Stellar kinematics — where it appears
Named by 3 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
A sheet of mass that changes nothing but the answer
A gravitational lens's images are unchanged by adding a uniform sheet of matter and rescaling the source. Every position, every shape and every flux ratio stays exactly as it was; only the time delays change, in proportion. So a Hubble constant measured from a delay is multiplied by a number the lensing itself cannot determine.
A dispersion that weighs the sheet only if the orbits are known
A lens's images cannot tell how much of its mass is in the galaxy and how much is spread through a sheet around it, and the time delay — and so the Hubble constant — scales with the answer. The stars' velocity dispersion can tell, because orbits feel mass in three dimensions where light only integrates along a line. One dispersion through one aperture weighs the sheet only to sixteen per cent, because the shape of the orbits moves it as much; the same dispersion measured in rings weighs it to four.
A hundred lenses and one assumption
A time-delay lens gives the Hubble constant to five or ten per cent, and the hope is that a hundred give it to one. The errors that differ from lens to lens — its delay, its own line of sight, its own internal sheet — do average away. The errors every lens shares because every lens was analysed the same way do not, and they set a floor that a sample reaches after a few dozen lenses and never goes beneath.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Hubble constantThe mass-sheet degeneracyTime-delayEinstein radiusLine of sight structureOrbital anisotropyConvergenceExact degeneracyExternal convergenceHubble tensionIntegral-field spectroscopyJeans equation