Paper detail

Slope evolution of GRB correlations and cosmology

Gamma -ray bursts (GRBs) observed up to redshifts $z>9.4$ can be used as possible probes to test cosmological models. Here we show how changes of the slope of the {\it luminosity $L^*_X$ -break time $T^*_a$} correlation in GRB afterglows, hereafter the LT correlation, affect the determination of the cosmological parameters. With a simulated data set of 101 GRBs with a central value of the correlation slope that differs on the intrinsic one by a $5σ$ factor, we find an overstimated value of the matter density parameter, $Ω_M$, compared to the value obtained with SNe Ia, while the Hubble constant, $H_0$, best fit value is still compatible in 1$σ$ compared to other probes. We show that this compatibility of $H_0$ is due to the large intrinsic scatter associated with the simulated sample. Instead, if we consider a subsample of high luminous GRBs ($HighL$), we find that both the evaluation of $H_0$ and $Ω_M$ are not more compatible in 1$σ$ and $Ω_M$ is underestimated by the $13\%$. However, the $HighL$ sample choice reduces dramatically the intrinsic scatter of the correlation, thus possibly identifying this sample as the standard canonical `GRBs' confirming previous results presented in Dainotti et al. (2010,2011). Here, we consider the LT correlation as an example, but this reasoning can be extended also for all other GRB correlations. In literature so far GRB correlations are not corrected for redshift evolution and selection biases, therefore we are not aware of their intrinsic slopes and consequently how far the use of the observed correlations can influence the derived `best' cosmological settings. Therefore, we conclude that any approach that involves cosmology should take into consideration only intrinsic correlations not the observed ones.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.