Paper detail

Observational Aspects of an Inhomogeneous Cosmology

One of the biggest mysteries in cosmology is Dark Energy, which is required to explain the accelerated expansion of the universe within the standard model. But maybe one can explain the observations without introducing new physics, by simply taking one step back and re-examining one of the basic concepts of cosmology, homogeneity. In standard cosmology, it is assumed that the universe is homogeneous, but this is not true at small scales (<200 Mpc). Since general relativity, which is the basis of modern cosmology, is a non-linear theory, one can expect some backreactions in the case of an inhomogeneous matter distribution. Estimates of the magnitude of these backreactions (feedback) range from insignificant to being perfectly able to explain the accelerated expansion of the universe. In the end, the only way to be sure is to test predictions of inhomogeneous cosmological theories, such as timescape cosmology, against observational data. If these theories provide a valid description of the universe, one expects aside other effects, that there is a dependence of the Hubble parameter on the line of sight matter distribution. The redshift of a galaxy, which is located at a certain distance, is expected to be smaller if the environment in the line of sight is mainly high density (clusters), rather than mainly low density environment (voids). Here we present a test for this prediction using redshifts and fundamental plane distances of elliptical galaxies obtained from SDSS DR8 data. In order to get solid statistics, which can handle the uncertainties in the distance estimate and the natural scatter due to peculiar motions, one has to systematically study a very large number of galaxies. Therefore, the SDSS forms a perfect basis for testing timescape cosmology and similar theories. The preliminary results of this cosmological test are shown in this contribution.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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.