4 ms·
Nobody seriously doubts the "tension" anymore. The analysis is good. The question is are there systemic errors. Chief among them is whether our ability to infe
by Shitty-kitty 6mo ago
Nobody seriously doubts the "tension" anymore. The analysis is good.
The question is are there systemic errors. Chief among them is whether our ability to infer the distance to objects billions of light years away is truly as good as we think it is.
- samus 6mo agoWe don't just use one single method to infer distances. TA is about that there are multiple methods, and that the framework is open for new ones. What is more likely at fault is the underlying model of how the cosmos developed, which is highly likely to be incomplete or misguided.
- Shitty-kitty 6mo agoActually is quite the opposite. If the difference in expansion between the early and late universe is real than the reigning cosmological model lambda-CDM will at least have to be revised, or be replaced with a model that made that prediction (there are several of them)
- samus 6mo agoI was referring to that model :-)
- DevelopingElk 6mo agoAccording to the article “This work effectively rules out explanations of the Hubble tension that rely on a single overlooked error in local distance measurements". So any systemic errors would need to affect multiple measurement types.
- Shitty-kitty 6mo agoDefinitely a good first step if their research holds up. Given the huge implications thou, it is unlikely to sway opinions much. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
- cindyllm 6mo ago[dead]