Paper detail

Consistency of the local Hubble constant with the cosmic microwave background

A significant tension has become manifest between the current expansion rate of our Universe measured from the cosmic microwave background by the Planck satellite and from local distance probes, which has prompted for interpretations of that as evidence of new physics. Within conventional cosmology a likely source of this discrepancy is identified here as a matter density fluctuation around the cosmic average of the 40 Mpc environment in which the calibration of Supernovae Type Ia separations with Cepheids and nearby absolute distance anchors is performed. Inhomogeneities on this scale easily reach 40% and more. In that context, the discrepant expansion rates serve as evidence of residing in an underdense region of $δ_{\rm env}\approx-0.5\pm0.1$. The probability for finding this local expansion rate given the Planck data lies at the 95% confidence level. Likewise, a hypothetical equivalent local data set with mean expansion rate equal to that of Planck, while statistically favoured, would not gain strong preference over the actual data in the respective Bayes factor. These results therefore suggest borderline consistency between the local and Planck measurements of the Hubble constant. Generally accounting for the environmental uncertainty, the local measurement may be reinterpreted as a constraint on the cosmological Hubble constant of $H_0=74.7^{+5.8}_{-4.2}$ km/s/Mpc. The current simplified analysis may be augmented with the employment of the full available data sets, an impact study for the immediate $\lesssim10$ Mpc environment of the distance anchors, more prone to inhomogeneities, as well as expansion rates measured by quasar lensing, gravitational waves, currently limited to the same 40 Mpc region, and local galaxy distributions.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

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.