Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-23T13:26:45.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Five Crucial Tests of the Extragalactic Distance Scale Using the Galaxy as Fundamental Calibrator

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 March 2016

G. de Vaucouleurs
G. de Vaucouleurs*
Affiliation:
University of Texas

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The traditional approach to the extragalactic distance scale has been through several levels of primary, secondary and tertiary indicators of increasing range and decreasing precision. This piecemeal approach, fraught with the danger of cumulative errors, has led in recent years to two widely divergent scales, the “long” scale of Sandage and Tammann (1974–1982), leading to ≃ 50 km s-1 Mpc-1, and the “short” scale of the author (1978–79), leading to Ho ≃ 100 (de Vaucouleurs and Bollinger 1979; de Vaucouleurs and Peters 1981; de Vaucouleurs et al. 1981). The divergence, increasing from ~ 0.4 mag in the Local Group to ~ 1.2 mag at the distance of the Virgo Cluster, indicates that at least one of the scales is not linear (de Vaucouleurs 1981).

Type
Joint Discussions
Information
Highlights of Astronomy , Volume 6 , 1983 , pp. 315 - 317
Copyright
Copyright © Reidel 1983

References

de Vaucouleurs, G., Nature, 266, 126 (1977).Google Scholar
de Vaucouleurs, G., Astrophys. J., 223, 351, 730: 224, 14, 710 (1978a, b, c, d).Google Scholar
de Vaucouleurs, G., Astrophys. J., 227, 380, 729 (1979a, b).Google Scholar
de Vaucouleurs, G., in Tenth Texas ‘Symposium on Relativistic Astrophysics, Baltimore 1980, Annals New York Acad. Sci., N.Y., 90 (1981).Google Scholar
de Vaucouleurs, G. and Bollinger, G., Astrophys. J., 233, 433 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Vaucouleurs, G. and Peters, W.L., Astrophys. J., 248, 395 (1981).Google Scholar
de Vaucouleurs, G., Peters, W.L., Bottinelli, L., Gouguenheim, L. and Paturel, G., Astrophys. J., 248, 408 (1981).Google Scholar
Faber, S.M. and Jackson, R.E. Astrophys. J., 204, 668 (1976).Google Scholar
Glass, I.S. and Feast, M.W., Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 198, 199 (1982).Google Scholar
Hanes, D.A., Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 180, 309 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanes, D.A., Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 188, 901 (1979).Google Scholar
Sandage, A. and Tammann, G.A., Astrophys. J., 190, 525; 191, 603; 194, 223, 559 (1974a, b, c, d).Google Scholar
Sandage, A. and Tammann, G.A., Astrophys. J., 196, 313; 197, 265 (1975a, b).Google Scholar
Sandage, A. and Tammann, G.A., Astrophys. J., 210, 7 (1976).Google Scholar
Sandage, A. and Tammann, G.A., Astrophys. J., 256, 339 (1982).Google Scholar
Tully, R.B. and Fisher, R., Astron. Astrophys., 54, 661 (1977).Google Scholar