Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Cosmic microwave background wikipedia , lookup
Weakly-interacting massive particles wikipedia , lookup
Dark matter wikipedia , lookup
Cosmic distance ladder wikipedia , lookup
Star formation wikipedia , lookup
Non-standard cosmology wikipedia , lookup
Weak gravitational lensing wikipedia , lookup
Gravitational lens wikipedia , lookup
Zheng Zheng I NSTITUTE for ADVANCED STUDY Cosmology and Structure Formation KIAS Sep. 21, 2006 Collaborators: David Weinberg (Ohio State) Andreas Berlind (NYU) Josh Frieman (Chicago) Idit Zehavi (Case Western) Jeremy Tinker (Chicago) Jaiyul Yoo (Ohio State) Kev Abazajian (LANL) Alison Coil (Arizona) SDSS collaboration Light traces mass? Snapshot @ z~1100 Light-Mass relation well understood CMB from WMAP Snapshot @ z~0 Light-Mass relation not well understood Galaxies from SDSS Cosmological Model initial conditions energy & matter contents Galaxy Formation Physics gas dynamics, cooling star formation, feedback m 8 ns Dark Halo Population n(M) (r|M) v(r|M) Weinberg 2002 Halo Occupation Distribution P(N|M) spatial bias within halos velocity bias within halos Galaxy Clustering Galaxy-Mass Correlations Halo Occupation Distribution (HOD) • P(N|M) Probability distribution of finding N galaxies in a halo of virial mass M mean occupation <N(M)> + higher moments • Spatial bias within halos Difference in the distribution profiles of dark matter and galaxies within halos • Velocity bias within halos Difference in the velocities of dark matter and galaxies within halos e.g., Jing & Borner 1998; Seljak 2000; Scoccimarro et al. 2001; Berlind & Weinberg 2002; Yang, Mo, & van den Bosch 2003; … Galaxies from SDSS P(N|M) from galaxy formation model For galaxies above a certain threshold in luminosity/baryon mass Mean: Low mass cutoff Plateau High mass power law Scatter: Sub-Poisson (low mass) Poisson (high mass) Berlind et al. 2003 P(N|M) from galaxy formation model It is useful to separate central and satellite galaxies Central galaxies: Step-like function Satellite galaxies Mean following a powerlaw-like function Scatter following Poisson distribution Kravtsov et al. 2004, Zheng et al. 2005 Probing Galaxy Formation: --- Galaxy Bias (HOD) from Galaxy Clustering Data HOD modeling of two-point correlation functions • Departure from a power law • Luminosity dependence • Color dependence • Evolution Two-point correlation function of galaxies Excess probability w.r.t. random distribution of finding galaxy pairs at a given separation 1-halo term Galaxies of each pair from the same halo 2-halo term Galaxies of each pair from different halos Two-point correlation function: Departures from a power law SDSS measurements Zehavi et al. 2004 Two-point correlation function: Departures from a power law The inflection around 2 Mpc/h can be naturally explained within the framework of the HOD: It marks the transition from a large scale regime dominated by galaxy pairs in separate dark matter halos (2-halo term) to a small scale regime dominated by galaxy pairs in same dark matter halos (1-halo term). 2-halo term 1-halo term Dark matter correlation function Divided by the best-fit power law Zehavi et al. 2004 Two-point correlation function: Departures from a power law Fit the data by assuming an r-1.8 real space correlation function r0 ~ 8Mpc/h host halo mass > 1013 Msun/h HDF-South Strong clustering of a population of red galaxies at z~3 + galaxy number density ~100 galaxies in each halo Daddi et al. 2003 Two-point correlation function: Departures from a power law Less surprising models from HOD modeling Signals are dominated by 1-halo term M > Mmin ~ 6×1011Msun/h (not so massive) <N(M)>=1.4(M/Mmin)0.45 Predicted r0 ~ 5Mpc/h Ouchi et al 2005 HOD modeling of the clustering of z~3 red galaxies Zheng 2004 Hogg & Blanton Luminosity dependence of galaxy clustering Zehavi et al. 2005 Luminosity dependence of galaxy clustering The HOD and its luminosity dependence inferred from fitting SDSS galaxy correlation functions have a general agreement with galaxy formation model predictions Luminosity dependence of the HOD predicted by galaxy formation models Berlind et al. 2003 Luminosity dependence of galaxy clustering Zehavi et al. 2005 Zheng et al. 2005 inferred from observation prediction of theory HOD parameters vs galaxy luminosity Hogg & Blanton Color dependence of galaxy clustering Zehavi et al. 2005 Color dependence of galaxy clustering Zehavi et al. 2005 Berlind et al. 2003, Zheng et al. 2005 Inferred from SDSS data Predicted by galaxy formation model Studying galaxy evolution z~1 z~1 Star Merging Formation Merging z~0 z~0 Establishing an evolution link between DEEP2 and SDSS galaxies Tentative results: For central galaxies in z~0 M<1012 h-1Msun halos, ~80% of their stars form after z~1 For central galaxies in z~0 M>1012 h-1Msun halos, ~20% of their stars form after z~1 Zheng, Coil & Zehavi 2006 Probing Cosmology: --- Constraints from Galaxy Clustering Data Tegmark et al. 2004 Why useful ? • Consistency check • Better constraints on cosmological parameters (e.g., 8, m) • Tensor fluctuation and evolution of dark energy • Non-Gaussianity Mass-to-Light ratio of large scale structure At a given cosmology (σ8) Mr<-21.5 Mr<-20 Modeling w_p as a function of luminosity How light occupies halos Φ(L|M) (CLF) Populating N-body simulation according to Φ(L|M) Mass-to-light ratio in different environments Comparison with observation Tinker et al 2005 Mass-to-Light ratio of large scale structure σ8=0.95 σ8=0.9 σ8=0.8 σ8=0.7 σ8=0.6 CNOC data M<-18 M<-20 Tinker et al 2005 Galaxy cluster <M/L>=universal value only for unbiased galaxies (σ8g~ σ8) Comparison with CNOC data indicates (σ8/0.9)(Ωm/0.3)0.6=0.75+/-0.06 Modeling redshift-space distortion For each (m, 8), choose HOD to match wp(rp) Large scale distortions degenerate along axis 8 m0.6, as predicted by linear theory Small scale distortions have different dependence on m, 8, v Tinker et al 2006 Recovering the linear power spectrum Galaxy bias is linear at k < 0.1~0.2 hMpc-1 and becomes scale-dependent at smaller scales. Power spectrum becomes nonlinear at similar scales HOD modeling helps to recover the linear power spectrum for k>0.2hMpc-1 and extend the leverage for constraining cosmology. Yoo et al 2006 Breaking the degeneracy between bias and cosmology Cosmology A HOD A Halo Population A Galaxy Clustering Galaxy-Mass Correlations A = Cosmology B Halo Population B HOD B Galaxy Clustering Galaxy-Mass Correlations B Breaking the degeneracy between bias and cosmology Changing m with 8, ns, and Fixed Zheng & Weinberg 2005 Influence Matrix Zheng & Weinberg 2005 Constraints on cosmological parameters Forecast : ~10% on m ~10% on 8 ~5% on 8 m0.75 From 30 observables of 8 different statistics with 10% fractional errors Zheng & Weinberg 2005 Joint constraints on m and 8 from SDSS projected galaxy correlation function and CMB anisotropy measurements. Abazajian et al. 2004 Summary and Conclusion • HOD is a powerful tool to model galaxy clustering. 2-pt, 3-pt, g-g lensing, voids, pairwise velocity, mock galaxy catalogs … • HOD modeling aids interpretation of galaxy clustering. * HOD leads to informative and physical explanations of galaxy clustering (departures from a power law, luminosity/color dependence). * HOD modeling helps to study galaxy evolution. * It is useful to separate central and satellite galaxies. * HODs inferred from the data have a general agreement with those predicted by galaxy formation models. • HOD modeling enhances the constraining power of galaxy redshift surveys on cosmology. * Current applications alreay led to interesting results, improving cosmological constraints * Galaxy bias and cosmology are not degenerate w.r.t. galaxy clustering. They can be simultaneously determined from galaxy clustering data (constrain cosmology and theory of galaxy formation).