REVIEW 1 cited by
Cosmic Microwave Background, Accelerating Universe and Inhomogeneous Cosmology
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
abstract
We consider a cosmology in which a spherically symmetric large scale inhomogeneous enhancement or a void are described by an inhomogeneous metric and Einstein's gravitational equations. For a flat matter dominated universe the inhomogeneous equations lead to luminosity distance and Hubble constant formulas that depend on the location of the observer. For a general inhomogeneous solution, it is possible for the deceleration parameter to differ significantly from the FLRW result. The deceleration parameter $q_0$ can be interpreted as $q_0 > 0$ ($q_0=1/2$ for a flat matter dominated universe) in a FLRW universe and be $q_0 < 0$ as inferred from the inhomogeneous enhancement that is embedded in a FLRW universe. A spatial volume averaging of local regions in the backward light cone has to be performed for the inhomogeneous solution at late times to decide whether the decelerating parameter $q$ can be negative for a positive energy condition. The CMB temperature fluctuations across the sky can be unevenly distributed in the northern and southern hemispheres in the inhomogeneous matter dominated solution, in agreement with the analysis of the WMAP power spectrum data by several authors. The model can possibly explain the anomalous alignment of the quadrupole and octopole moments observed in the WMAP data.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
CMB sky for an off-center observer in a local void I: framework for forecasts
An off-center observer in an LTB void would see off-diagonal CMB correlations; the paper develops a Fisher forecast framework and finds S/N > 10 for two illustrative void models with Planck.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.