prev

next

of 39

View

19Download

0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Baryon Acoustic Oscillations: overview. Will Sutherland (QMUL). Talk overview. Baryon acoustic oscillations motivation. BAO theory overview. Review of current and planned BAO observations. WMAP7 TT power spectrum: (Larson et al 2011). Planck TT power spectrum: (Planck XV, 2013). - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript

Baryon Acoustic Oscillations:overviewWill Sutherland (QMUL)

Talk overviewBaryon acoustic oscillations motivation.BAO theory overview.Review of current and planned BAO observations.

WMAP7 TT power spectrum: (Larson et al 2011)

Planck TT power spectrum: (Planck XV, 2013)

The CMB geometrical degeneracy CMB gives us acoustic angle * to < 0.1%, and m h2 to ~ 1%. This tells us angular distance to last scattering surface. But, this distance depends on many parameters, e.g. m, k, h, w (plus time-varying w ?).

Result: the geometrical degeneracy. Weakly broken by CMB lensing or flatness assumption. Strongly broken by independent low-z distances, e.g. SNe or BAOs.

WMAP7: allowed non-flat LambdaCDM models(Larson et al 2011)

Planck: flat LambdaCDM parameter likelihoods

Planck 2013, flat LambdaCDM :

(Supernovae Union-2 ; Amanullah et al 2010)

w = -1 assumed.

LambdaCDM + 1-param extensions

Planck only (red)Planck + BAO (blue)

(Planck coll XVI, 2013)

BAOs : analogue of CMB peaks in the matter power spectrum

Eisenstein, Seo & White, ApJ 2007Development of the BAO feature real space

2005: first observation of predicted BAO featureby SDSS and 2dFGRS(Eisenstein et al 2005)

BAO feature in BOSS DR9 data: ~ 6 sigma(Anderson et al 2012)

(Seo & Eisenstein 2005)Non-linearity smears out the BAO feature and gives a small shift(Seo et al 2008)

(Padmanabhan et al 2012)

(Seo et al 2010)

(Mehta et al 2012)Reconstruction un-does most of the effect of non-linearity(Seo et al 2010)

BAO observables: transverse and radial Spherical average gives rs / DV ,

BAOs : strengths and weaknessesBAO length scale calibrated by the CMB .+ Uses well-understood linear physics (unlike SNe). - CMB is very distant: hard to independently verify assumptions.

BAO length scale is very large, ~ 152 Mpc: + Ruler is robust against non-linearity, details of galaxy formation+ Observables very simple: galaxy positions and redshifts. - Huge volumes must be surveyed to get a precise measurement.- Cant measure BAO scale at z ~ 0

BAOs can probe both DA(z) and H(z); + no differentiation needed for H(z)+ enables consistency tests for flatness and homogeneity.

Precision from ideal BAO experiments:(Weinberg et al 2012)Right panel idealized: assumes matter+baryon densities known exactly

BAOs : present and futureWiggleZ (AAT): 0.4 < z < 0.9, complete. ~ 200k Emission line galaxies. Many papers recently.

BOSS (SDSS3): 0.2 < z < 0.65 ; in progress. > 1 million luminous red galaxies (LRGs); sky, complete 2014. Also at z ~ 2.5 with QSO absorbers. HetDEX: under construction. z ~ 2 Lyman-alpha emitters.

Large fibre-fed MOSs on 4-ms: start ~ 2018. USA: BigBOSS and DESpec have merged into MS-DESI. Passed CD-0 approval, telescope choice soon. ~ 3000 fibres ? WEAVE: 1000 fibres on WHT. 4MOST on VISTA: 2400 fibres, ESO decision coming soon.

AESOP for 4MOST (Australia ESO Positioner AAO)Independent tilting piezo-driven spines- developed from proven FMOS Echidna.AESOP has 2400 spines (1600 med-res, 800 high-res). Any point reachable by 3 7 spines (typical 5) flexible configuration

Fibre bundles - new wrap.Spectrographs on the yoke, under floor.Short fibre runs, gravity invariant.

BAOs : present and futureSubaru PFS (formerly WFMOS): 8m telescope, smaller FoV; mainly focused on galaxy evolution , also BAOs at z > 1.

Euclid (ESA): 1.2m, space. 0.7 < z < 2.0 Approved for 2020+. Near-IR slitless spectroscopy . Huge survey volume; but only H-alpha line detected. WFIRST (NASA): 1st ranked in US decadal survey ; not yet funded. Was 1.5m ; maybe 2.4m with free spy telescope .

SKA : potentially the ultimate BAO machine ?Depends on achievable mapping speed, FoV etc.

Cosmic expansion rate: da/dt

Cosmic expansion rate, relative to today

BOSS: Busca et al 2012Caveat: assumed flatness and standard rs

Good approximation at z < 0.5 :

The Neff / scale degeneracy :Nearly all our CMB + SNe + BAO observables are actually dimensionless (apart from baryon+photon densities) : redshift of matter-radiation equality CMB acoustic angle SNe give us distance ratios or H0 DL /c . BAOs also give distance ratios All these can give us robust values for s , w, E(z) etc. But: there are 3 dimensionful quantities in FRW cosmology ; Distances, times, densities.Two inter-relations : distance/time via c ,and Friedmann equation relates density + time, via G. This leaves one short, i.e. any number of dimensionless distance ratios cant determine overall scale.Usually, scales are (implicitly) anchored to the standard radiation density, Neff ~ 3.0 . But if we drop this, then there is one overall unknown scale factor.

Explanation :

Baryon and photon densities are determined in absolute units but these dont appear separately in Friedmann eq., only as contributions.

Rescaling total radiation, total matter and dark energy densities by a common factor leaves CMB, BAO and SNe observables (almost) unchanged; but changes dimensionful quantities e.g. H.

Potential source of confusion: use of h and s. These are unitless but they are not really dimensionless, since they involve arbitrary choice of H = 100 km/s/Mpc etc.

h becomes a derived parameter:Define as error inapproximation :This is exact (apart from non-linear shifts in rs )and fully dimensionless: all H and s cancelled. An easy route to mBAO ratio is :

This is all dimensionless, and nicely splits z-dependent effects: Zeroth-order term is just m-0.5 (strictly cb , without neutrinos)

Leading order z-dependence is E(2z/3)

The V is second-order in z, typically ~ z2 / 25 , almost negligible at z < 0.5

For WMAP baryon density, the above simplifies to the following , to 0.4 percent : An easy route to m

What BAOs really measure :

Standard rule-of-thumb is CMB measures m , and the sound horizon; then BAOs measure h ; this is only true assuming standard radiation density.

Really, CMB measures zeq , and then a low-redshift BAO ratio measures (almost) m. These two tell us H0 / (Xrad) , but not an overall scale.

Thus, measuring the absolute BAO length provides a strong test of standard early-universe cosmology, including the radiation content.

Conclusions :

BAOs are a gold standard for cosmological standard rulers. Very well understood; observations huge in scope, but clean.

Most planned BAO surveys are targeting z > 0.7, to exploit the huge available volume and sensitivity to dark energy w.

However, there are still good cases for optimal low-z BAO surveys at z ~ 0.25 0.7 (e.g. extending BOSS to South and lower galactic latitude) : A direct test of cosmic acceleration with minimal assumptions

In conjunction with precision distance measurements, can provide a test of the CMB prediction rs ~ 152 Mpc, and/or a clean test for extra radiation Neff > 3.04 .

Thank you !

**