Investigating the Hubble tension: Effect of cepheid calibration

Thakur, Rahul; Kumar, Harish; Gupta, Shashikant; Verma, Dinkar; Nigam, Rahul

doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137886

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their value of H 0 = 69.8 ± 0.8 ± 1.1 km s −1 Mpc −1 is smaller than that of Riess et al (2016), leading to a reduction in the discrepancy level. However, the tension between the local and global value of H 0 has not disappeared and requires attention of researchers (Haslbauer et al 2020;Di Valentino et al 2021;Freedman 2021;Thakur et al 2021a;Łukasz Lenart et al 2023;Adhikari 2022;Cai et al 2022;Dainotti et al 2022;Rezazadeh et al 2022;Dainotti et al 2023;Thakur et al 2023).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the Hubble Tension Through Hubble Parameter Data

Thakur

Gupta

Nigam

et al. 2023

Res. Astron. Astrophys.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Hubble constant ($H_0$), which represents the expansion rate of the Universe, is one of the most important cosmological parameters. The recent measurements of $H_0$ using the distance ladder methods such as Type Ia Supernovae (SNe Ia) are significantly greater than the CMB measurements by Planck. The difference points to a crisis in the standard model of cosmology termed as Hubble tension. In this work we compare different cosmological models, determine the Hubble constant and comment on the Hubble tension using the data from differential ages of galaxies. The data we use is free from the systematic effects as the absolute age estimation of the galaxies is not needed. We have used the Bayesian approach along with the commonly used maximum likelihood method to estimate $H_0$ and have calculated the AIC scores to compare the different cosmological models.The non-flat cosmological model provides a higher value for matter density as well as the Hubble constant compared to the flat $\Lambda$CDM model. The AIC score is smaller for the flat $\Lambda$CDM cosmology compared to the non-flat model indicating the flat model a better choice. The best-fit value of $H_0$ for both these models are $68.7\pm3.1$ km/s/Mpc and $72.2\pm4$ km/s/Mpc, respectively. Our results are consistent with the CCHP measurements. However, flat model result does not agree with the SH0ES result, while the non-flat result is inconsistent with the Planck value.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the Hubble Tension Through Hubble Parameter Data

Thakur

Gupta

Nigam

et al. 2023

Res. Astron. Astrophys.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Search for the f(R, T) gravity functional form via gaussian processes

Fortunato,

Moraes,

de Lima Júnior

et al. 2024

Eur. Phys. J. C

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The f(R, T) gravity models, for which R is the Ricci scalar and T is the trace of the energy–momentum tensor, elevate the degrees of freedom of the renowned f(R) theories, by making the Einstein field equations of the theory to also depend on T. While such a dependence can be motivated by quantum effects, the existence of imperfect or extra fluids, or even a cosmological “constant” which effectively depends on T, the formalism can truly surpass some deficiencies of f(R) gravity. As the f(R, T) function is arbitrary, several parametric models have been proposed ad hoc in the literature and posteriorly confronted with observational data. In the present article, we use gaussian process to construct an $$f(R,T)=R+f(T)$$ f ( R , T ) = R + f ( T ) model. To apply the gaussian process we use a series of measurements of the Hubble parameter. We then analytically obtain the functional form of the function. By construction, this form, which is novel in the literature, is well-adjusted to cosmological data. In addition, by extrapolating our reconstruction to redshift $$z=0$$ z = 0 , we were able to constrain the Hubble constant value to $$H_0=69.97\pm 4.13\ \hbox {km}\ \hbox {s}^{-1} \ \hbox {Mpc}^{-1}$$ H 0 = 69.97 ± 4.13 km s - 1 Mpc - 1 with $$5\%$$ 5 % precision. Lastly, we encourage the application of the functional form herewith obtained to other current problems of observational cosmology and astrophysics, such as the rotation curves of galaxies.

show abstract

Investigating the Hubble tension: Effect of cepheid calibration

Cited by 2 publications

References 34 publications

Investigating the Hubble Tension Through Hubble Parameter Data

Investigating the Hubble Tension Through Hubble Parameter Data

Search for the f(R, T) gravity functional form via gaussian processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About