The use of supernovae as distance
indicators has grown dramatically in the last few years.
Supernovae have been applied
to the Hubble Constant problem, to measurement of
the cosmological parameters 0 and
,
and even, in a preliminary
way, to constraining bulk peculiar motions. There is every
reason to believe that in the next decade supernovae
will become still more important as distance indicators.
It is certain that many more will be discovered,
especially at high redshift.
Supernovae come in two main varieties. Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia)
are thought to result from
the nuclear detonation of a white dwarf star that has been
overloaded by mass transferred from an evolved
(Population II) companion. (Recall that a white dwarf
cannot have a masss above the Chandrasekhar limit, 1.4 M
When mass transfer causes the white dwarf to surpass this
limit, it explodes.) Type II supernovae result from the imploding cores
of high-mass, young (Population I) stars that have exhausted their nuclear
fuel. (1)
Of the two, it is the Type Ias that have received the most
attention lately. Type IIs have
shown somewhat less promise as distance indicators.
They are considerably fainter (~ 2 mag), and thus
are detected less often in magnitude limited surveys
(although their intrinsic frequency of occurrence is in
fact greater than that of Type 1as).
The discussion to follow will be restricted to Type Ias.
Because SNe Ias result (in all likelihood) from detonating white dwarfs,
and because the latter tend to have very similar masses,
SNe Ias tend to have very similar luminosities.
That is, they are very nearly standard candles, so comparison
of their apparent and abolute magnitudes yields a distance.
Recent work suggests that Type Ia SNe are not quite
standard candles, in that their peak luminosities
correlate with the shape of their light curves
(Phillips 1993;
Hamuy et al. 1995;
Riess et al. 1995a,
b;
Perlmutter et
al. 1997).
Basically, broad light curves
correspond to brighter, and narrow light curves to fainter,
supernovae. When this effect is accounted for, the
scatter in SNe Ia predicted peak magnitudes might be
as small as 0.1 mag, as found by
Riess et al. (1995b).
Hamuy et
al. (1995) and
Perlmutter et
al. (1997)
find that the scatter drops from
0.3 mag mag when SNe Ia
are treated as standard candles to 0.17
mag when the light curve shape is taken into account.
The precise scatter of SNe Ias remains a subject for further study.
The wealth of new SNe data that has become available in recent years is due to the advent of large-scale, systematic search techniques. To understand this, it may be worth stating the obvious. It is not possible to pick an arbitrary galaxy and get a supernova distance for it because most galaxies, at a given time, do not have a supernova in them. Thus, it is necessary to search many galaxies at random and somehow identify the small fraction (~ 10-4) in which a supernova is going off at any given time. Methods for doing this have been pioneered by Perlmutter and collaborators (Goobar & Perlmutter 1995; Perlmutter et al. 1995, 1996, 1997). Deep images are taken of the same region of the sky 2-3 weeks apart. Stellar objects which appear in the second image but not in the first are candidate supernovae to be confirmed by spectroscopy. By means of such an approach, of order 30 high-redshift (z = 0.35-0.65) are now known. Related approaches for finding moderate- (Adams et al. 1995; Hamuy et al. 1995) and high- (Schmidt et al. 1995) redshift supernovae have been developed by other groups as well.
Search techniques such as those of the Perlmutter group
survey many faint galaxies in limited regions of the sky, and
are not very good at finding low-redshift (z 0.03)
supernovae. Thus, they
are not particularly relevant to peculiar velocity studies
(but see below). However, precisely because they
detect intermediate to high redshift supernovae, such techniques
will be useful for measuring H0 (with supernovae
found at z
0.2,
where cosmological effects are relatively unimportant),
and are among the best existing methods for
determining the cosmological parameters
0 and
(with supernovae at z
0.3, which probe spatial curvature.)
To see how this works, one can plot Hubble diagrams
for recently discovered supernovae both at moderate
and high redshift. This is done in Figure 6,
which has been adapted from
the 1996 San Antonio AAS meeting contribution by the Perlmutter group.
The low redshift data (log (cz) < 4.5) are from
Hamuy et al. (1995),
and the high redshift data are from
Perlmutter et
al. (1996).
Figure 6 contains several important features.
First, the observed peak apparent magnitudes are plotted versus log redshift
in the top panel.
To the degree SNe Ias are standard candles, one expects these
apparent magnitudes to go as const. + 5 log (cz),
the straight line plotted through the points at low redshift.
Correcting the SNe Ia magnitudes for the light
curve widths (i.e., going from the top to the bottom panel) significantly
improves the agreement with this low-redshift prediction.
This is the main reason that the light curve width correction
is thought to greatly reduce the SNe Ia scatter.
Whether or not the correction is made, however,
the data provide unequivocal proof of
the linearity of the Hubble law at low (z 0.1) redshift.
Second, one expects that
that at higher redshifts the mB - log (cz)
relation will depart
from linearity because of spacetime curvature.
The departure from linearity is, to first order in z, a function only
of the deceleration parameter q0 - or equivalently, if
the universe has vanishing cosmological constant
(see below),
by the density parameter
0, which in that case is exactly
twice q0. Figure 6 assumes
0
and thus labels the curves by
0.
There is a hint in the behavior of the light-curve-shape corrected
magnitudes that this departure
from linearity has been detected, and in particular that
0
1 is a better fit to the data than
0
0
(Perlmutter et
al. 1996).
Neither q0 nor 0 alone fully characterizes
the departure from a linear Hubble diagram.
More generally, the behavior of the Hubble diagram at high redshift
depends on the cosmological parameters
0 and
/ 3H02.
Perlmutter et
al. (1997)
suggest that the SNe Ia data should
be interpreted for now in the context of two cosmological
paradigms: a
= 0 universe,
and a spatially flat (
0
+
= 1)
universe. (2)
Perlmutter et
al. (1997)
carried out a statistical analysis of the
7 high-redshift (0.354
z
0.458) supernovae
discovered in their survey, and the 9 lower redshift
SNe Ias found by the Hamuy group, that are shown
in Figure 6. They find that
0
= 0.96+.56-.50 if a
= 0 universe is assumed.
If the universe is flat,
0 = 0.98+.28-.24, with
corresonding limits on
= 1 -
0.
The constraints are stronger in the flat universe case because
of the strong effect of a cosmological constant on the apparent
magnitudes of high-redshift standard candles.
These results are, potentially,
highly significant for cosmology. Low-density, spatially flat models
have become popular lately because
they make the universe older (for a given H0 and
0),
provide a better fit to large-scale structure data than
0 = 1 models,
and yet remain consistent with the attractive idea that the early universe
underwent inflation. Currently favored versions of such models
have
0.6-0.7
(Ostriker &
Steinhardt 1995).
The SNe Ia results of
Perlmutter et
al. (1997),
which strongly disfavor such
a large
, will be
difficult to reconcile with low-density flat models.
The analysis just described did not require absolute calibration
of SNe Ias. Indeed,
Perlmutter et
al. (1997)
use a formalism
similar to that used in peculiar velocity studies, in which distances
are measured in km s-1, and absolute magnitudes are,
correspondingly, defined only up to an arbitrary constant.
The SNe Ia data can be used to determine H0, however,
only to the degree that the true absolute magnitudes (preferably corrected for
light curve width) of such objects are known.
This requires either theoretical calibration
or empirical calibration in galaxies with
Cepheid distances. Both of these approaches pose difficulties.
A range of models of exploding white dwarfs predict peak
absolute magnitudes for SNe Ias of
MV -19.5
with small scatter, but significantly lower luminosities
can result if some of the key inputs to the models (especially the
mass of the 56Ni ejectae) are varied
(Höflich et
al. 1995).
This suggests that the absolute magnitudes of SNe Ias cannot yet be predicted
theoretically, and that an
empirical calibration using Cepheid distances
will do better. However, because local galaxies with Cepheid distances
are scarce, and SNe Ias are rare, there are still few reliable local
calibrators for SNe Ias. It has been necessary to analyze historical
as well as modern SNe Ia data
(Saha et al. 1995;
Sandage et al. 1996)
in Cepheid galaxies in order to
increase the number of calibrators. This approach encounters
the problem of relating modern CCD photometry with photometric methods
from decades past. Pending the detection and analysis of SNe Ias in
a larger number of local galaxies with Cepheid distances, one should
view estimates of H0 inferred from supernovae as preliminary.
Being rare events,
SNe Ias are unlikely to provide a detailed map of the local peculiar
velocity field.
However, because of their small scatter (see above), a few
well-observed SNe Ias distributed on the sky may lead to useful constraints on
amplitude and scale of large-scale bulk flows.
A first attempt at this was carried out by
Riess et al. (1995b),
who used 13 SNe Ias with peak
magnitudes corrected by light curve widths to place limits on the
bulk flow within ~ 7000 km s. They found the data to be consistent
with at most a small (
400 km s) bulk streaming, and to
be inconsistent with the large bulk flow found by
Lauer & Postman (1994)
using an independent method (cf.
Section 7). However, one must be cautious in
interpreting such results because small-scale power in the velocity field can
obscure large-scale motion
(Watkins & Feldman
1995).
Constraints on bulk flows using SNe Ias are likely to improve in the
coming years.
2 With a large sample of SNe Ias that
spans a large redshift range, it may be possible to constrain 0 and
separately, without assuming either a flat universe
or a vanishing cosmological constant
(Goobar &
Perlmutter 1995).
Back.