Paper detail

Cosmological constraints from supernova data set with corrected redshift

Observations of distant type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia), used as standard candles, support the notion that the Cosmos is filled with a mysterious form of energy, the dark energy. The constraints on cosmological parameters derived from data of SNe Ia and the measurements of the cosmic microwave background anisotropies indicate that the dark energy amounts to roughly 70% of all the energy contained in the Universe. In the hypothesis of a flat Universe, we investigate if the dark energy is really required in order to explain the SNe Ia experimental data, and, in this case, how much of such unknown energy is actually deduced from the analysis of these data and must be introduced in the LambdaCDM model of cosmology. In particular we are interested in verifying if the Einstein-de Sitter model of the expanding Universe is really to be ruled out. By using a fitting procedure based on the Newton method search for a minimum, we reanalyzed the "Union compilation" reported by Kowalski et al. (2008) formed by 307 SNe, obtaining a very different estimate of the dark energy, that is roughly 60%. Furthermore, in order to balance the correction of the apparent magnitude of SNe Ia, due to the dilation or stretching of the corresponding light curve width, we introduce a suitable modified redsfhit. Taking into account this correction, we refitted the Union compilation dataset after a selection cut. The main result that emerges from our analysis is that the values of Omega_m and Omega_Lambda strongly depend on the fitting procedure and the selected sample. In particular, the constraint we obtain on the mass density, normalized by the critical mass density, is Omega_m = 0.7 for a sample of 252, and Omega_m = 1 for a sample of 242 SNe Ia respectively. The latter case does not imply the existence of any additional form of dark energy.

preprint2012arXivOpen 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.