Paper detail

The Age-Redshift Relationship of Old Passive Galaxies

We use 32 age measurements of passively evolving galaxies as a function of redshift to test and compare the standard model ($Λ$CDM) with the $R_{\rm h}=ct$ Universe. We show that the latter fits the data with a reduced $χ^2_{\rm dof}=0.435$ for a Hubble constant $H_{0}= 67.2_{-4.0}^{+4.5}$ km $\rm s^{-1}$ $\rm Mpc^{-1}$. By comparison, the optimal flat $Λ$CDM model, with two free parameters (including $Ω_{\rm m}=0.12_{-0.11}^{+0.54}$ and $H_{0}=94.3_{-35.8}^{+32.7}$ km $\rm s^{-1}$ $\rm Mpc^{-1}$), fits the age-\emph{z} data with a reduced $χ^2_{\rm dof}=0.428$. Based solely on their $χ^2_{\rm dof}$ values, both models appear to account for the data very well, though the optimized $Λ$CDM parameters are only marginally consistent with those of the concordance model ($Ω_{\rm m}=0.27$ and $H_{0}= 70$ km $\rm s^{-1}$ $\rm Mpc^{-1}$). Fitting the age-$z$ data with the latter results in a reduced $χ^2_{\rm dof}=0.523$. However, because of the different number of free parameters in these models, selection tools, such as the Akaike, Kullback and Bayes Information Criteria, favour $R_{\rm h}=ct$ over $Λ$CDM with a likelihood of $\sim 66.5\%-80.5\%$ versus $\sim 19.5\%-33.5\%$. These results are suggestive, though not yet compelling, given the current limited galaxy age-$z$ sample. We carry out Monte Carlo simulations based on these current age measurements to estimate how large the sample would have to be in order to rule out either model at a $\sim 99.7\%$ confidence level. We find that if the real cosmology is $Λ$CDM, a sample of $\sim 45$ galaxy ages would be sufficient to rule out $R_{\rm h}=ct$ at this level of accuracy, while $\sim 350$ galaxy ages would be required to rule out $Λ$CDM if the real Universe were instead $R_{\rm h}=ct$.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.