REVIEW
The Astrophysical Distance Scale III: Distance to the Local Group Galaxy WLM using Multi-Wavelength Observations of the Tip of the Red Giant Branch, Cepheids, and JAGB Stars
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
The Astrophysical Distance Scale III: Distance to the Local Group Galaxy WLM using Multi-Wavelength Observations of the Tip of the Red Giant Branch, Cepheids, and JAGB Stars
read the original abstract
The local determination of the Hubble Constant sits at a crossroad. Current estimates of the local expansion rate of the Universe differ by about 1.7-sigma, derived from the Cepheid and TRGB based calibrations, applied to type Ia supernovae. To help elucidate possible sources of systematic error causing the tension, we show in this study the recently developed distance indicator, the J-region Asymptotic Giant Branch (JAGB) method (arXiv:2005.10792), can serve as an independent cross-check and comparison with other local distance indicators. Furthermore, we make the case that the JAGB method has substantial potential as an independent, precise and accurate calibrator of type Ia supernovae for the determination of H0. Using the Local Group galaxy, WLM we present distance comparisons between the JAGB method, a TRGB measurement at near-infrared (JHK) wavelengths, a TRGB measurement in the optical I band, and a multi-wavelength Cepheid period-luminosity relation determination. We find: $\mu_0$ (JAGB) = 24.97 +/- 0.02 (stat) +/- 0.04 (sys) mag, $\mu_0$ (TRGB NIR) = 24.98 +/- 0.04 stat) +/- 0.07 (sys) mag, $\mu_0$ (TRGB F814W) = 24.93 +/- 0.02 (stat) +/- 0.06 (sys) mag, $\mu_0$ (Cepheids) = 24.98 +/- 0.03 (stat) +/- 0.04 (sys) mag. All four methods are in good agreement, confirming the local self-consistency of the four distance scales at the 3% level, and adding confidence that the JAGB method is as accurate and as precise a distance indicator as either of the other three astrophysically-based methods.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.