An HST Program for the Luminosity Calibration of Type Ia Supernovae

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Hubble Constant (H0) and its calibration through Type Ia Supernovae using data from the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). Participants explore the implications of various values of H0, the assumptions involved in its determination, and the relevance of these findings to cosmological models and early structure formation.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references a paper summarizing the HST program for luminosity calibration of Type Ia Supernovae, noting that the determination of H0 is contingent on assumptions regarding Omega[M] and Omega[lambda].
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the consensus on H0, citing differing results from various studies, including a lower value of H0 = 66 ± 7 from Rebolo et al. (2004) compared to other estimates.
  • Concerns are raised about the reliance on a priori assumptions in the WMAP data analysis, suggesting that this may affect the reliability of the derived H0 values.
  • One participant argues that a lower value of H0 allows for more flexibility in explaining early structure formation, which poses challenges for current cosmological theories.
  • There is a light-hearted acknowledgment of the confidence often displayed by cosmologists despite potential errors, highlighting the need for humility in scientific discourse.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the reliability of various H0 estimates and the assumptions underlying them. There is no consensus on which value of H0 is more accurate or preferable, indicating ongoing debate in the community.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the determination of H0 is influenced by multiple free parameters and observational constraints, which may vary between studies. The discussion reflects the complexity and uncertainty inherent in cosmological measurements.

Chronos
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
11,420
Reaction score
750
Here is an interesting [and important] paper, IMO:

The Hubble Constant: A Summary of the HST Program for the Luminosity Calibration of Type Ia Supernovae by Means of Cepheids
Authors: A. Sandage (1), G.A. Tammann (2), A. Saha (3), B. Reindl (2), F.D. Macchetto (4), N. Panagia (4)
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0603643

P25
. . . To obtain H0 some assumptions on Omega[M] and Omega[lambda] necessary. The disadvantage of long look-back times for the deermination of H0 becomes most pronounced in case of the Fourier spectrum of the CMB acoustic waves, where a number of free parameters must simultaneously be solved for. The solution for H0 depends therefore on the number of free parameters allowed for and on some priors forced on the data as well as on the observations used. A six-parameter solution of the WMAP data with some priors and additional observational constraints has yielded H0 = 71+4−3 Spergel et al. (2003). This has often been taken as a confirmation of H0 = 72± 8 as obtained from various distance indicators by Freedman et al. (2001), and has led to the opinion that the problem
of H0 has been solved. We disagree. The actual situation has been illustrated by Rebolo et al. (2004) who have used the Very Small Array and WMAP data to derive H0 = 66 ± 7 allowing for twelve free parameters and no priors. Clearly a strong motive to further reduce the systematic error of H0 by conventional means comes from the desire to use the Hubble constant itself as a reliable prior for the interpretation of the CMB spectrum.

A value of H0 = 62.3 corresponds in an Omega[M] = 0.3 and Omega[lambda] = 0.7 universe to an expansion age of 15.1 Gyr, which may be compared with the age of M92 of 13.5 Gyr (VandenBerg et al. 2002) and the Th/Eu age of the Galactic halo of ~15 Gyr (Pagel 2001). Ultra-metal-poor giants yield radioactive ages between 14.2±3.0 to 15.6±4.0 Gyr (Cowan et al. 1999; Westin et al. 2000; Truran et al. 2001; Sneden et al. 2003). A high-weight determination of the U/Th age of the Milky Way gives 14.5 ± 2.5 Gyr (Dauphas 2005). All these values must, of course, still to be increased by the gestation time of the chemical elements.

P26
. . . 7. CONCLUSIONS
(1) The final result of our HST collaboration, ranging over 15 years, is that
H0(cosmic) = 62.3 ± 1.3 (random) ± 5.0 (systematic) (8)
based on 62 SNe Ia with 3000 < vCMB < 20 000 kms−1 and on 10 luminosity-calibrated SNe Ia. All SNe Ia have been corrected for Galactic and internal absorption and are normalized to decline rate #m15 and color (Paper III). The weighted mean luminosities of the 10 calibrators of MB = −19.49, MV = −19.46, and MI = −19.22 (Table 4) are based on metallicity-corrected Cepheid distances (Paper IV) from the new P-L relations of the Galaxy and LMC (Paper I & II). (2) The local value of H0 (300 ∼< v220 < 2000 kms−1) is H0(local) = 60.9 ± 1.3 (random) ± 5.0 (systematic) (9)
from 25 Cepheid and 16 SNe Ia distances, involving a total of 34 di#erent galaxies. Their distances are related to the barycenter of the Local Group and their observed velocities are corrected for a self-consistent Virgocentric infall model with a local infall vector of 220 kms−1.
The local value of H0 is supported by the mean distances and mean velocities hv220i of the Virgo and Fornax cluster (Table 7).
 
Space news on Phys.org
"Cosmologists are often in error and never in doubt"

Its always wise to be uncertain of one's certainty.

Garth
 
Garth said:
"Cosmologists are often in error and never in doubt"

Its always wise to be uncertain of one's certainty.

:biggrin: :approve:
 
:smile:

Wow, Sandage is still sticking to those guns, I see.

BTW, I think you meant to link this paper:

http://www.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0603647"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Indeed he is, ST. In this particular case, I think he has made one of his stronger arguments. The lower value for H0 gives more wiggle room for early structure formation that is difficult to explain under modern theory. I also agree the latest WMAP release relies upon some apparently unnecessary [IMO] a priori's. It seems to be a well reasoned paper.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
7K
Replies
20
Views
7K
  • · Replies 96 ·
4
Replies
96
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
6K