Paper detail

Are long gamma-ray bursts standard candles?

Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) are widely proposed as an effective probe to trace the Hubble diagram of the Universe in high redshift range. However, the calibration of GRBs is not as easy as that of type-Ia supernovae (SNe Ia). Most calibrating methods at present make use one or some of the empirical luminosity correlations, e.g., Amati relation. One of the underlying assumptions of these calibrating methods is that the empirical correlation is universal over all redshifts. In this paper, we check to what extent this assumption holds. Assuming that SNe Ia exactly trace the Hubble diagram of the Universe, we re-investigate the Amati relation for low redshift ($z<1.4$) and high redshift ($z>1.4$) GRBs, respectively. It is found that the Amati relation of low-$z$ GRBs differs from that of high-$z$ GRBs at more than $3σ$ confidence level. This result is insensitive to cosmological models. We should be cautious when using Amati relation to reconstruct the Hubble diagram of the Universe.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.