English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The Universe may feature large-scale inhomogeneities beyond the standardparadigm, implying that statistical homogeneity and isotropy may be reachedonly on much larger scales than the usually assumed $\sim$100 Mpc. This meansthat we are not necessarily typical observers and that the Copernican principlecould be recovered only on super-Hubble scales. Here, we do not assume thevalidity of the Copernican principle and let Cosmic Microwave Background,Baryon Acoustic Oscillations, type Ia supernovae, local $H_0$, cosmicchronometers, Compton y-distortion and kinetic Sunyaev-Zeldovich observationsconstrain the geometrical degrees of freedom of the local structure, which weparametrize via the $\Lambda$LTB model -- basically a non-linear radialperturbation of a FLRW metric. In order to quantify if a non-Copernicanstructure could explain away the Hubble tension, we pay careful attention tocomputing the Hubble constant in an inhomogeneous universe, and we adopt modelselection via both the Bayes factor and the Akaike information criterion. Ourresults show that, while the $\Lambda$LTB model can successfully explain awaythe $H_0$ tension, it is favored with respect to the $\Lambda$CDM model only ifone solely considers supernovae in the redshift range that is used to fit theHubble constant, that is, $0.023<z<0.15$. If one considers all the supernovasample, then the $H_0$ tension is not solved and the support for the$\Lambda$LTB model vanishes. Combined with other data sets, this solution tothe Hubble tension barely helps. Finally, we have reconstructed our localspacetime. We have found that data are best fit by a shallow void with$\delta_L \approx -0.04$ and $r^{\mathrm{out}}_L \approx 300$ Mpc, which,interestingly, lies on the border of the 95\% credible region relative to thestandard model expectation.

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