Paper detail

Alcock-Paczynski cosmological test

In order to test the expansion of the universe and its geometry, we carry out an Alcock & Paczynski cosmological test, that is, an evaluation of the ratio of observed angular size to radial/redshift size. The main advantage of this test is that it does not depend on the evolution of the galaxies, but only on the geometry of the universe. However, the redshift distortions produced by the peculiar velocities of the gravitational infall do also have an influence, which should be separated from the cosmological effect. We derive the anisotropic correlation function of sources in three surveys within the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS): galaxies from SDSS-III/Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopy Survey-Data Release 10 (BOSS-DR10), and QSOs from SDSS-II and SDSS-III/BOSS-DR10. From these, we are able to disentangle the dynamic and geometric distortions and thus derive the ratio of observed angular size to radial/redshift size at different redshifts. We also add some other values available in the literature. Then, we use the data to evaluate which cosmological model fits them. We used six different models: concordance Lambda-CDM, Einstein-de Sitter, open-Friedman Cosmology without dark energy, flat quasi-steady state cosmology, a static universe with a linear Hubble law, and a static universe with tired-light redshift. Only two of the six models above fit the data of the Alcock & Paczynski test: concordance Lambda-CDM and static universe with tired-light redshift; whereas the rest of them are excluded at a >95% confidence level. If we assume that Lambda-CDM is the correct one, the best fit with a free Omega_m is produced for Omega_m=0.24^{+0.10}_{-0.07}.

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.