Hubble tension -- any resolution?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Mordred
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hubble Tension
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Hubble tension remains unresolved, with current estimates of the Hubble constant diverging between 68 km/s/Mpc and 74 km/s/Mpc. This discrepancy arises from different measurement methodologies, particularly between the Planck satellite data and cosmic distance ladder measurements. Recent discussions highlight the possibility of systematic errors in the interpretation of Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) data, suggesting that the LambdaCDM model may not accurately represent the universe's cosmological reality. Notable contributions from researchers such as Wendy Freedman and Adam Riess indicate that new physics may be necessary to address this ongoing issue.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hubble's Law and the Hubble constant
  • Familiarity with the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) and its significance in cosmology
  • Knowledge of the LambdaCDM model and its implications for cosmological measurements
  • Basic grasp of statistical analysis and measurement error in scientific data
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the latest findings from the DESI collaboration regarding cosmological constraints
  • Explore the implications of the LambdaCDM model and its limitations in current cosmological studies
  • Investigate the role of systematic errors in CMB data interpretation and their impact on Hubble constant measurements
  • Review recent papers by authors such as Gialamas (2024) and Valentino & Blunt on the Hubble tension
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, cosmologists, and astrophysicists interested in the latest developments regarding the Hubble tension and its implications for our understanding of the universe's expansion and structure.

  • #91
Excuse me ? I was thanking you for your statement given here.

Jaime Rudas said:
Sorry but the calibration of JWST characteristics isn't the topic of the original post.

We both agree on that and I am the OP of this thread and would like it to stay on track
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
Space news on Phys.org
  • #92
Jaime Rudas said:
Regarding the OP's question, it seems that in a recent conference, Wendy Freedman showed signs of a possible solution, as described by Dr. Becky here.
Of course, as Dr. Becky rightly points out, we need to wait for the publication of the paper to draw conclusions.
The paper by Freedman et al. is now on arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.06153. From the abstract:
"The distances measured using the TRGB and the JAGB method agree at the 1% level, but differ from the Cepheid distances at the 2.5-4% level. The value of Ho based on these two methods with JWST data alone is Ho = 69.03 +/- 1.75 (total error) km/sec/Mpc. These numbers are consistent with the current standard Lambda CDM model, without the need for the inclusion of additional new physics. Future JWST data will be required to increase the precision and accuracy of the local distance scale."
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mordred, Jaime Rudas, nnunn and 3 others
  • #93
Thanks will study it tonight
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970
  • #94
Jaime Rudas said:
It should be noted that Freedman's results have not yet been published.
Yesterday, finally, Freedman's paper was published in The Astrophysical Journal, with this relevant conclusion:

The distances measured using the TRGB and the JAGB methods agree, on average, at a level better than 1%, and with the SHoES Cepheid distances at just over the 1% level. Our results are consistent with the current standard Lambda cold dark matter (ΛCDM) model, without the need for the inclusion of additional new physics.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis, ohwilleke and Ibix
  • #95
renormalize said:
The paper by Freedman et al. is now on arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.06153. From the abstract:
"The distances measured using the TRGB and the JAGB method agree at the 1% level, but differ from the Cepheid distances at the 2.5-4% level. The value of Ho based on these two methods with JWST data alone is Ho = 69.03 +/- 1.75 (total error) km/sec/Mpc. These numbers are consistent with the current standard Lambda CDM model, without the need for the inclusion of additional new physics. Future JWST data will be required to increase the precision and accuracy of the local distance scale."
It strikes me that in this new version, the highlighted quote reads:
The distances measured using the TRGB and the JAGB methods agree, on average, at a level better than 1%, and with the SHoES Cepheid distances at just over the 1% level.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nnunn, ohwilleke and renormalize

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K