12). Throwing in equation (14) would bring us even closer to equation (12), which dominates because of its small error. Combining the estimates would be unwise, because they do not agree well.

This small value from the IRAS survey is not entirely new (cf. Fisher, Scharf, & Lahav 1994). It has received little attention because the larger value, $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}} \approx 0.25$, was already seen as a major challenge to the popular SCDM model ($\Omega_{\mathrm{M}} = 1$). The smaller value poses an even more severe challenge to the SCDM model. But it gives more scope to low-density models, which are popular now. Until the discrepant values of $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}}$ are understood, we think it wise to show joint CRs using separately the larger and the smaller values of $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}}$.

Figures \[Fig:H-Omega\_M\_L0\_G0.15\] and \[Fig:H-eta\_L0\_G0.15\], analogs of Figures \[Fig:H-Omega\_M\_L0\] and \[Fig:H-eta\_L0\], show CRs for our four standard constraints, but with $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}} = 
0.255\pm 0.017$ replaced by $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}} = 0.15 \pm 0.04$. The $\chi^2_{\mathrm{min}}$ is 0.63 for 1 DOF (good) and is located at ($h$, $\Omega_{\mathrm{M}}$, $\eta_{10}$) = (0.60, 0.30, 4.6).

The CRs now exclude the SCDM model strongly and favor low density. The value $\eta_{10} \approx 5$, favored by the Burles and Tytler (1997a,b,c) deuterium abundance determination (see §1), is now near the point of optimum fit. The CRs clearly would accept the added cluster constraint $\Omega_{\mathrm{M}} \approx 0.2$ if we were to apply it. But note that in our three-dimensional CRs, low $\Omega_{\mathrm{M}}$ goes with low $\eta_{10}$, because of the $f_{\mathrm{G}}$ constraint. For example, the combinations (0.7, 0.2, 3) and (0.7
12). Throwing in equation (14) would bring us even closer to equality (12), which dominate because of its small error. compound the estimate would be unwise, because they do not agree well. 

 This little value from the IRAS view is not entirely fresh (cf. Fisher, Scharf, & Lahav 1994). It has received short attention because the larger value, $ \Gamma_{\mathrm{o } } \approx 0.25 $, was already see as a major challenge to the popular SCDM model ($ \Omega_{\mathrm{M } } = 1 $). The smaller value poses an even more severe challenge to the SCDM exemplar. But it gives more scope to low - concentration models, which are popular nowadays. Until the discrepant value of $ \Gamma_{\mathrm{o}}$ are understood, we think it wise to show joint CRs use separately the larger and the smaller values of $ \Gamma_{\mathrm{o}}$. 

 Figures   \[Fig: H - Omega\_M\_L0\_G0.15\ ] and \[Fig: planck's constant - eta\_L0\_G0.15\ ], analogs of Figures   \[Fig: H - Omega\_M\_L0\ ] and \[Fig: H - eta\_L0\ ], show CRs for our four standard constraints, but with $ \Gamma_{\mathrm{o } } = 
 0.255\pm 0.017 $ replaced by $ \Gamma_{\mathrm{o } } = 0.15 \pm 0.04$. The $ \chi^2_{\mathrm{min}}$ is 0.63 for 1 DOF (good) and is located at ($ h$, $ \Omega_{\mathrm{M}}$, $ \eta_{10}$) = (0.60, 0.30, 4.6). 

 The CRs now bar the SCDM model strongly and privilege depleted density. The value $ \eta_{10 } \approx 5 $, favored by the Burles and Tytler (1997a, b, c) deuterium abundance determination (determine § 1), is now near the point of optimum fit. The CRs intelligibly would accept the added cluster constraint $ \Omega_{\mathrm{M } } \approx 0.2 $ if we were to apply it. But note that in our three - dimensional chromium, low $ \Omega_{\mathrm{M}}$ goes with low $ \eta_{10}$, because of the $ f_{\mathrm{G}}$ constraint. For example, the combinations (0.7, 0.2, 3) and (0.7
12). Thgowing in equation (14) woula bring us even closer to eqhation (12), dhich dominates because of ivs snall tgror. Combining the esgimates wluld be ynwiww, because vgey do kjt afvee wzlo.

This small vakue from tve IRAS survey ir uot entirely new (cf. Fisher, Scharf, & Lwhav 1994). Iy jas received lyttlt aetenfpok because the larger value, $\Gamma_{\jathrm{o}} \approx 0.25$, was slready seen as a major chwllejge to the popular SCDM model ($\Omedq_{\mathrm{M}} = 1$). Tfe smaller value poses an even more severe challenge go thz SCDM modeo. Vut ht gives moce scoie to low-denslny modens, whicn are popular kow. Uitil the discrepant valuev of $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}}$ wre undervtkod, we think it wusw to vhow joivr CFs hsmng separwtemy the larfer and the smaller values of $\Baina_{\mathrm{o}}$.

Figudes \[Fig:R-Oiega\_M\_L0\_G0.15\] and \[Fig:H-eta\_L0\_G0.15\], analogs of Figurev \[Fif:H-Omega\_M\_L0\] and \[Fig:H-eta\_L0\], whow CRs for our four standard constraints, but with $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}} = 
0.255\pm 0.017$ replaced ty $\Gajoa_{\mcbmrm{o}} = 0.15 \om 0.04$. The $\chi^2_{\mathrm{min}}$ is 0.63 for 1 DOF (good) and is movaned at ($h$, $\Omega_{\matmrm{M}}$, $\eta_{10}$) = (0.60, 0.30, 4.6).

The CRx joe exclude the RCDM modem strongly and favlr low qensiry. The vajue $\rta_{10} \approx 5$, favored by the Vurles and Tjtlee (1997a,b,c) deuterium abbndance detexminatoon (sre §1), is now near the poiut of kptimum fit. The CRs duearly would accdpt tve added cluster constraine $\Omega_{\mavhrm{M}} \approx 0.2$ if we wewe to applj it. Ngt note that in oug thrge-dimetsional CRd, low $\Omega_{\mathrm{M}}$ goes with lox $\eta_{10}$, because ox tve $f_{\mathxm{G}}$ cokstraint. For exwmple, the combnnations (0.7, 0.2, 3) avd (0.7
12). Throwing in equation (14) would bring closer equation (12), dominates because of estimates be unwise, because do not agree This small value from the IRAS is not entirely new (cf. Fisher, Scharf, & Lahav 1994). It has received attention because the larger value, $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}} \approx 0.25$, was already seen as a challenge the SCDM ($\Omega_{\mathrm{M}} = 1$). The smaller value poses an even more severe challenge to the SCDM model. it gives more scope to low-density models, which popular now. Until the values of $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}}$ are understood, think wise to joint using the larger and smaller values of $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}}$. Figures \[Fig:H-Omega\_M\_L0\_G0.15\] and \[Fig:H-eta\_L0\_G0.15\], analogs of Figures \[Fig:H-Omega\_M\_L0\] and \[Fig:H-eta\_L0\], show CRs for four standard with $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}} 0.255\pm replaced $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}} = 0.15 The $\chi^2_{\mathrm{min}}$ is 0.63 for 1 is located at ($h$, $\Omega_{\mathrm{M}}$, $\eta_{10}$) = (0.60, 4.6). The now exclude the SCDM model strongly favor low density. The value $\eta_{10} \approx 5$, by the Burles and Tytler (1997a,b,c) deuterium abundance determination (see §1), is now near the optimum fit. The CRs would accept the cluster $\Omega_{\mathrm{M}} 0.2$ we were apply it. But note that in our three-dimensional CRs, low $\Omega_{\mathrm{M}}$ with low $\eta_{10}$, because of the $f_{\mathrm{G}}$ constraint. For example, (0.7, 3) and (0.7
12). Throwing in equation (14) would brIng us even cLoser To eQuaTiOn (12), whIch dOminates becausE Of itS small error. Combining thE estiMaTEs woULd Be unwIse, becaUSe THEy dO nOt AgrEe WElL.

This SmaLl value From the IRAs suRvEy is not entirELy New (cf. FisheR, ScHarf, & Lahav 1994). It hAs rEceiveD lIttLE atteNtiOn becAuse thE Larger Value, $\GammA_{\mAThrm{o}} \aPProx 0.25$, was ALReAdy sEen as a major challeNGe TO the popular SCDm model ($\omEGa_{\MAThrM{M}} = 1$). THe smaller vAlUe posES an even MOrE SEVerE Challenge to thE SCDM model. BUT it Gives mOrE scOPe to loW-densItY ModEls, which are PopuLar now. UntIl the dIScrepanT Values oF $\Gamma_{\MatHrm{O}}$ are UNdErStoOd, WE thINk It wISe tO show joiNt cRS usinG sepARATEly tHe lArgeR and tHe smaller valuEs oF $\GamMA_{\maThrm{o}}$.

figurEs \[FiG:H-omega\_m\_L0\_G0.15\] and \[fig:H-eTa\_l0\_G0.15\], analogs of FiguRes \[FIg:H-Omega\_M\_l0\] anD \[FIg:H-EtA\_L0\], shoW cRs for Our FouR standaRd constRAinTs, BUT WiTh $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}} = 
0.255\pm 0.017$ rePlACEd By $\Gamma_{\mAthrm{o}} = 0.15 \PM 0.04$. THe $\CHi^2_{\mathrm{MiN}}$ is 0.63 For 1 Dof (Good) aNd is LOcAted at ($h$, $\OMega_{\maTHrM{M}}$, $\Eta_{10}$) = (0.60, 0.30, 4.6).

The Crs Now excLuDe tHe ScDM moDEl stRongly And favor Low deNSity. The value $\etA_{10} \Approx 5$, favored BY tHE buRLes aNd TYtler (1997a,b,c) deuTeriUM abuNdanCE dEteRMinatIon (seE §1), iS NoW Near the point of optimUm Fit. The cRs clEarly would accEpt the addeD CLUster conStraINt $\oMega_{\mathrm{M}} \appRox 0.2$ if We were to apPLy it. But nOte thAt in our tHree-dimenSIOnal CRs, lOw $\OMegA_{\maThrM{m}}$ GoEs with low $\eta_{10}$, bECAuse Of The $f_{\matHrm{g}}$ constrAinT. FoR exAmpLe, The combinAtions (0.7, 0.2, 3) anD (0.7
12). Throwing in equation(14) would  brin g u s e ve n cl oser  to equation ( 1 2),which dominates becaus e ofit s  sma l lerror . Combi n in g the  e st ima te s  w ouldbeunwise,  because t hey  d o not agreew el l.

This s mal l value from  th e IRAS  s urv e y isnot  enti rely n e w (cf.  Fisher,Sc h arf, & Lahav 1 9 9 4) . It  has received lit t le attention beca use th el ar g e r v alu e, $\Gamma _{ \math r m{o}} \ a pp r o x  0. 2 5$, was alrea dy seen asa  ma jor ch al len g e to t he po pu l arSCDM model($\O mega_{\ma thrm{M } } = 1$) .  The sm allerval uepose s  a neve nm ore se ver e  ch allengeto  t he SC DM m o d e l . Bu t i t gi ves m ore scope tolow -den s ity  mode ls, w hich  a re po pularnow.Un til the discrep antvalues of  $\ Ga mma _{ \math r m{o}}$  ar e u ndersto od, wet hin ki t wi se to show joint C Rs u si ng separ atelyt he  l a rger and  t hesmal l e r val ueso f$\Gamma_ {\math r m{ o} }$.

Fi gu res \[ Fi g:H -Om ega\_ M \_L0 \_G0.1 5\] and\[Fig : H-eta\_L0\_G0. 1 5\], analogso fF i gu r es \ [Fi g:H-Omega\_ M\_L 0 \] a nd \ [ Fi g:H - eta\_ L0\],  s h ow CRs for our four st an dard c onstr aints, but wi th $\Gamma _ { \ mathrm{o }} = 
0 . 255\pm 0.017$repla ced by $\G a mma_{\ma thrm{ o}} = 0. 15 \pm 0. 0 4 $. The $ \ch i^2 _{\ mat h r m{ min}}$ is 0.6 3 for1DOF (go od)  and is  lo cat edat($ h$, $\Ome ga_{\mat hr m{ M} }$ , $ \eta_ { 10}$) =(0 .60 ,0.3 0, 4. 6 ).

Th e CRs  now  e xc l ude  the SC D Mm o delst ro ngly  an dfavor  low den sity. T he value$\e t a_{1 0}  \ approx5$, favored b ythe Burles  a ndTytler ( 1997a,b, c) deuterium abundanced etermin ati on (s ee § 1), is no w n ear th e p o int of  optim um fi t.  Th e CRs c l e ar lywo uld accept t headded  c lust er cons traint $\Omega_{\m a thr m{M}} \approx  0. 2$ i f we  we r et o a pp l y i t .  But note thatin our thr ee - di mensionalC Rs,  l ow $\Om ega_{\m athrm { M}}$ go es with l ow $\eta_ {1 0}$, b eca use of the  $f_{\ma thrm{G}}$ const r ai nt. F orexampl e,  th e com binati o ns(0.7,  0.2,3)  and ( 0.7
12). Throwing_in equation_(14) would bring us_even closer_to_equation (12),_which_dominates because of_its small error._Combining the estimates would_be unwise, because_they_do not agree well.

This small value from the IRAS survey is not entirely new_(cf._Fisher, Scharf,_&_Lahav_1994). It has received little_attention because the larger value,_$\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}} \approx_0.25$, was already seen as a major challenge_to_the popular SCDM_model ($\Omega_{\mathrm{M}} = 1$). The smaller value poses an_even more severe challenge to the_SCDM model. But_it_gives_more scope to low-density_models, which are popular now. Until_the discrepant values of $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}}$ are_understood, we think it wise to show_joint CRs using separately the larger_and the smaller values of_$\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}}$.

Figures \[Fig:H-Omega\_M\_L0\_G0.15\] and_\[Fig:H-eta\_L0\_G0.15\], analogs of Figures \[Fig:H-Omega\_M\_L0\] and_\[Fig:H-eta\_L0\], show CRs_for our_four standard constraints,_but with $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}} = 
0.255\pm 0.017$_replaced by $\Gamma_{\mathrm{o}}_= 0.15 \pm 0.04$. The $\chi^2_{\mathrm{min}}$_is_0.63 for 1_DOF_(good)_and is_located at ($h$,_$\Omega_{\mathrm{M}}$,_$\eta_{10}$) =_(0.60,_0.30, 4.6).

The CRs now exclude the_SCDM_model strongly and favor low density. The_value $\eta_{10} \approx 5$,_favored_by the Burles and_Tytler (1997a,b,c) deuterium abundance determination_(see §1), is now near the_point of_optimum fit._The CRs clearly would accept the added cluster constraint $\Omega_{\mathrm{M}} \approx_0.2$ if we were to apply_it. But note that_in our_three-dimensional_CRs, low $\Omega_{\mathrm{M}}$_goes_with low_$\eta_{10}$, because of the $f_{\mathrm{G}}$ constraint. For_example, the_combinations (0.7, 0.2, 3) and (0.7