A Comparison of Cosmological Models Using Strong Gravitational Lensing Galaxies
Fulvio Melia, Jun-Jie Wei, and Xue-Feng Wu

TL;DR
This study compares the standard LCDM cosmology and the R_h=ct universe using a catalog of 69 strong gravitational lensing systems, finding current data insufficient to favor one model but estimating future sample sizes needed for decisive tests.
Contribution
It provides a direct comparison of two cosmological models with lensing data and estimates the sample size required to distinguish them at high confidence.
Findings
Both models fit current lensing data well.
Approximately 200 lenses needed to rule out R_h=ct if LCDM is correct.
Approximately 300 lenses needed to rule out LCDM if R_h=ct is correct.
Abstract
Strongly gravitationally lensed quasar-galaxy systems allow us to compare competing cosmologies as long as one can be reasonably sure of the mass distribution within the intervening lens. In this paper, we assemble a catalog of 69 such systems, and carry out a one-on-one comparison between the standard model, LCDM, and the R_h=ct Universe. We find that both models account for the lens observations quite well, though the precision of these measurements does not appear to be good enough to favor one model over the other. Part of the reason is the so-called bulge-halo conspiracy that, on average, results in a baryonic velocity dispersion within a fraction of the optical effective radius virtually identical to that expected for the whole luminous-dark matter distribution. Given the limitations of doing precision cosmological testing using the current sample, we also carry out Monte Carlo…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
