REVIEW 4 cited by
A critical discussion on the $H_0$ tension
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
A critical discussion on the $H_0$ Hubble constant tension is presented by considering both early and late-type observations. From recent precise measurements, discrepancies emerge when comparing results for some cosmological quantities obtained at different redshifts. We highlight the most relevant measurements of $H_0$ and propose potential ideas to solve its tension. These solutions concern the exploration of new physics beyond the $\Lambda$CDM model or the evaluation of $H_0$ by other methods. In particular, we focus on the role of the look-back time.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
Covariant cosmography in the presence of local structures: comparing exact solutions and perturbation theory
Off-center observers in a spherical LTB overdensity get accurate cosmographic distances up to δc≈2.5 near the structure, while linear perturbation theory is better beyond ~3Rs; a gauge dictionary links the two.
-
BAO miscalibration cannot rescue late-time solutions to the Hubble tension
Even after rescaling BAO data to prefer H0≈73 km/s/Mpc, none of six tested late-time dark-energy models can resolve the Hubble tension once unanchored SNeIa and CMB geometry are included.
-
Investigating the cosmic distance duality relation with gamma-ray bursts
Combined gamma-ray burst and multi-probe data show no significant violation of the cosmic distance duality relation and prefer a Planck-like Hubble constant.
-
Late Time Phenomena in $f(T,\mathcal{T})$ Gravity Framework: Role of $H_0$ Priors
An f(T,T) gravity model fitted to Pantheon+, BAO, and cosmic chronometer data yields a range of H0 posteriors that track the input priors, and predicts a growth rate about 9-11% below ΛCDM for two data combinations.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.