Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 36 references

Kinematically induced dipole anisotropy in line-emitting galaxy number counts and line intensity maps

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Line-emitting galaxy counts and intensity maps carry a Doppler dipole that measures the solar velocity.

desk verdict The kinematic dipole derivation for line intensity maps is clean and new, but the SPHEREx number-count forecast is built on a flux-integrated formula that omits the Doppler-boosted flux threshold, so its quoted reach is not yet reliable. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.09800 v1 pith:JMK4JPY2 submitted 2025-01-16 astro-ph.CO

Kyungjin Ahn This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords kinematicdipoleanisotropyline-emittinggalaxiesgalaxynumbercountslineintensitymappingsolarvelocityDopplereffectSPHEREx
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that the same Doppler effect that produces the cosmic microwave background dipole also imprints a dipole on spectrally resolved maps of line-emitting galaxies and on line intensity maps. For galaxy number counts the dipole amplitude is $N'_{\rm dip}=N\,(1-\partial \ln N/\partial \ln \nu)\,\beta$, and for intensity maps it is $I'_{\rm dip}/I=(3-\partial \ln I/\partial \ln \nu)\,\beta$, with $\beta$ the solar velocity against the large-scale-structure frame. Because each observing frequency corresponds to a distinct redshift, measuring the dipole at many frequencies yields redundant estimates of $\beta$, which is why the paper forecasts that such surveys could measure the solar velocity precisely and even constrain how the line luminosity density evolves. The paper concludes that SPHEREx's full-sky spectroscopic galaxy counts are the most promising near-term probe, with full-sky line intensity mapping a viable alternative.

What carries the argument

The central object is the kinematic dipole derived from frame transformations between the background-rest frame and the observer-rest frame. The machinery is Lorentz invariance of the source number, $N'\,d\nu'\,d\Omega'=N\,d\nu\,d\Omega$, and Liouville's theorem for specific intensity, $I'_{\nu'}/I_\nu=(\nu'/\nu)^3$, combined with the redshift relation $1+z'=\gamma(1-\beta\mu')(1+z)$ and first-order Taylor expansion of the monopole field in the observer-frame variables. What does the work in the argument is that the dipole amplitude is proportional not to the monopole itself but to the logarithmic spectral slope at the observing frequency, which is exactly the quantity that carries the astrophysical and cosmological redshift evolution of the sources.

What would settle it

A decisive test is to observe the line-galaxy number-count dipole with SPHEREx in several independent frequency bins and check whether each bin yields the same $\beta$ to within the quoted uncertainties; because the formula predicts redundant estimates of a single $\beta$, any statistically significant bin-to-bin scatter that tracks the spectral-slope factor would falsify Eq. (8). A second, sharper check is to include the flux-threshold selection term in a flux-limited version of the forecast and see whether the predicted dipole, not just the fitted $\beta$, matches the measured amplitude.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Stated in the paper's own terms: the dipole anisotropy in line-emitting galaxy number counts and line intensity maps is kinematically induced and its amplitude is fixed by the solar velocity times a logarithmic derivative of the monopole with respect to frequency. Using Lorentz invariance of the Lagrangian number of sources, $N'(\nu',\hat{n}')\,d\nu'\,d\Omega'=N(\nu)\,d\nu\,d\Omega$, the cumulative number-count dipole is Eq. (8): $N'_{\rm dip}=N\left(1-\partial\ln N/\partial\ln\nu\right)\beta$. For diffuse line intensity, Liouville's theorem, $I'_{\nu'}/I_\nu=(\nu'/\nu)^3$, gives Eq. (12): $I'_{\nu',\rm dip}/I_{\nu'}=\left(3-\partial\ln I_\nu/\partial\ln\nu\right)\beta$, equivalently $\left(3+\partial\ln\rho_c/\partial\ln(1+z)-\partial\ln H/\partial\ln(1+z)\right)\beta$. These expressions are the line analogues of the classic continuum count dipole $[2+x(1+\alpha)]\beta$, with the spectral slope replacing the flux-index term. Multi-frequency observations are independent because different frequencies probe different redshifts, so the same $\beta$ can be estimated redundantly.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the forecast for galaxy number counts can treat the sample as complete at all line fluxes, so the Doppler boost that pushes faint galaxies above the detection threshold adds no extra selection term to the dipole; if real surveys are flux-limited, that omitted term changes the predicted amplitude and the required sensitivity.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A full-sky spectroscopic survey such as SPHEREx, with roughly $4.5\times10^8$ galaxies across $z\simeq0$ to $2$, can measure the line-galaxy count dipole with per-redshift-bin errors near a few tens of percent, improving with the square root of the number of bins.
  • Each observing frequency is a separate estimator of $\beta$, so stacking many line frequencies removes the shot-noise floor and gives a precision solar-velocity measurement independent of the CMB dipole.
  • In line intensity mapping, the dipole is degenerate between $\beta$ and the evolution of the comoving luminosity density $\rho_c$, but with priors on the Hubble parameter and cosmology the dipole can constrain $\beta$ and the astrophysical parameters $\gamma_1$, $\gamma_2$, and $z_t$ of the line-luminosity evolution.
  • A dipole-only LIM measurement with 10% per-bin errors and existing cosmological priors can determine $\beta$ to about 10% and the astrophysical parameters to roughly 3 to 10% in the paper's Fisher forecast.
  • If the measured line dipoles disagree with the CMB value of $\beta$, the redundancy across frequencies sharpens the existing dipole tension and could point to a local matter rest frame moving relative to the CMB frame.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial extension: because the observer-frame redshift $z'$ itself is Doppler-shifted, a line survey's redshift bin assignment affects the inferred monopole slope; the paper's formulas are first order in $\beta$, and a full treatment might need to account for $O(\beta^2)$ corrections in the forecast errors.
  • Editorial extension: the same derivation should hold for absorption lines such as the Ly$\alpha$ forest, where the observable is a decrement rather than an emission; the dipole would then constrain the radial velocity field of the absorbing gas rather than the luminosity density.
  • Editorial extension: the number-count formula (8) omits a flux-selection term; in a flux-limited line survey the detection threshold is Doppler boosted by the same factor that boosts observed fluxes, adding a term proportional to the logarithmic slope of the cumulative flux function, which could be tested by comparing Eq. (8) with a full flux-limited calculation at the SPHEREx sensitivity limit.
  • Editorial extension: the paper's Fisher forecasts assume fixed bin assignments and a specific parametric form for $\rho_c(z)$; a nonparametric reconstruction of the luminosity-density slope from the dipole across many frequencies would provide a model-independent cross-check of the star-formation history.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper derives the kinematic dipole anisotropy expected in spectral-line galaxy number counts and line intensity maps, assuming the observer's motion relative to the cosmic rest frame. The main theoretical results are Eq. (8) for the number-count dipole, N'_dip = N (1 - d ln N / d ln nu) beta, and Eq. (12) for the intensity-map dipole, I'_dip / I = (3 - d ln I / d ln nu) beta. The paper then forecasts detectability with SPHEREx galaxy counts and with future full-sky line intensity mapping surveys, arguing that multi-frequency measurements provide redundant estimates of the solar velocity beta and can constrain the evolution of the line luminosity density. The discussion also touches on the possible relevance to the local-universe dipole tension and to non-standard cosmology.

Significance. The theoretical framework is clear and the application of Lorentz invariance to spectral-line observables is a worthwhile extension of the continuum dipole formalism. The formulas are simple, falsifiable, and provide a new route to measuring the kinematic dipole. If the forecasts are reliable, SPHEREx would offer a powerful new probe, potentially illuminating the known tension between the CMB dipole and galaxy-count dipoles. The proposed use of LIM dipole measurements to constrain astrophysical parameters is also novel. However, the number-count forecast currently ignores the flux-threshold selection effect, which is a central component of the SPHEREx-based claim, so the quantitative forecast is not yet trustworthy as written.

major comments (3)
  1. [2.2, Eqs. (7)-(8), and 3.1] Equation (8) is derived for the cumulative count N(nu) = integral dF n(F,nu) with the integral running over all fluxes, but the SPHEREx forecast applies this formula to a flux-limited sample. For a survey with a line-flux threshold F_lim, the observed dipole acquires a selection term: to first order in beta, N'_dip = N(nu') [1 - d ln N / d ln nu + 2 F_lim n(F_lim,nu') / N(nu')] beta, which for a power-law count N(>F) proportional to F^{-x} becomes [1 - d ln N / d ln nu + 2x] beta. The forecast in Eq. (19) and the associated sensitivity requirements should be recomputed with this term. As written, the predicted dipole amplitude for a flux-limited SPHEREx sample is underestimated for x > 0, so the quantitative forecast is not reliable.
  2. [3.1, Eq. (19)] The error propagation from Eq. (18) appears to have an incorrect scaling. Using sigma_N' = sigma_D = sqrt(N'), the correct result is sigma_beta / beta = 1 / (beta |1 - d ln N / d ln nu| sqrt(N')), which scales as |A|^{-1}, not |A|^{-1/2} as written in Eq. (19). Numerically, for N' = 10^6, |A| = 5, and beta = 1.23 x 10^{-3}, the error is about 16%, not 36%. The prefactor and the scaling in Eq. (19) should be corrected, as they affect the discussion of required galaxy numbers.
  3. [3.2, Table 1 and Figs. 2-3] The Fisher forecasts assume a fixed fractional error (3% or 10%) on the LIM dipole ratio per redshift bin, but they do not include the intrinsic dipole anisotropy from large-scale structure. In the local universe, the intrinsic dipole in galaxy counts or intensity maps can be comparable to or larger than the kinematic dipole, as the existing continuum dipole tension illustrates. Without quantifying this contamination, the quoted 1-sigma errors on beta_sun and the astrophysical parameters are optimistic. The authors should either include an estimate of the intrinsic dipole or explicitly state that the forecasts are idealized upper limits on sensitivity.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figure 2 caption] The caption states '1% error on H and DA at each of 40 redshift bins', but Section 3.2.1 specifies 20 redshift bins for H and DA; please correct the caption.
  2. [Figure 3 caption] The caption states '40 redshift bins' but Section 3.2.2 specifies 20 uniformly spaced bins; please correct the caption.
  3. [2.3, text near Eq. (14)] The text uses alpha and beta for the Madau-Dickinson SFR fit parameters, while Eq. (14) and Table 1 use gamma1 and gamma2; please use a single consistent set of symbols.
  4. [3.1, Eq. (19)] The definition of the uncertainty sigma_ext in the sentence following Eq. (18) is a bit vague; clarifying how spectral resolution enters the uncertainty would be helpful.
  5. [Abstract] The final sentence about non-standard cosmology is speculative and not directly supported by the forecasts in the paper; consider softening or clarifying the claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the dipole amplitudes are derived from Lorentz invariance and number conservation, with only minor non-load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Equation (8) is obtained from the Lagrangian conservation law dN'=dN together with the Lorentz transformation relations in Eq. (2), and Eq. (12) follows from the Liouville relation I'_nu'/I_nu=(nu'/nu)^3 plus a Taylor expansion in the observer velocity. Neither amplitude is fitted to the quantity it predicts; the monopole N(nu) and its spectral slope d ln N/d ln nu are inputs from the assumed isotropic BRF field, not outputs of the dipole itself. The forecasts use external fiducial inputs: the rho_c(z) evolution is taken explicitly from the Madau-Dickinson fit to observed star-formation data (Eq. 14), and cosmological priors are from Planck and DESI; the Fisher analysis is a sensitivity forecast, not a reconstruction of the signal from itself. The self-citations to Hotinli & Ahn (2024) and Ahn & Oh (2024) are for standard transformation rules or as background; the transformation rules are also attributed to Bottani et al. (1992) and Rybicki & Lightman (1979), and the paper notes its galaxy-count derivation is 'almost identical to that by Ref. [7]' (Dalang & Bonvin 2022), an independent source. One genuine correctness limitation, which is not circularity, is that Eq. (8) integrates over all fluxes in Eq. (7), so the SPHEREx flux-limited forecast may miss the Doppler-shifted threshold selection term; this affects forecast accuracy but does not make the prediction equivalent to its input.

Assumptions & free parameters 9 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central dipole formulas require only Lorentz invariance and isotropic monopole fields. The forecast uses a larger set of fiducial astrophysical and cosmological parameters from external fits plus an assumed parametric form for rho_c(z). No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (9)
  • gamma1 = 2.7
    SFR broken power-law slope at z < zt, adopted from Madau and Dickinson fit; used as a fiducial in the Fisher forecast and in Eq. (13).
  • gamma2 = -2.9
    SFR broken power-law slope at z > zt, adopted from Madau and Dickinson fit; used as a fiducial in the Fisher forecast.
  • zt = 1.9
    Turnover redshift of the SFR parameterization; used as a fiducial in the Fisher forecast.
  • rho_star(zt) = 0.133 M_sun/yr/Mpc^3
    Normalization of the SFR fit from Madau and Dickinson; enters the monopole normalization but cancels in the dipole ratio, and is used in Fig. 1.
  • w0 = -0.727
    Fiducial dark energy equation-of-state parameter from DESI, used in the Fisher forecast and priors.
  • wa = -1.05
    Fiducial dark energy equation-of-state slope from DESI, used in the CPL parametrization and priors.
  • H0 = 70 km/s/Mpc
    Fiducial Hubble constant from local measurements, used in the E(z) function and priors.
  • Omega_m0 = 0.3
    Fiducial matter density from Planck-based priors, used in the E(z) function.
  • Omega_k0 = 0
    Fiducial curvature density from Planck-based priors, used in the E(z) function.
assumptions (9)
  • domain assumption The universe is homogeneous and isotropic in the background-rest frame (cosmological principle).
    Invoked at the start of Section 2.1; the calculation computes the dipole induced by boosting an otherwise isotropic field.
  • domain assumption The intrinsic dipole from structure formation is negligible compared with the kinematic dipole.
    Section 1 states it is natural to ignore the intrinsic dipole for the CMB, and Section 2.2 assumes an isotropic source distribution in the BRF.
  • domain assumption Line emission is approximated by a Dirac delta profile.
    Section 2.1 states phi(nu) is approximately delta(nu - nu0), ignoring line width and internal velocity structure.
  • standard math Number of sources is conserved under Lorentz transformation.
    Used in Section 2.2 to derive Eqs. (5), (6), and (8) via dN' = dN.
  • standard math Specific intensity transforms by the Liouville theorem with I'/I = (nu'/nu)^3.
    Used in Section 2.3 to derive Eq. (12).
  • domain assumption There is no absorption of the line between source and observer.
    Section 2.3 assumes all gas is comoving and away from the line center, so no absorption occurs.
  • ad hoc to paper The comoving line luminosity density follows the star formation rate density with constant mass-to-light ratio.
    Section 2.3 states that with constant M/L it is reasonable to let rho_c be proportional to rho_star; this is a modeling assumption for forecasts.
  • ad hoc to paper The parametric form of Eq. (13) for the redshift evolution of rho_c is adopted.
    Section 2.3 says Eq. (13) is simply to test the power of the dipole measurement and can be changed if a better prior is available.
  • domain assumption For the Case 1 forecast, H(z) and D_A are assumed measurable with 1% errors.
    Section 3.2.1 assumes an almost ideal situation with 1% errors on H and D_A at each redshift bin; this drives the Fisher forecast.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Kinematically induced dipole anisotropy in line-emitting galaxy number counts and line intensity maps." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JMK4JPY2

@misc{pith2026250109800,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Kinematically induced dipole anisotropy in line-emitting galaxy number counts and line intensity maps},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JMK4JPY2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.09800}
}
read the original abstract

The motion of the solar system against an isotropic radiation background, such as the cosmic microwave background, induces a dipole anisotropy in the background due to the Doppler effect. Flux-limited observation of the continuum radiation from galaxies also has been studied extensively to show a dipole anisotropy due to the Doppler effect and the aberration effect. We show that a similar dipole anisotropy exists in spectral-line intensity maps, represented as either galaxy number counts or the diffuse intensity maps. The amplitude of these dipole anisotropies is determined by not only the solar velocity against the large-scale structures but also the temporal evolution of the monopole (sky-average) component. Measuring the dipole at multiple frequencies, which have mutually independent origins due to their occurrence from multiple redshifts, can provide a very accurate measure of the solar velocity thanks to the redundant information. We find that such a measurement can even constrain astrophysical parameters in the nearby universe. We explore the potential for dipole measurement of existing and upcoming surveys, and conclude that the spectral number count of galaxies through SPHEREx will be optimal for the first measurement of the dipole anisotropy in the spectral-line galaxy distribution. LIM surveys with reasonable accuracy are also found to be promising. We also discuss whether these experiments might reveal a peculiar nature of our local universe, that seems to call for a non-standard cosmology other than the simple LambdaCDM model as suggested by recent measures of the baryon acoustic oscillation signatures and the Alcock-Paczynski tests.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Yasini, S., Pierpaoli, E.: Beyond the boost: Measuring the intrinsic d ipole of the cosmic microwave background using the spectral distortions of th e monopole and quadrupole. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119(22), 221102 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.119.221102 14

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    Ellis, G.F.R., Baldwin, J.E.: On the expected anisotropy of radio sourc e counts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 206, 377–381 (1984) https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/ 206.2.377

    doi:10.1093/mnras/ 1984

  3. [3]

    Astrophys

    Xia, J.-Q., Viel, M., Baccigalupi, C., De Zotti, G., Matarrese, S., Verde , L.: Pri- mordial Non-Gaussianity and the NRAO VLA Sky Survey. Astrophys . J. Lett. 717(1), 17–21 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1088/2041-8205/717/1/L17

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/717/1/l17 2010

  4. [4]

    Astrophys

    Singal, A.K.: Large peculiar motion of the solar system from the dipo le anisotropy in sky brightness due to distant radio sources. Astrophys. J. 742(2), 23 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1088/2041-8205/742/2/l23

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/742/2/l23 2011

  5. [5]

    Chen, S., Schwarz, D.J.: Angular two-point correlation of NVSS ga laxies revis- ited. Astron. Astrophys. 591, 135 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/ 201526956

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/ 2016

  6. [6]

    Astrophys

    Secrest, N.J., von Hausegger, S., Rameez, M., Mohayaee, R., Sar kar, S., Colin, J.: A Test of the Cosmological Principle with Quasars. Astrophys. J. Le tt. 908(2), 51 (2021) https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/abdd40

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abdd40 2021

  7. [7]

    Dalang, C., Bonvin, C.: On the kinematic cosmic dipole tension. Mon. N ot. R. Astron. Soc. 512(3), 3895–3905 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stac726

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac726 2022

  8. [8]

    et al.: Is the observable universe consistent with the cosmological principle? Class

    Kumar Aluri, P., Cea, P., Chingangbam, P., Chu, M.-C., Clowes, R.G., Hu t- sem´ ekers, D., Kochappan, J.P., Lopez, A.M., Liu, L., Martens, N.C.M. et al.: Is the observable universe consistent with the cosmological principle? Class. Quan- tum Gravity 40(9), 094001 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/acbefc

    doi:10.1088/1361-6382/acbefc 2023

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    Astrophys

    Darling, J.: The universe is brighter in the direction of our motion: G alaxy counts and fluxes are consistent with the cmb dipole. Astrophys. J. Lett. 931(2), 14 (2022) https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ac6f08

    2022 doi

  2. [10]

    Panwar, M., Jain, P., Omar, A.: Colour dependence of dipole in catw ise2020 data. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. Lett. 535(1), 63–69 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1093/ mnrasl/slae093

    2024

  3. [11]

    Tiwari, P., Nusser, A.: Revisiting the nvss number count dipole. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2016(03), 062–062 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/ 2016/03/062

    2016 doi

  4. [12]

    Journal of Cosmology and Astrop article Physics 2022(10), 019 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2022/10/019

    Dom` enech, G., Mohayaee, R., Patil, S.P., Sarkar, S.: Galaxy numb er-count dipole and superhorizon fluctuations. Journal of Cosmology and Astrop article Physics 2022(10), 019 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2022/10/019

    2022 doi

  5. [13]

    et al.: Spherex: Nasa’s near -infrared spectrophotometric all-sky survey

    Crill, B.P., Werner, M., Akeson, R., Ashby, M., Bleem, L., Bock, J.J., B ryan, S., Burnham, J., Byunh, J., Chang, T.-C. et al.: Spherex: Nasa’s near -infrared spectrophotometric all-sky survey. In: Lystrup, M., Perrin, M.D. (eds.) Space 15 Telescopes and Instrumentation 2020: ...

    2020 doi

  6. [14]

    et al.: Improved upper limits on the 21 cm signal power spectrum of neutra l hydrogen at z ≈ 9.1 from lofar

    Mertens, F.G., Mevius, M., Koopmans, L.V.E., Offringa, A.R., Mellema, G., Zaroubi, S., Brentjens, M.A., Gan, H., Gehlot, B.K., Pand ey, V.N. et al.: Improved upper limits on the 21 cm signal power spectrum of neutra l hydrogen at z ≈ 9.1 from lofar. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 49...

    2020 doi

  7. [15]

    In: Advancing Astrophysics with the Square K ilometre Array (AASKA14), p

    Ahn, K., Mesinger, A., Alvarez, M.A., Chen, X.: Probing the first ga laxies and their impact on the intergalactic medium through 21-cm observation s of the cos- mic dawn with the ska. In: Advancing Astrophysics with the Square K ilometre Array (AASKA14), p. 3 (2015). https://do...

    2015 doi

  8. [16]

    Labate, M.G., Waterson, M., Alachkar, B., Hendre, A., Lewis, P., B artolini, M., Dewdney, P.: Highlights of the square kilometre array low frequency (ska-low) telescope. J. Astron. Telesc. Instrum. Syst. 8(01) (2022) https://doi.org/10.1117/ 1.jatis.8.1.011024

    2022

  9. [17]

    Astrophys

    Hotinli, S.C., Ahn, K.: Probing the global 21 cm background by veloc ity-induced dipole and quadrupole anisotropies. Astrophys. J. 964(1), 21 (2024) https://doi. org/10.3847/1538-4357/ad2209

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    Ahn, K., Oh, M.: Probing the global 21-cm signal via the integrate d sachs-wolfe effect on the 21-cm background. Phys. Rev. D 109(4), 043539 (2024) https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.043539

    2024 doi

  11. [19]

    Astrophys

    Bottani, S., Bernardis, P., Melchiorri, F.: On the origin of the dipole anisotropy as determined by quadrupole measurements. Astrophys. J. Lett . 384, 1 (1992) https://doi.org/10.1086/186250

    1992 doi

  12. [20]

    Challinor, A., van Leeuwen, F.: Peculiar velocity effects in high-res olution microwave background experiments. Phys. Rev. D 65(10), 103001 (2002) https:// doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.65.103001

    2002 doi

  13. [21]

    Rybicki, G.B., Lightman, A.P.: Radiative Processes in Astrophysics (1979)

    1979

  14. [22]

    Peacock, J.A.: Cosmological Physics (1999)

    1999

  15. [23]

    Madau, P., Dickinson, M.: Cosmic star-formation history. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 52, 415–486 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-astro-081811- 125615

    2014 doi

  16. [24]

    International Journal of Modern Physics D 10(2), 213–223 (2001) https://doi

    Chevallier, M., Polarski, D.: Accelerating Universes with Scaling Dar k Matter. International Journal of Modern Physics D 10(2), 213–223 (2001) https://doi. org/10.1142/S0218271801000822 16

    2001 doi

  17. [25]

    Linder, E.V.: Exploring the Expansion History of the Universe. Ph ys. Rev. Lett. 90(9), 091301 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.091301

    2003 doi

  18. [26]

    arXiv e-prints, 2405.09762 (2024) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.09762

    Abghari, A., Bunn, E.F., Hergt, L.T., Li, B., Scott, D., Sullivan, R.M., W ei, D.: Reassessment of the dipole in the distribution of quasars on the s ky. arXiv e-prints, 2405.09762 (2024) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.09762

    2024 doi arXiv

  19. [27]

    et al.: The ly α reference sample

    ¨Ostlin, G., Hayes, M., Duval, F., Sandberg, A., Rivera-Thorsen, T., Ma rquart, T., Orlitov´ a, I., Adamo, A., Melinder, J., Guaita, L. et al.: The ly α reference sample. i. survey outline and first results for markarian 259. Astro phys. J. 797(1), 11 (2014) https://doi.org/10....

    2014 doi

  20. [28]

    et al.: The 16th data release of the sloan digital sky surveys: First releas e from the apogee-2 southern survey and full release of eboss spectra

    Ahumada, R., Allende Prieto, C., Almeida, A., Anders, F., Anderson , S.F., Andrews, B.H., Anguiano, B., Arcodia, R., Armengaud, E., Aubert, M. et al.: The 16th data release of the sloan digital sky surveys: First releas e from the apogee-2 southern survey and full release of e...

    2020 doi

  21. [29]

    et al.: Improved constraints on the 21 cm eor power spectrum and the x- ray heating of the igm with hera phase i observations

    HERA Collaboration, Abdurashidova, Z., Adams, T., Aguirre, J.E., Alexander, P., Ali, Z.S., Baartman, R., Balfour, Y., Barkana, R., Beardsley, A.P. et al.: Improved constraints on the 21 cm eor power spectrum and the x- ray heating of the igm with hera phase i observations. Ast...

    2023 doi

  22. [30]

    Astrophys

    Keating, G.K., Marrone, D.P., Bower, G.C., Leitch, E., Carlstrom, J .E., DeBoer, D.R.: Copss ii: The molecular gas content of ten million cubic megaparsec s at redshift z ∼ 3. Astrophys. J. 830(1), 34 (2016) https://doi.org/10.3847/0004- 637X/830/1/34

    2016 doi

  23. [31]

    Astrophys

    Li, T.Y., Wechsler, R.H., Devaraj, K., Church, S.E.: Connecting co in tensity mapping to molecular gas and star formation in the epoch of galaxy as sembly. Astrophys. J. 817(2), 169 (2016) https://doi.org/10.3847/0004-637X/817/2/169

    2016 doi

  24. [32]

    Bassett, B.A., Fantaye, Y., Hlozek, R., Kotze, J.: Fisher matrix p reloaded — fisher4cast. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 20(13), 2559–2598 (2011) https://doi.org/10. 1142/S0218271811020548

    2011

  25. [33]

    et al.: DESI 2024 VI : Cos- mological Constraints from the Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations

    DESI Collaboration, Adame, A.G., Aguilar, J., Ahlen, S., Alam, S., Alex ander, D.M., Alvarez, M., Alves, O., Anand, A., Andrade, U. et al.: DESI 2024 VI : Cos- mological Constraints from the Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations. arXiv e-prints, 2404–03002 (2024) https:...

    2024 doi arXiv

  26. [34]

    Astrophys

    Dong, F., Park, C., Hong, S.E., Kim, J., Hwang, H.S., Park, H., Appleb y, S.: Tomographic Alcock-Paczy´ nski Test with Redshift-space Corre lation Function: Evidence for the Dark Energy Equation-of-state Parameter w > -1. Astrophys. J. 953(1), 98 (2023) https://doi.org/10.3847...

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    e t al.: Planck 2018 results

    Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., Ashdown, M., Aumon t, J., Baccigalupi, C., Ballardini, M., Banday, A.J., Barreiro, R.B., Bartolo, N. e t al.: Planck 2018 results. vi. cosmological parameters. Astron. Ast rophys. 641, 6 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/20...

    2020

  28. [36]

    et al.: The c lustering of galaxies in the sdss-iii baryon oscillation spectroscopic survey: g alaxy clustering measurements in the low-redshift sample of data release 11

    Tojeiro, R., Ross, A.J., Burden, A., Samushia, L., Manera, M., Per cival, W.J., Beutler, F., Brinkmann, J., Brownstein, J.R., Cuesta, A.J. et al.: The c lustering of galaxies in the sdss-iii baryon oscillation spectroscopic survey: g alaxy clustering measurements in the low-re...

    2014 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.