pith. the verified trust layer for science. sign in

arxiv: 1810.07628 · v1 · pith:4F5XD3VOnew · submitted 2018-10-17 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · astro-ph.GA

H₀ Tension: Response to Riess et al arXiv:1810.03526

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.GA
keywords riessanalysescepheidgaiashankstensionthereadvance
0
0 comments X p. Extension
Add this Pith Number to your LaTeX paper What is a Pith Number?
\usepackage{pith}
\pithnumber{4F5XD3VO}

Prints a linked pith:4F5XD3VO badge after your title and writes the identifier into PDF metadata. Compiles on arXiv with no extra files. Learn more

read the original abstract

Riess et al (2018c) have claimed there exist seven problems in the analyses presented by Shanks et al (2018) where we argue that there is enough uncertainty in Cepheid distances and local peculiar velocity fields to explain the current tension in $H_0$. Here, we take each of the Riess et al (2018c) points in turn and suggest that either they do not apply or that the necessary caveats are already made by Shanks et al (2018). We conclude that the main point to be inferred from our analyses still stands which is that previous claims by Riess et al (2018b) that Gaia parallaxes confirm their Cepheid scale are, at best, premature in advance of further improvements in the Gaia astrometric solution.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.