Content deleted Content added
AnakinTang (talk | contribs) |
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Alter: title. Add: s2cid, bibcode, arxiv, authors 1-1. Removed parameters. Some additions/deletions were parameter name changes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Whoop whoop pull up | #UCB_webform 167/695 |
||
Line 102:
Considering the possibility that BBN predictions are sound, the measured value of the primordial lithium abundance should be in error and astrophysical solutions offer revision to it. For example, systematic errors, including ionization correction and inaccurate stellar temperatures determination could affect Li/H ratios in stars. Furthermore, more observations on lithium depletion remain important since present lithium levels might not reflect the initial abundance in the star. In summary, accurate measurements of the primordial lithium abundance is the current focus of progress, and it could be possible that the final answer does not lie in astrophysical solutions.<ref name="fields11" />
Some astronomers suggest that the velocities of nucleons do not follow Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. They test the framework of Tsallis non-extensive statistics.Their result suggest that 1.069<q<1.082 is a possible new solution to the cosmological lithium problem.<ref>{{Cite journal |
=== Nuclear physics solutions ===
| |||