Paper detail

Relativistic cosmology number densities in void-Lemaitre-Tolman-Bondi models

The goal of this work is to compute the number density of far-IR selected galaxies in the comoving frame and along the past lightcone of observationally constrained LTB models and to compare those results with their standard model counterparts. We derived integral number densities and differential number densities using different cosmological distance definitions in the LTB models. Then, we computed selection functions and consistency functions for the luminosity functions in the combined fields of the Herschel/PACS evolutionary probe (PEP) survey in both standard and void cosmologies, from which we derived the observed values of the above-mentioned densities. We used the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistics to study both the evolution of the consistency functions and its connection to the evolution of the comoving density of sources. Finally, we fitted the power-law behaviour of the densities along the observer's past lightcone. The analysis of the comoving number density shows that the increased flexibility of the LTB models is not enough to fit the observed redshift evolution of the number counts, if it is specialised to a recent best-fit giant void parametrisation. The results for the power-law fits of the densities along the observer's past lightcone show general agreement across both cosmological models studied here around a slope of -2.5 $\pm$ 0.1 for the integral number density on the luminosity-distance volumes. The differential number densities show much bigger slope discrepancies. We conclude that the differential number densities on the observer's past lightcone were still rendered dependent on the cosmological model by the flux limits of the PEP survey. In addition, we show that an intrinsic evolution of the sources must be assumed to fit the comoving number-density redshift evolution in the giant void parametrisation for the LTB models used in this work.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 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.