Pith. sign in

REVIEW 10 cited by

A tale of many $H_0$

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

arxiv 2311.13305 v1 pith:O3CVWSKE submitted 2023-11-22 astro-ph.CO

classification astro-ph.CO
keywords modelagreecommunitycosmologicaldataearlyhighlambda
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

The Hubble parameter $H_0$, is not a univocally-defined quantity: it relates redshifts to distances in the near Universe, but is also a key parameter of the $\Lambda$CDM standard cosmological model. As such, $H_0$ affects several physical processes at different cosmic epochs, and multiple observables. We have counted more than a dozen $H_0$'s which are expected to agree if a) there are no significant systematics in the data and their interpretation and b) the adopted cosmological model is correct. With few exceptions (proverbially confirming the rule) these determinations do not agree at high statistical significance; their values cluster around two camps: the low (68 km/s/Mpc) and high (73 km/s/Mpc) camp. It appears to be a matter of anchors: the shape of the Universe expansion history agrees with the model, it is the normalizations that disagree. Beyond systematics in the data/analysis, if the model is incorrect there are only two viable ways to "fix" it: by changing the early time ($z\gtrsim 1100$) physics and thus the early time normalization, or by a global modification, possibly touching the model's fundamental assumptions (e.g., homogeneity, isotropy, gravity). None of these three options has the consensus of the community. The research community has been actively looking for deviations from $\Lambda$CDM for two decades; the one we might have found makes us wish we could put the genie back in the bottle.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 10 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Simulation Based Inference Approach to Modelling of Type Ia Supernova Populations

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A simulation-based inference pipeline (Stjörnumál) fits SN Ia dust and intrinsic scatter models to DES 5-year data, enabling fast Bayesian model comparison across seven SN Ia population models.

  2. General Relativistic Entropic Acceleration at the perturbation level: a CLASS implementation and first Boltzmann-code constraints

    gr-qc 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    First full Boltzmann-code implementation of entropic dark energy, with MCMC constraints from CMB+BAO+SN, yields α≈1 and a fit statistically indistinguishable from ΛCDM.

  3. Hubble tension: the shape wall

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Late-time modifications to the expansion history can raise H0 by at most about 2% (conservative) to 3.7% (permissive) if the CMB acoustic scale is fixed.

  4. Evaporating cosmologically coupled black holes

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    If a black hole's mass grows with cosmic expansion, Hawking evaporation is slowed or reversed, weakening gamma-ray bounds on primordial black holes.

  5. The $H_0$ world cup. II. A comprehensive competition between proposed Hubble tension solutions

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Against a common 2025-26 dataset (Planck PR4, ACT DR6, SPT-3G, DESI DR2, Pantheon+), early dark energy and early modified gravity models win the H0 competition (~3σ residual tension), while radiation and late-time sol...

  6. BAO miscalibration cannot rescue late-time solutions to the Hubble tension

    astro-ph.CO 2025-10 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Even after rescaling BAO data to prefer H0≈73 km/s/Mpc, none of six tested late-time dark-energy models can resolve the Hubble tension once unanchored SNeIa and CMB geometry are included.

  7. The Perfect Host: JWST Cepheid Observations in a Background-Free SN Ia Host Confirm No Bias in Hubble-Constant Measurements

    astro-ph.CO 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    JWST Cepheid distances in a background-free galaxy match HST distances, ruling out crowding as the cause of the Hubble tension.

  8. Forecasting the E_G measurements from the photometric and spectroscopic surveys of Chinese Space Station Survey Telescope (CSST)

    astro-ph.CO 2026-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    CSST forecasts E_G to 3–9% over 0<z<1.2, with the modified-gravity parameter Σ0 constrained to ~5% if β errors follow an assumed external forecast.

  9. Dark energy era with a resolution of Hubble tension in generalized entropic cosmology

    gr-qc 2025-07 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    A generalized-entropy dark energy model with one fitted extra parameter returns H0 near 73 km/s/Mpc on some datasets, but the reported model-comparison statistics do not favor it over LambdaCDM.

  10. The Hubble tension: A decade review

    astro-ph.CO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

    Pure early or late fixes to the Hubble tension are tightly constrained; remaining options are combined early-late interacting dark energy or new physics at the local-to-homogeneous transition.

Pith tools