#galoppo — Public Fediverse posts

In simpler language for non-cosmologists:

#SylosLabini + #Galoppo analysed #DESI galaxy data and thought that they had discovered more structure than expected in the standard cosmological model. They seem to have made two elementary mistakes. Re-analysis of the data by @TillSawala without the two mistakes changes their result (detection of extra structure) into a non-detection [2].

#syloslabini #galoppo #desi

Boud @[email protected] · 2026-07-06 · 19:27 UTC

In simpler language for non-cosmologists:

#SylosLabini + #Galoppo analysed #DESI galaxy data and thought that they had discovered more structure than expected in the standard cosmological model. They seem to have made two elementary mistakes. Re-analysis of the data by @TillSawala without the two mistakes changes their result (detection of extra structure) into a non-detection [2].

#syloslabini #galoppo #desi

Boud @[email protected] · 2026-07-06 · 19:27 UTC

In simpler language for non-cosmologists:

#SylosLabini + #Galoppo analysed #DESI galaxy data and thought that they had discovered more structure than expected in the standard cosmological model. They seem to have made two elementary mistakes. Re-analysis of the data by @TillSawala without the two mistakes changes their result (detection of extra structure) into a non-detection [2].

#desi #galoppo #syloslabini

Boud @[email protected] · 2026-07-06 · 19:27 UTC

In simpler language for non-cosmologists:

#SylosLabini + #Galoppo analysed #DESI galaxy data and thought that they had discovered more structure than expected in the standard cosmological model. They seem to have made two elementary mistakes. Re-analysis of the data by @TillSawala without the two mistakes changes their result (detection of extra structure) into a non-detection [2].

#syloslabini #galoppo #desi

Boud @[email protected] · 2026-07-06 · 16:39 UTC

In their article that is *still* not on #ArXiv, looks like #SylosLabini+#Galoppo made two elementary mistakes.

@TillSawala has reanalysed the data, and presented a convincing case that SylosLabini+Galoppo forgot about #little_h and accidentally used #LuminosityDistance s instead of #ComovingDistance s [2]. See Fig 9, and p14 (15th page) of the pdf.

So much for #Nature's peer review standards ...

[2] #ArXiv_2607_01172 https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01172

#arxiv #galoppo #little_h #luminositydistance #comovingdistance #nature

Boud @[email protected] · 2026-07-06 · 16:39 UTC

In their article that is *still* not on #ArXiv, looks like #SylosLabini+#Galoppo made two elementary mistakes.

@TillSawala has reanalysed the data, and presented a convincing case that SylosLabini+Galoppo forgot about #little_h and accidentally used #LuminosityDistance s instead of #ComovingDistance s [2]. See Fig 9, and p14 (15th page) of the pdf.

So much for #Nature's peer review standards ...

[2] #ArXiv_2607_01172 https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01172

#arxiv #galoppo #little_h #luminositydistance #comovingdistance #nature

Boud @[email protected] · 2026-07-06 · 16:39 UTC

In their article that is *still* not on #ArXiv, looks like #SylosLabini+#Galoppo made two elementary mistakes.

@TillSawala has reanalysed the data, and presented a convincing case that SylosLabini+Galoppo forgot about #little_h and accidentally used #LuminosityDistance s instead of #ComovingDistance s [2]. See Fig 9, and p14 (15th page) of the pdf.

So much for #Nature's peer review standards ...

[2] #ArXiv_2607_01172 https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01172

#arxiv #galoppo #little_h #luminositydistance #comovingdistance #nature

Boud @[email protected] · 2026-07-06 · 16:39 UTC

In their article that is *still* not on #ArXiv, looks like #SylosLabini+#Galoppo made two elementary mistakes.

@TillSawala has reanalysed the data, and presented a convincing case that SylosLabini+Galoppo forgot about #little_h and accidentally used #LuminosityDistance s instead of #ComovingDistance s [2]. See Fig 9, and p14 (15th page) of the pdf.

So much for #Nature's peer review standards ...

[2] #ArXiv_2607_01172 https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01172

#syloslabini #arxiv_2607_01172 #tillsawala #nature #comovingdistance #luminositydistance

Boud @[email protected] · 2026-07-06 · 16:39 UTC

In their article that is *still* not on #ArXiv, looks like #SylosLabini+#Galoppo made two elementary mistakes.

@TillSawala has reanalysed the data, and presented a convincing case that SylosLabini+Galoppo forgot about #little_h and accidentally used #LuminosityDistance s instead of #ComovingDistance s [2]. See Fig 9, and p14 (15th page) of the pdf.

So much for #Nature's peer review standards ...