<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Is there really a Hubble tension? · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1911.06456/</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/1911.06456/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Is there really a Hubble tension? — mentioned by astro123</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21661458</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1911.06456:21661458</guid><pubDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2019 02:07:04 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Not to go into much detail, but these author&amp;#x27;s views are not shared broadly in the cosmology community. There was a recent paper [1] put on the arxiv that talked a bit about this. I&amp;#x27;m not an expert on supernova cosmology (I work on cosmology using other methods) but people I know who are experts claim there are issues. There are also a ton of other reasons to think that the universe is flat (see the CMB [2]) and to think that there is dark energy (large scale structure [3]). We still have no idea what DE is and it might not be an &amp;quot;Energy&amp;quot; but rather some modification of gravity or something…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1911.06456/"&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>
