Paper detail

Standard Siren Speeds: Improving velocities in gravitational-wave measurements of $H_{0}$

We re-analyze data from the gravitational-wave event GW170817 and its host galaxy NGC4993 to demonstrate the importance of accurate total and peculiar velocities when measuring the Hubble constant using this nearby Standard Siren. We show that a number of reasonable choices can be made to estimate the velocities for this event, but that systematic differences remain between these measurements depending on the data used. This leads to significant changes in the Hubble constant inferred from GW170817. We present Bayesian Model Averaging as one way to account for these differences, and obtain $H_{0}=66.8^{+13.4}_{-9.2}\,\mathrm{km\,s^{-1}\,Mpc^{-1}}$. Adding additional information on the viewing angle from high resolution imaging of the radio counterpart refines this to $H_{0}=64.8^{+7.3}_{-7.2}\,\mathrm{km\,s^{-1}\,Mpc^{-1}}$. During this analysis we also present an alternative Bayesian model for the posterior on $H_{0}$ from Standard Sirens that works more closely with observed quantities from redshift and peculiar velocity surveys. Our results more accurately capture the true uncertainty on the total and peculiar velocities of NGC4993 and show that exploring how well different datasets characterize galaxy groups and the velocity field in the local Universe could improve this measurement further. These considerations impact any low-redshift distance measurement, and the improvements we suggest here can also be applied to standard candles like type Ia supernovae. GW170817 is particularly sensitive to peculiar velocity uncertainties because it is so close. For future standard siren measurements the importance of this error will decrease as (a) we will measure more distant standard sirens, and (b) the random direction of peculiar velocities will average out with more detections.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 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.