<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Constraints on the Hubble constant from Supernova Refsdal's reappearance · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2305.06367/</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/2305.06367/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Constraints on the Hubble constant from Supernova Refsdal's reappearance — mentioned by raattgift</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35924765</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2305.06367:35924765</guid><pubDate>Sat, 13 May 2023 02:07:46 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;[part 1/2] &amp;gt; I wonder what happens if ... mond is used for galaxies that do the lensing tl;dr: massive galaxy cluster with multiple images of a cosmologically-distant background supernova is a relativistic system, so neither Newtonian limit of GR nor MOND is suitable and thus defy useful comparison. Instead compare relativistic theories that reliably produce Newtonian limit (e.g. General Relativity + cold dark matter) or MOND (long list of relativistic theories...) at the limbs of galaxies. The article at the top corresponds with the arXiv preprint &amp;lt;https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.06367&amp;gt;. The…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2305.06367/"&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>
