, exploiting the fact that nonlinearities in
the Dirac-Born-Infeld action for the brane become important in this limit [44, 45].
Susskind relates the “landscape” of string theory vacua to the anthropic principle
and Weinberg’s solution to the cosmological constant problem [46] (following earlier
work by Bousso and Polchinski [47]).
Borde, Guth and Vilenkin prove that inflationary spacetimes are not past eternal
and therefore don’t evade the problem of the initial singularity [48].
• 2008: Silverstein, Westphal and McAllister introduce “axion monodromy infla-
tion” [49, 50], a promising candidate for large-field inflation in string theory.
Cheung, Creminelli, Fitzpatrick, Kaplan and Senatore develop an effective theory
to describe inflationary models with large self-interactions [51] (see also [52]). The
inflationary fluctuations are identified with the Goldstone boson of spontaneously
broken time translations, whose interactions are constrained by the nonlinearly
realized symmetry.
15 Cosmological Inflation

• 2015: East et al. [53] and Clough et al. [54] revisit the problem of inflationary
initial conditions with numerical GR simulations in 3+1 dimensions. (See also the
earlier work by Laguna, Kurki-Suonio and Matzner [55].)
5 Structure Formation

A wonderful summary of the history of cosmological structure formation can be

found in the books by Peebles [1] and Longair [2]. Moreover, the history of dark
matter and its role in structure formation is reviewed in the article by Bertone and
Hopper [3]. A few milestone and important papers are listed below.
• pre-1900: It wasn’t until the beginning of the last century that the scale of the
universe and of the structures within it was understood.
Between 1771 and 1784, Charles Messier catalogs over 100 fuzzy ‘nebulae’ in the sky
(to avoid confusing them with comets, his main objects of interest). The systematic
cataloguing of these nebulae is carried forward by William Herschel, who, in 1786,
and with assistance from his sister Caroline, publishes a catalogue of over 1000
nebulae. In 1864, John Herschel (son of William) publishes the General Catalogue
of Nebulae containing over 5000 objects, and, in 1888, Dreyer releases the New
General Catalogue of Nebulae (NGC) with over 15 000 objects. NGC and Messier
numbers are still used to refer to nearby galaxies.
• 1902: Jeans studies the growth of matter perturbations in a static space, finding
the exponential instability that is now named after him [4].
• 1912: Henrietta Leavitt discovers the period–luminosity relationship for Cepheid
variable stars in the Magellanic clouds [5].
• 1920: On 26 April, the National Academy of Sciences in Washington organizes
the famous Great Debate between Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis. While Shapley
believes that the nebulae are objects inside our own Milky Way galaxy, Curtis argues
that they are distant “island universes” (galaxies). Their arguments are summarized
in [6], but the data at the time wasn’t good enough to resolve the issue conclusively.
• 1925: Hubble observes Cepheids in nearby nebulae and uses them to show that
these nebulae are objects outside of our own galaxy [7].
• 1929: Hubble discovers the expansion of the universe [8] (see Chapter 2).
• 1933: Lemaître finds that a spherically-symmetric perturbation in an expand-
ing, matter-dominated universe grows as δρ/ρ ∝ t2/3 [9]. Lifshitz later establishes
the same result without assuming spherical symmetry [10] (see also [11, 12]). The
growth of the large-scale structure of the universe therefore requires initial per-
turbations of a sufficiently large amplitude, which leads Lemaître and Lifshitz to
conclude erroneously that galaxies were not formed by gravitational collapse.
Zwicky provides the first evidence for the existence of dark matter in the Coma
16
17 Structure Formation

cluster [13, 14]. He also proposes to measure the masses of galaxies and clusters
through gravitational lensing.
• 1946: Lifshitz studies Einstein’s equations in linear perturbation theory [10]. He
derives the solutions to the linearized equation for both matter perturbations and
radiation. This remarkable paper initiated cosmological perturbation theory in the
fully relativistic context (see Chapter 6).
• 1948: Gamow highlights the significance of matter–radiation equality for struc-
ture formation [15], which was later made rigorous by Mészáros [16].
• 1952: Neyman and Scott initiate a statistical treatment of the spatial distribution
of galaxies [17, 18]. Their work also introduces the two-point correlation function,
ξ(r), to describe the large-scale clustering of galaxies.
• 1957: Bonnor derives the perturbation equations from the fluid equations in
Newtonian gravity [19].
• 1964: Novikov argues that the formation of galaxies requires the initial density
perturbations to have δρ/ρ ∼ 10−4 [20].
• 1965: Peebles proposes that structure forms from the “bottom-up” through the
hierarchical clustering of small objects into larger ones [21].
Gunn and Peterson predict that the presence of neutral hydrogen in the inter-
galactic medium (IGM) would lead to a characteristic feature in the spectra of
high-redshift quasars—the “Gunn–Peterson trough” [22].
• 1969: Totsuji and Kihara show that the galaxy correlation function can be ap-
proximated by a power law over a large range of scales, ξ(r) = (r/r0 )−γ [23].
• 1970: Harrison [24] and Peebles and Yu [25] propose a scale-invariant spectrum
as the most natural initial conditions. This was later picked up by Zel’dovich [26]
and is now called the “Harrison–Zel’dovich spectrum.”
Rubin and Ford provide new evidence for the existence of dark matter by study-
ing galactic rotation curves [27] (see also [28, 29]). Over the course of the next
decade, astronomers finally get convinced that dark matter exists around galaxies
and clusters of galaxies [30].
• 1971: Peebles publishes his book Physical Cosmology [31].
• 1972: Gunn and Gott introduce the spherical collapse model for nonlinear struc-
ture formation [32].
Cowsik and McClelland present a cosmological upper bound on the mass of neu-
trinos [33] (see also [34]), but don’t discuss the potential role of neutrinos as dark
matter.
• 1974: Press and Schechter develop a theory of the statistics of dark matter ha-
los [35]. Although the Press–Schechter theory makes a number of unjustified as-
sumptions, it initiates a large body of work on structure formation in the nonlinear
regime.
18 Structure Formation

Ostriker et al. [36] and Einasto et al. [37] use a variety of datasets to argue for
the existence of dark matter over a wide range of scales. These papers established
the cosmological significance of dark matter.
• 1976: Marx and Szalay suggest that 10 eV neutrinos could be the dark matter [38].
• 1977: Lee and Weinberg show that very heavy neutrinos (mν > 2 GeV) are still
consistent with cosmological constraints and propose that these neutrinos could
be the dark matter [39]. A number of similar papers appeared almost simultane-
ously [40–43].
• 1980: Studies of tritium beta decay claim a measurement of the mass of the
electron anti-neutrino of about 30 eV [44]. Although this result did not survive
further scrutiny, at the time, it provided significant motivation for exploring the
consequences of neutrinos as hot dark matter (HDM).
• 1981: Guth introduces the concept of cosmological inflation [45]. A key prediction
of the theory—the spatial flatness of the universe—seems to be in tension with the
observed matter density, Ωm ≈ 0.3.
• 1982: A number of groups compute the spectrum of density perturbations created
by quantum fluctuations during inflation [46–50].
The CfA redshift survey releases the first extensive 3D survey of galaxies [51].
Dick Bond introduces the term “cold dark matter” (CDM) to describe mas-
sive particles that decoupled from the thermal plasma after they had become non-
relativistic. Peebles discussed structure formation in a CDM cosmology [52].
• 1983: Numerical simulations by White, Frenk and Davis rule out the HDM
model [53].
• 1984: Davis, Efstathiou, Frenk and White (the “gang of four”) perform the first
numerical simulations of structure formation in the (Λ)CDM cosmology [54].
Blumenthal, Faber, Primack and Rees [55] compare the predictions of the CDM
model to data from the CfA survey.
Turner, Steigman and Krauss [56] argue that a cosmological constant can make
the low matter density of the universe consistent with the spatial flatness predicted
by inflation. See also the paper by Peebles of the same year [57].
Kaiser introduces the concept of “galaxy biasing” to explain the difference in the
correlation strengths of galaxies and clusters of galaxies [58]. He shows that clusters
are naturally highly biased tracers of the underlying matter distribution since they
form only at the highest density peaks of the mass distribution.
• 1986: Bardeen, Bond, Kaiser and Szalay (BBKS) provide further mathematical
details of Kaiser’s idea of galaxy biasing [59].
• 1987: Weinberg derives an anthropic bound on the value of the cosmological
constant [60].
19 Structure Formation

• 1989: Using data from the second CfA survey, Geller and Huchra discover the
Great Wall, one of the largest known superstructures in the observable universe [61].
• 1990: Efstathiou, Sutherland and Maddox argue that the low matter density
inferred from large-scale structure observations implies the need for a cosmological
constant [62].
• 1992: COBE measures the amplitude of CMB temperature fluctuations [63]. The
size of the fluctuations indicates that dark matter is required to explain the growth
of structure.
• 1997: The Two-degree-Field Galaxy Redshift Survey (2dF) begins operation.
• 2000: The Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) begins operation.
• 2001: SDSS discovers the Gunn–Peterson trough in a z = 6.28 quasar. This
provides evidence that the universe had undergone a transition from neutral to
ionized gas around z ∼ 6.
• 2003: WMAP confirms the predictions of the ΛCDM concordance cosmology
with increasing precision [64] .
• 2004: Tegmark et al. [65] provide a joint-analysis of data from WMAP and SDSS.
• 2005: The Virgo Consortium runs the “Millennium Simulation” based on the
N-body code GADGET [66]. The simulation follows the evolution of over 10 billion
“particles” in a volume with a side-length of over 2 billion light years. The simulation
ran for over a month producing 25 terabytes of data.
• 2010: Together with Nicolis, Senatore and Zaldarriaga, I show that dark matter
fluctuations can be described by an “effective fluid” [67]. This is later expanded
into a rigorous effective theory of large-scale structure (EFT-of-LSS) by Senatore
and collaborators [68].
• 2019: The EFT-of-LSS is applied for the first time to measure cosmological
parameters from the BOSS galaxy survey [69, 70].
Jim Peebles receives the Nobel prize for his groundbreaking work in physical
cosmology.
• 2021: The Dark Energy Survey (DES) releases its first cosmological results from
galaxy clustering and weak leasing data [71].
The Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) begins operation.
6 Relativistic Perturbation Theory

The following are a few papers that have played an important role in the develop-
ment of cosmological perturbation theory:
• 1946: Lifshitz provides a seminal analysis of linearized general relativity in cos-
mological spacetimes [1]. It is remarkable how much of our modern understanding
of cosmological perturbation theory (as described in my book) is in this paper. The
paper introduces the scalar-vector-tensor decomposition of metric and matter fluc-
tuations. It derives the linearized Einstein equations for k = ±1 (but not k = 0!)
backgrounds in synchronous gauge. The issue of unphysical gauge modes is treated
carefully. Solutions to the equations are presented for scalar, vector and tensor in
FRW backgrounds with matter and radiation.
Ironically, the introduction of the paper ends with the following sentences:
We shall see that in the expanding universe of the general relativity theory the perturba-
tions of most types decrease with time, thus showing no tendency to spontaneous increase.
There exist also such perturbations which increase with time, but so slowly that they can-
not produce large condensations. Thus we can apparently conclude that gravitational in-
stability is not the source of condensation of matter into separate nebulae.

• 1959: Arnowitt, Deser and Misner introduce a Hamiltonian formulation of gen-

eral relativity [2, 3]. In this so-called ADM formalism, the metric is separated into
dynamical and constrained degrees of freedom, which allows for a convenient for-
mulation of the initial value problem in GR. The ADM parameterization plays an
important role in numerical relativity and also has found applications in cosmolog-
ical perturbation theory [4].
• 1963: Lifshitz and Khalatnikov extend and correct aspects of Lifshitz’ 1946 pa-
per [5]. They also study matter perturbations in a contracting universe, showing
that scalar perturbations are unstable and hence grow rapidly.
• 1966: Hawking develops a formalism to study perturbation in the curvature tensor
directly (rather than in the metric), thereby avoiding gauge ambiguities [6].
• 1967: Sachs and Wolfe extend Lifshitz’ treatment to include perturbations in
the radiation. They discuss the effect of cosmological perturbations on the CMB
anisotropies. (Remember that the CMB was only discovered two years earlier.) The
paper presents the linearized Einstein equations now also for k = 0 backgrounds,
but still in synchronous gauge.
Harrison derives the linearized Einstein equations in conformal Newtonian gauge
(longitudinal gauge) [7].
20
21 Relativistic Perturbation Theory

• 1969: Nariai studies cosmological perturbations in comoving gauge [8].

• 1970: Peebles and Yu develop the Boltzmann formalism for the evolution of
photons and neutrinos in the early universe [9], which is the basis of all modern
CMB codes.
• 1980: Press and Vishniac show how to eliminate the two unphysical gauge modes
in synchronous gauge and interpret ambiguous density perturbations on superhori-
zon scales [10].
Bardeen introduces a gauge-invariant formulation of cosmological perturbation
theory clearing up a persistent confusion about fictitious gauge modes [11]. Clas-
sic reviews of the gauge-invariant approach are by Kodama and Sasaki [12] and
Mukhanov, Feldman and Brandenberger [13].
• 1982: The primordial perturbations from inflation are computed in a number of
papers [14–18]. The paper by Bardeen, Steinhardt, and Turner includes the first
definition of the conserved curvature perturbation, ζ [15] (see also [19, 20]).
• 1984: Lyth introduces the curvature perturbation in comoving gauge, R [21].
• 1995: Hu and Sugiyama provide a semi-analytic treatment of small-scale cosmo-
logical perturbations [22].
• 1996: Ma and Bertschinger present the equations of linearized cosmological per-
turbations in both conformal Newtonian and synchronous gauges [23].
Seljak and Zaldarriaga release the Boltzmann code CMBFast [24]. Besides com-
puting the CMB spectra, the code outputs linear transfer functions for all fluctua-
tions.
• 1997: Eisenstein and Hu give an analytic derivation of the BAO feature in the
matter power spectrum [25].
• 1999: Bucher, Moodley and Turok provide a comprehensive analysis of isocurva-
ture perturbations [26].
• 2000: Using only the local conservation of energy and momentum, Wands, Malik,
Lyth and Liddle prove that curvature perturbations are conserved on large scales
when non-adiabatic pressure perturbations are negligible [20]. Different versions of
the proof have also appeared in [27–29].
• 2005: The Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (BOSS) of SDSS-III detects
the BAO feature in the galaxy power spectrum [30].
7 Cosmic Microwave Background

Observations of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) have revolutionized cos-

mology (see Table 7.1 for a list of selected experiments). The existence of the CMB
is a cornerstone of the modern Big Bang theory and observations of the CMB
anisotropies have been instrumental in establishing the ΛCDM concordance cos-
mology. The fascinating history of the cosmic microwave background is chronicled
in [1]. Here is a list of key events:
• 1934: Tolman shows that blackbody radiation in an expanding universe cools but
remains thermal [2].
• 1941: McKellar measures a background radiation with an effective temperature
of 2.3 K using stellar absorption lines [3]. The cosmic significance of this measure-
ment, however, was not appreciated until 1966, one year after Penzias and Wilson’s
discovery of the CMB.
• 1946: Gamow estimates the present temperature of the universe to be 50 K (as-
suming the universe to be 3 billion year old). He comments that this “is in reasonable
agreement with the actual temperature of interstellar space”, but does not mention
a background radiation.
• 1948: Alpher and Herman predict the CMB with a temperature of 5 K [4]. How-
ever, their prediction is not picked up by the astronomical community and does not
lead to an experimental search for the CMB.
• 1964: Doroshkevich and Novikov emphasize that the background radiation from
the Big Bang should be observable by radio observations [5]. The same was realized
by Dicke and his group in Princeton, who initiate an experimental search for the
relic radiation.
• 1965: Following a suggestion by Zel’dovich, Sakharov shows that density pertur-
bations in a relativistic fluid develop pressure-supported acoustic waves on small
scales [6]. Essentially the same physics is responsible for the oscillations in the
primordial photon–baryon fluid, although Sakharov didn’t make that connection.
Instead, Sakharov was studying quantum fluctuations of the density in a cold uni-
verse (based on Zel’dovich’s hypothesis that the initial temperature of matter in
the universe was zero). Nevertheless, Sakharov understood that these acoustic os-
cillations lead to a preferred scale in the mass spectrum of the large-scale structure
of the universe, as they do in the CMB anisotropy spectrum [7, 8].
Penzias and Wilson accidentally discover the cosmic background radiation [9].
Dicke, Peebles, Roll and Wilkinson explain its cosmological significance [10].
22
23 Cosmic Microwave Background

Table 7.1 List of selected CMB experiments (adapted from [Link]

Name Full Name Type Duration
RELIKT Relikt Satellite 1983 – 1984
COBE Cosmic Background Explorer Satellite 1989 – 1992
Millimeter Anisotropy eXperiment
MAXIMA Balloon 1998 – 1999
Imaging Array

Balloon Observations Of
BOOMERanG Millimetric Extragalactic Radiation Balloon 1997 – 2003
and Geophysics

Degree Angular Scale

DASI Ground 2001 – 2003
Interferometer

Wilkinson Microwave
WMAP Satellite 2001 – 2010
Anisotropy Probe
CBI Cosmic Background Imager Ground 2002 – 2008
Cosmic Anisotropy
CAPMAP Ground 2002 – 2008
Polarization MAPper
KECKArray Keck Array Ground 2003 –
Background Imaging of Cosmic
BICEP Ground 2006 –
Extragalactic Polarization
SPT South Pole Telescope Ground 2007 –
ACT Atacama Cosmology Telescope Ground 2008 –
QUIET QU Imaging ExperimenT Ground 2008 – 2010
Planck Planck Satellite 2009 – 2013
ABS Atacama B-mode Search Ground 2011 – 2014
Polarization of Background
POLARBear Ground 2012 –
Microwave Radiation
EBEX The E and B Experiment Balloon 2012 – 2013
SPTpol SPT: Polarization Ground 2012 –
ACTPol ACT: Polarization Ground 2013 –
SPIDER Spider Balloon 2015 –
Cosmology Large-Angular
CLASS Ground 2016 –
Scale Surveyor
SPT-3G SPT: Third Generation Ground 2018 –
SO Simons Observatory Ground Future
CMB-S4 CMB Stage-4 Ground Future
(Lite) B-mode polarization and
LiteBIRD Inflation from cosmic background Satellite Future
Radiation Detection
24 Cosmic Microwave Background

• 1967: Sachs and Wolfe study the effect of density fluctuations on the CMB
temperature anisotropies [11].
• 1968: Rees predicts that the CMB should be polarized [12].
Rees and Sciama predict that CMB fluctuations are created when photons travel
through time-dependent gravitational potentials [13].
• 1969: Sunyaev and Zel’dovich show that, before recombination, photons and
baryons are strongly coupled and can be described by a single fluid [14] (see also
the earlier paper by Weymann [15]).
• 1970: Peebles and Yu study the evolution of fluctuations in the primordial
photon–baryon fluid [7]. Amongst many other things, this remarkable paper con-
tains the first derivation of the CMB power spectrum. The paper also sets up the
Boltzmann formalism used in modern CMB codes. Independently, Sunyaev and
Zel’dovich [8] explore the same physics. They also derive the oscillatory feature in
the CMB power spectra. Their abstract ends with the following sentences:
A detailed investigation of the spectrum of fluctuations may, in principle, lead to an under-
standing of the nature of initial density perturbations since a distinct periodic dependence
of the spectral density of perturbations on wavelength (mass) is peculiar to adiabatic per-
turbations. Practical observations are quite difficult due to the smallness of the effects
and the presence of fluctuations connected with discrete sources of radio emission.

• 1971: Paul Henry reports the first measurement of the CMB dipole [16]. The
work was part of his PhD thesis under the supervision of Dave Wilkinson. It was
published as a single authored paper because at the time Princeton required such
papers for a successful PhD thesis. Henry’s measurement was later confirmed by
Corey and Wilkinson [17], as well as Smooth, Gorenstein and Muller [18].
• 1972: Sunyaev and Zel’dovich show that the inverse Compton scattering of mi-
crowave background photons by the hot gas in galaxy clusters produces a spectral
distortion of the CMB fluctuations on small scales (the SZ effect) [19].
• 1983: Kaiser computes the damping rate of the photon–baryon plasma [20] and
Silk shows how this leads to a suppression of small-scale CMB fluctuations [21].
• 1984: Birkinshaw, Gull, and Hardebeck report the first detection of the SZ ef-
fect [22].
• 1985: Polnarev computes the CMB polarization spectrum for small angular sep-
arations [23]. See also the later treatments [24–26].
• 1987: Bond and Efstathiou provide a very comprehensive analysis of the CMB
anisotropies in a CDM cosmology [27].
• 1990: The COBE satellite measures the blackbody spectrum of the CMB [28],
thereby confirming the cosmological origin of the signal.
• 1992: COBE announces the first detection of CMB anisotropies on large scales [29].
• 1995: Bertschinger releases the Boltzmann code COSMICS [30]. The code is
slow and takes hours to compute a single CMB spectrum.
25 Cosmic Microwave Background

Hu and Sugiyama provide a semi-analytic solution for the sound waves in the
primordial plasma [31].
• 1996: Zaldarriaga and Seljak [32], and independently Kamionkowski, Kosowsky
and Stebbins [33], introduce the E/B decomposition of CMB polarization and pro-
vide an all-sky analysis of the corresponding power spectra.
Seljak and Zaldarriaga release the Boltzmann code CMBFast [34] which signif-
icantly speeds up the computation of the CMB spectra. The code includes E/B
modes, CMB lensing, and applies to curved universes.
• 1999: Lewis and Challinor release the Boltzmann code CAMB [35] as an alter-
native to CMBFast.
Seager, Sasselov and Scott create the recombination code RecFast [36].
• 2000: BOOMERanG measures enhanced CMB fluctuations on degree angular
scales [37], thereby confirming that the geometry of the universe is close to spa-
tially flat. This was further corroborated by measurements of the TOCO [38] and
MAXIMA [39] experiments.
• 2002: The polarization of the CMB is detected by the Degree Angular Scale
Interferometer (DASI) [40].
• 2003: The first E-mode polarization spectrum is measured by the Cosmic Back-
ground Imager (CBI) [41].
WMAP detects a small scale dependence, ns = ̸ 1, in the primordial density
fluctuations [42], as predicted by all inflationary models. Stephen Hawking calls it
“the discovery of the century, if not of all time.” WMAP also measures the large-
scale TE correlation [43] proving that there was time before the hot Big Bang [44].
• 2004: Bashinsky and Seljak derive the neutrino-induced phase shift of the CMB
anisotropy spectrum [45].
• 2005: Alpher is awarded the National Medal of Science for his foundational work
in nucleosynthesis and the prediction of the CMB.
• 2006: Smoot and Mather receive the Nobel prize for their work on COBE.
• 2007: Smith, Zahn and Doré provide the first detection of CMB lensing using
cross correlation with radio galaxy counts [46].
• 2011: ACT [47] and SPT [48] measure the CMB lensing power spectrum.
Lesgourgues, Tram and others release the Boltzmann code CLASS [49], a signif-
icantly restructured alternative to CAMB and CMBFast.
• 2014: The BICEP collaboration announces a detection of primordial B-modes [50].
Doubts are soon raised about the primordial origin of the signal [51].
• 2015: Follin et al. [52] measure the phase shift expected from the cosmic neutrino
background in the Planck data.
In a joint analysis [53], the Planck and BICEP collaborations show that the
26 Cosmic Microwave Background

previously announced B-mode detection was not due to primordial gravitational

waves, but came from dust in our own galaxy.
• 2018: The Planck satellite releases its final data [54].
8 Quantum Initial Conditions

The history of inflation was sketched in Chapter 4. In the following, I will add a
few more details on the key developments establishing the quantum generation of
perturbations during inflation.
• 1975: Hawking shows that black holes radiate due to the effect of quantum
fluctuations near the black hole’s event horizon [1]. This is the famous Hawking
radiation.
• 1977: Gibbons and Hawking show that the concept of Hawking radiation also
applies to cosmological horizon [2]. This provides the conceptual basis for the com-
putation of the vacuum fluctuations in inflation.
• 1978: Bunch and Davies define a preferred vacuum state for quantum fluctuations
in de Sitter space [3]. See also the earlier work by Chernikov and Tagirov [4].
• 1979: Starobinsky derives the spectrum of gravitational waves generated in a de
Sitter background [5].
• 1981: Mukhanov and Chibisov [6] compute the spectrum of scalar fluctuations
in the Starobinsky model. The red tilt of the spectrum, ns < 1, is predicted.
• 1982: The general theory of quantum fluctuations during inflation is developed at
the “Nuffield workshop” in Cambridge. This results in a series of papers computing
the power spectrum of density fluctuations [7–10].
• 1983: Hartle and Hawking introduce the “no-boundary state” as an initial con-
dition for the universe [11].
• 1990: Salopek and Bond [12] estimate the amount of non-Gaussianity in slow-roll
inflation (see also [13, 14]). The paper also contains a nonlinear definition of the
comoving curvature perturbation.
• 1996: Lyth derives his famous bound on the field variation in inflationary models
with observable gravitational waves [15].
• 1997: Spergel and Zaldarriaga [16] point out that the cross-correlation of CMB
temperature fluctuations and polarization on large scales is an important test of
inflation (or more general a period that preceded the hot Big Bang). A few years
later, this feature is measured by the WMAP satellite [17] proving that the hot Big
Bang was not the beginning of time.
• 2003: Maldacena provides the first rigorous calculation of the inflationary non-
Gaussianity using the in-in formalism [18].
27
28 Quantum Initial Conditions

WMAP measures the scale dependence in the primordial density fluctuations [19]
expected from inflationary models.
• 2004: Creminelli and Zaldarriaga prove a consistency relation for single-field
inflation, relating the squeezed limit of the bispectrum to the scale dependence of
the power spectrum [20]. This proves that a large signal in the squeezed limit can
only come from additional particles during inflation.
Silverstein and Tong introduce Dirac-Born-Infeld (DBI) inflation [21], a model of
inflation inspired by string theory that allows for large equilateral non-Gaussianity
coming from higher-derivative interactions.
• 2005: Weinberg provides a systematic treatment of the “in-in formalism” [22] to
compute higher-order Gaussian and non-Gaussian correlations in cosmology. While
previous calculations were restricted to tree graphs, this paper also considers loops.
• 2006: Chen, Huang, Kachru and Shiu [23] derive the bispectrum in P (X) theories
(i.e. inflationary models with an arbitrary kinetic term X ≡ (∂ϕ)2 ). Creminelli [24]
had previously calculated the non-Gaussianity coming from the leading higher-
derivative interaction X 2 .
• 2008: Cheung et al. [25] introduce an influential effective theory of inflation. In
this effective theory, the inflationary fluctuations are associated with the Goldstone
boson of broken time translations during inflation.
Dalal et al. show that local non-Gaussianity leads to a scale-dependent bias that
can be measured in the galaxy power spectrum [26].
• 2009: Chen and Wang [27] show that inflationary models with additional massive
particles close to the Hubble scale, m ≲ 23 H, lead to a distinct non-analytic scaling
in the squeezed limit of the bispectrum. They called such scenarios “quasi-single-
field inflation.” Daniel Green and I argue that extra fields with masses close to
the Hubble scale arise naturally in inflationary models with spontaneously broken
supersymmetry [28].
• 2015: Arkani-Hamed and Maldacena [29] show that massive particles with m >
3
2 H lead to characteristic oscillatory signatures in the squeezed limit of the bispec-
trum. These oscillations are the analog of a resonance in ordinary collider physics.
Making this analogy precise, they initiate the field of “cosmological collider physics.”
A A Cosmic Chronology

1917 Einstein applies general relativity to a homogeneous universe.

He introduces the cosmological constant to achieve a static universe.
De Sitter finds a solution for an empty universe with a cosmological
constant.
1920 Shapley and Curtis debate the distances to the spiral nebulae.
1922 Friedmann derives new solutions to the Einstein field equations for an
expanding universe.
1925 Hubble shows that the spiral nebulae are extragalactic objects.
1927 Lemaître applies the Einstein equations to an expanding universe with
matter and curvature. He predicts the distance–redshift relation (the
Hubble–Lemaître law).
1929 Hubble measures the linear distance–redshift relation and thus establishes
the expansion of the universe.
1930 Eddington rediscovers and promotes Lemaître’s 1927 paper.
Pauli proposes the existence of neutrinos.
1931 Lemaître introduces the “primevial atom” as the initial state of the universe.
Einstein drops the cosmological constant from his field equations.
1932 Chadwick discovers the neutron.
1933 Zwicky argues for the existence of dark matter in the Coma cluster.
Lemaître studies the gravitational collapse of matter perturbations in an
expanding universe.
1934 Lemaître identifies the cosmological constant with vacuum energy.
1935 Robertson and Walker derive the FRW metric.
1938 Bethe explains the energy production inside stars via the CN cycle.
1946 Gamov initiates the study of Big Bang nucleosynthesis (BBN).
Lifshitz studies cosmological perturbations in general relativity.

29
30 A Cosmic Chronology

1948 Gamov, Alpher, and Herman develop further details of BBN.

Alpher and Herman predict a 5K background radiation.
Bondi, Gold, and Hoyle propose the steady-state cosmology.
1949 Fred Hoyle coins the term “Big Bang.”
1950 Hayashi derives the primordial neutron-to-proton ratio and predicts the
helium abundance from BBN.
1953 Alpher, Follin and Herman present a more refined version of BBN,
incorporating recent advances in nuclear physics.
1956 Cowan and Reines discover the neutrino.
1957 Burbidge, Burbidge, Fowler and Hoyle (B2 FH) show that the heavy
elements are produced inside of stars.
1965 Penzias and Wilson discover the CMB.
1967 Sakharov presents the requirements for baryogenesis.
Wagner, Fowler, and Hoyle show that BBN predicts the correct deuterium
and lithium abundances.
Sachs and Wolfe study the effects of cosmological perturbations on the
CMB anisotropies.
1968 Peebles develops the non-equilibrium theory of recombination.
Rees predicts that the CMB should be polarized.
Misner formulates the horizon problem of the Big Bang theory.
1969 Dicke highlights the flatness problem.
1970 Rubin and Ford provide decisive evidence for dark matter through the
measurement of galaxy rotation curves.
Hawking and Penrose prove the cosmological singularity theorem.
The Harrison–Zel’dovich spectrum is introduced as the natural initial
condition for cosmological perturbations.
Peebles and Yu derive the CMB power spectrum.
1972 Gunn and Gott study the spherical collapse model of nonlinear structure
formation.
Cowsik and McClelland present an upper bound on neutrino masses.
1974 Press and Schechter develop a theory for the statistics of dark matter halos.
1975 Hawking discovers that black holes radiate quantum mechanically.
1976 Marx and Szalay suggest neutrinos as hot dark matter (HDM).
31 A Cosmic Chronology

1977 Peccei and Quinn introduce the axion to solve the strong CP problem.
Axion-like particles become a popular dark matter candidate.
1979 Starobinsky derives the spectrum of gravitational waves generated in a de
Sitter background.
1980 Starobinsky shows that high-energy corrections to Einstein gravity can lead
to a de Sitter solution.
Bardeen introduces a gauge-invariant formulation of cosmological
perturbation theory.
1981 Guth proposes inflation as a solution to the horizon and flatness problems.
Mukhanov and Chibisov suggest that quantum fluctuations during inflation
could lead to primordial density fluctuations.
Dimopoulos and Georgi introduce the MSSM. The neutralino becomes a
popular dark matter candidate.
1982 Linde, and independently Albrecht and Steinhardt, produce the first models
of slow-roll inflation. Several groups compute the density fluctuations
predicted by quantum fluctuations during inflation.
The first CfA galaxy redshift survey is completed.
Peebles introduces the cold dark matter (CDM) cosmology.
Steinhardt introduces the first example of eternal inflation.
1983 White, Frenk and Davis rule out the HDM cosmology.
Silk derives the damping of small-scale CMB fluctuations.
1984 Davis, Efstathiou, Frenk and White perform the first numerical simulations
in ΛCDM cosmology.
Turner, Steigman and Krauss argue that a cosmological constant is needed
to make the low matter density of the universe consistent with the spatial
flatness predicted by inflation.
1984 Polnarev computes the CMB polarization spectrum on small scales.
1987 Weinberg provides an anthropic explanation for the small value of the
cosmological constant.
32 A Cosmic Chronology

1990 COBE measures the blackbody spectrum of the CMB.

Efstathiou, Sutherland and Maddox argue that large-scale structure
observation imply the need for a cosmological constant.
Freese, Frieman and Olinto develop the theory of “natural inflation.”
Salopek and Bond estimate the amount of non-Gaussianity in slow-roll
inflation.
1992 COBE announces the first detection of CMB anisotropies.
1996 Seljak and Zaldarriaga release the Boltzmann code CMBFast.
Zaldarriaga and Seljak, and independently Kamionkowski, Kosowsky and
Stebbins, introduce the E/B decomposition of CMB polarization.
Lyth shows that inflationary models with observable gravitational waves
involve super-Planckian field excursions.
1997 Kofman, Linde and Starobinsky provide a comprehensive analysis of
perturbative reheating.
1998 The Supernova Cosmology Project and High-Z Supernova Search Team
discover the accelerated expansion of the universe.
1999 Seager, Sasselov and Scott develop the recombination code RecFast.
Turner introduces the term “dark energy.”
2000 BOOMERanG measures the position of the first peak in the CMB
spectrum, indicating that the universe is spatially flat.
2002 DASI discovers CMB polarization.
2003 The 2dF Survey shows that the matter density is 25% of the critical
density, giving independent evidence for dark energy.
CBI measures the E-mode polarization spectrum.
WMAP measures the CMB spectrum to unprecedented accuracy. It
discovers the deviation from scale-invariance predicted by inflation.
Maldacena provides the first rigorous calculation of the bispectrum of
slow-roll inflation.
2004 A joint-analysis of WMAP and SDSS data provides precision constraints on
the ΛCDM concordance cosmology.
Creminelli and Zaldarriaga prove the consistency relation for
non-Gaussianity in single-field inflation.
2005 SDSS discovers the BAO feature in the galaxy power spectrum.
2006 Smoot and Mather receive the Nobel prize for their work on COBE.
33 A Cosmic Chronology

2011 ACT and SPT measure the CMB lensing power spectrum.
2012 The ATLAS and CMS experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC)
report the detection of the Higgs boson.
2013 The Planck satellite provides precision measurements of the standard
cosmological parameters.
2014 BICEP announces the detection of primordial B-modes; the signal is later
shown to come from dust in our own galaxy.
2016 LIGO announces the detection of gravitational waves from black hole
mergers.
2019 Peebles receives the Nobel prize for his groundbreaking work in physical
cosmology.
 References

Chapter 2

[1] H. Kragh, Cosmology and Controversy. Princeton University Press, 1996.

[2] M. Longair, The Cosmic Century: a History of Astrophysics and Cosmology.
Cambridge University Press, 2006.
[3] [Link]
[4] V. Slipher, “Spectrographic Observations of Nebulae,” Popular Astronomy 23
(1915) 21–24.
[5] A. Einstein, “Kosmologische Betrachtungen zur Allgemeinen
Relativitätstheorie,” Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preußischen Akademie
der Wissenschaften (1917) 142–152.
[6] W. De Sitter, “On the Relativity of Inertia. Remarks Concerning Einstein’s
Latest Hypothesis,” Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wet. 19 (1917) 1217–1225.
[7] W. De Sitter, “On the Curvature of Space,” Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wet. 20
(1917) 229–243.
[8] H. Weyl, “Zur Allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie,” Phys. Zeitschrift 24 (1923)
230–232.
[9] G. Lemaître, “Note on de Sitter’s Universe,” Journal of Mathematics and
Physics 4 no. 1-4, (1925) 188–192.
[10] H. Robertson, “On Relativistic Cosmology,” The London, Edinburgh, and
Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 5 no. 31, (1928)
835–848.
[11] A. Friedmann, “Über die Krümmung des Raumes,” Zeitschrift für Physik 10
no. 1, (1922) 377–386.
[12] C. Wirtz, “Notiz zur Radialbewegung der Spiralnebel,” Astronomische
Nachrichten 216 (1922) 451.
[13] A. Friedmann, “Über die Möglichkeit einer Welt mit konstanter negativer
Krümmung des Raumes,” Zeitschrift für Physik 21 no. 1, (1924) 326–332.
[14] K. Lundmark, “The Determination of the Curvature of Spacetime in de
Sitter’s World,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 84 (1924)
747–770.
34
35 References

[15] K. Lundmark, “The Motions and the Distances of Spiral Nebulae,” Monthly
Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 85 (1925) 865.
[16] G. Stromberg, “Analysis of Radial Velocities of Globular Clusters and
Non-Galactic Nebulae,” The Astrophysical Journal 61 (1925) .
[17] G. Lemaître, “A Homogeneous Universe of Constant Mass and Growing
Radius Accounting for the Radial Velocity of Extragalactic Nebulae,”
Annales Soc. Sci. Bruxelles A 47 (1927) 49–59.
[18] E. Hubble, “A Relation Between Distance and Radial Velocity Among
Extra-Galactic Nebulae,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
15 no. 3, (1929) 168–173.
[19] H. Leavitt and E. Pickering, “Periods of 25 Variable Stars in the Small
Magellanic Cloud,” Harvard College Observatory Circular 173 (1912) 1–3.
[20] A. Eddington, “On the Instability of Einstein’s Spherical World,” Mon. Not.
Roy. Astron. Soc. 90 (1930) 668–678.
[21] M. Humason, “Apparent Velocity-Shifts in the Spectra of Faint Nebulae,”
The Astrophysical Journal 74 (1931) 35.
[22] E. Hubble and M. Humason, “The Velocity-Distance Relation Among
Extra-Galactic Nebulae,” Astrophys. J. 74 (1931) 43–80.
[23] R. Tolman, “On the Problem of the Entropy of the Universe as a Whole,”
Phys. Rev. 37 (1931) 1639–1660.
[24] A. Eddington, “The End of the World: from the Standpoint of Mathematical
Physics,” Nature 127 no. 3203, (1931) 447–453.
[25] G. Lemaître, “The Beginning of the World from the Point of View of
Quantum Theory,” Nature 127 (1931) 706.
[26] G. Lemaître, “L’Expansion de l’Espace,” Publications du Laboratoire
d’Astronomie et de Geodesie de l’Universite de Louvain 8 (1931) 101–120.
[27] A. Einstein, Zum Kosmologischen Problem der Allgemeinen
Relativitätstheorie. Akad. d. Wissenschaften, 1931.
[28] A. Einstein and W. de Sitter, “On the Relation between the Expansion and
the Mean Density of the Universe,” Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences 18 no. 3, (1932) 213–214.
[29] F. Zwicky, “Die Rotverschiebung von Extragalaktischen Nebeln,” Helv. Phys.
Acta 6 (1933) 110–127.
[30] F. Zwicky, “On the Masses of Nebulae and of Clusters of Nebulae,”
Astrophys. J. 86 (1937) 217–246.
[31] V. Rubin and W. Ford, “Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a
Spectroscopic Survey of Emission Regions,” Astrophys. J. 159 (1970) 379.
[32] V. Rubin, W. Ford, and N. Thonnard, “Extended Rotation Curves of
High-Luminosity Spiral Galaxies. IV. Systematic Dynamical Properties,”
Astrophys. J. 225 (1978) L107–L111.
[33] V. Rubin, W. Ford, and N. Thonnard, “Rotational Properties of 21 SC
Galaxies with a Large Range of Luminosities and Radii, from NGC 4605
(R = 4 kpc) to UGC 2885 (R = 122 kpc),” Astrophys. J. 238 (1980) 471–487.
36 References

[34] H. Robertson, “Relativistic Cosmology,” Reviews of Modern Physics 5 no. 1,

(1933) 62.
[35] G. Lemaître, “Evolution of the Expanding Universe,” Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 20 no. 1, (1934) 12–17.
[36] Y. Zel’dovich, “The Cosmological Constant and the Theory of Elementary
Particles,” Sov. Phys. Usp. 11 (1968) 381–393.
[37] W. Nernst, “Über einen Versuch, von Quantentheoretischen Betrachtungen
zur Annahme stetiger Energieänderungen zurückzukehren,” Verhandlungen
der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft 4 no. S 83, (1916) .
[38] H. Kragh, “Preludes to Dark Energy: Zero-Point Energy and Vacuum
Speculations,” arXiv:1111.4623 [[Link]-ph].
[39] H. Robertson, “Kinematics and World-Structure,” Astrophys. J. 82 (1935)
284–301.
[40] A. Walker, “On Milne’s Theory of World-Structure,” Proceedings of the
London Mathematical Society 2 no. 1, (1937) 90–127.
[41] E. Milne, “World-Structure and the Expansion of the Universe,” Zeitschrift
für Astrophysik 6 (1933) 1.
[42] G. Gamow, “Expanding Universe and the Origin of Elements,” Phys. Rev. 70
(1946) 572–573.
[43] R. Alpher and R. Herman, “Evolution of the Universe,” Nature 162 no. 4124,
(1948) 774–775.
[44] F. Hoyle, “A New Model for the Expanding Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy.
Astron. Soc. 108 (1948) 372–382.
[45] H. Bondi and T. Gold, “The Steady-State Theory of the Expanding
Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 108 (1948) 252.
[46] P. Halpern, Flashes of Creation: George Gamow, Fred Hoyle, and the Great
Big Bang Debate. Basic Books, 2021.
[47] M. Ryle and P. Scheuer, “The Spatial Distribution and the Nature of Radio
Stars,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical
and Physical Sciences 230 no. 1183, (1955) 448–462.
[48] M. Schmidt, “3C 273: A Star-like Object with Large Redshift,” Nature 197
no. 4872, (1963) 1040–1040.
[49] A. Penzias and R. Wilson, “A Measurement of Excess Antenna Temperature
at 4080-Mc/s,” Astrophys. J. 142 (1965) 419–421.
[50] R. Dicke, P. J. E. Peebles, P. Roll, and D. Wilkinson, “Cosmic Black-Body
Radiation,” Astrophys. J. 142 (1965) 414–419.
[51] S. Hawking and R. Penrose, “The Singularities of Gravitational Collapse and
Cosmology,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A A314 (1970) 529–548.
[52] S. Hawking, “Occurrence of Singularities in Open Universes,” Phys. Rev.
Lett. 15 (1965) 689–690.
[53] A. Guth, “The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and
Flatness Problems,” Phys. Rev. D 23 (1981) 347–356.
[54] S. Weinberg, “Anthropic Bound on the Cosmological Constant,” Physical
Review Letters 59 no. 22, (1987) 2607.
37 References

[55] J. Mather et al. [COBE Collaboration], “A Preliminary Measurement of the

Cosmic Microwave Background Spectrum by the Cosmic Background
Explorer (COBE) Satellite,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 354 (1990) L37–L40.
[56] G. Smoot et al. [COBE Collaboration], “Structure in the COBE Differential
Microwave Radiometer First-Year Maps,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 396 (1992)
L1–L5.
[57] S. Perlmutter et al. [Supernova Cosmology Project], “Measurements of Ω and
Λ from 42 High Redshift Supernovae,” Astrophys. J. 517 (1999) 565–586.
[58] A. Riess et al. [Supernova Search Team], “Observational Evidence from
Supernovae for an Accelerating Universe and a Cosmological Constant,”
Astron. J. 116 (1998) 1009–1038.
[59] D. Huterer and M. Turner, “Prospects for Probing the Dark Energy via
Supernova Distance Measurements,” Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 081301.
[60] P. de Bernardis et al. [Boomerang Collaboration], “A Flat Universe from
High-Resolution Maps of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation,”
Nature 404 (2000) 955–959.
[61] D. Spergel et al. [WMAP Collaboration], “First-Year Wilkinson Microwave
Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Determination of Cosmological
Parameters,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 175–194.
[62] P. Ade et al. [Planck Collaboration], “Planck 2013 Results. XVI.
Cosmological Parameters,” Astron. Astrophys. 571 (2014) A16.

Chapter 3

[1] M. Saha, “Ionisation in the Solar Chromosphere,” Nature 105 no. 2634,
(1920) 232–233.
[2] M. Saha, “On a Physical Theory of Stellar Spectra,” Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and
Physical Character 99 no. 697, (1921) 135–153.
[3] C. Payne, Stellar Atmospheres. PhD thesis, Radcliffe College, 1925.
[4] A. Eddington, The Internal Constitution of the Stars. Cambridge University
Press, 1988.
[5] R. Atkinson and F. Houtermans, “Zur Frage der Aufbaumöglichkeit der
Elemente in Sternen,” Zeitschrift für Physik 54 no. 9, (1929) 656–665.
[6] W. Pauli, Pauli Letter Collection: Letter to Lise Meitner.
[7] J. Chadwick, “Possible Existence of a Neutron,” Nature 129 no. 3252, (1932)
312–312.
[8] C. Anderson, “The Apparent Existence of Easily Deflectable Positives,”
Science 76 no. 1967, (1932) 238–239.
[9] P. A. M. Dirac, “The Quantum Theory of the Electron,” Proceedings of the
Royal Society of London Series A 117 no. 778, (1928) 610–624.
38 References

[10] R. Tolman, Relativity, Thermodynamics and Cosmology. Clarendon Press,

1934.
[11] C. Anderson and S. Neddermeyer, “Cloud Chamber Observations of Cosmic
Rays at 4300 Meters Elevation and Near Sea-Level,” Physical Review 50
no. 4, (1936) 263.
[12] S. Neddermeyer and C. Anderson, “Note on the Nature of Cosmic-Ray
Particles,” Physical Review 51 no. 10, (1937) 884.
[13] J. Street and E. Stevenson, “New Evidence for the Existence of a Particle of
Mass Intermediate Between the Proton and Electron,” Physical Review 52
no. 9, (1937) 1003.
[14] H. Bethe, “Energy Production in Stars,” Phys. Rev. 55 (1939) 434–456.
[15] C. von Weizsäcker, Über Elementumwandlungen im Inneren der Sterne. II. S.
Hirzel, 1938.
[16] S. Chandrasekhar and L. Henrich, “An Attempt to Interpret the Relative
Abundances of the Elements and their Isotopes,” Astrophysical Journal 95
(1942) 288–298.
[17] G. Gamow, “Expanding Universe and the Origin of Elements,” Phys. Rev. 70
(1946) 572–573.
[18] C. Lattes, H. Muirhead, G. Occhialini, and C. Powell, “Processes Involving
Charged Mesons,” Nature 159 no. 4047, (1947) 694–697.
[19] H. Yukawa, “On the Interaction of Elementary Particles,” Proceedings of the
Physico-Mathematical Society of Japan. 3rd Series 17 (1935) 48–57.
[20] P. J. E. Peebles, “Discovery of the Hot Big Bang: What Happened in 1948,”
Eur. Phys. J. H 39 (2014) 205–223.
[21] H. Kragh, Cosmology and Controversy. Princeton University Press, 1996.
[22] P. J. E. Peebles, L. Page, and B. Partridge, Finding the Big Bang.
Cambridge University Press, 2009.
[23] R. Alpher, H. Bethe, and G. Gamow, “The Origin of Chemical Elements,”
Phys. Rev. 73 (1948) 803–804.
[24] R. Alpher and R. Herman, “Evolution of the Universe,” Nature 162 no. 4124,
(1948) 774–775.
[25] S. Weinberg, The First Three Minutes. A Modern View of the Origin of the
Universe. Basic Books, 1993.
[26] C. Hayashi, “Proton-Neutron Concentration Ratio in the Expanding Universe
at the Stages Preceding the Formation of the Elements,” Prog. Theor. Phys.
5 no. 2, (1950) 224–235.
[27] R. Alpher, J. Follin, and R. Herman, “Physical Conditions in the Initial
Stages of the Expanding Universe,” Phys. Rev. 92 (1953) 1347–1361.
[28] H. Bondi and T. Gold, “The Steady-State Theory of the Expanding
Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 108 (1948) 252.
[29] F. Hoyle, “A New Model for the Expanding Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy.
Astron. Soc. 108 (1948) 372–382.
[30] F. Hoyle, “On Nuclear Reactions Occuring in Very Hot Stars. I. The
Synthesis of Elements from Carbon to Nickel.,” Astrophys. J. 1 (1954) 121.
39 References

[31] C. Cook, W. Fowler, C. Lauritsen, and T. Lauritsen, “b12 , c12 , and the red
giants,” Phys. Rev. 107 (1957) 508–515.
[32] C. Cowan, F. Reines, F. Harrison, H. Kruse, and A. McGuire, “Detection of
the Free Neutrino: A Confirmation,” Science 124 no. 3212, (1956) 103–104.
[33] M. Burbidge, G. Burbidge, W. Fowler, and F. Hoyle, “Synthesis of the
Elements in Stars,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 29 (1957) 547–650.
[34] D. Osterbrock and J. Rogerson, “The Helium and Heavy-Element Content of
Gaseous Nebulae and the Sun,” Publications of the Astronomical Society of
the Pacific 73 no. 431, (1961) 129–134.
[35] F. Hoyle and R. Tayler, “The Mystery of the Cosmic Helium Abundance,”
Nature 203 no. 4950, (1964) 1108–1110.
[36] A. Penzias and R. Wilson, “A Measurement of Excess Antenna Temperature
at 4080-Mc/s,” Astrophys. J. 142 (1965) 419–421.
[37] R. Dicke, P. J. E. Peebles, P. Roll, and D. Wilkinson, “Cosmic Black-Body
Radiation,” Astrophys. J. 142 (1965) 414–419.
[38] Y. Zel’dovich, “Survey of Modern Cosmology,” in Advances in astronomy and
astrophysics, vol. 3, pp. 241–379. Elsevier, 1965.
[39] P. J. E. Peebles, “Primeval Helium Abundance and the Primeval Fireball,”
Physical Review Letters 16 no. 10, (1966) 410.
[40] S. Gerstein and Y. Zel’dovich, “Rest Mass of the Muonic Neutrino and
Cosmology,” JETP Letters 4 (1966) 120.
[41] R. Cowsik and J. McClelland, “An Upper Limit on the Neutrino Rest Mass,”
Phys. Rev. Lett. 29 (Sep, 1972) 669–670.
[42] R. Wagoner, W. Fowler, and F. Hoyle, “On the Synthesis of Elements at
Very High Temperatures,” Astrophys. J. 148 (1967) 3–49.
[43] R. Wagoner, “Big Bang Nucleosynthesis Revisited,” Astrophys. J. 179 (1973)
343–360.
[44] A. Sakharov, “Violation of CP Invariance, C Asymmetry, and Baryon
Asymmetry of the Universe,” Sov. Phys. Usp. 34 no. 5, (1991) 392–393.
[45] P. J. E. Peebles, “Recombination of the Primeval Plasma,” Astrophys. J. 153
(1968) 1.
[46] Y. Zel’dovich, V. Kurt, and R. Sunyaev, “Recombination of Hydrogen in the
Hot Model of the Universe,” Sov. Phys. JETP 28 (1969) 146.
[47] R. Peccei and H. Quinn, “CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,”
Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 1440–1443.
[48] R. Peccei and H. Quinn, “Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the
Presence of Instantons,” Phys. Rev. D 16 (1977) 1791–1797.
[49] S. Weinberg, “A New Light Boson?,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 223–226.
[50] F. Wilczek, “Problem of Strong P and T Invariance in the Presence of
Instantons,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 279–282.
[51] G. Steigman, D. Schramm, and J. Gunn, “Cosmological Limits to the
Number of Massive Leptons,” Phys. Lett. B 66 (1977) 202–204.
[52] B. Lee and S. Weinberg, “Cosmological Lower Bound on Heavy Neutrino
Masses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 39 (1977) 165–168.
40 References

[53] D. Dicus, E. Kolb, and V. Teplitz, “Cosmological Implications of Massive,

Unstable Neutrinos: New and Improved,” Astrophys. J. 221 (1978) 327–341.
[54] M. Yoshimura, “Unified Gauge Theories and the Baryon Number of the
Universe,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 41 (1978) 281–284. [Erratum: [Link]. 42,
746 (1979)].
[55] S. Weinberg, “Cosmological Production of Baryons,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 42
(1979) 850–853.
[56] S. Dimopoulos and H. Georgi, “Softly Broken Supersymmetry and SU(5),”
Nucl. Phys. B 193 (1981) 150–162.
[57] S. Weinberg, “Upper Bound on Gauge Fermion Masses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 50
(1983) 387.
[58] J. Ellis, J. Hagelin, D. Nanopoulos, K. Olive, and M. Srednicki,
“Supersymmetric Relics from the Big Bang,” Nucl. Phys. B 238 (1984)
453–476.
[59] J. Mather et al. [COBE Collaboration], “A Preliminary Measurement of the
Cosmic Microwave Background Spectrum by the Cosmic Background
Explorer (COBE) Satellite,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 354 (1990) L37–L40.
[60] S. Seager, D. Sasselov, and D. Scott, “A New Calculation of the
Recombination Epoch,” Astrophys. J. 523 (1999) L1–L5.
[61] D. Spergel et al. [WMAP Collaboration], “First-Year Wilkinson Microwave
Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Determination of Cosmological
Parameters,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 175–194.
[62] Y. Ali-Haimoud and C. Hirata, “HyRec: A Fast and Highly Accurate
Primordial Hydrogen and Helium Recombination Code,” Phys. Rev. D 83
(2011) 043513.
[63] J. Chluba and R. Thomas, “Towards a Complete Treatment of the
Cosmological Recombination Problem,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 412
(2011) 748.

Chapter 4

[1] K. Olive, “Inflation,” Phys. Rept. 190 (1990) 307–403.

[2] E. Gliner, “Algebraic Properties of the Energy-Momentum Tensor and
Vacuum-like States of Matter,” Soviet Journal of Experimental and
Theoretical Physics 22 (1966) 378.
[3] Y. Zel’dovich, “The Cosmological Constant and the Theory of Elementary
Particles,” Soviet Physics Uspekhi 11 no. 3, (1968) 381.
[4] C. Misner, “The Isotropy of the Universe,” Astrophys. J. 151 (1968) 431–457.
[5] R. Dicke, Gravitation and the Universe: Jayne Lectures, 1969.
[6] A. Linde, “Is the Cosmological Constant a Constant?,” JETP Lett. 19 (1974)
183.
41 References

[7] J. Dreitlein, “Broken Symmetry and the Cosmological Constant,” Phys. Rev.
Lett. 33 (1974) 1243–1244.
[8] E. Gliner and I. Dymnikova, “A Nonsingular Friedmann Cosmology,” Soviet
Astronomy Letters 1 (1975) 93.
[9] S. Hawking and W. Israel, General Relativity: an Einstein Centenary Survey.
Cambridge University Press, 2010.
[10] J. Preskill, “Cosmological Production of Superheavy Magnetic Monopoles,”
Phys. Rev. Lett. 43 (1979) 1365.
[11] A. Linde, “Phase Transitions in Gauge Theories and Cosmology,” Reports on
Progress in Physics 42 (1979) 389–437.
[12] E. Kolb and S. Wolfram, “Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking and the
Expansion Rate of the Early Universe,” Astrophys. J. 239 (1980) 428.
[13] A. Starobinsky, “A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without
Singularity,” Phys. Lett. B 91 (1980) 99–102.
[14] A. Guth and H. Tye, “Phase Transitions and Magnetic Monopole Production
in the Very Early Universe,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 (1980) 631.
[15] D. Kazanas, “Dynamics of the Universe and Spontaneous Symmetry
Breaking,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 241 (1980) L59–L63.
[16] A. Guth, “The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and
Flatness Problems,” Phys. Rev. D 23 (1981) 347–356.
[17] K. Sato, “Cosmological Baryon-Number Domain Structure and the
First-Order Phase Transition of a Vacuum,” Physics Letters B 99 (1981)
66–70.
[18] K. Sato, “First Order Phase Transition of a Vacuum and Expansion of the
Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 195 (1981) 467–479.
[19] A. Linde, “A New Inflationary Universe Scenario: A Possible Solution of the
Horizon, Flatness, Homogeneity, Isotropy and Primordial Monopole
Problems,” Phys. Lett. B 108 (1982) 389–393.
[20] A. Albrecht and P. Steinhardt, “Cosmology for Grand Unified Theories with
Radiatively Induced Symmetry Breaking,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 48 (1982)
1220–1223.
[21] V. Mukhanov and G. Chibisov, “Quantum Fluctuations and a Nonsingular
Universe,” JETP Lett. 33 (1981) 532–535.
[22] J. Bardeen, P. Steinhardt, and M. Turner, “Spontaneous Creation of Almost
Scale-Free Density Perturbations in an Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Rev. D
28 (1983) 679.
[23] S. Hawking, “The Development of Irregularities in a Single Bubble
Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Lett. B 115 (1982) 295.
[24] A. Starobinsky, “Dynamics of Phase Transition in the New Inflationary
Universe Scenario and Generation of Perturbations,” Phys. Lett. B 117
(1982) 175–178.
[25] A. Guth and S. Y. Pi, “Fluctuations in the New Inflationary Universe,” Phys.
Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 1110–1113.
42 References

[26] G. Gibbons, S. Hawking, S. Siklos, and F. Wilczek, The Very Early Universe.
Proceedings of the Nuffield Workshop. Cambridge University Press, 1983.
[27] A. Linde, “A Brief History of the Multiverse,” Rept. Prog. Phys. 80 no. 2,
(2017) 022001.
[28] A. Albrecht, P. Steinhardt, M. Turner, and F. Wilczek, “Reheating an
Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 48 (1982) 1437.
[29] A. Vilenkin, “The Birth of Inflationary Universes,” Phys. Rev. D 27 (1983)
2848.
[30] A. Linde, “Chaotic Inflation,” Phys. Lett. B 129 (1983) 177–181.
[31] A. Linde, “Eternally Existing Selfreproducing Chaotic Inflationary Universe,”
Phys. Lett. B 175 (1986) 395–400.
[32] D. Goldwirth and T. Piran, “Inhomogeneity and the Onset of Inflation,”
Phys. Rev. Lett. 64 (Jun, 1990) 2852–2855.
[33] D. Goldwirth and T. Piran, “Spherical Inhomogeneous Cosmologies and
Inflation: Numerical Methods,” Phys. Rev. D 40 (Nov, 1989) 3263–3279.
[34] K. Freese, J. Frieman, and A. Olinto, “Natural Inflation with
Pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone Bosons,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 3233–3236.
[35] L. Kofman, A. Linde, and A. Starobinsky, “Towards the Theory of Reheating
after Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 3258–3295.
[36] C. Armendariz-Picon, T. Damour, and V. Mukhanov, “k-inflation,” Physics
Letters B 458 no. 2-3, (1999) 209–218.
[37] P. de Bernardis et al. [Boomerang Collaboration], “A Flat Universe from
High-Resolution Maps of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation,”
Nature 404 (2000) 955–959.
[38] J. Khoury, B. Ovrut, P. Steinhardt, and N. Turok, “The Ekpyrotic Universe:
Colliding Branes and the Origin of the Hot Big Bang,” Phys. Rev. D 64
(2001) 123522.
[39] P. Steinhardt and N. Turok, “A Cyclic Model of the Universe,” Science 296
(2002) 1436–1439.
[40] H. Peiris et al. [WMAP Collaboration], “First Year Wilkinson Microwave
Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Implications for Inflation,”
Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 213–231.
[41] S. Kachru, R. Kallosh, A. Linde, and S. Trivedi, “De Sitter Vacua in String
Theory,” Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 046005.
[42] S. Kachru, R. Kallosh, A. Linde, J. Maldacena, L. McAllister, and S. Trivedi,
“Towards Inflation in String Theory,” JCAP 10 (2003) 013.
[43] D. Baumann, A. Dymarsky, I. Klebanov, and L. McAllister, “Towards an
Explicit Model of D-brane Inflation,” JCAP 01 (2008) 024.
[44] E. Silverstein and D. Tong, “Scalar Speed Limits and Cosmology:
Acceleration from D-cceleration,” Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 103505.
[45] M. Alishahiha, E. Silverstein, and D. Tong, “DBI in the Sky,” Phys. Rev. D
70 (2004) 123505.
[46] L. Susskind, “The Anthropic Landscape of String Theory,”
arXiv:hep-th/0302219.
43 References

[47] R. Bousso and J. Polchinski, “Quantization of Four-Form Fluxes and

Dynamical Neutralization of the Cosmological Constant,” JHEP 06 (2000)
006.
[48] A. Borde, A. Guth, and A. Vilenkin, “Inflationary Spacetimes are Incomplete
in Past Directions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 151301.
[49] E. Silverstein and A. Westphal, “Monodromy in the CMB: Gravity Waves
and String Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 106003.
[50] L. McAllister, E. Silverstein, and A. Westphal, “Gravity Waves and Linear
Inflation from Axion Monodromy,” Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 046003.
[51] C. Cheung, P. Creminelli, L. Fitzpatrick, J. Kaplan, and L. Senatore, “The
Effective Field Theory of Inflation,” JHEP 03 (2008) 014.
[52] S. Weinberg, “Effective Field Theory for Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008)
123541.
[53] W. East, M. Kleban, A. Linde, and L. Senatore, “Beginning Inflation in an
Inhomogeneous Universe,” JCAP 09 (2016) 010.
[54] K. Clough, E. Lim, B. DiNunno, W. Fischler, R. Flauger, and S. Paban,
“Robustness of Inflation to Inhomogeneous Initial Conditions,” JCAP 09
(2017) 025.
[55] P. Laguna, H. Kurki-Suonio, and R. Matzner, “Inhomogeneous Inflation: The
Initial Value Problem,” Phys. Rev. D 44 (1991) 3077–3086.

Chapter 5

[1] P. J. E. Peebles, Cosmology’s Century: An Inside History of Our Modern

Understanding of the Universe. Princeton University Press, 2020.
[2] M. Longair, The Cosmic Century: A History of Astrophysics and Cosmology.
Cambridge University Press, 2006.
[3] G. Bertone and D. Hooper, “History of Dark Matter,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 90
no. 4, (2018) 045002.
[4] J. Jeans, “The Stability of a Spherical Nebula,” Phil. Trans. A. Math. Phys.
Eng. Sci. 199 no. 312-320, (1902) 1–53.
[5] H. Leavitt and E. Pickering, “Periods of 25 Variable Stars in the Small
Magellanic Cloud,” Harvard College Observatory Circular 173 (1912) 1–3.
[6] H. Shapley and H. Curtis, “The Scale of the Universe,” Bulletin of the
National Research Council 2 no. 11, (1921) 171–217.
[7] E. Hubble, “Cepheids in Spiral Nebulae,” Publications of the American
Astronomical Society 5 (1927) 261–264.
[8] E. Hubble, “A Relation Between Distance and Radial Velocity Among
Extra-Galactic Nebulae,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
15 no. 3, (1929) 168–173.
44 References

[9] G. Lemaître, “La Formation des Nebuleuses dans l’Univers en Expansion,”

Comptes Rendus 196 (1933) 1085–1087.
[10] E. Lifshitz, “On the Gravitational Stability of the Expanding Universe,” J.
Phys. (USSR) 10 no. 2, (1946) 116.
[11] R. Tolman, “Effect of Inhomogeneity on Cosmological Models,” Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences 20 no. 3, (1934) 169.
[12] G. Gamow and E. Teller, “On the Origin of Great Nebulae,” Physical Review
55 no. 7, (1939) 654.
[13] F. Zwicky, “Die Rotverschiebung von Extragalaktischen Nebeln,” Helv. Phys.
Acta 6 (1933) 110–127.
[14] F. Zwicky, “On the Masses of Nebulae and of Clusters of Nebulae,”
Astrophys. J. 86 (1937) 217–246.
[15] G. Gamow, “The Origin of Elements and the Separation of Galaxies,”
Physical Review 74 no. 4, (1948) 505.
[16] P. Meszaros, “The Behaviour of Point Masses in an Expanding Cosmological
Substratum,” Astron. Astrophys. 37 (1974) 225–228.
[17] J. Neyman and E. Scott, “A Theory of the Spatial Distribution of Galaxies,”
The Astrophysical Journal 116 (1952) 144.
[18] J. Neyman, E. Scott, and C. Shane, “The Index of Clumpiness of the
Distribution of Images of Galaxies,” The Astrophysical Journal Supplement
Series 1 (1954) 269.
[19] W. Bonnor, “Jeans’ Formula for Gravitational Instability,” Monthly Notices
of the Royal Astronomical Society 117 no. 1, (02, 1957) 104–117.
[20] I. Novikov, “On the Possibility of Appearance of Large-Scale Inhomogeneities
in the Expanding Universe,” Sov. Phys. JETP 19 no. 2, (1964) 686–9.
[21] P. J. E. Peebles, “The Black-Body Radiation Content of the Universe and the
Formation of Galaxies.,” Astrophys. J. 142 (1965) 1317.
[22] J. Gunn and B. Peterson, “On the Density of Neutral Hydrogen in
Intergalactic Space.,” Astrophys. J. 142 (1965) 1633–1636.
[23] H. Totsuji and T. Kihara, “The Correlation Function for the Distribution of
Galaxies,” Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 21 (1969) 221.
[24] E. Harrison, “Fluctuations at the Threshold of Classical Cosmology,” Phys.
Rev. D 1 (1970) 2726–2730.
[25] P. J. E. Peebles and J. Yu, “Primeval Adiabatic Perturbation in an
Expanding Universe,” Astrophys. J. 162 (1970) 815–836.
[26] Y. Zel’dovich, “A Hypothesis, Unifying the Structure and the Entropy of the
Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 160 (1972) 1P–3P.
[27] V. Rubin and W. Ford, “Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a
Spectroscopic Survey of Emission Regions,” Astrophys. J. 159 (1970) 379.
[28] V. Rubin, W. Ford, and N. Thonnard, “Extended Rotation Curves of
High-Luminosity Spiral Galaxies. IV. Systematic Dynamical Properties,”
Astrophys. J. 225 (1978) L107–L111.
45 References

[29] V. Rubin, W. Ford, and N. Thonnard, “Rotational Properties of 21 SC

Galaxies with a Large Range of Luminosities and Radii, from NGC 4605
(R = 4 kpc) to UGC 2885 (R = 122 kpc),” Astrophys. J. 238 (1980) 471–487.
[30] S. Faber and J. Gallagher, “Masses and Mass-To-Light Ratios of Galaxies,”
Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 17 no. 1, (1979) 135–187.
[31] P. J. E. Peebles, Physical Cosmology. Princeton University Press, 1971.
[32] J. Gunn and J. Gott, “On the Infall of Matter into Clusters of Galaxies and
Some Effects on Their Evolution,” Astrophys. J. 176 (1972) 1–19.
[33] R. Cowsik and J. McClelland, “An Upper Limit on the Neutrino Rest Mass,”
Phys. Rev. Lett. 29 (Sep, 1972) 669–670.
[34] S. Gerstein and Y. Zel’dovich, “Rest Mass of the Muonic Neutrino and
Cosmology,” JETP Letters 4 (1966) 120.
[35] W. Press and P. Schechter, “Formation of Galaxies and Clusters of Galaxies
by Self-Similar Gravitational Condensation,” Astrophys. J. 187 (1974)
425–438.
[36] J. Ostriker, P. J. E. Peebles, and A. Yahil, “The Size and Mass of Galaxies,
and the Mass of the Universe,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 193 (1974) L1–L4.
[37] J. Einasto, A. Kaasik, and E. Saar, “Dynamic Evidence on Massive Coronas
of Galaxies,” Nature 250 no. 5464, (1974) 309–310.
[38] A. Szalay and G. Marx, “Neutrino Rest Mass from Cosmology,” Astron.
Astrophys. 49 (1976) 437–441.
[39] B. Lee and S. Weinberg, “Cosmological Lower Bound on Heavy Neutrino
Masses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 39 (1977) 165–168.
[40] P. Hut, “Limits on Masses and Number of Neutral Weakly Interacting
Particles,” Phys. Lett. B 69 (1977) 85.
[41] K. Sato and M. Kobayashi, “Cosmological Constraints on the Mass and the
Number of Heavy Lepton Neutrinos,” Prog. Theor. Phys. 58 (1977) 1775.
[42] D. Dicus, E. Kolb, and V. Teplitz, “Cosmological Implications of Massive,
Unstable Neutrinos: New and Improved,” Astrophys. J. 221 (1978) 327–341.
[43] M. Vysotsky, A. Dolgov, and Y. Zel’dovich, “Cosmological Restriction on
Neutral Lepton Masses,” JETP Lett. 26 (1977) 188–190.
[44] V. Lyubimov, E. Novikov, V. Nozik, E. Tretyakov, and V. Kosik, “An
Estimate of the Electron-Neutrino Mass from the Beta Spectrum of Tritium
in the Valine Molecule,” Phys. Lett. B 94 (1980) 266–268.
[45] A. Guth, “The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and
Flatness Problems,” Phys. Rev. D 23 (1981) 347–356.
[46] V. Mukhanov and G. Chibisov, “Quantum Fluctuations and a Nonsingular
Universe,” JETP Lett. 33 (1981) 532–535.
[47] J. Bardeen, P. Steinhardt, and M. Turner, “Spontaneous Creation of Almost
Scale-Free Density Perturbations in an Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Rev. D
28 (1983) 679.
[48] S. Hawking, “The Development of Irregularities in a Single Bubble
Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Lett. B 115 (1982) 295.
46 References

[49] A. Starobinsky, “Dynamics of Phase Transition in the New Inflationary

Universe Scenario and Generation of Perturbations,” Phys. Lett. B 117
(1982) 175–178.
[50] A. Guth and S. Y. Pi, “Fluctuations in the New Inflationary Universe,” Phys.
Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 1110–1113.
[51] M. Davis, J. Huchra, D. Latham, and J. Tonry, “A Survey of Galaxy
Redshifts. II. The Large Scale Space Distribution,” Astrophys. J. 253 (1982)
423–445.
[52] P. J. E. Peebles, “Large-Scale Background Temperature and Mass
Fluctuations Due to Scale-Invariant Primeval Perturbations,” Astrophys. J.
Lett. 263 (1982) L1–L5.
[53] S. White, C. Frenk, and M. Davis, “Clustering in a Neutrino-Dominated
Universe,” Astrophys. J. 274 (Nov., 1983) L1–L5.
[54] M. Davis, G. Efstathiou, C. Frenk, and S. White, “The Evolution of Large
Scale Structure in a Universe Dominated by Cold Dark Matter,” Astrophys.
J. 292 (1985) 371–394.
[55] G. Blumenthal, S. Faber, J. Primack, and M. Rees, “Formation of Galaxies
and Large Scale Structure with Cold Dark Matter,” Nature 311 (1984)
517–525.
[56] M. Turner, G. Steigman, and L. Krauss, “Flatness of the Universe:
Reconciling Theoretical Prejudices with Observational Data,” Phys. Rev.
Lett. 52 (Jun, 1984) 2090–2093.
[57] P. J. E. Peebles, “Tests of Cosmological Models Constrained by Inflation,”
Astrophys. J. 284 (1984) 439–444.
[58] N. Kaiser, “On the Spatial Correlations of Abell Clusters,” Astrophys. J.
Lett. 284 (1984) L9–L12.
[59] J. Bardeen, J. Bond, N. Kaiser, and A. Szalay, “The Statistics of Peaks of
Gaussian Random Fields,” Astrophys. J. 304 (1986) 15.
[60] S. Weinberg, “Anthropic Bound on the Cosmological Constant,” Phys. Rev.
Lett. 59 (1987) 2607.
[61] M. Geller and J. Huchra, “Mapping the Universe,” Science 246 no. 4932,
(1989) 897–903.
[62] G. Efstathiou, W. Sutherland, and S. Maddox, “The Cosmological Constant
and Cold Dark Matter,” Nature 348 (1990) 705–707.
[63] G. Smoot et al. [COBE Collaboration], “Structure in the COBE Differential
Microwave Radiometer First-Year Maps,” The Astrophysical Journal 396
(1992) L1–L5.
[64] D. Spergel et al. [WMAP Collaboration], “First-Year Wilkinson Microwave
Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Determination of Cosmological
Parameters,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 175–194.
[65] M. Tegmark et al. [SDSS Collaboration], “Cosmological Parameters from
SDSS and WMAP,” Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 103501.
[66] V. Springel et al., “Simulations of the Formation, Evolution and Clustering of
Galaxies and Quasars,” Nature 435 no. 7042, (2005) 629–636.
47 References

[67] D. Baumann, A. Nicolis, L. Senatore, and M. Zaldarriaga, “Cosmological

Non-Linearities as an Effective Fluid,” JCAP 07 (2012) 051.
[68] J. J. Carrasco, M. Hertzberg, and L. Senatore, “The Effective Field Theory
of Cosmological Large Scale Structures,” JHEP 09 (2012) 082.
[69] G. D’Amico, J. Gleyzes, N. Kokron, K. Markovic, L. Senatore, P. Zhang,
F. Beutler, and H. Gil-Marín, “The Cosmological Analysis of the
SDSS/BOSS Data from the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure,”
JCAP 05 (2020) 005.
[70] M. Ivanov, M. Simonović, and M. Zaldarriaga, “Cosmological Parameters
from the BOSS Galaxy Power Spectrum,” JCAP 05 (2020) 042.
[71] T. Abbott et al. [DES Collaboration], “Dark Energy Survey Year 3 Results:
Cosmological Constraints from Galaxy Clustering and Weak Lensing,” Phys.
Rev. D 105 no. 2, (2022) 023520.

Chapter 6

[1] E. Lifshitz, “On the Gravitational Stability of the Expanding Universe,” J.

Phys. (USSR) 10 no. 2, (1946) 116.
[2] R. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. Misner, “Dynamical Structure and Definition
of Energy in General Relativity,” Phys. Rev. 116 (1959) 1322–1330.
[3] R. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. Misner, “The Dynamics of General Relativity,”
Gen. Rel. Grav. 40 (2008) 1997–2027, arXiv:gr-qc/0405109.
[4] J. Maldacena, “Non-Gaussian Features of Primordial Fluctuations in
Single-Field Inflationary Models,” JHEP 05 (2003) 013.
[5] E. Lifshitz and I. Khalatnikov, “Investigations in Relativistic Cosmology,”
Advances in Physics 12 no. 46, (1963) 185–249.
[6] S. Hawking, “Perturbations of an Expanding Universe,” Astrophys. J. 145
(1966) 544–554.
[7] E. Harrison, “Normal Modes of Vibrations of the Universe,” Reviews of
Modern Physics 39 no. 4, (1967) 862.
[8] H. Nariai, “The Lagrangian Approach to the Gravitational Instability in an
Expanding Universe,” Progress of Theoretical Physics 41 no. 3, (1969)
686–694.
[9] P. J. E. Peebles and J. Yu, “Primeval Adiabatic Perturbation in an
Expanding Universe,” Astrophys. J. 162 (1970) 815–836.
[10] W. Press and E. Vishniac, “Tenacious Myths about Cosmological
Perturbations Larger than the Horizon Size,” Astrophys. J. 239 (1980) 1–11.
[11] J. Bardeen, “Gauge Invariant Cosmological Perturbations,” Phys. Rev. D 22
(1980) 1882–1905.
[12] H. Kodama and M. Sasaki, “Cosmological Perturbation Theory,” Prog.
Theor. Phys. Suppl. 78 (1984) 1–166.
48 References

[13] V. Mukhanov, H. Feldman, and R. Brandenberger, “Theory of Cosmological

Perturbations,” Phys. Rept. 215 (1992) 203–333.
[14] V. Mukhanov and G. Chibisov, “Quantum Fluctuations and a Nonsingular
Universe,” JETP Lett. 33 (1981) 532–535.
[15] J. Bardeen, P. Steinhardt, and M. Turner, “Spontaneous Creation of Almost
Scale-Free Density Perturbations in an Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Rev. D
28 (1983) 679.
[16] S. Hawking, “The Development of Irregularities in a Single Bubble
Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Lett. B 115 (1982) 295.
[17] A. Starobinsky, “Dynamics of Phase Transition in the New Inflationary
Universe Scenario and Generation of Perturbations,” Phys. Lett. B 117
(1982) 175–178.
[18] A. Guth and S. Y. Pi, “Fluctuations in the New Inflationary Universe,” Phys.
Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 1110–1113.
[19] R. Brandenberger and R. Kahn, “Cosmological Perturbations in
Inflationary-Universe Models,” Phys. Rev. D 29 (May, 1984) 2172–2190.
[20] D. Wands, K. Malik, D. Lyth, and A. Liddle, “A New Approach to the
Evolution of Cosmological Perturbations on Large Scales,” Phys. Rev. D 62
(2000) 043527.
[21] D. Lyth, “Large Scale Energy Density Perturbations and Inflation,” Phys.
Rev. D 31 (1985) 1792–1798.
[22] W. Hu and N. Sugiyama, “Small Scale Cosmological Perturbations: An
Analytic Approach,” Astrophys. J. 471 (1996) 542–570.
[23] C.-P. Ma and E. Bertschinger, “Cosmological Perturbation Theory in the
Synchronous and Conformal Newtonian Gauges,” Astrophys. J. 455 (1995)
7–25.
[24] U. Seljak and M. Zaldarriaga, “A Line-of-Sight Integration Approach to
Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropies,” Astrophys. J. 469 (1996)
437–444.
[25] D. Eisenstein and W. Hu, “Baryonic Features in the Matter Transfer
Function,” Astrophys. J. 496 (1998) 605.
[26] M. Bucher, K. Moodley, and N. Turok, “The General Primordial Cosmic
Perturbation,” Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 083508.
[27] S. Weinberg, “Adiabatic Modes in Ccosmology,” Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003)
123504.
[28] D. Lyth, K. Malik, and M. Sasaki, “A General Proof of the Conservation of
the Curvature Perturbation,” JCAP 05 (2005) 004.
[29] D. Langlois and F. Vernizzi, “Conserved Nonlinear Quantities in Cosmology,”
Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 103501.
[30] D. Eisenstein et al. [SDSS Collaboration], “Detection of the Baryon Acoustic
Peak in the Large-Scale Correlation Function of SDSS Luminous Red
Galaxies,” Astrophys. J. 633 (2005) 560–574.
49 References

Chapter 7

[1] P. J. E. Peebles, L. Page, and B. Partridge, Finding the Big Bang.

Cambridge University Press, 2009.
[2] R. Tolman, Relativity, Thermodynamics and Cosmology. Clarendon Press,
1934.
[3] A. McKellar, “Molecular Lines from the Lowest States of Diatomic Molecules
Composed of Atoms Probably Present in Interstellar Space,” Publications of
the Dominion Astrophysical Observatory Victoria 7 (1941) 251.
[4] R. Alpher and R. Herman, “Evolution of the Universe,” Nature 162 no. 4124,
(1948) 774–775.
[5] A. Doroshkevich and I. Novikov, “Mean Density of Radiation in the
Metagalaxy and Certain Problems in Relativistic Cosmology,” Soviet Physics
Doklady 9 (1964) 111.
[6] A. Sakharov, “The Initial Stage of an Expanding Universe and the
Appearance of a Non-Uniform Distribution of Matter,” Soviet Journal of
Experimental and Theoretical Physics 22 (1966) 241.
[7] P. J. E. Peebles and J. Yu, “Primeval Adiabatic Perturbation in an
Expanding Universe,” Astrophys. J. 162 (1970) 815–836.
[8] R. Sunyaev and Y. Zel’dovich, “Small Scale Fluctuations of Relic Radiation,”
Astrophys. Space Sci. 7 (1970) 3–19.
[9] A. Penzias and R. Wilson, “A Measurement of Excess Antenna Temperature
at 4080-Mc/s,” Astrophys. J. 142 (1965) 419–421.
[10] R. Dicke, P. J. E. Peebles, P. Roll, and D. Wilkinson, “Cosmic Black-Body
Radiation,” Astrophys. J. 142 (1965) 414–419.
[11] R. Sachs and A. Wolfe, “Perturbations of a Cosmological Model and Angular
Variations of the Microwave Background,” Astrophys. J. 147 (1967) 73–90.
[12] M. Rees, “Polarization and Spectrum of the Primeval Radiation in an
Anisotropic Universe,” The Astrophysical Journal 153 (1968) L1.
[13] M. Rees and D. Sciama, “Large-Scale Density Inhomogeneities in the
Universe,” Nature 217 no. 5128, (1968) 511–516.
[14] Y. Zel’dovich and R. Sunyaev, “The Interaction of Matter and Radiation in a
Hot-Model Universe,” Astrophys. Space Sci. 4 (1969) 301–316.
[15] R. Weymann, “The Energy Spectrum of Radiation in the Expanding
Universe,” The Astrophysical Journal 145 (1966) 560.
[16] P. Henry, “Isotropy of the 3 K Background,” Nature 231 no. 5304, (1971)
516–518.
[17] B. Corey and D. Wilkinson, “A Measurement of the Cosmic Microwave
Background Anisotropy at 19 GHz,” Bulletin of the American Astronomical
Society 8 (1976) 351.
[18] G. Smoot, M. Gorenstein, and R. Muller, “Detection of Anisotropy in the
Cosmic Blackbody Radiation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 39 no. 14, (1977) 898–901.
50 References

[19] R. Sunyaev and Y. Zel’dovich, “The Observations of Relic Radiation as a

Test of the Nature of X-Ray Radiation from the Clusters of Galaxies,”
Comments on Astrophysics and Space Physics 4 (1972) 173.
[20] N. Kaiser, “Small-Angle Anisotropy of the Microwave Background Radiation
in the Adiabatic Theory,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
202 no. 4, (1983) 1169–1180.
[21] J. Silk, “Cosmic Black-Body Radiation and Galaxy Formation,” Astrophys.
J. 151 (1968) 459.
[22] M. Birkinshaw, S. Gull, and H. Hardebeck, “The Sunyaev–Zeldovich Effect
Towards Three Clusters of Galaxies,” Nature 309 no. 5963, (1984) 34–35.
[23] A. Polnarev, “Polarization and Anisotropy Induced in the Microwave
Background by Cosmological Gravitational Waves,” Soviet Astronomy 29
(1985) 607–613.
[24] R. Crittenden, R. Davis, and P. Steinhardt, “Polarization of the Microwave
Background due to Primordial Gravitational Waves,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 417
(1993) L13–L16.
[25] D. Coulson, R. Crittenden, and N. Turok, “Polarization and Anisotropy of
the Microwave Sky,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 73 (1994) 2390–2393.
[26] A. Kosowsky, “Cosmic Microwave Background Polarization,” Annals Phys.
246 (1996) 49–85.
[27] J. Bond and G. Efstathiou, “The Statistics of Cosmic Background Radiation
Fluctuations,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 226 (1987) 655–687.
[28] J. Mather et al. [COBE Collaboration], “A Preliminary Measurement of the
Cosmic Microwave Background Spectrum by the Cosmic Background
Explorer (COBE) Satellite,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 354 (1990) L37–L40.
[29] G. Smoot et al. [COBE Collaboration], “Structure in the COBE Differential
Microwave Radiometer First-Year Maps,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 396 (1992)
L1–L5.
[30] E. Bertschinger, “COSMICS: Cosmological Initial Conditions and Microwave
Anisotropy Codes,” arXiv:astro-ph/9506070.
[31] W. Hu and N. Sugiyama, “Small Scale Cosmological Perturbations: An
Analytic Approach,” Astrophys. J. 471 (1996) 542–570.
[32] M. Zaldarriaga and U. Seljak, “An All-Sky Analysis of Polarization in the
Microwave Background,” Phys. Rev. D 55 (1997) 1830–1840.
[33] M. Kamionkowski, A. Kosowsky, and A. Stebbins, “Statistics of Cosmic
Microwave Background Polarization,” Phys. Rev. D 55 (1997) 7368–7388.
[34] U. Seljak and M. Zaldarriaga, “A Line-of-Sight Integration Approach to
Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropies,” Astrophys. J. 469 (1996)
437–444.
[35] A. Lewis, A. Challinor, and A. Lasenby, “Efficient Computation of CMB
Anisotropies in Closed FRW Models,” Astrophys. J. 538 (2000) 473–476.
[36] S. Seager, D. Sasselov, and D. Scott, “A New Calculation of the
Recombination Epoch,” Astrophys. J. 523 (1999) L1–L5.
51 References

[37] P. de Bernardis et al. [Boomerang Collaboration], “A Flat Universe from

High-Resolution Maps of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation,”
Nature 404 (2000) 955–959.
[38] A. Miller et al. [QMAP and TOCO Collaborations], “The QMAP and
MAT/TOCO Experiments for Measuring Anisotropy in the Cosmic
Microwave Background,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 140 (2002) 115–142.
[39] A. Lee et al. [MAXIMA Collaboration], “A High Spatial Resolution Analysis
of the MAXIMA-1 Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropy Data,”
Astrophys. J. Lett. 561 (2001) L1–L6.
[40] E. Leitch et al. [DASI Collaboration], “Measurement of Polarization with the
Degree Angular Scale Interferometer,” Nature 420 no. 6917, (2002) 763–771.
[41] A. Readhead et al. [CBI Collaboration], “Polarization Observations with the
Cosmic Background Imager,” Science 306 (2004) 836.
[42] H. Peiris et al. [WMAP Collaboration], “First Year Wilkinson Microwave
Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Implications for Inflation,”
Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 213–231.
[43] A. Kogut et al. [WMAP Collaboration], “Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy
Probe (WMAP) First-Year Observations: TE Polarization,” Astrophys. J.
Suppl. 148 (2003) 161.
[44] D. Spergel and M. Zaldarriaga, “CMB Polarization as a Direct Test of
Inflation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 79 (1997) 2180–2183.
[45] S. Bashinsky and U. Seljak, “Neutrino Perturbations in CMB Anisotropy and
Matter Clustering,” Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 083002.
[46] K. Smith, O. Zahn, and O. Doré, “Detection of Gravitational Lensing in the
Cosmic Microwave Background,” Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 043510.
[47] S. Das et al. [ACT Collaboration], “Detection of the Power Spectrum of
Cosmic Microwave Background Lensing by the Atacama Cosmology
Telescope,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 021301.
[48] A. van Engelen [SPT Collaboration], “A Measurement of Gravitational
Lensing of the Microwave Background using South Pole Telescope Data,”
Astrophys. J. 756 (2012) 142.
[49] J. Lesgourgues, The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) I:
Overview, 2011. arXiv:1104.2932 [[Link]].
[50] P. Ade et al. [BICEP2 Collaboration], “Detection of B-Mode Polarization at
Degree Angular Scales by BICEP2,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 no. 24, (2014)
241101.
[51] R. Flauger, C. Hill, and D. Spergel, “Toward an Understanding of
Foreground Emission in the BICEP2 Region,” JCAP 08 (2014) 039.
[52] B. Follin, L. Knox, M. Millea, and Z. Pan, “First Detection of the Acoustic
Oscillation Phase Shift Expected from the Cosmic Neutrino Background,”
Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 no. 9, (2015) 091301.
[53] P. Ade et al. [BICEP2 and Planck Collaborations], “Joint Analysis of
BICEP2/KeckArray and P lanck Data,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 101301.
52 References

[54] N. Aghanim et al. [Planck Collaboration], “Planck 2018 Results. I. Overview

and the Cosmological Legacy of Planck,” Astronomy & Astrophysics 641
(2020) A1.

Chapter 8

[1] S. Hawking, “Particle Creation by Black Holes,” Commun. Math. Phys. 43

(1975) 199–220.
[2] G. Gibbons and S. Hawking, “Cosmological Event Horizons,
Thermodynamics, and Particle Creation,” Phys. Rev. D 15 (1977) 2738–2751.
[3] T. Bunch and P. Davies, “Quantum Field Theory in de Sitter Space -
Renormalization by Point-Splitting,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of
London Series A 360 no. 1700, (1978) 117–134.
[4] N. Chernikov and E. Tagirov, “Quantum Theory of Scalar Field in De Sitter
Spacetime,” Annales Henri Poincar&eacute; 9 (1968) 109–141.
[5] A. Starobinsky, “Relict Gravitation Radiation Spectrum and Initial State of
the Universe,” JETP lett 30 no. 682-685, (1979) 131–132.
[6] V. Mukhanov and G. Chibisov, “Quantum Fluctuations and a Nonsingular
Universe,” JETP Lett. 33 (1981) 532–535.
[7] J. Bardeen, P. Steinhardt, and M. Turner, “Spontaneous Creation of Almost
Scale-Free Density Perturbations in an Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Rev. D
28 (1983) 679.
[8] S. Hawking, “The Development of Irregularities in a Single Bubble
Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Lett. B 115 (1982) 295.
[9] A. Starobinsky, “Dynamics of Phase Transition in the New Inflationary
Universe Scenario and Generation of Perturbations,” Phys. Lett. B 117
(1982) 175–178.
[10] A. Guth and S. Y. Pi, “Fluctuations in the New Inflationary Universe,” Phys.
Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 1110–1113.
[11] J. Hartle and S. Hawking, “Wave Function of the Universe,” Phys. Rev. D 28
no. 12, (1983) 2960–2975.
[12] D. Salopek and J. Bond, “Nonlinear Evolution of Long-Wavelength Metric
Fluctuations in Inflationary Models,” Phys. Rev. D 42 (1990) 3936–3962.
[13] T. Falk, R. Rangarajan, and M. Srednicki, “The Angular Dependence of the
Three-Point Correlation Function of the Cosmic Microwave Background
Radiation as Predicted by Inflationary Cosmologies,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 403
(1993) L1.
[14] A. Gangui, F. Lucchin, S. Matarrese, and S. Mollerach, “The Three-Point
Correlation Function of the Cosmic Microwave Background in Inflationary
Models,” Astrophys. J. 430 (1994) 447–457.
53 References

[15] D. Lyth, “What would we learn by detecting a gravitational wave signal in

the cosmic microwave background anisotropy?,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997)
1861–1863.
[16] D. Spergel and M. Zaldarriaga, “CMB Polarization as a Direct Test of
Inflation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 79 (1997) 2180–2183.
[17] A. Kogut et al. [WMAP Collaboration], “Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy
Probe (WMAP) First-Year Observations: TE Polarization,” Astrophys. J.
Suppl. 148 (2003) 161.
[18] J. Maldacena, “Non-Gaussian Features of Primordial Fluctuations in
Single-Field Inflationary Models,” JHEP 05 (2003) 013.
[19] H. Peiris et al. [WMAP Collaboration], “First Year Wilkinson Microwave
Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Implications for Inflation,”
Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 213–231.
[20] P. Creminelli and M. Zaldarriaga, “Single-Field Consistency Relation for the
Three-Point Function,” JCAP 10 (2004) 006.
[21] E. Silverstein and D. Tong, “Scalar Speed Limits and Cosmology:
Acceleration from D-cceleration,” Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 103505.
[22] S. Weinberg, “Quantum Contributions to Cosmological Correlations,” Phys.
Rev. D 72 (2005) 043514, arXiv:hep-th/0506236.
[23] X. Chen, M.-x. Huang, S. Kachru, and G. Shiu, “Observational Signatures
and Non-Gaussianities of General Single-Field Inflation,” JCAP 01 (2007)
002.
[24] P. Creminelli, “On Non-Gaussianities in Single-Field Inflation,” JCAP 10
(2003) 003.
[25] C. Cheung, P. Creminelli, L. Fitzpatrick, J. Kaplan, and L. Senatore, “The
Effective Field Theory of Inflation,” JHEP 03 (2008) 014.
[26] N. Dalal, O. Doré, D. Huterer, and A. Shirokov, “The Imprints of Primordial
Non-Gaussianities on Large-Scale Structure: Scale-Dependent Bias and
Abundance of Virialized Objects,” Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 123514.
[27] X. Chen and Y. Wang, “Quasi-Single Field Inflation and Non-Gaussianities,”
JCAP 04 (2010) 027.
[28] D. Baumann and D. Green, “Signatures of Supersymmetry from the Early
Universe,” Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 103520.
[29] N. Arkani-Hamed and J. Maldacena, “Cosmological Collider Physics,”
arXiv:1503.08043 [hep-th].