<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Large Magellanic Cloud Cepheid Standards Provide a 1% Foundation for the Determination of the Hubble Constant and Stronger Evidence for Physics Beyond LambdaCDM · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1903.07603/</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/1903.07603/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Large Magellanic Cloud Cepheid Standards Provide a 1% Foundation for the Determination of the Hubble Constant and Stronger Evidence for Physics Beyond LambdaCDM — HN submission</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20454067</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:submission:1903.07603:20454067</guid><pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2019 21:28:26 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Mystery of universe&amp;#x27;s expansion rate deepens with new Hubble data&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;3 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. &lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1903.07603/"&gt;Paper and source history&lt;/a&gt;. A submission is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>astro-ph.CO</category></item><item><title>Large Magellanic Cloud Cepheid Standards Provide a 1% Foundation for the Determination of the Hubble Constant and Stronger Evidence for Physics Beyond LambdaCDM — mentioned by acqq</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19837252</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1903.07603:19837252</guid><pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2019 06:25:09 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;The paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.07603 The disagreement existed for years already, the news is one more value from those measurements using the &amp;quot;distance ladder&amp;quot; which disagrees with the values obtained from &amp;quot;CMB and BAO&amp;quot; method. Both groups believe they haven&amp;#x27;t made any error in their measurements and can still claim so: https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/05/03/cosm...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1903.07603/"&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>
