H0LiCOW – IX. Cosmographic analysis of the doubly imaged quasar SDSS 1206+4332 and a new measurement of the Hubble constant

Abstract

We present a blind time-delay strong lensing (TDSL) cosmographic analysis of the doubly imaged quasar SDSS 1206+4332 . We combine the relative time delay between the quasar images, Hubble Space Telescope imaging, the Keck stellar velocity dispersion of the lensing galaxy, and wide-field photometric and spectroscopic data of the field to constrain two angular diameter distance relations. The combined analysis is performed by forward modelling the individual data sets through a Bayesian hierarchical framework, and it is kept blind until the very end to prevent experimenter bias. After unblinding, the inferred distances imply a Hubble constant H 0 = 68.8 +5.4 −5.1 km s −1 Mpc −1 , assuming a flat Λ cold dark matter cosmology with uniform prior on Ω m in [0.05, 0.5]. The precision of our cosmographic measurement with the doubly imaged quasar SDSS 1206+4332 is comparable with those of quadruply imaged quasars and opens the path to perform on selected doubles the same analysis as anticipated for quads. Our analysis is based on a completely independent lensing code than our previous three H0LiCOW systems and the new measurement is fully consistent with those. We provide the analysis scripts paired with the publicly available software to facilitate independent analysis. The consistency between blind measurements with independent codes provides an important sanity check on lens modelling systematics. By combining the likelihoods of the four systems under the same prior, we obtain H 0 = 72.5 +2.1 −2.3 km s −1 Mpc −1 . This measurement is independent of the distance ladder and other cosmological probes.

Nonminimal dark sector physics and cosmological tensions

“…Local measurements other than the R19 one exist, but most of them appear to consistently point towards values of H 0 significantly higher than the CMB one (see e.g. [27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41]). 3 Other scenarios worth mentioning include the possibility that properly accounting for cosmic variance (due to the fact that a limited sample of the Hubble flow is observed) enlarges the DM and DE beyond the purely gravitational ones are not forbidden by any fundamental symmetry in nature [118][119][120][121][122][123] and could help addressing the so called coincidence or why now?…”

Preferred-frame effects, the $$H_0$$ tension, and probes of Hořava–Lifshitz gravity

“…Recently, various measurements of the Hubble constant, H 0 , have revealed a discrepancy between the value at high and low redshift, respectively. In fact, this discrepancy has been confirmed by many independent observations (using ΛCDM as a background model) at low (quasars [22], gravitational waves [23][24][25], Cepheid stars [26][27][28]) and high (Cosmic Microwave Background [29], Baryon Acoustic Oscillations [30,31], the inverse distance ladder [32,33]) redshift. The difference in the value of the H 0 from these different observations lie around 4% -9%.…”

Degenerate Sub-keV fermion dark matter from a solution to the Hubble tension

“…9 From here on, whenever we encounter T RH , we can convert it using 7 We also assume that the reheating temperature T RH is much less than the inflaton mass. 8 In the extra dimension picture, taking the inflaton field Φ I as the bulk field, we treat its coupling to Φ 1 and Φ 6 on an equal footing. 9 To get Eq.…”

“…The recently raised Hubble tension is one of them. This regards discrepancy reaching ∼ 4σ level [4] between a local measurement of the Hubble expansion rate (H 0 ) [5][6][7][8] and that inferred from the cosmic microwave background (CMB) observation [9]. While unknown systematics may affect the discrepancy [10][11][12], it could be a clue for a nature of DM.…”

“…(8) and Eq (13). withρ DM (a BBN ) = m 2 DM + m 6 a FS 2a BBN DM s SM (a BBN ) ,(18)yields the parameter space in (m DM , V 6 ) plane satisfying the condition ∆N BBN eff 1.…”