Full paper here[1], and here's[2] the earlier paper about the model itself.<p>They overloaded the CCC acronym, which has also been used for Penrose's Conformal cyclic cosmology[3], though can't say which is more speculative.<p>I'm also reminded of Von Neumann's elephant[4], given that they vary the constants it doesn't seem <i>that</i> surprising I suppose that they can get a fit. Freeman Dyson learned this the hard way[5].<p>This is just one test, the article mentions a few others that they'll need to pass to be a serious contender. Will be interesting to see how it goes.<p>[1]: <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ad1bc6" rel="nofollow">https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ad1bc6</a><p>[2]: <a href="https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/524/3/3385/7221343?login=false" rel="nofollow">https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/524/3/3385/7221343?lo...</a><p>[3]: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformal_cyclic_cosmology" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformal_cyclic_cosmology</a><p>[4]: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann%27s_elephant" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann%27s_elephant</a><p>[5]: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV41QEKiMlM" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV41QEKiMlM</a>