Paper detail

Comment on "Constraining the smoothness parameter and dark energy using observational H(z) data"

In this Comment we discuss a recent analysis by Yu et al. [RAA 11, 125 (2011)] about constraints on the smoothness $α$ parameter and dark energy models using observational $H(z)$ data. It is argued here that their procedure is conceptually inconsistent with the basic assumptions underlying the adopted Dyer-Roeder approach. In order to properly quantify the influence of the $H(z)$ data on the smoothness $α$ parameter, a $χ^2$-test involving a sample of SNe Ia and $H(z)$ data in the context of a flat $Λ$CDM model is reanalyzed. This result is confronted with an earlier approach discussed by Santos et al. (2008) without $H(z)$ data. In the ($Ω_m, α$) plane, it is found that such parameters are now restricted on the intervals $0.66 \leq α\leq 1.0$ and $0.27 \leq Ω_m \leq 0.37$ within 95.4% confidence level (2$σ$), and, therefore, fully compatible with the homogeneous case. The basic conclusion is that a joint analysis involving $H(z)$ data can indirectly improve our knowledge about the influence of the inhomogeneities. However, this happens only because the $H(z)$ data provide tighter constraints on the matter density parameter $Ω_m$.

preprint2011arXivOpen 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.