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 Tools annual

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 monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Shanks et al. (2018) arXiv:1810.02595 make two claims that they argue bringthe local measurement and early Universe prediction of H0 into agreement: A)they claim that Gaia DR2 parallax measurements show the geometric calibrationof the Cepheid distance scale used to measure H0 to be grossly in error and B)that we live near the middle of an enormous void, further biasing the localmeasurement of the Hubble constant. We show that the first claim is caused byfive erroneous uses of the data: in decreasing order of importance: 1) the useof a distance indicator, main sequence fitting of cluster stars, which isunrelated to the calibration of Cepheids and therefore has no bearing oncurrent measurements of H0; 2) the use of Gaia data for Cepheids that fullysaturate the detector, producing unreliable parallaxes; 3) the use of a fixedparallax offset which is known to depend on source magnitude and color butwhich is derived for sources with extremely different colors and magnitudes; 4)ignoring the uncertainty in this offset; and 5) ignoring the other geometricsources of Cepheid calibration, the distance of the LMC from detached eclipsingbinaries and the masers in NGC 4258, which are independent of Milky Wayparallaxes. Just resolving the first two of these issues by not using unrelatedor saturated data leads to no inconsistency between Gaia parallaxes and thecurrent Cepheid distance scale. The second claim can be refuted 6) because ofthe increase in chi-squared that the alleged void would entail in SNmeasurements in the Hubble flow, and 7) because it would represent a 6 sigmafluctuation of cosmic variance between the local and globally measuredexpansion, requiring us to live in an exceedingly special location.

Seven Problems with the Claims Related to the Hubble Tension in arXiv:1810.02595