arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2102.01239astro-ph.HE
收藏

"A more probable explanation" is still impossible to explain GN-z11-flash: in response to Steinhardt et al. (arXiv:2101.12738)

Linhua Jiang, Shu Wang, Bing Zhang, Nobunari Kashikawa, Luis C. Ho, Zheng Cai, Eiichi Egami, Gregory Walth, Yi-Si Yang, Bin-Bin Zhang, Hai-Bin Zhao

英文摘要:

In Jiang et al. (2020), we reported a possible bright flash (hereafter GN-z11-flash) from a galaxy GN-z11 at z ~ 11. Recently, Steinhardt et al. (2021; arXiv:2101.12738) found 27 images with transient signals in Keck MOSFIRE archival data and claimed that GN-z11-flash was more likely from a moving object in our Solar system. We show that the Steinhardt et al.'s definition of the chance probability and their methodology of finding GN-z11-flash-like transients are problematic in several aspects. In particular, none of their transients is analogous to GN-z11-flash, and none of them is positionally coincident with a known object in their imaging data. In Jiang et al., we performed a comprehensive analysis of the origin of GN-z11-flash and ruled out, to the best of our knowledge, the possibility of known man-made objects or moving objects in the Solar system, based on all available information and our current understanding of these objects. Steinhardt et al. did not use such information and did not analyse the GN-z11-flash event itself. The majority of their transients are apparently low-Earth orbit satellites or aircrafts. Therefore, their analysis can neither prove nor disprove our results. Finally, we present a method to estimate the chance probability of finding GN-z11-flash-like transients in archival data. Based on this method and the archival data used by Steinhardt et al., we obtain a loose upper limit of the probability that actually support the original results of Jiang et al. (2020).

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。

↑