Paper detail

Cosmological test using the Hubble diagram of high-z quasars

It has been known for over three decades that the monochromatic X-ray and UV luminosities in quasars are correlated, though non-linearly. This offers the possibility of using high-z quasars as standard candles for cosmological testing. In this paper, we use a recently assembled, high-quality catalog of 1598 quasars extending all the way to redshift ~6, to compare the predictions of the R_h=ct and LCDM cosmologies. In so doing, we affirm that the parameters characterizing the correlation depend only weakly on the chosen cosmology, and that both models account very well for the data. Unlike LCDM, however, the R_h=ct model has no free parameters for this work, so the Bayesian Information Criterion favours it over LCDM with a relative likelihood of ~88 % versus ~10 %. This result is consistent with the outcome of other comparative tests, many of which have shown that R_h=ct is favoured over the standard model based on a diverse range of observations.

preprint2019arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 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.