Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userDo quasar X-ray and UV flux measurements provide a useful test of cosmological models?
70
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
The recent compilation of quasar (QSO) X-ray and UV flux measurements include QSOs that appear to not be standardizable via the X-ray luminosity and UV luminosity ($L_X-L_{UV}$) relation and so should not be used to constrain cosmological model parameters. Here we show that the largest of seven sub-samples in this compilation, the SDSS-4XMM QSOs that contribute about 2/3 of the total QSOs, have $L_X-L_{UV}$ relations that depend on the cosmological model assumed and also on redshift, and is the main cause of the similar problem discovered earlier for the full QSO compilation. The second and third biggest sub-samples, the SDSS-Chandra and XXL QSOs that together contribute about 30% of the total QSOs, appear standardizable, but provide only weak constraints on cosmological parameters that are not inconsistent with the standard spatially-flat $Lambda$CDM model or with constraints from better-established cosmological probes.
rate research
Read More
We study eight different gamma-ray burst (GRB) data sets to examine whether current GRB measurements -- that probe a largely unexplored part of cosmological redshift ($z$) space -- can be used to reliably constrain cosmological model parameters. We use three Amati-correlation samples and five Combo-correlation samples to simultaneously derive correlation and cosmological model parameter constraints. The intrinsic dispersion of each GRB data set is taken as a goodness measurement. We examine the consistency between the cosmological bounds from GRBs with those determined from better-established cosmological probes, such as baryonic acoustic oscillation (BAO) and Hubble parameter $H(z)$ measurements. We use the Markov chain Monte Carlo method implemented in textsc{MontePython} to find best-fit correlation and cosmological parameters, in six different cosmological models, for the eight GRB samples, alone or in conjunction with BAO and $H(z)$ data. For the Amati correlation case, we compile a data set of 118 bursts, the A118 sample, which is the largest -- about half of the total Amati-correlation GRBs -- current collection of GRBs suitable for constraining cosmological parameters. This updated GRB compilation has the smallest intrinsic dispersion of the three Amati-correlation GRB data sets we examined. We are unable to define a collection of reliable bursts for current Combo-correlation GRB data. Cosmological constraints determined from the A118 sample are consistent with -- but significantly weaker than -- those from BAO and $H(z)$ data. They also are consistent with the spatially-flat $Lambda$CDM model as well as with dynamical dark energy models and non-spatially-flat models. Since GRBs probe a largely unexplored region of $z$, it is well worth acquiring more and better-quality burst data which will give a more definitive answer to the question of the title.
Risaliti and Lusso have compiled X-ray and UV flux measurements of 1598 quasars (QSOs) in the redshift range $0.036 leq z leq 5.1003$, part of which, $z sim 2.4 - 5.1$, is largely cosmologically unprobed. In this paper we use these QSO measurements, alone and in conjunction with baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) and Hubble parameter [$H(z)$] measurements, to constrain cosmological parameters in six different cosmological models, each with two different Hubble constant priors. In most of these models, given the larger uncertainties, the QSO cosmological parameter constraints are mostly consistent with those from the $H(z)$ + BAO data. A somewhat significant exception is the non-relativistic matter density parameter $Omega_{m0}$ where the QSO data favors $Omega_{m0} sim 0.5 - 0.6$ in most models. Consequently in joint analyses of QSO data with $H(z)$ + BAO data the one-dimensional $Omega_{m0}$ distributions shift slightly toward larger values. A joint analysis of the QSO + $H(z)$ + BAO data is consistent with the current standard model, spatially-flat $Lambda$CDM, but mildly favors closed spatial hypersurfaces and dynamical dark energy. Since the higher $Omega_{m0}$ values favored by the QSO data appear to be associated with the $z sim 2 - 5$ part of these data, and conflict somewhat with strong indications for $Omega_{m0} sim 0.3$ from most $z < 2.5$ data as well as from the cosmic microwave background anisotropy data at $z sim 1100$, in most models, the larger QSO data $Omega_{m0}$ is possibly more indicative of an issue with the $z sim 2 - 5$ QSO data than of an inadequacy of the standard flat $Lambda$CDM model.
We use six different cosmological models to study the recently-released compilation of X-ray and UV flux measurements of 2038 quasars (QSOs) which span the redshift range $0.009 leq z leq 7.5413$. We find, for the full QSO data set, that the parameters of the X-ray and UV luminosities $L_X-L_{UV}$ relation used to standardized these QSOs depend on the cosmological model used to determine these parameters, i.e, it appears that the full QSO data set include QSOs that are not standardized and so cannot be used for the purpose of constraining cosmological parameters. Subsets of the QSO data, restricted to redshifts $z lesssim 1.5-1.7$ obey the $L_X-L_{UV}$ relation in a cosmological-model-independent manner, and so can be used to constrain cosmological parameters. The cosmological constraints from these lower-$z$, smaller QSO data subsets are mostly consistent with, but significantly weaker than, those that follow from baryon acoustic oscillation and Hubble parameter measurements.
We use the Risaliti & Lusso (2015) compilation of 808 X-ray and UV flux measurements of quasars (QSOs) in the redshift range $0.061 leq z leq 6.28$, alone and in conjuction with baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) and Hubble parameter [$H(z)$] measurements, to constrain cosmological parameters in six cosmological models. The QSO data constraints are significantly weaker than, but consistent with, those from the $H(z)$ + BAO data. A joint analysis of the QSO + $H(z)$ + BAO data is consistent with the current standard model, spatially-flat $Lambda$CDM, but mildly favors closed spatial hypersurfaces and dynamical dark energy.
We compare the constraints from two (2019 and 2021) compilations of HII starburst galaxy (HIIG) data and test the model-independence of quasar angular size (QSO) data using six spatially flat and non-flat cosmological models. We find that the new 2021 compilation of HIIG data generally provides tighter constraints and prefers lower values of cosmological parameters than those from the 2019 HIIG data. QSO data by themselves give relatively model-independent constraints on the characteristic linear size, $l_{rm m}$, of the QSOs within the sample. We also use Hubble parameter ($H(z)$), baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO), Pantheon Type Ia supernova (SN Ia) apparent magnitude (SN-Pantheon), and DES-3yr binned SN Ia apparent magnitude (SN-DES) measurements to perform joint analyses with HIIG and QSO angular size data, since their constraints are not mutually inconsistent within the six cosmological models we study. A joint analysis of $H(z)$, BAO, SN-Pantheon, SN-DES, QSO, and the newest compilation of HIIG data provides almost model-independent summary estimates of the Hubble constant, $H_0=69.7pm1.2 rm{km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}}$, the non-relativistic matter density parameter, $Omega_{rm m_0}=0.293pm0.021$, and $l_{rm m}=10.93pm0.25$ pc.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
