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

We consider the published distance moduli to the Fornax and Coma galaxyclusters, with emphasis on the period since 1990. We have carefully homogenizedour catalogs of distance moduli onto the distance scale established in theprevious papers in this series. We assessed systematic differences associatedwith the use of specific tracers, and discarded results based on application ofthe Tully--Fisher relation and of globular cluster and planetary nebulaluminosity functions. We recommend `best' weighted relative distance moduli forthe Fornax and Coma clusters with respect to the Virgo cluster of $\Delta(m-M)_0^{\rm Fornax - Virgo} = 0.18 \pm 0.28 $ mag and $\Delta (m-M)_0^{\rmComa - Virgo} = 3.75 \pm 0.23$ mag. The set of weighted mean distance moduli(distances) we derived as most representative of the clusters' distances is,\begin{eqnarray} (m-M)_0^{\rm Fornax} &=& 31.41 \pm 0.15 \mbox{ mag } (D =19.1^{+1.4}_{-1.2} \mbox{ Mpc) and} \nonumber  &=& 31.21 \pm 0.28 \mbox{ mag } (D = 17.5^{+2.4}_{-2.2} \mbox{ Mpc)};\nonumber \\ (m-M)_0^{\rm Coma} &=& 34.99 \pm 0.38 \mbox{ mag } (D =99.5^{+19.0}_{-15.9} \mbox{ Mpc) and} \nonumber  &=& 34.78 \pm 0.27 \mbox{ mag } (D = 90.4^{+11.9}_{-10.6} \mbox{ Mpc)},\nonumber \end{eqnarray} where the first value for each cluster is the resultof our analysis of the direct distance moduli, while the second modulus isbased on distance moduli relative to the Virgo cluster. The absolute andrelative distance moduli for both clusters are mutually consistent within theuncertainties; the relative distance moduli yield shorter distances by$\sim$1$\sigma$. Lingering uncertainties in the underlying absolute distancescale appear to have given rise to a systematic uncertainty on the order of0.20 mag.

Clustering of Local Group distances: publication bias or correlated measurements? VII. A distance framework out to 100 Mpc