The Carnegie–Chicago Hubble Program. V. The Distances to NGC 1448 and NGC 1316 via the Tip of the Red Giant Branch
The Carnegie–Chicago Hubble Program (CCHP) is recalibrating the extragalactic SN Ia distance scale using exclusively Population II stars. This effort focuses on the Tip of the Red Giant Branch (TRGB) method, whose systematics are entirely independent of the Population I Cepheid-based determinations...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Astrophysical journal 2018-10, Vol.866 (2), p.145 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The Carnegie–Chicago Hubble Program (CCHP) is recalibrating the extragalactic SN Ia distance scale using exclusively Population II stars. This effort focuses on the Tip of the Red Giant Branch (TRGB) method, whose systematics are entirely independent of the Population I Cepheid-based determinations that have long served as calibrators for the SN Ia distance scale. We present deep
Hubble Space Telescope
imaging of the low surface density and low line-of-sight reddening halos of two galaxies, NGC 1448 and NGC 1316, each of which have been hosts to recent SN Ia events. Provisionally anchoring the TRGB zero-point to the geometric distance to the Large Magellanic Cloud derived from detached eclipsing binaries, we measure extinction-corrected distance moduli of
mag for NGC 1448 and
mag for NGC 1316, respectively, giving metric distances of
Mpc, and
Mpc. We find agreement between our result and the available Cepheid distance for NGC 1448; for NGC 1316, where there are relatively few published distances based on direct measurements, we find that our result is consistent with the published SN Ia distances whose absolute scales are set from other locally determined methods such as Cepheids. For NGC 1448 and NGC 1316, our distances are some of the most precise (and systematically accurate) measurements with errors at 1.7 (2.8)% and 1.6 (2.7)% levels, respectively. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0004-637X 1538-4357 |
DOI: | 10.3847/1538-4357/aadfe8 |