Paper detail

Measuring the cosmological bulk flow using the peculiar velocities of supernovae

We study large-scale coherent motion in our universe using the existing Type IA supernovae data. If the recently observed bulk flow is real, then some imprint must be left on supernovae motion. We run a series of Monte Carlo Markov Chain runs in various redshift bins and find a sharp contrast between the z < 0.05 and z > 0.05 data. The$z < 0.05 data are consistent with the bulk flow in the direction (l,b)=({290^{+39}_{-31}}^{\circ}, {20^{+32}_{-32}}^{\circ}) with a magnitude of v_bulk = 188^{+119}_{-103} km/s at 68% confidence. The significance of detection (compared to the null hypothesis) is 95%. In contrast, z > 0.05 data (which contains 425 of the 557 supernovae in the Union2 data set) show no evidence for bulk flow. While the direction of the bulk flow agrees very well with previous studies, the magnitude is significantly smaller. For example, the Kashlinsky, et al.'s original bulk flow result of v_bulk > 600 km/s is inconsistent with our analysis at greater than 99.7% confidence level. Furthermore, our best-fit bulk flow velocity is consistent with the expectation for the ΛCDM model, which lies inside the 68% confidence limit.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors3 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.