Concluding discussion

Notes written by Richard Saunders

Many important points emerged during the meeting and several of these were emphasised in the concluding discussion. Among these are the following. On the practice of H0 determination: Hipparcos parallax work on a series of star clusters indicates that main sequences can differ by up to 0.4 mag. Main-sequence fitting itself does not necessarily figure in the distance-ladder method, but the differences do indicate a worrying lack of understanding of main-sequence luminosities - something we all thought was tied down. One has to keep in mind that the number of Cepheid variables with parallax distances is critically small. There is the question of whether enough parameters are being used to describe the correlations. For example, in Tully-Fisher relations, would one be better off characterising the line-shape with more than just one width? There is certainly point in introducing more parameters if there is an underlying physical model (which is always worth striving to achieve), and Bayesian analysis will tell you whether the reduction in scatter is worth the extra parameter. Ever present is the risk that something that doesn't fit the correlation - or expectation - will be classified as something else and thus excluded. A related point is that if, having done a programme of work, one gets an extreme or unpalatable value of H0, one should still report it to avoid introducing biases. On the present position on the value of H0: The distance-ladder community seems to be arguing about 50-65 km s-1 Mpc-1, rather about than factors of two. But it is certainly still arguing: "we have moved away from being bimodal" claimed one participant, yet "the bimodality has narrowed" was how another put it. Looked at from another perspective, it is both remarkable and reassuring that the physical methods (Sunyaev-Zel'dovich plus X-ray and gravitational-lens time delay) and the distance ladder methods agree at all, given they have such different bases. And on the point of it all: What you get from primordial microwave background anisotropy and structure formation depends on total density - and on H0. What you get from nucleosynthesis depends on the baryon density - and on H0 too. So to find out what went on and what's going on, you need H0 - certainly to a few percent. So we'd better make the effort...

How Far Can You Go ?
Proceedings of a workshop organized by the Observatoire de Strasbourg
La Petite Pierre (Northern Vosges), 25-27 June 1997