Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 296

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Surface Brightness Fluctuation Survey of Galaxy Distances. II. Local and Large‐Scale Flows

Open access
Tonry, John L., Blakeslee, John P., Ajhar, Edward A., Dressler, Alan·2000·The Astrophysical Journal

Abstract

We present results from the Surface Brightness Fluctuation (SBF) Survey for the distances to 300 early-type galaxies, of which approximately half are ellipticals. A modest change in the zero point of the SBF relation, derived by using Cepheid distances to spirals with SBF measurements, yields a Hubble constant H 0 = 77 ± 4 ± 7 km s -1 Mpc -1 , somewhat larger than the HST Key Project result. We discuss how this difference arises from a different choice of zero point, a larger sample of galaxies, and a different model for large-scale flows. Our result is 4% larger than found in a recent comparison of the SBF Survey peculiar velocities with predictions derived from the galaxy density field measured by redshift surveys (Blakeslee et al. 1999b). The zero point of the SBF relation is the largest source of uncertainty, and our value for H 0 is subject to all the systematic uncertainties of the Key Project zero point, including a 5% decrease if a metallicity correction for the Cepheids is adopted. To analyze local and large-scale flows—departures from smooth Hubble flow—we use a parametric model for the distribution function of mean velocity and velocity dispersion at each point in space. These models include a uniform thermal velocity dispersion and spherical attractors whose position, amplitude, and radial shape are free to vary. Our modeling procedure performs a maximum likelihood fit of the model to the observations. Our models rule out a uniform Hubble flow as an acceptable fit to the data. Inclusion of two attractors, one of which having a best-fit location coincident with the Virgo cluster and the other having a fit location slightly beyond the Centaurus clusters (which we refer to by convention as the Great Attractor), reduces χ 2 / N from 2.1 to 1.1. The fits to these attractors both have radial profiles such that v ≈ r -1 (i.e., isothermal) over a range of overdensity between about 10 and 1, but fall off more steeply at larger radius. The best-fit value for the small-scale, cosmic thermal velocity is 180 ± 14 km s -1 . The quality of the fit can be further improved by the addition of a quadrupole correction to the Hubble flow. The dipole velocity offset from the CMB frame for the volume we survey (amplitude ~150 km s -1 ) and the quadrupole may be genuine (though weak) manifestations of more distant density fluctuations, but we find evidence that they are more likely due to the inadequacy of spherical models to describe the density profile of the attractors. The residual dipole we find is comparable to the systematic error in these simple, parametrized models; in other words, our survey volume of R < 3000 km s -1 is, in a mass averaged sense, essentially at rest with respect to the CMB. This contradicts claims of large amplitude flows in much larger volumes that include our sample. Our best-fitting model, which uses attenuated power-law mass distributions for the two attractors, has enclosed mass overdensities at the Local Group of 7 × 10 14 M ☉ for the Virgo Attractor and 9 × 10 15 M ☉ for the Great Attractor. Without recourse to information about the overdensities of these attractors with respect to the cosmic mean we cannot provide a good constraint on Ω M , but our data do give us accurate measurements in terms of δ, the overdensities of the enclosed masses with respect to the background: δ Ω = 0.33 for the Virgo Attractor and δ Ω = 0.27 for the Great Attractor.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/308409

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 296

Metadata

Authors
Tonry, J. L., Blakeslee, J. P., Ajhar, E. A., & Dressler, A.
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Published
2000-02-20
Volume
530
Issue
2
Pages
625-651
ISSN
  • 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4357
OpenAlex
W2052235912
Cited by
296
References
4
FWCI
16.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Surface Brightness Fluctuation Survey of Galaxy Distances. II. Local and Large‐Scale Flows. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/308409
The paper
Tonry, J. L., Blakeslee, J. P., Ajhar, E. A., & Dressler, A. (2000). The Surface Brightness Fluctuation Survey of Galaxy Distances. II. Local and Large‐Scale Flows. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1086/308409

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.