No Arabic abstract
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).
Riess et al (2018c) have claimed there exist seven problems in the analyses presented by Shanks et al (2018) where we argue that there is enough uncertainty in Cepheid distances and local peculiar velocity fields to explain the current tension in $H_0$. Here, we take each of the Riess et al (2018c) points in turn and suggest that either they do not apply or that the necessary caveats are already made by Shanks et al (2018). We conclude that the main point to be inferred from our analyses still stands which is that previous claims by Riess et al (2018b) that Gaia parallaxes confirm their Cepheid scale are, at best, premature in advance of further improvements in the Gaia astrometric solution.
The recently discovered rapid transient GN-z11-flash has been suggested to be the prompt-emission ultraviolet flash associated with a gamma-ray burst serendipitously exploding in the ultra-high-$z$ galaxy GN-z11. We here place the flash into the context of the early ultraviolet emission of gamma-ray bursts, and find it is in agreement with the luminosity distribution of these events.
Recent work reported the discovery of a gamma-ray burst (GRB) associated with the galaxy GN-z11 at $zsim 11$. The extreme improbability of the transient source being a GRB in the very early Universe requires robust elimination of all plausible alternative hypotheses. We identify numerous examples of similar transient signals in separate archival MOSFIRE observations and argue that Solar system objects -- natural or artificial -- are a far more probable explanation for these phenomena. An appendix has been added in response to additional points raised in Jiang et al. (2021), which do not change the conclusion.
We discuss the possible interpretation of the recently observed transient, GN-z11-flash as originating from a shock-breakout in a Population III supernova occurring in the GN-z11 galaxy at $z sim 11$. We find that the parameters of the explosion are fully consistent with those expected from the shock breakout associated with a Type II supernova of a progenitor star of $sim 300$ solar masses in this galaxy, with of order unity such events expected over an observing timescale of a few years. We forecast the expected number of such transients from $z > 10$ galaxies as a function of their host stellar mass and star formation rate.
We offer a brief response to the criticisms put forward by Cusin et al in arXiv:1811.03582 about our work arXiv:1810.13435 and arXiv:1806.01718, emphasising that none of these criticisms are relevant to our main results.