Mehtapress 2013 Print-ISSN: 2320-6756

J.Phy.Ast. Online-ISSN: 2320-6764

Journal of
FullPhysics
paper &
Astronomy
WWW.MEHTAPRESS.COM
Full Paper
C.C.Onuchukwu1*, A.C.Ezeribe2 Constraining the Hubble parameter using dis-
1
Department of Industrial Physics, tance modulus – Redshift relation
Anambra State University, Uli, (NIGE-
RIA)
2
Department of Physics/Industrial Phys- Abstract
ics, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Using the relation between distance modulus (m – M), redshift (z) and deceleration parameter
(NIGERIA) (q0), obtained using Friedman-Robertson-Walker (FRW) metric, we constrain the Hubble
E-mail: [email protected] parameter (h). Using the mean and the median values of our data obtained from NASA
Extragalactic Database (NED), the value of Hubble parameter we estimated is 0.66  0.11
Received: September 26, 2013 and 0.84  0.11 for q0 = –1 and q0 = 0 respectively. In general, using the minimum and the
Accepted: November 10, 2013 maximum values of the parameter in our data, the value of Hubble parameter we estimated
lies in the range 0.6  0.2  h  2.2  0.7, with an average value of h = 0.67  0.22 – 0.96 0.29,
giving an average age for the universe as 11.4  2.4 – 14.3  2.2 Gyr.
*Corresponding author’s
Name & Address
Key Words
C.C.Onuchukwu Cosmology - Miscellaneous; Astronomical database - Miscellaneous; Method - Statistical; Data
Department of Industrial Physics, Analysis.
Anambra State University, Uli, (NIGE-
RIA)
E-mail: [email protected]

INTRODUCTION the evolution of the universe, the Big Bang Theory is pres-
ently the most acceptable model that described most of
The universe is all of space, time, matter and energy the observational features in the evolution of the universe.
that exist. The ultimate fate of the universe is determined, It explained the universe to have started from an extremely
through its gravity, thus, the amount of matter/energy in hot dense phase called the Planck epoch (all fundamental
the universe is therefore a considerable importance in cos- forces are unified – the period of Theory Of Everything
mology. The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (TOE)) at the end of which gravitational force separated
(WMAP) in collaboration with National Aeronautics and from gauge forces, and passed through the Grand Unifi-
Space Admiration (NASA) in one of their mission esti- cation Epoch and Inflationary Epoch (at the end of which
mated that the universe comprises of about 4.6% of vis- strong forces separated from electroweak force) and the
ible matter, 24% of matter with gravity but do not emit Electroweak Epoch (unification of electromagnetism and
observable light (the dark matter) and about 71.4% was weak nuclear interaction). Other phases include –
attributed to dark energy (possibly anti-gravity) that may Baryogenesis, Hadron Epoch, Lepton Era, Nucleosyn-
be responsible for driving the acceleration of the observed thesis, Photon Era, Recombination Epoch and presently
expansion of the universe[20]. The universe has been ob- Matter Dominated Era[7,14,23-25].
served to be expanding, first suggested by Einstein in his The generally acceptable mathematical theory for study-
general theory of relativity and observed by ing the evolution of the universe is general relativity[9].
Hubble[17,21,29,30]. General relativity is the theory of gravitation, in which
Amongst the different models proposed to explain gravitational effects between masses results from warping
Full Paper JOPA, 2(4) 2013

of space-time by the masses. In a uniform universe, gen- deceleration parameter (q0) of the universe to constrain
eral relativity has a simple solution for the evolution of the the Hubble constant for a large database obtained from
geometry of the universe (contraction or expansion) which NED and possibly trace the evolution of the Hubble pa-
depends on its content and past history[29]. In the presence rameter as a function of redshift (H(z)).
of enough matter, the expansion will slow or even be-
come a contraction. On the other hand, the dark energy THEORETICAL RELATIONSHIPS
(cosmological constant ()) drives the universe towards
increasing expansion[29]. The current rate of expansion is The evolutionary trend of the universe has been mod-
usually expressed as Hubble constant (H0) with an esti- eled by using the density parameter (), determine by the
mated value of H0 = 100h kms-1 Mpc-1, with the Hubble density of the universe, the deceleration parameter (q0)
parameter (h) having values of h = 0.5 – 1.0[24,25]. and the Hubble constant (H0). The Hubble constant is an
One of the fundamental goals of cosmology is to important parameter in cosmology as it not only deter-
determine the expansion rate of the universe. Various mines its expansion rate, it also set limit to the possible
methods that have been applied include: age, critical density and size of the observable universe.
(1) The use of distant Type 1a supernovae (SN 1a) as The velocity (v) of the expansion of the universe has been
standard candles[22,2,8,31]. The apparent peak magnitude defined by Hubble[16] as
of these supernovae yields a relative luminosity dis- v(t) = H0(t)d (1)
tance dL as a function of redshift from which the where d is the radius of the expanding universe. The size
Hubble constant is estimated[27,28,32]. of the universe is unknown, yet it undergoes expansion or
(2) Large galaxy surveys for mapping of cosmic distances contraction, thus, the evolution of the universe can be ex-
and expansion, by using the large scale clustering pat- press in terms of cosmic scale factor (a(t)) as
tern of galaxies which contains the signature of Baryon
Acoustic Oscillation (BAOs). BAO refers to the regu- (2)
lar periodic fluctuations in the density of the visible
baryonic matter of the universe, caused by acoustic In terms of the cosmic expansion factor (R0), at the
waves which existed in the early universe. By looking time (t0), the Hubble constant is given by (e.g.[24])
at large scale clustering of galaxies, a preferred length-
scale which was imprinted in the distribution of pho- (3)
tons and baryons propagated by the sound waves in
where is the first time derivative of R0. The cosmic
the relativistic plasma of the early universe, can be
calibrated by the observation of Cosmic Background scale factor affect all distances, thus, the wavelength (e)
Microwave Radiation (CMBR) and applied as cos- of a photon emitted at time of emission (te) and observed
mological standard rod (e.g.[1,5,19]). at another time (t0), will be (e.g.[24])
(3) Other test include the redshift-angular size test, galaxy
(4)
cluster gas mass fraction, strong gravitational lensing
test and structure formation test, these test generally where 0 is the wavelength of the observed photon at
constrain cosmological parameters as a function of time (t0). The cosmological redshift (z) is usually given by
redshift (see review by Samushia & Rastra[26]). (e.g.[24])
Several decades have passed since Hubble published
the correlation between distances to galaxies and their ex- (5)
pansion velocities, but establishing an accurate cosmologi-
cal distance scale and value for the Hubble constant (H0) where d is radius of the universe centered on the observer
have proved challenging. The value of H0 has evolved at time t0, and c is the speed of photons. Allowing for
from H0 = 500 kms-1 Mps-1 recorded by Hubble[17] to a some form of time evolution of the expansion factor
well-known range of range of H0 = 50 - 100 kms-1 Mps- (R(t)), we expand it using Taylor series. Following Roos[24]
1[3]
. The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) gave a more spe- we can for t in general write
cific value of H0 = 70 - 80  10%[11], while the WAMP
(6)
data give H0 = 72  5 kms-1 Mps-1, m = 0.3, and  =
0.7[30], where m is relative matter density (both luminous Making use of the definition of equation (3), equa-
and dark matter) and  is the relative dark energy den- tion (6) implies that to a second order expansion, the cos-
sity. mic scale factor can be written as
In this article, we which to use the dependence of
observed distance modulus (m – M) on redshift (z) and
FP 141
JOPA, 2(4) 2013 . Full Paper

(e.g.[24])
(7)
(16)
From equation (3), we can write For an expanding universe parameterized by the cos-
(8) mic scale factor (a(t)), in which photons are redshifted and
The deceleration parameter (q) which measure the rate suffer from energy effect, if the apparent brightness of a
of slowing down of the expansion factor is defined galaxy is Ba, then its proper distance is given by (e.g.[24])
(e.g.[24]) by (17)
Equating Ba = Bo, implies that dL = (1 + z)dp. Thus, the
(9)
luminosity distance in terms of redshift is given by
Makin use of equations (3), (4), (7) and (9) in equation
(5), the cosmological redshift can be expressed as (18)

In terms of distance modulus (m – M), the luminosity

(10)
distance to a source is given by (e.g.[15])
making use of the series expansion
(19)
, equation (10) can be approxi-
mated to Substituting equation (18) into equation (19), we have
(20)
(11)

In obtaining equation (11), we made use of terms where , and H0 =

only to the second order in t. Inverting equation (11), 100h kms-1 Mpc-1 (e.g.[24]) and in S.I is given by H0 = 3.241h
making use of equation (3), we have H0 in terms of red- x 10-18 S-1. For q0 = 0 (e.g.[18] – matter dominated uni-
shift (z) as verse)
(12) (21a)

For an isotropic and homogeneous universe, the For q0 = –1 (e.g.[18] – vacuum energy dominated uni-
Robertson–Walker metric in Minkowiski space-time best verse)
describe the geometry of space given by (e.g.[24]) f(z) = 5 log z + 5 log(1 + z) (21b)
Equation (20) provides a way to constrain the Hubble
(13)
parameter (h) for a given sample of sources with ob-
where ds is the invariant line element,  is the dimension- served redshift and distance modulus.
less comoving coordinate, k is the curvature parameter, 
and  are spherical coordinate points (polar and azimuthal ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
angle respectively). In such homogenous isotropic universe,
photons propagates along null geodesic given by ds2 = 0, The data used in this analysis were sourced from the
and along the line of sight of an observer,  and  are NASA Extragalactic Database (NED). We selected sources
kept constant. Thus, the observed proper distance (dp) to with observed distance modulus (m - M) and redshift (z).
a galaxy for a flat universe with k = 0 is given by (e.g.[24]) The sample consists of 11 585 sources which is spread
over 0.00016  z  8.26. Due to large volume of data, we
(14) binned the sources into various redshift bin widths to en-
able fair representation of sources in each bin.
Using equation (12) in equation (14), the proper dis-
The binning ranges, the mean, median values of each
tance in terms of redshift (z) to the lowest order in (t0 – te)
bin size and the estimated Hubble parameter and esti-
is given by
mated age of the universe from Hubble parameter based
on equation (21) are shown in Table 1. The plot of m - M
(15)
against f(z) for all the sources are shown in figures 1 and 2
The first term on the right of equation (15) gives the for q0 = 0 and q0 = 1 respectively, the error bars are errors
Hubble linear law, while the second term measures the associated with the distance modulus. A linear fit to the
deviation from linearity to lowest order depending on the plot gives: for q0 = 0, we have m - M = (1.02  0.07) f(z) +
value of q0. 43.23  0.25, which gives h = 0.93  0.1; for q0 = –1, we
The luminosity distance (dL) to a galaxy of absolute have m - M = (0.95  0.07) f(z) + 42.76  0.20, which gives
luminosity (L) with observed brightness (Bo) is given by h = 0.75  0.07. In general, using the minimum and the
FP 142
Full Paper JOPA, 2(4) 2013

maximum values of the parameter in our data, the value against different redshift (z) bins to check the dependence
of Hubble parameter we estimated lies in the range 0.6  of the Hubble parameter on different epoch (shown in
0.2  h  2.2  0.7, with an average value of h = 0.67  figure 3). The plot showed an exponential dependence of
0.22 - 0.96  0.29, giving an average age for the universe h on z, with the best fit being h = (0.71  0.36)e(0.21  0.09)z
as 11.4  2.4 - 14.3  2.2 Gyr. and h = (0.65  0.27)e(0.11  0.07)z for q0 = – 1 and q0 = 0
We also plotted the estimated Hubble parameter (h) respectively.

Figure 1 : Plot of m - M against f(z) for q0 = 0

Figure 2 : Plot of m - M against f(z) for q0 = -1

Figure 3 : The plot of estimated hubble parameter (h) against redshift (z)
FP 143
JOPA, 2(4) 2013 . Full Paper

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Series in High Energy Physics, Cosmology and Gravitation,
253, (2002).
The value of Hubble constant (H0) we estimated (i.e. [8] A.Conley, M.Sullivan; Astrophysics Source Code Library,
converting the Hubble parameter (h) to Hubble constant) 111, 38 (2011).
[9] A.Einstein; 1916 in ‘The principle of relativity’ with notes
lies in the range of 60  20 kms-1 Mpc-1  H0  220  70
by A.Sommerfeld; Dover Publication INC, USA, 216 (1923).
kms-1 Mpc-1 with an average value of H0 = 67  22 - 96 
[10] O.Farooq, B.Rastra; Modern Physics D., 21, 1 (2012).
29 kms-1 Mpc-1. The mean value of H0 we estimated is in [11] W.L.Freedman; ASP Conference, 245, 542 (2012).
reasonable agreement with the HST value of H0 = 70 - [12] W.L.Freedman, B.F.Madore, V.Scowcroft, C.Burns,
82  10% kms-1 Mpc-1 recorded by Freedman[11]. Our re- A.Monson, S.E.Persson, M.Seibert, J.Rigby; ApJ, 758, 10
sult in general is also in agreement with results obtained (2012).
from other works in literature e.g. H0 = 50 - 100 kms-1 [13] A.H.Guth; Physical Review D., 23, 347 (1981).
Mpc-1 by Assis et al.[3], H0 = 72  5 kms-1 Mpc-1 from WMAP [14] E.R.Harrison; Masks of the Universe, Cambridge Univer-
data by Spergel et al.[30], by sity Press, UK, Second Edition, 351 (2003).
Aviles et al.[4], H0 = 79  30% kms-1 Mpc-1 by Blinnikov et [15] D.W.Hogg; Distance Measure in Cosmology, Institute for
al.[6], H0 = 74  2.5 kms-1 Mpc-1 by Lima et al.[18] similar to Advance Study, Olden Lane, Princeton Press, 98 (1998).
[16] E.P.Hubble; Cepheid in Spiral Nebulae, American Astro-
H0 = 74  2.5 kms-1 Mpc-1 by Freedman et al.[12] and H0 =
nomical Society, 33, 139 (1925).
68.9  7.1 kms-1 Mpc-1 by Reid et al.[20]. The limit of the
[17] E.P.Hubble; Proceeding of the National Academy of Sci-
range 60 kms-1 Mpc-1  H0  220 kms-1 Mpc-1 is also in agree- ence of USA, 15, 168 (1929).
ment with H0 = 60 - 220 kms-1 Mpc-1 obtained by Farooq [18] J.A.S.Lima, J.F.Jesus, R.C.Santos, M.S.S.Gill; A&A, 4, 46
& Rastra[10]. (2012).
Our plot of Hubble parameter (h) against redshift (z) [19] N.Padmanabhan, X.Xu, D.J.Eisenstein, R.Scalzo,
indicates that h depends stronger on z for q0 = -1 than for A.J.Cuesta, K.T.Mehta, E.Kazin; MNRAS, 427, 2132 (2012).
q0 = 0, with an exponential dependence on redshift, an [20] M.J.Reid, J.A.Braatz, J.J.Condon, K.Y.Lo, C.Y.Kuo,
indication that the Hubble constant (H0) is a function of C.M.V.Impwllizzeri, C.Henkel; APJ, 767, 154 (2013).
time an indication that the earlier universe expanded faster [21] A.G.Reiss, L.Marci, S.Casertano, H.Lampelt, H.C.Ferguson,
(assuming redshift indicates the time evolution of the uni- A.V.Fillipenko, S.W.Jha, W.Li, R.Chornock, J.M.Silverman;
APJ, 732, 129 (2011).
verse). The generally acceptable standard theory of the
[22] A.G.Reiss, A.V.Fillipenko, P.Challis, A.Clocchiattia,
early universe – inflationary theory[13], incorporates an ex- A.Dierrcks, P.M.Garnavich, R.L.Gilliland, C.J.Hogan,
ponential increase in the very early evolution of the uni- S.W.Jha, R.P.Kirshner, B.Leibundgut, M.M.Phillips, D.Reiss,
verse. B.P.Schmidt, R.A.Schommer, R.C.Smith, J.Spyromilio,
In conclusion, using the observed distance modulus C.Stubbs, N.B.Suntzeff, J.Torny; APJ, 116, 1009 (1998).
and redshift, we estimated Hubble parameter, for differ- [23] I.Robson; Active Galactic Nuclei, Praxis Publishing Ltd, The
ent assumed energy densities of the universe represented White House Eastergate, Chichester, West Sussex, England,
by the deceleration parameter (q0). The age of the uni- 310 (1996).
verse estimated from the Hubble parameter suggests that [24] M.Roos; Introduction to Cosmology, Third Edition, John
the universe is ~11.4  2.4 - 14.3  2.2 Gyr old with the Wiley & Sons, Chichester, West Sussex, England, 287 (2003).
possible limit to the edge of the observable universe of d [25] B.Ryden; Introduction to Cosmology, Ohio State Univer-
sity Press, 163 (2006).
~ 5000 Mpc.
[26] L.Samushia, B.Rastra; APJ, 650, L5 (2006).
[27] A.Shafieloo, C.Clarkson; Physical Review D., 81, 83 (2010).
REFERENCES [28] J.Sollerman, M.Ergon, C.Inserra, S.Valenti, P.A.Wilson,
S.Jon Juliusson, H.Holma, M.Ingemyr, O.Saxen,
[1] L.Anderson, E.Aubourg, S.Bailey, D.Bizyaev, et al., (75 co- L.Haukanes; Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, 2068(1),
authors); MNRAS, 427, 3435 (2012). 32 (2009).
[2] R.Amanuallah, C.Lidman, D.Rubin, et al., (42 co-authors); [29] D.N.Spergel, M.Bolte, W.Freedman; Proceeding of National
APJ, 716, 712 (2012). Academy of Science, USA, 94(13), 6579 (1997).
[3] A.K.T.Assis, M.C.D.Neves, D.S.L.Soares; ASP Conf., 413(2), [30] D.N.Spergel, L.Verde, H.V.Peiris, E.Komatsu, M.R.Nolta,
225 (2009). C.L.Bennett, M.Halpern, G.Hinshaw, N.Jarosik, A.Kogut,
[4] A.Aviles, C.Gruber, O.Luongo, H.Quevedo; Physical Re- M.Limon, S.S.Meyer, L.Page, G.S.Tucker, J.L.Weiland,
view D., 86, 123516 (2012). E.Wollack, E.L.Wright; APJSS, 148, 175 (2003).
[5] C.Blake, S.Brough, M.Colles, et al., (22 co-authors); MNRAS, [31] K.Suzuki, H.Nagai, M.Kino, J.Kataoka, K.Asada, A.Doi,
425, 405 (2012). M.Inoue, M.Orienti, G.Giovanni, M.Giroletti,
[6] S.Blinnikov, M.Potashov, P.Baklanov, A.Dolgov; Journal A.Lähteenmäki, M.Tornikoski, J.León-Tavares, U.Bach,
of Experimental and Theoretical Physics, 96, 153 (2012). S.Kameno, H.Kobayashi; APJ, 18, 251 (2011).
[7] S.Bonometto, V.Gorini, U.Moschella; Modern Cosmology [32] Y.Wang, M.Tergmark; Physical Review D., 71, 167 (2005).

FP 144