NASA/IPAC EXTRAGALACTIC DATABASE
Date and Time of the Query: 2019-05-24 T04:19:49 PDT
Help | Comment | NED Home

For refcode 1992PASP..104..599J:
Retrieve 29 NED objects in this reference.
Please click here for ADS abstract

NED Abstract

Copyright by Astronomical Society of the Pacific. Reproduced by permission
1992PASP..104..599J A Critical Review of Selected Techniques for Measuring Extragalactic Distances GEORGE H. JACOBY Kitt Peak National Observatory, National Optical Astronomy Observatories, P.O. Box 26732, Tucson, Arizona 85726 Electronic mail: gjacoby@noao.edu DAVID BRANCH Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Oklahoma Norman, Oklahoma 73019 Electronic mail: branch@phyast.nhn.uoknor.edu ROBIN CIARDULLO Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Penn State University, 325 Davey Lab, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802 Electronic mail: rbe@astro.psu.edu ROGER L. DAVIES Department of Physics, Astrophysics Group, Oxford University, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH, England Electronic mail: rld@astro.ox.ac.uk WILLIAM E. HARRIS Department of Physics and Astronomy, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4Ml, Canada Electronic mail: harris@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca MICHAEL J. PIERCE Dominion Astrophysical Observatory, Current address: Kitt Peak National Observatory, P.O. Box 26732, Tucson, Arizona 85726 Electronic mail: mpierce@noao.edu CHRISTOPHER J. PRITCHET Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, P.O.B. 3055, Victoria, British Columbia V8W 3P6, Canada Electronic mail: pritchet@clam.phys.uvic.ca JOHN L. TONRY Department of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 Electronic mail: jt@antares.mit.edu DOUGLAS L. WELCH Department of Physics and Astronomy, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4M1, Canada Electronic mail: welch@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca Received 1992 April 30; accepted 1992 June 3 ABSTRACT. We review seven of the most reliable indicators used for deriving distances to galaxies as far away as 100 Mpc: globular-cluster luminosity functions (GCLF), novae, type-Ia supernovae (SN Ia), H I linewidth (Tully-Fisher) relations, planetary-nebula luminosity functions (PNLF), surface-brightness fluctuations (SBF), and fundamental-plane relationships for elliptical galaxies (D_n_-{sigma}). In addition, we examine the use of Cepheid variables since these serve to set zero points for most of the methods. We pay particular attention to the uncertainties inherent in these methods, both internal and external. We then test these uncertainties by comparing distances derived with each technique to distances derived from surface-brightness fluctuations. We find that there are small systematic offsets between the PNLF, GCLF, and SBF methods, with the PNLF and GCLF distances being on average 6% and 13% larger than those of the SBF method. The dispersion between the PNLF and SBF distances is 8%; the GCLF-SBF dispersion is 16%, the SN Ia-SBF dispersion is 28%, the D_n_-{sigma}-SBF dispersion is 26%, and the Tully- Fisher-SBF dispersion is 32%. The latter value drops to 14%, however, when one considers only well-mixed groups, suggesting that the spiral galaxies measured with Tully-Fisher are not always spatially coincident with the groups elliptical galaxies. In the mean, all the methods agree extremely well. We also present a summary of distances to the Virgo cluster. Weighted and unweighted averages of the seven methods yield Virgo distances of 16.0 +/- 1.7 and 17.6 +/- 2.2 Mpc, respectively. The overlap among all the indicators is well within the expected accuracies of the methods. Using the weighted or unweighted Virgo distances to bootstrap to the Coma cluster, we find the Hubble constant to be either 80+/-11 or 73+/-11 km s^-1^ Mpc^-1^, respectively.
Retrieve 29 NED objects in this reference.
Please click here for ADS abstract

Back to NED Home