arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 1005.4458astro-ph.COgr-qc
收藏

用星系团和Ia型超新星检验距离-对偶关系

Testing the Distance-Duality Relation with Galaxy Clusters and Type Ia Supernovae

R. F. L. Holanda, J. A. S. Lima, M. B. Ribeiro

摘要:

本文提出了一个新的与模型无关的距离-对偶关系的宇宙学检验,η= D_{L}(z)(1+z)^{-2}/ D_{A}(z)=1,其中D_{L}和D_{A}分别是光度和角直径距离。对于$D_L$,我们考虑从Constitution数据(2009)中获取的两个Ia型SNe子样本,而$D_A$距离由De Fillipis等人(2005)和Bonamente等人(2006)通过结合Sunyaev-Zeldovich效应(SZE)和X射线表面亮度编制的两个星系团样本提供。每个子样本的超新星Ia红移都经过仔细选择,以与相关星系团样本的红移相一致(Δz<0.005),从而可以直接测试DD关系。由于对于非常低的红移,D_{A}(z)\approxeq D_{L}(z),我们通过假设$η$是由两个不同表达式参数化的红移的函数来测试DD关系:η(z)= 1 + η_{0}z和η(z)= 1 + η_{0}z/(1+z),其中η_0是量化可能偏离互易关系的严格有效性的恒定参数(η_0=0)。在最好的情况下(线性参数化),我们得到η_{0} =-0.28 ^{+ 0.44}_{-0.44}(2σ $, statistical + systematic errors) for de Fillipis et al. sample (eliptical geometry), a result only marginally compatible with the DD relation. However, for Bonamente et al. sample (spherical geometry) the constraint is η_{0} = -0.42^{+ 0.34}_{- 0.34} (3σ$,统计+系统误差),这显然与对偶距离关系不相容。

英文摘要:

In this letter we propose a new and model-independent cosmological test for the distance-duality (DD) relation, η=D_{L}(z)(1+z)^{-2}/D_{A}(z)=1, where D_{L} and D_{A} are, respectively, the luminosity and angular diameter distances. For $D_L$ we consider two sub-samples of SNe type Ia taken from Constitution data (2009) whereas $D_A$ distances are provided by two samples of galaxy clusters compiled by De Fillipis et al. (2005) and Bonamente et al. (2006) by combining Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect (SZE) and X-ray surface brightness. The SNe Ia redshifts of each sub-sample were carefully chosen to coincide with the ones of the associated galaxy cluster sample (Δz<0.005) thereby allowing a direct test of DD relation. Since for very low redshifts, D_{A}(z) \approxeq D_{L}(z), we have tested the DD relation by assuming that $η$ is a function of the redshift parametrized by two different expressions: η(z) = 1 + η_{0}z and η(z) = 1 + η_{0}z/(1+z), where η_0 is a constant parameter quantifying a possible departure from the strict validity of the reciprocity relation (η_0=0). In the best scenario (linear parametrization) we obtain η_{0} = -0.28^{+ 0.44}_{- 0.44} (2σ$, statistical + systematic errors) for de Fillipis et al. sample (eliptical geometry), a result only marginally compatible with the DD relation. However, for Bonamente et al. sample (spherical geometry) the constraint is η_{0} = -0.42^{+ 0.34}_{- 0.34} (3σ$, statistical + systematic errors) which is clearly incompatible with the duality-distance relation.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑