arxiv:astro-ph/ v1 13 Jun 2006

Transcription

1 Large Scae Tests of the DGP Mode Yong-Seon Song, 1,2 Ignacy Sawicki, 1,3 and Wayne Hu 1,2 1 Kavi Institute for Cosmoogica Physics, Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago IL Department of Astronomy & Astrophysics, University of Chicago, Chicago IL Department of Physics, University of Chicago, Chicago IL (Dated: June 14, 2006) arxiv:astro-ph/ v1 13 Jun 2006 The sef-acceerating braneword mode (DGP) can be tested from measurements of the expansion history of the universe and the formation of structure. Current constraints on the expansion history from supernova uminosity distances, the CMB, and the Hubbe constant excude the simpest fat DGP mode at about 3σ. The best-fit open DGP mode is, however, ony a marginay poorer fit to the data than fat ΛCDM. Its substantiay different expansion history raises structure formation chaenges for the mode. A dark-energy mode with the same expansion history woud predict a highy significant discrepancy with the baryon osciation measurement due the high Hubbe constant required and a arge enhancement of CMB anisotropies at the owest mutipoes due to the ISW effect. For the DGP mode to satisfy these constraints new gravitationa phenomena woud have to appear at the non-inear and cross-over scaes respectivey. A prediction of the DGP expansion history in a region where the phenomenoogy is we understood is that high-redshift gaaxies shoud be substantiay correated with the CMB through the ISW effect. This correation shoud provide a sharp test of the DGP mode in the future. PACS numbers: I. INTRODUCTION Cosmic acceeration may arise either from a new form of energy density, dubbed dark energy, or from a modification of gravity on cosmoogica scaes. Dvai, Gabadadze and Porrati (DGP) [1] have proposed a braneword modification of gravity to expain acceeration (see [2] for a recent review). In this mode our universe is a (3+1)-dimensiona brane embedded in an infinite Minkowski buk. The cosmoogica soution of this theory exhibits sef-acceeration on the brane cassicay [3, 4] (see [5] for probems with the quantum theory). Various cosmoogica probes which can distinguish DGP from dark energy modes (DE) have been investigated in the iterature [6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17]. These come in two casses: those that test DGP modifications of the expansion history and those that test changes in how cosmoogica structures are formed. The advantage of the former cass is that the predictions of the DGP mode are we understood theoreticay. The main disadvantage is that they currenty ack the power to distinguish the DGP mode from its dark energy counterpart the ΛCDM mode at high significance. Moreover, expansion rate tests cannot distinguish between the DGP mode and an arbitrary form of smooth dark energy that is constructed to mimic it in the background. Structure formation tests on the other hand can in principe sove both these probems. However due to compexities in the theory they currenty can ony be rigorousy impemented on a rather sma range of scaes. In this paper, we examine the combination of these two types of tests. We empoy three tests of the expan- Eectronic address: ysong@cfcp.uchicago.edu sion history: the anguar diameter distance to recombination from the three-year WMAP data [18], uminosity distance to high-redshift supernovae (SNGod[19] and SNLS[20]) and the oca expansion rate from Hubbe constant measurements. These tests do in fact strongy disfavor the simpest version of the DGP mode: a modification of gravity in a spatiay fat cosmoogy with no buk cosmoogica constant. The best fit DGP mode has a significant negative curvature and a high Hubbe constant. Even with the addition of spatia curvature, it is a sighty poorer fit to the data than fat ΛCDM. The best fit DGP mode yieds an expansion history that is strikingy different from fat ΛCDM. The dark energy mode that mimics this expansion history has negative curvature and a dark energy equation of state that increases sharpy with redshift. In the dark energy context such an expansion history woud be strongy excuded by structure formation tests. These incude the baryon acoustic osciations (BAO) in gaaxy custering [17, 21], the integrated Sachs-Wofe (ISW) enhancement of ow CMB mutipoe power, the abundance of gaaxy custers, and fuctuations in the Lyman-α forest. Whie these probes ikey aso test the DGP mode, none of these phenomena are sufficienty we understood in the mode to provide a definitive test. Structure formation in DGP is currenty we understood on scaes between a few percent of the Hubbe scae and the scae radius of a typica dark matter hao. Since the ISW enhancement persists to these scaes and is measurabe in its correation with gaaxies [22, 23, 24, 25], it is a robust test of the DGP mode in principe. This enhancement however occurs mainy at higher redshifts than currenty observed. The ΛCDM mode on the other hand predicts negigibe true correation at high redshift. Therefore CMB-gaaxy correations at high redshift wi in the future provide a sharp test of DGP braneword

2 2 acceeration. II. EXPANSION HISTORY A. Supernovae, CMB and H 0 through the measurement of the acoustic peak scae A = and its ength caibration through the matter density Ω m h 2 = [29]. Note that the SN are a reative distance indicator and hence constrain D whereas the CMB is an absoute distance measure which constrains D/h. The expansion history of a DGP mode is determined by the usua Friedman-Robertson-Waker parameters and the crossover distance. The crossover distance is defined as the ratio of 5-dimensiona to 4-dimensiona Panck mass scaes r c = M(4)2 P 2M (5)3 P. (1) It is a free parameter of the theory. If r c is cose to the current horizon scae, the acceeration of cosmic expansion is repicated without dark energy. Gravity on scaes much ess than r c does not penetrate into the buk significanty, and exhibits the usua Newtonian potentia faing as the inverse distance. In the DGP mode, as the Hubbe scae approaches r c, the universe enters an acceerating, asymptoticay de-sitter phase despite the absence of a cosmoogica constant. The main evidence for cosmic acceeration is geometrica and based on the uminosity distance to high-redshift supernovae (SN) [19, 26, 27, 28] and the anguar diameter distance to the recombination epoch of the CMB (e.g. [29]). Both distances are given as usua by the (comoving) anguar diameter distance in units of H0 1 D(z) = Ω k sinh (r(z)/ ) Ω k, (2) where r(z) is r(z) = z 0 dz E(z ). (3) E(z) is the Hubbe parameter in units of the Hubbe constant. The DGP mode modifies the Friedman equation or the reationship between E(z) and the energy densities of matter and radiation in units of the critica density E 2 H2 H 2 0 = Ω k a 2 + ( Ωrc + Ω rc + Ω m a 3 + Ω r a 4 ) 2, (4) where H 0 = h Mpc 1. Here the scae factor a = 1/(1 + z), Ω rc (=1/4r 2 ch 2 0) is given by Ω rc = (1 Ω k Ω m Ω r ) 2. (5) 4(1 Ω k ) We impement the SN constraints from the god SN data set of [19] and the SNLS set of [20]. For the CMB, we fix the distance to recombination at z ss = FIG. 1: The χ 2 between the best fit fat and open DGP versus that of fat ΛCDM mode. SNGod supernova (SN) data set is used in the top pane and SNLS SN data set is used in the bottom pane. The DGP mode requires curvature and a high Hubbe constant. With the addition of Key Project (KP) direct Hubbe constant measurements open DGP is a marginay poorer fit to the data than fat ΛCDM. Like fat ΛCDM (fλcdm), fat DGP has a singe parameter Ω m that is over-constrained by the distances to recombination, Ω m h 2, and high-redshift supernovae. Unike fλcdm, fat DGP is not a good fit to these data. In DGP cosmoogies, the SN favor a ower Ω m than in fλcdm resuting in a shorter anguar diameter distance to the CMB than is measured by WMAP. For the SNGod data set the excess χ 2 over fλcdm is χ 2 4 whie for SNLS the excess is χ 2 9 (see Fig. 1). A negativey curved geometry eongates the CMB distance and aows a ow Ω m in agreement with the SN distances [17, 30]. Even so, the CMB constraint on Ω m h 2 favors a high Hubbe constant of h = 0.8 (SNGod) and h 0.9 (SNLS) compared with observations from the HST Key Project (KP) h = 0.72 ± 0.08 [31]. fλcdm on the other hand, despite being highy over-constrained satisfies the observations with h = With the addition of the KP H 0 constraint, the best fit open DGP (odgp) mode has h = 0.76 (SNGod) and h = 0.82 (SNLS) but is a marginay poorer fit to the data than fλcdm. The excess over fλcdm of the atter

3 3 is χ with one fewer degree of freedom due to the fit to spatia curvature. The other parameters of this best fit mode are Ω m = 0.18, Ω k = If the Hubbe constant measurements can be improved by a factor of 2 in the future, then the odgp and fλcdm wi be ceary distinguished from each other. They are currenty both acceptabe fits to these data. We wi hereafter take the best fit mode to the WMAP, SNLS and KP data sets as the odgp mode for further tests. B. DGP vs. Dark Energy The main expansion history differences between the best fit odgp mode and fλcdm can be exposed by finding the scaar fied or QCDM mode that matches the odgp distance measures exacty. With the same curvature, Ω m h 2 and H 0, that QCDM mode has a timedependent equation of state w(a) = 1 3 de 2 d n a + 3Ω ma 3 + 2Ω k a 2 + 4Ω r a 4 E 2 Ω m a 3 Ω k a 2 Ω r a 4 1.(6) This equation of state starts at w = 1/3 during radiation domination, becomes w = 0.5 during matter domination and decays to w = 0.85 at the present time. The vaue of w(a) is substantiay higher than the w = 1 of fλcdm. The impied increase in the dark energy density causes both the arger Hubbe constant and a decrement in D(z) at high redshift. This decrement is compensated by negative curvature to match the CMB distance. The expansion history of this QCDM mode is strikingy different from fλcdm despite the fact that they both satisfy CMB and SN constraints. Both the increased dark energy density and the negative spatia curvature contribute to changes in structure formation that woud vioate even current observations. One therefore expects that structure formation tests shoud provide a strong constraint on the odgp mode. It is important to emphasize that it is not necessary to distinguish between odgp and QCDM based on difference in the growth of structure. The comparison is between odgp and fλcdm because the QCDM mode is not viabe. We therefore use the degenerate QCDM mode as a guide to understand the quaitative predictions of odgp. The main task of testing the expansion history consequences for odgp is to find a structure formation probe that can be robusty cacuated in the DGP mode. III. STRUCTURE FORMATION A. Baryon acoustic osciations As discussed in the previous section, the argest expansion history discrepancy between odgp and fλcdm ies in the current expansion rate or Hubbe constant. In the distance-degenerate QCDM mode, the arge Hubbe constant woud be in strong confict with the measured baryon acoustic osciations in the SDSS gaaxy correations. Baryon acoustic osciations appear near the scae where density perturbations become non-inear and hence cannot be considered a purey geometric test. Detaied predictions in the odgp mode beow this scae require the soution of the N-body probem with a noninear Poisson equation. It is nonetheess usefu to quantify the extent of the probem in the QCDM mode since it determines the eve at which noninear odgp corrections woud have to ater inear theory predictions to satisfy the data [17]. The baryon osciations are imprinted at a fixed physica scae by the CMB at recombination. Under ordinary gravity, they yied a neary geometric test since noninearities are insufficient to change the physica scae of features substantiay. The SDSS uminous red gaaxy (LRG) survey measures the features between 0.16 z At these redshifts, this distance is sensitive mainy to the Hubbe constant [32]. More specificay, it can be converted to a reative distance measure between the effective LRG redshift and recombination of D(z = 0.35)/D(z ss ) = ± Reca that the CMB measures D(z ss )/h. Hence in the high Hubbe constant QCDM mode this number is too ow, specificay eading to a 4.5σ discrepancy. This discrepancy can be sighty ameiorated by refitting the modes to a data incuding the BAO data [17]. If odgp shared the same non-inear effects with QCDM, the BAO measurement woud excude it as we. In the DGP mode, there is a key distance scae, r, above which the inearized perturbations experience the weakbrane phase [2, 33, 34, 35, 36]. In the weak-brane regime r c r r, gravity is modified as a scaar-tensor theory. Beow r, gravity is described by the standard Einstein theory. For a point mass M, the transition scae r = (r 2 c r g) 1/3, (r g = 2G N M). (7) Since even the inear density fied is constructed from the spatia average of coapsed dark matter haos under any hierarchica structure formation mode, the critica scae is associated with the r of the dark matter haos. For definiteness et us take the other cosmoogica parameters as in the best fit QCDM mode: Ω m h 2 = 0.122, Ω b h 2 = , τ = 0.11 with a power aw spectrum of adiabatic fuctuations with n s = 0.958, δ ζ = at k norm = 0.05 Mpc 1. In this QCDM mode, the LRG gaaxy number densities correspond to haos of M h 1 M corresponding to r 3 Mpc. This scae is ony marginay smaer than the baryon osciation scae. Furthermore, without a determination of how dark matter haos form under DGP and whether the observed gaaxies indeed reside in h 1 M haos it remains uncear whether weak-brane phase predictions can be appied to the BAO measurements.

4 4 B. Linear Growth Rate The same expansion history discrepancy between QCDM and fλcdm which raises h aso causes both an earier decay of the growth of structure and a arger tota change in the growth to z = 0. For exampe, in the QCDM mode σ 8 = 0.6 and Ω m = These vaues are in confict with the abundance of oca custers. Unfortunatey, this QCDM prediction again reies on the non-inear aspects of structure formation and hence cannot yet be appied to odgp. In order to test odgp we must find a probe on scaes r c r r. In this regime, the inear theory predictions of DGP are now we understood. In genera, the equations of motion of inear perturbations in DGP are not cosed on the brane. They require knowedge of the gradient of metric perturbations into the buk as quantified by the so-caed master variabe [37]. This in turn depends on boundary conditions in the buk. Koyama and Maartens [14] soved this system in the sma scae imit k/ah 1 where the expansion rate can be ignored compared to the master variabe frequency ω k. In this quasi-static (QS) imit, the Newtonian metric perturbations become during the transition from matter domination to acceerated expansion but the iteration yieds stabe soutions. We ca this the dynamica scaing (DS) soution. Under these assumptions the quasistatic soution is staby approached by k = 10aH and hence is vaid to better than 2% at k > 0.01 Mpc 1 for z = 0. Combined with the condition from r, a robust test of the quasi-static predictions of odgp woud invove fuctuations between 0.01 < k(mpc 1 ) < 0.1. k 2 a 2 Φ = 4πGρ m m, k 2 a 2 Φ + = 4πG 3β ρ m m, (8) where Φ = (Φ Ψ)/2 and Φ + = (Φ + Ψ)/2 and ( ) β = 1 2r c H 1 + Ḣ 3H 2. (9) Here m is the comoving matter density perturbation and for k/ah 1 satisfies m + 2H m = k2 a 2 (Φ + Φ ). (10) These reations agree with the earier concusions of Lue [6] obtained in a different manner. This QS soution impies a 5% to 10% extra decay of Φ in the odgp compared with the QCDM mode with the same expansion history. We show the evoution of Φ for each mode in Fig. 2. The main effect however is not a difference between odgp and QCDM but between either and fλcdm. In either case, Φ begins to decay at high-z such that there is as much decay at z > 1 as there is in fλcdm at z < 1. In order to find an appropriate test of this prediction, we need to determine the vaidity of the quasistatic soution on arge scaes approaching r c. In a companion paper [38], we soved the dynamica equations by making a starting assumption that outside the horizon the evoution is scae free and that perturbations in the buk vanish at the causa horizon. We then iterate the soution through the dynamica equations unti they reach convergence. The starting scaing assumption is midy vioated FIG. 2: The growth factor of Φ of fλcdm and odgp under the quasi-static (QS) assumption normaized to Φ (z 1) = 1. The mode parameters are chosen as the best fit to the CMB (3yr- WMAP), SN (SNLS), and H 0 (KP). QCDM is the scaar fied dark energy mode which has the same expansion history as odgp. The growth rate is potted on subhorizon scaes where the dark energy is smooth and odgp foows the QS assumption. C. ISW Effect The decay in the gravitationa potentia Φ at k > Mpc 1 causes an enhancement of the arge-ange anisotropy in the CMB through the ISW effect. The anguar power spectrum of the ISW effect is given by C II dk = 4π k [II (k)] 2 k3 P Φ Φ (k, 0) 2π 2, (11) where P Φ Φ (k, 0) is the power spectrum of Φ at the present time and the kerne I I is I I (k) = dz Φ ( ) 1/2 (k, z) dd Φ (k, 0) W I (k, z)j (kd). (12) dr

5 5 The window function is given by W I (k, z) = 2 Φ Φ z. (13) We have have here assumed that the spatia curvature is sma enough that the spherica Besse function j accuratey represents the radia harmonics. FIG. 4: Top pane: the spatia wavenumbers corresponding to the ISW effect under the QS approximation for mutipoes = 2, 20. For = 20 the scaes associated with the effect are 1/r c k 1/r and even the quadrupoe receives much of its contribution from 1/r c k. Bottom pane: the fractiona difference between the dynamica scaing (DS) and quasi-static (QS) soutions for DGP at the reevant scaes for = 2, 20. For = 20, the QS approximation is accurate to the severa percent eve. FIG. 3: The CMB temperature anisotropy power spectra of the various modes. Top pane: odgp under the quasi-static (QS) approximation versus QCDM and fλcdm for the tota power (upper curves) and the ISW effect (ower curves). Bottom pane: odgp (QS) compared with the dynamica scaing (DS) soution. The DS soution predicts a further enhancement of the ISW effect such that < 10 strongy vioates the WMAP measurements (points). The errors are mainy associated with cosmic variance at these mutipoes and the 68% and 95% CL bands per have been attached to the DS mode. Fig. 3 shows the difference between predictions for C II from odgp under the quasistatic approximation compared with fλcdm and QCDM. We aso show the tota temperature power spectrum C TT. The enhancement of the ow-mutipoe power spectrum directy refects the high-redshift decay of the gravitationa potentia in odgp and QCDM. In QCDM the effect at the owest mutipoes is smaer since a scaar fied has a Jeans scae at the horizon. Beyond this scae, dark energy perturbations sow the decay of the potentia. There are anaogous corrections for odgp on arge scaes but they have the opposite sign. Under the DS approximation the decay rate of the Φ actuay increases at the argest scaes (see Fig. 4) eading to even arger fuctuations. In [38], we show that this approximation shoud at east give the right sign of the effect. The QS soution shoud thus be taken as a ower bound on the ISW effect. Hence the discrepancy between the odgp QS predictions and the measurements at = 2 5 in the 3year WMAP data are a chaenge to the mode that wi require new phenomena near r c to overcome. At 20 the ISW effect comes from physica scaes that are within the imit of the quasistatic approximation as we as we beow r c. The ISW effect here is a sma fraction of the tota anisotropy and is best isoated through cross correation with tracers of the gravitationa potentia, e.g. gaaxies. Moreover the cross correation can isoate the redshift history of the potentia decay and expose a key prediction of the odgp structure formation: an eary decay of the potentia. IV. GALAXY-ISW CORRELATION TEST The odgp mode predicts a stronger and earier decay of the gravitationa potentia than the fλcdm mode. By cross-correating gaaxies of different redshifts with the CMB, one can in principe reconstruct the redshift history of the potentia decay. Furthermore, the crosscorreation arises from the we understood quasi-static (QS) regime of odgp. The cross-power spectrum of the CMB and a set of

6 FIG. 5: The gaaxy-isw cross-correation coefficient R i in each gaaxy bin from z = 0 to z = 3. Soid curves denotes fλcdm and dash curves denotes odgp. Note the much arger correation at high z in odgp. gaaxies g i is given by a generaization of Eq. (11) C gii dk = 4π k Igi (k)i I (k) k3 P Φ Φ (k, 0) 2π 2, (14) where the gaaxy kerne I gi is I gi (k) = dz Φ ( ) 1/2 (k, z) dd Φ (k, 0) W gi (k, z)j (kd).(15) dr Under the QS approximation, the window function becomes W gi (k, z) = 2 k 2 n i (z)b i (z) 3Ω m H0 2, (16) 1 + z where n i (z) is the redshift distribution of the gaaxies normaized to dzn i = 1 and b i (z) is the gaaxy bias. For definiteness, we assume that the gaaxy sets come from a net gaaxy distributions of n g (z) z 2 e (z/1.5)2, (17) where the normaization is given by the LSST expectation [42] of 35 gaaxies per arcmin 2. For the subsets of gaaxies, we assume that this tota distribution is separated by photometric redshifts which have a Gaussian error distribution with rms σ(z) = 0.03(1 + z) (see [39] for detais). The redshift distributions are then given by n i (z) = A i 2 n g(z) [ erfc ( zi 1 z 2σ(z) ) erfc ( )] zi z, 2σ(z) where erfc is the compementary error function and A i is determined by the normaization constraint. Our gaaxy bias b i (z) is determined by a hao mode and ranges from 1.4 at z 0 to 3.8 at z 3. However with our narrow binning, the bias is neary constant across the bin and so its vaue can be empiricay determined through comparing the auto and cross power spectra once the data are in hand. In particuar, the cross-correation coefficient R i in harmonic space R i = C gii C TT C gigi (18) is independent of the bias and is a robust measure of the gaaxy-isw correation. In Fig. 5, we show R i for odgp and fλcdm. The main difference appears in the high-redshift bins and refects the eary decay of the potentia in odgp. The correation of high-redshift gaaxies with the CMB is therefore a sharp test of the odgp mode. To determine whether these correations are potentiay observabe, we estimate the samping and noise errors in the cross-correation measurement. First et us gigi define the tota gaaxy power spectra C as C gigi = C gigi + N gigi. (19) Here the shot noise N gigi = 1/n i A where ni A is the anguar number density of gaaxies in the bin. With our number densities the variance is neary sampe imited in a of the redshift bins. Likewise the tota power in the CMB measurements is given by C TT = C TT + N TT (20) where the instrumenta noise N TT is 2 T e(+1)σ2 /8n2. With either WMAP or Panck sateite assumptions for the noise T and the beam σ the temperature map is sampe variance imited to good approximation. The error on cross-correation can be cacuated under

7 7 the Gaussian assumption as C gii 1 = (2 + 1)f sky [ ( ) 2 C gii + ig i Cg ] 1/2 C TT,(21) where f sky is the sky fraction covered by the gaaxy survey. Statistica Properties of Gaaxy Correations z (S i /N i )/ f sky % R odgp 50% /R fλcdm 50% TABLE I: Rows: mean redshift, tota signa-to-nose of correation, mutipoe beow which 50% of the (S i /N i ) 2 arises, ratio of correation between odgp and fλcdm at that mutipoe. The signa to noise in each bin is given by ( ) S i 2 N i = ( ) C gii 2 C gii (22) and these vaues are given in Tab. I. In the sampe variance imit approached by our fiducia assumptions ( ) S i 2 N i (R i (2 + 1)f )2 sky 1 + (R i. (23) )2 Even at high redshift z 2 3 the signa to noise aows a 15% 20% measurement of the correation. Such a measurement woud be more than sufficient to distinguish the factor of a few difference between the odgp and fλcdm modes. Most of the detectabe signa comes from the regime where the QS approximation is appropriate. At ow mutipoes < 10, the cosmic variance of both the gaaxy and temperature fieds dominate [40]. By = 100 the sampe variance of the acoustic peaks dominates. From the signa to noise sum in Eq. (22), one can define 50% as the mutipoe at which the (S i /N i ) 2 reaches haf its tota vaue. This scae is aso given in Tab. I and ies between = for most of the bins. At this scae the ratio of correation coefficients in odgp and fλcdm approaches a factor of 6 at z = 3. High redshift gaaxies can thus test the quasi-static odgp predictions with high significance. V. DISCUSSION The sef-acceerating DGP braneword mode is chaenged by expansion history constraints from the CMB, supernovae and the Hubbe constant. Unike a mode with a cosmoogica constant as the dark energy, the DGP mode requires spatia curvature to satisfy the CMB and supernovae constraint and even so midy exceeds bounds on the Hubbe constant. In a dark energy mode, the DGP expansion history woud be rued out by structure formation tests. Among the most powerfu are the baryon osciations and the arge ange CMB anisotropy from the ISW effect. In the DGP mode, these two phenomena ie cose to the two critica scaes: r where gravity transitions from obeying the usua Einstein equations to a scaar-tensor or weak brane phase and r c when gravity exits the weak brane phase and becomes fuy 5 dimensiona. At these transitions, the theoretica framework to cacuate structure formation is currenty incompete. Nonetheess, noninear and 5 dimensiona corrections at these scaes woud have to be stronger than expected to accommodate these phenomena. The enhancement of the ISW effect from the decay of the gravitationa potentia extends to intermediate scaes where the theoretica cacuations are robust. The main difference between the DGP and the fat cosmoogica constant expansion history is the prediction that the gravitationa begins its decay at high redshift. A sharp test of the DGP scenario woud be to isoate this decay at high redshift by cross correating the CMB with a highredshift gaaxy popuation. We show that a gaaxy survey that covers a substantia fraction of the sky at z > 1 can detect this correation at high significance. Such surveys are currenty being panned for the measurement of high-redshift baryon osciations. Aternatey, radio sources, X-ray sources and quasars provide other highredshift popuations for cross correation. A possibe source of confusion for this test is the apparent number density fuctuation induced by magnification from gravitationa ensing by the same structures associated with the ISW effect [41]. Magnification both owers the number density for a fixed popuation behind a ens and aso raises it for a fixed fux imit by bringing faint gaaxies into the sampe. This effect may be separated from a true spatia correation by examining different popuations of objects where the competition between these two effects differ and the cross-correation between high and ow redshift gaaxy popuations. A fu examination of this issue is beyond the scope of this paper but it is ikey that the gaaxy-isw cross correation wi become a sharp test of the DGP braneword acceeration mode in the future. Acknowedgments: We thank Sean Carro, Nemanja Kaoper, Arthur Lue, and Xiaomin Wang for usefu conversations. This work was supported by the U.S. Dept. of Energy contract DE-FG02-90ER IS and WH are additionay supported by the David and Lucie Packard Foundation. This work was carried out at the KICP under NSF PHY

8 8 [1] G. R. Dvai, G. Gabadadze, and M. Porrati, Phys. Lett. B485, 208 (2000), hep-th/ [2] A. Lue, Phys. Rept. 423, 1 (2006), astro-ph/ [3] C. Deffayet, Phys. Lett. B502, 199 (2001), hepth/ [4] C. Deffayet, G. R. Dvai, and G. Gabadadze, Phys. Rev. D65, (2002), astro-ph/ [5] C. Charmousis, R. Gregory, N. Kaoper, and A. Padia (2006), hep-th/ [6] A. Lue, R. Scoccimarro, and G. D. Starkman, Phys. Rev. D69, (2004), astro-ph/ [7] Y.-S. Song, Phys. Rev. D71, (2005), astroph/ [8] C. Schimd, J.-P. Uzan, and A. Riazueo, Phys. Rev. D71, (2005), astro-ph/ [9] L. Knox, Y.-S. Song, and J. A. Tyson (2005), astroph/ [10] M. Ishak, A. Upadhye, and D. N. Sperge (2005), astroph/ [11] M. Amarzguioui, O. Egaroy, D. F. Mota, and T. Mutamaki (2005), astro-ph/ [12] E. V. Linder, Phys. Rev. D72, (2005), astroph/ [13] I. Sawicki and S. M. Carro (2005), astro-ph/ [14] K. Koyama and R. Maartens, JCAP 0601, 016 (2006), astro-ph/ [15] H. F. Stabenau and B. Jain (2006), astro-ph/ [16] P. Zhang (2005), astro-ph/ [17] R. Maartens and E. Majerotto (2006), astro-ph/ [18] D. N. Sperge et a. (2006), astro-ph/ [19] A. G. Riess et a. (Supernova Search Team), Astrophys. J. 607, 665 (2004), astro-ph/ [20] P. Astier et a., Astron. Astrophys. 447, 31 (2006), astroph/ [21] D. J. Eisenstein et a. (2005), astro-ph/ [22] M. R. Nota et a., Astrophys. J. 608, 10 (2004), astroph/ [23] S. Boughn and R. Crittenden, Nature 427, 45 (2004). [24] P. Fosaba and E. Gaztanaga, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 350, 37 (2004). [25] R. Scranton et a., Astrophys. J. in press (2004), astroph/ [26] A. G. Riess, A. V. Fiippenko, P. Chais, A. Cocchiatti, A. Diercks, P. M. Garnavich, R. L. Giiand, C. J. Hogan, S. Jha, R. P. Kirshner, et a., Astron. J. 116, 1009 (1998). [27] S. Permutter et a. (Supernova Cosmoogy Project), Astrophys. J. 517, 565 (1999), astro-ph/ [28] S. Permutter, M. S. Turner, and M. White, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 670 (1999). [29] D. N. Sperge et a. (WMAP), Astrophys. J. Supp. 148, 175 (2003), astro-ph/ [30] M. Fairbairn and A. Goobar (2005), astro-ph/ [31] W. L. Freedman, B. F. Madore, B. K. Gibson, L. Ferrarese, D. D. Keson, S. Sakai, J. R. Moud, R. C. Kennicutt, Jr., H. C. Ford, J. A. Graham, et a., Astrophys. J. 553, 47 (2001). [32] D. J. Eisenstein, W. Hu, and M. Tegmark, Astrophys. J. Lett. 504, L57 (1998), astro-ph/ [33] A. Gruzinov, New Astron. 10, 311 (2005), astroph/ [34] M. Porrati, Phys. Lett. B534, 209 (2002), hepth/ [35] A. Lue and G. Starkman, Phys. Rev. D67, (2003), astro-ph/ [36] G. Dvai, A. Gruzinov, and M. Zadarriaga, Phys. Rev. D68, (2003), hep-ph/ [37] C. Deffayet, Phys. Rev. D66, (2002), hepth/ [38] I. Sawicki, Y.-S. Song, and W. Hu (2006), astroph/ [39] W. Hu and R. Scranton, Phys. Rev. D70, (2004), astro-ph/ [40] N. Afshordi, Phys. Rev. D70, (2004), astroph/ [41] L. Hui and M. Loverde (2006), in preparation. [42]