Abstract
In the past year, several pieces of evidence have pointed to a possible deviation from the standard cosmological model, the Λ cold dark matter model (where Λ is the cosmological constant). The recent work by the Dark Energy Survey collaboration reports a preference in the ballpark of 3σ in favour of dynamical dark energy against the standard cosmological model. For that, it used its final analyses of baryonic acoustic oscillations and type Ia supernovae, both of which are sensitive to the expansion history of the Universe, in combination with the cosmic microwave background from Planck. This adds to the growing debate about the nature of dark energy.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$32.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
$119.00 per year
only $9.92 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to the full article PDF.
USD 39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Lorentz, H. A., Einstein, A., Minkowski, H. & Weyl, H. The Principle of Relativity: A Collection of Original Memoirs on the Special and General Theory of Relativity (Meuthen & Co., 1923).
Percival, W. J. et al. The 2df Galaxy Redshift Survey: the power spectrum and the matter content of the Universe. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 327, 1297–1306 (2001).
Riess, A. G. et al. Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant. Astron. J. 116, 1009–1038 (1998).
Perlmutter, S. et al. Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 high-redshift supernovae. Astron. J. 517, 565–586 (1999).
Eisenstein, D. J. et al. Detection of the baryon acoustic peak in the large-scale correlation function of SDSS luminous red galaxies. Astron. J. 633, 560–574 (2005).
Cole, S. et al. The 2df Galaxy Redshift Survey: power-spectrum analysis of the final data set and cosmological implications. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 362, 505–534 (2005).
Fixsen, D. J. et al. The cosmic microwave background spectrum from the FullCOBEFIRAS data set. Astron. J. 473, 576–587 (1996).
Netterfield, C. B. et al. A measurement by BOOMERANG of multiple peaks in the angular power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background. Astron. J. 571, 604–614 (2002).
Hinshaw, G. et al. First-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: the angular power spectrum. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 148, 135–159 (2003).
Peebles, P. J. E. Large-scale background temperature and mass fluctuations due to scale-invariant primeval perturbations. Astrophys. J. 263, 1–5 (1982).
Ostriker, P. J., Peebles, P. J. E. & Yahil, A. The size and mass of galaxies, and the mass of the Universe. Astrophys. J. 193, 1–4 (1974).
Einasto, J., Kaasik, A. & Saar, E. Dynamic evidence on massive coronas of galaxies. Nature 250, 309–310 (1974).
Albrecht, A. et al. Report of the Dark Energy Task Force. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0609591 (2006).
The DES collaboration The Dark Energy Survey. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0510346 (2005).
Flaugher, B. et al. The Dark Energy Camera. Astron. J. 150, 150 (2015).
The Planck collaboration Planck 2018 results—VI. Cosmological parameters. Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020).
The DES collaboration The Dark Energy Survey: cosmology results with 1500 new high-redshift type Ia supernovae using the full 5 yr data set. Astrophys. J. Lett. 973, L14 (2024).
The DES collaboration Dark Energy Survey: a 2.1% measurement of the angular baryonic acoustic oscillation scale at redshift zeff=0.85 from the final dataset. Phys. Rev. D 110, 063515 (2024).
The DESI collaboration DESI 2024 VI: cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2025, 021 (2025).
The DES collaboration Dark Energy Survey: implications for cosmological expansion models from the final DES baryon acoustic oscillation and supernova data. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.06712 (2025).
The DESI collaboration DESI DR2 results II: measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.14738 (2025).
Weinberg, S. The cosmological constant problem. Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 1–23 (1989).
Velten, H. E. S., Marttens, R. F. & Zimdahl, W. Aspects of the cosmological “coincidence problem”. Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 1–8 (2014).
Chevallier, M. & Polarski, D. Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 10, 213–223 (2001).
Linder, E. V. Exploring the expansion history of the Universe. Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 091301 (2003).
Putter, R. & Linder, E. V. Calibrating dark energy. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10, 042 (2008).
Frieman, J. A., Hill, C. T., Stebbins, A. & Waga, I. Cosmology with ultralight pseudo Nambu–Goldstone bosons. Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 2077–2080 (1995).
Brax, P. & Martin, J. Quintessence and supergravity. Phys. Lett. B 468, 40–45 (1999).
Caldwell, R. R. A phantom menace? Cosmological consequences of a dark energy component with super-negative equation of state. Phys. Lett. B 545, 23–29 (2002).
Carroll, S. M., Hoffman, M. & Trodden, M. Can the dark energy equation-of-state parameter w be less than −1? Phys. Rev. D 68, 023509 (2003).
Hu, W. Crossing the phantom divide: dark energy internal degrees of freedom. Phys. Rev. D 71, 047301 (2005).
Rindler, W. Visual horizons in world models. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 116, 662–677 (1956).
Yamamoto, M. et al. Dark Energy Survey year 6 results: cell-based coadds and metadetection weak lensing shape catalogue. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.05665 (2025).
To, C.-H. et al. Dark Energy Survey: modeling strategy for multiprobe cluster cosmology and validation for the full six-year dataset. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.13631 (2025).
Mellier, Y. et al. Euclid. I. Overview of the Euclid mission. Astron. Astrophys. 697, A1 (2025).
Ivezić, Ž. et al. LSST: from science drivers to reference design and anticipated data products. Astrophys. J. 873, 111 (2019).
Acknowledgements
S.A. has been supported by the Ramon y Cajal fellowship (RYC2022-037311-I) funded by the State Research Agency of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033) and Social European Funds plus (FSE+). We are grateful for having been members of the Dark Energy Survey collaboration, which allowed us to participate in the analyses that led to the results discussed in this paper. The insights presented in this article represent only the views of the authors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
S.A., J.M.-F. and M.V. coordinated the preparation and defined the structure and main message of the paper. S.A. and J.M.F. wrote the body of the article. S.A., J.M.-F. and M.V. were heavily involved in the science analysis that preceded this Perspective. J.M.-F. prepared the figures.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Avila, S., Mena-Fernández, J. & Vincenzi, M. Challenges to the cosmological constant model following results from the Dark Energy Survey. Nat Astron 9, 1129–1133 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-025-02618-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Version of record:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-025-02618-3
