论文标题
来自Cepheid距离梯子的本地$ H_0 $的宇宙学模型不敏感性
Cosmological model insensitivity of local $H_0$ from the Cepheid distance ladder
论文作者
论文摘要
观察到的张力（$ \ sim 9 \％$差异）在哈勃常数的局部距离梯子测量之间，$ h_0 $及其从宇宙微波背景（CMB）推断的值可能暗示新的，外来的，外来的宇宙物理学。我们测试了对宇宙扩展历史的假设（0.01 <z <2.3 $）对本地距离梯子估计$ H_0 $的影响。在基准分析中，将哈勃流动类型IA超新星（SN〜IA）样本截断为$ z <0.15 $，将减速参数（$ q_0 $）固定为-0.55。我们创建了对校准器和万神殿样本的逼真的模拟，并在这两组之间说明了完整的系统协方差。我们拟合了几种有力动机的暗能量模型，并得出了校准器和万神殿SNE〜IA的结合约束，并同时推断$ H_0 $和深色能量特性。我们发现，在暗能量模型上的假设不会显着改变$ h_0 $的本地距离梯子值，而不同型号的可推断值之间的最大差异（$ΔH_0$）在0.47 km $ $^{ - 1} $ s $ s $ s $ s $^{ - 1} $ mpc $^{ - 1} $ mpc $^{ - 1} $ 0.6 $ 0.6 $ $ shipt $ shipt $ shipt $ hship hey the $ shipt y the $ shipt the $ shipt the $ hship hs $ shipt the。黑暗能源模型中的额外自由不会增加$ H_0 $的推断值中的误差。包括校准器之间的系统协方差，低红移SNE和高红移SNE可以引起$ H_0 $的推断价值的小变化。这项研究中的SN〜IA系统学对$ H_0 $的总不确定性贡献了$ \ Lessim 0.8 \％$。
The observed tension ($\sim 9\%$ difference) between the local distance ladder measurement of the Hubble constant, $H_0$, and its value inferred from the cosmic microwave background (CMB) could hint at new, exotic, cosmological physics. We test the impact of the assumption about the expansion history of the universe ($0.01<z<2.3$) on the local distance ladder estimate of $H_0$. In the fiducial analysis, the Hubble flow Type Ia supernova (SN~Ia) sample is truncated to $z < 0.15$ and the deceleration parameter ($q_0$) fixed to -0.55. We create realistic simulations of the calibrator and Pantheon samples and account for a full systematics covariance between these two sets. We fit several physically motivated dark energy models and derive combined constraints from calibrator and Pantheon SNe~Ia and simultaneously infer $H_0$ and dark energy properties. We find that the assumption on the dark energy model does not significantly change the local distance ladder value of $H_0$, with a maximum difference ($ΔH_0$) between the inferred value for different models of 0.47 km$^{-1}$ s$^{-1}$ Mpc $^{-1}$, i.e. a 0.6$\%$ shift in $H_0$, significantly smaller than the observed tension. Additional freedom in the dark energy models does not increase the error in the inferred value of $H_0$. Including systematics covariance between the calibrators, low redshift SNe, and high redshift SNe can induce small shifts in the inferred value for $H_0$. The SN~Ia systematics in this study contribute $\lesssim 0.8 \%$ to the total uncertainty on $H_0$.
