Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Saturday October 26 2019, @05:24AM   Printer-friendly
from the when-constants-aren't dept.

Submitted via IRC for Bytram

New measurement of Hubble constant adds to cosmic mystery

New measurements of the rate of expansion of the universe, led by astronomers at the University of California, Davis, add to a growing mystery: Estimates of a fundamental constant made with different methods keep giving different results.

"There's a lot of excitement, a lot of mystification and from my point of view it's a lot of fun," said Chris Fassnacht, professor of physics at UC Davis and a member of the international SHARP/H0LICOW collaboration, which made the measurement using the W.M. Keck telescopes in Hawaii.

A paper about the work is published by the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

The Hubble constant describes the expansion of the universe, expressed in kilometers per second per megaparsec. It allows astronomers to figure out the size and age of the universe and the distances between objects.

Graduate student Geoff Chen, Fassnacht and colleagues looked at light from extremely distant galaxies that is distorted and split into multiple images by the lensing effect of galaxies (and their associated dark matter) between the source and Earth. By measuring the time delay for light to make its way by different routes through the foreground lens, the team could estimate the Hubble constant.

Using adaptive optics technology on the W.M. Keck telescopes in Hawaii, they arrived at an estimate of 76.8 kilometers per second per megaparsec. As a parsec is a bit over 30 trillion kilometers and a megaparsec is a million parsecs, that is an excruciatingly precise measurement. In 2017, the H0LICOW team published an estimate of 71.9, using the same method and data from the Hubble Space Telescope.

Journal Reference:
Geoff C-F Chen, et. al. A SHARP view of H0LiCOW: H0 from three time-delay gravitational lens systems with adaptive optics imaging. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 2019; 490 (2): 1743 DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stz2547


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 26 2019, @08:17PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 26 2019, @08:17PM (#912176)

    What in the world is "troll" about pointing out a misinterpretation of a confidence interval? This site is going to shit, someone wants to suppress all rational thought ahead of the 2020 US election so they can spew their drivel at each other.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 27 2019, @02:49AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 27 2019, @02:49AM (#912268)

    TFA: Here is the peer-reviewed measurement with its error bars.

    1P: What are the measurement's error bars?

    2P: Here are the error bars from TFA, try reading it next time.

    1P: Oh, well despite not RTFA, I'm going to argue they don't understand error bars.

    1P: Why did someone think my assertion based on nothing wouldn't advance the conversation?