2007
DOI: 10.1007/s10701-007-9108-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Luminosity Distance, Angular Size and Surface Brightness in Cosmological General Relativity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
21
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
(15 reference statements)
2
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In practice we use a, a small free parameter, to optimize the fits. In CGR the luminosity distance was found [10] to be slightly different to the expression used in the FRW theory. This fact, results from a relativistic effect on the emission times of the photons from the distant source.…”
Section: Comparison With Observationmentioning
confidence: 80%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In practice we use a, a small free parameter, to optimize the fits. In CGR the luminosity distance was found [10] to be slightly different to the expression used in the FRW theory. This fact, results from a relativistic effect on the emission times of the photons from the distant source.…”
Section: Comparison With Observationmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…But we can employ a 'bootstrapping' technique. By substituting the limited redshift solution from (10) into the rhs and assuming the averaged matter density in the universe…”
Section: Extended Redshift Rangementioning
confidence: 99%
“…From this it can be shown [15] that the luminosity L 0 of a source at the present time is related to the luminosity L of an identical source which emitted at time t by…”
Section: Luminosity Distancementioning
confidence: 95%
“…where (5) and (15) have been used. Substituting (9) in (16) produces gravitational effects on the angular size that can be called lensing.…”
Section: Angular Sizementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This improvement is surprising considering the 11 being outliers which should least impact the robust curve fitting process. None of the models however, return excellent fits with this data as judged by a χ 2 /N-FP of less than 1.35 (Hartnett & Oliveira, 2007). Noteworthy of this data reduction is that the Simple-DE model now presents a better fit than the Analytic-ST, for the reverse is true when all 398 data pairs are (283) and FP the number of free parameters (Kessler et al, 2009).…”
Section: Modeling and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 91%