![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
However, the WMAP value was not determined
directly from the data, but rather by comparison against theoretical models and picking the model with the parameters which gave the best fit. This strikes me as kind of "cheating," in the sense that all models are by necessity a simplification, and there are underlying assumptions which may or may not be valid. The Hubble value, OTOH, is derived from Cepheid variables so constitutes a direct measurement. They only assumption being made is that the calibration scale for Cepheids being used is correct. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Clueless pundits (was High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers) | Rand Simberg | Space Science Misc | 18 | February 14th 04 03:28 AM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | February 2nd 04 03:33 AM |
New Hubble Space Telescope Exhibit Opens At Goddard | Ron Baalke | Science | 0 | September 30th 03 11:07 PM |
Electric Gravity&Instantaneous Light | ralph sansbury | Astronomy Misc | 8 | August 31st 03 02:53 AM |
News: Hubble plans and policy | Kent Betts | History | 101 | August 18th 03 09:25 PM |