Paper detail

A void in the Hubble tension? The end of the line for the Hubble bubble

The Universe may feature large-scale inhomogeneities beyond the standard paradigm, implying that statistical homogeneity and isotropy may be reached only on much larger scales than the usually assumed $\sim$100 Mpc. This means that we are not necessarily typical observers and that the Copernican principle could be recovered only on super-Hubble scales. Here, we do not assume the validity of the Copernican principle and let Cosmic Microwave Background, Baryon Acoustic Oscillations, type Ia supernovae, local $H_0$, cosmic chronometers, Compton y-distortion and kinetic Sunyaev-Zeldovich observations constrain the geometrical degrees of freedom of the local structure, which we parametrize via the $Λ$LTB model -- basically a non-linear radial perturbation of a FLRW metric. In order to quantify if a non-Copernican structure could explain away the Hubble tension, we pay careful attention to computing the Hubble constant in an inhomogeneous universe, and we adopt model selection via both the Bayes factor and the Akaike information criterion. Our results show that, while the $Λ$LTB model can successfully explain away the $H_0$ tension, it is favored with respect to the $Λ$CDM model only if one solely considers supernovae in the redshift range that is used to fit the Hubble constant, that is, $0.023<z<0.15$. If one considers all the supernova sample, then the $H_0$ tension is not solved and the support for the $Λ$LTB model vanishes. Combined with other data sets, this solution to the Hubble tension barely helps. Finally, we have reconstructed our local spacetime. We have found that data are best fit by a shallow void with $δ_L \approx -0.04$ and $r^{\mathrm{out}}_L \approx 300$ Mpc, which, interestingly, lies on the border of the 95\% credible region relative to the standard model expectation.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.