<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Damn You, Little h! (or, Real-World Applications Of The Hubble Constant Using Observed And Simulated Data) · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1308.4150/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1308.4150/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Damn You, Little h! (or, Real-World Applications Of The Hubble Constant Using Observed And Simulated Data) — mentioned by astro123</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22360332</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1308.4150:22360332</guid><pubDate>Tue, 18 Feb 2020 20:57:29 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Famously, Hubble&amp;#x27;s 1931 paper that detected the expansion of the universe found H0 ~ 500 km/s/Mpc (fig 5 in [1]). The distances that he was using were way off... Through most of the late 1900s the uncertainty was between 50 and 100 km/s/Mpc. Now we know it at least as well as most other things, but this history of uncertainty means it is treated differently. Most annoyingly, simulations often work in units of Distance/h (where h = H0/100). This causes anyone who uses them incredible annoyance as you need to get your factors of little h right. Someone even wrote a paper called &amp;quot;Damn you little…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1308.4150/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>astro-ph.CO</category></item></channel></rss>
