Статья

TDCOSMO

Martin MillonInstitute of Physics, Laboratory of Astrophysics, Ecole Polytech-nique Fdrale de Lausanne (EPFL), Observatoire de Sauverny, 1290 Versoix, SwitzerlandA. GalanInstitute of Physics, Laboratory of Astrophysics, Ecole Polytech-nique Fdrale de Lausanne (EPFL), Observatoire de Sauverny, 1290 Versoix, SwitzerlandF. CourbinInstitute of Physics, Laboratory of Astrophysics, Ecole Polytech-nique Fdrale de Lausanne (EPFL), Observatoire de Sauverny, 1290 Versoix, SwitzerlandTommaso TreuDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USAS. H. SuyuX. DingDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USASimon BirrerKavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology and Depart-ment of Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USAG. C.-F. ChenAnowar J. ShajibDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USADominique SluseSTAR Institute, Quartier Agora -Alle du six Aot, 19c B-4000 Lige, BelgiumK. C. WongKavli IPMU (WPI), UTIAS, The University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8583, JapanA. AgnelloDARK, Niels Bohr Institute, Lyngbyvej 2, 2100 Copenhagen, Den-markM. W. AugerInstitute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0HA, UKE. J. Buckley-GeerFermi National Accelerator Laboratory, PO Box 500, Batavia, IL 60510, USAJ. H. H. ChanInstitute of Physics, Laboratory of Astrophysics, Ecole Polytech-nique Fdrale de Lausanne (EPFL), Observatoire de Sauverny, 1290 Versoix, SwitzerlandT. CollettUniversity of Portsmouth, Institute of Cosmology and Gravitation, Portsmouth PO1 3FX, UKC. D. FassnachtDepartment of Physics, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USAS. HilbertMax-Planck-Institut fr Astrophysik, Karl-Schwarzschild-Str. 1, 85748 Garching, GermanyL. V. E. KoopmansKapteyn Astronomical Institute, University of Groningen, PO Box 800, 9700 AV Groningen, The NetherlandsV. MottaInstituto de Fsica y Astronoma, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Valparaso, Avda. Gran Bretaa 1111, Valparaso, ChileS. MukherjeeSTAR Institute, Quartier Agora -Alle du six Aot, 19c B-4000 Lige, BelgiumC. E. RusuNational Astronomical Observatory of Japan, 2-21-1 Osawa, Mitaka, Tokyo 181-8588, JapanA. SonnenfeldLeiden Observatory, Leiden University, Niels Bohrweg 2, 2333 CA, Leiden, The NetherlandsC. SpinielloEuropean Southern Observatory, Karl-Schwarschild-Str. 2, 85748 Garching, GermanyL. Van de VyvereSTAR Institute, Quartier Agora -Alle du six Aot, 19c B-4000 Lige, Belgium

2020en

ABI

Аннотация

Time-delay cosmography of lensed quasars has achieved 2.4% precision on the measurement of the Hubble constant, H 0 . As part of an ongoing effort to uncover and control systematic uncertainties, we investigate three potential sources: 1- stellar kinematics, 2- line-of-sight effects, and 3- the deflector mass model. To meet this goal in a quantitative way, we reproduced the H0LiCOW/SHARP/STRIDES (hereafter TDCOSMO) procedures on a set of real and simulated data, and we find the following. First, stellar kinematics cannot be a dominant source of error or bias since we find that a systematic change of 10% of measured velocity dispersion leads to only a 0.7% shift on H 0 from the seven lenses analyzed by TDCOSMO. Second, we find no bias to arise from incorrect estimation of the line-of-sight effects. Third, we show that elliptical composite (stars + dark matter halo), power-law, and cored power-law mass profiles have the flexibility to yield a broad range in H 0 values. However, the TDCOSMO procedures that model the data with both composite and power-law mass profiles are informative. If the models agree, as we observe in real systems owing to the “bulge-halo” conspiracy, H 0 is recovered precisely and accurately by both models. If the two models disagree, as in the case of some pathological models illustrated here, the TDCOSMO procedure either discriminates between them through the goodness of fit, or it accounts for the discrepancy in the final error bars provided by the analysis. This conclusion is consistent with a reanalysis of six of the TDCOSMO (real) lenses: the composite model yields H 0 = 74.0 −1.8 +1.7 km s −1 Mpc −1 , while the power-law model yields 74.2 −1.6 +1.6 km s −1 Mpc −1 . In conclusion, we find no evidence of bias or errors larger than the current statistical uncertainties reported by TDCOSMO.

Перевод пока недоступен

Идентификаторы

DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937351

Цитирования и источники

Цитирований: 2Использованных источников: 0

Показатели — AkademScholar