Hubble tension -- any resolution?

  • #71
Mordred said:
Really ?
Really. What you quote does not refer at all to calibration of JWST characteristics, but to the calibration of the distance by the TRGB method.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #72
How do you calibrate filters used by the JWST without a good reference ? the paper fully details the process including listing any applicable software the JWST uses.

Not sure what your after but quite frankly that paper specifically details calibrations.
Including some of its different methodologies.

If it helps here is another related paper this one better describes some of the noise issues

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/ad1ddd/pdf
 
Last edited:
  • #73
Mordred said:
Not sure what your after but quite frankly that paper specifically details calibrations.
Including some of its different methodologies.
Yes, that paper specifically details the calibration of distance measurement by the TRGB method, but it does not address the calibration of JWST characteristics.
 
  • #74
Then define JWST characteristics for me because quite frankly that includes the filters and software the JWST uses by my way of thinking
 
  • #75
Mordred said:
Then define JWST characteristics for me because quite frankly that includes the filters and software the JWST uses by my way of thinking
The paper deals with the calibration of the distance measurement by the TRGB method, but doesn't deal with the calibration of the JWST filters or software.
 
  • #76
The two go hand in hand you cannot determine a distance involving brightness using Leavitt without a solid calibration.
 
  • #77
Mordred said:
The two go hand in hand you cannot determine a distance involving brightness using Leavitt without a solid calibration.
Yes, it is possible, but, contrary to what you stated, the methods of the paper aren't related to the calibration of JWST characteristics.
 
  • #78
Whatever you believe but when I see a paper measuring well established objects as baseline and discusses its filters and software and details its error margins and compares the different components and software the same telescope uses as well as any details relating to noise reduction then that's directly related to its calibration.

Calibration obviously isn't restricted to just components which I believe your getting at but the links I provided also includes error margins of the components

A common baseline object used being NGC 4285.

The article you linked for example lists 3 independent measurements. That's excellent for calibration the more independent measurements the better. Another common independent measurement for calibration purposes being interstellar parallax.

How else you you establish a zero point baseline.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top