Table 1
Distance estimates to NGC 4258.
| Method | D | μ | Δμ | Median |
| (Mpc) | (mag) | (mag) | (mag) | |
|
|
||||
| SCM1a | 6.37 (1.13) | 29.02 (0.38) | −0.38 | 32.0 |
| SCM1b | 7.07 (1.15) | 29.25 (0.35) | −0.15 | 34.9 |
| SCM2a | 6.78 (1.01) | 29.16 (0.32) | −0.24 | 34.2 |
| SCM2b | 5.39 (1.05) | 28.66 (0.42) | −0.74 | 33.2 |
| SCM3 | 7.48 (1.07) | 29.37 (0.31) | −0.03 | 32.7 |
| SCM4 | 8.77 (1.45) | 29.71 (0.36) | 0.31 | 34.8 |
|
|
||||
| Maser5 | 7.60 (0.23) | 29.40 (0.07) | ... | ... |
| Cepheid6 | 7.40 (1.16) | 29.35 (0.34) | ... | ... |
|
|
||||
| SCM7 (here) | 7.08 (0.86) | 29.25 (0.26) | 0.15 | 29.7 |
Notes. H0 = 73.8 km s-1 Mpc-1 (Riess et al. 2011). Uncertainties are given in parentheses. Δμ is the difference between each SCM distance modulus estimate and the maser distance modulus. Median distance modulus of the SNe comprising each sample. 1aHamuy (2003b) Eq. (3), whole sample (σ = 0.32 mag); 1bHamuy (2003b) Eq. (4), excluding SNe with z< 0.01 which results in a lower scatter (σ = 0.29 mag);2aNugent et al. (2006) Eq. (1), whole sample;2bNugent et al. (2006) Eq. (1), excluding SNe with z> 0.05;3Poznanski et al. (2009) Eq. (2);4D’Andrea et al. (2010) Eq. (2); the Poznanski et al. (2009) sample is essentially subsumed in its entirety in the computation of this calibration. 5Humphreys et al. (2013);6Fiorentino et al. (2013) provide the most recent Cepheid distance estimate to NGC 4258; 7this work: Eq. (1).
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.