Cosmological Structure Formation

Similar documents
Cluster abundances, clustering and cosmology. Ravi K Sheth (ICTP/UPenn)

Lecture 6: Dark Matter Halos

Origin of Structure Formation of Structure. Projected slice of 200,000 galaxies, with thickness of a few degrees.

Physics 463, Spring 07. Formation and Evolution of Structure: Growth of Inhomogenieties & the Linear Power Spectrum

AST4320: LECTURE 10 M. DIJKSTRA

You may not start to read the questions printed on the subsequent pages until instructed to do so by the Invigilator.

Halo models of large scale structure

N-body Simulations. Initial conditions: What kind of Dark Matter? How much Dark Matter? Initial density fluctuations P(k) GRAVITY

BAO & RSD. Nikhil Padmanabhan Essential Cosmology for the Next Generation VII December 2017

Galaxies 626. Lecture 3: From the CMBR to the first star

An excursion set model of the cosmic web: The abundance of sheets, filaments and halos

Preliminaries. Growth of Structure. Today s measured power spectrum, P(k) Simple 1-D example of today s P(k) Growth in roughness: δρ/ρ. !(r) =!!

formation of the cosmic large-scale structure

The Effects of Inhomogeneities on the Universe Today. Antonio Riotto INFN, Padova

Week 3: Sub-horizon perturbations

2. What are the largest objects that could have formed so far? 3. How do the cosmological parameters influence structure formation?

CHAPTER 20. Collisions & Encounters of Collisionless Systems

AST4320: LECTURE 6 M. DIJKSTRA

Princeton December 2009 The fine-scale structure of dark matter halos

Cross-Correlation of CFHTLenS Galaxy Catalogue and Planck CMB Lensing

ASTR 610 Theory of Galaxy Formation Lecture 15: Galaxy Interactions

Observational Cosmology

Linear Theory and perturbations Growth

Halo Model. Vinicius Miranda. Cosmology Course - Astro 321, Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics University of Chicago

Consistent modified gravity analysis of anisotropic galaxy clustering using BOSS DR11

Measures of Cosmic Structure

8.1 Structure Formation: Introduction and the Growth of Density Perturbations

You may not start to read the questions printed on the subsequent pages until instructed to do so by the Invigilator.

Cluster Formation in Lagrangian Perturbation Theory. Lavinia Heisenberg

Survey of Astrophysics A110

Modeling the Universe Chapter 11 Hawley/Holcomb. Adapted from Dr. Dennis Papadopoulos UMCP

Cosmology. Introduction Geometry and expansion history (Cosmic Background Radiation) Growth Secondary anisotropies Large Scale Structure

Structure formation. Yvonne Y. Y. Wong Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, München

Appendix E. Lagrangian Perturbation Theory and Initial condition for Cosmological N-body Simulation

(Gaussian) Random Fields

Future evolution of bound supercluster in an accelerating Universe

Physics of the Large Scale Structure. Pengjie Zhang. Department of Astronomy Shanghai Jiao Tong University

N-body Simulations and Dark energy

Non-linear structure in the Universe Cosmology on the Beach

Redshift space distortions and The growth of cosmic structure

Binary star formation

Non-linear structure in the Universe Cosmology on the Beach

4 Evolution of density perturbations

Precision Cosmology from Redshift-space galaxy Clustering

The Zel dovich Approximation. Large-scale structure goes ballistic

The Zel dovich Approximation. Large-scale structure goes ballistic

Chapter 9. Cosmic Structures. 9.1 Quantifying structures Introduction

Formation time-distribution of dark matter haloes: theories versus N-body simulations

Redshift Space Distortions

On the gravitational redshift of cosmological objects

Equations of Stellar Structure

Gasdynamical and radiative processes, gaseous halos

Large Scale Structure

Clusters: Context and Background

Galaxy interaction and transformation

AST1100 Lecture Notes

Galaxies: Structure, Dynamics, and Evolution. Elliptical Galaxies (II)

Cosmology with high (z>1) redshift galaxy surveys

A A + B. ra + A + 1. We now want to solve the Einstein equations in the following cases:

Olbers Paradox. Lecture 14: Cosmology. Resolutions of Olbers paradox. Cosmic redshift

PHY 316 FINAL EXAM ANSWERS DEC

Non-linear structure in the Universe Cosmology on the Beach

Large Scale Structure (Galaxy Correlations)

Beyond the spherical dust collapse model

Halo formation times in the ellipsoidal collapse model

Dark Matter Halos. They will have a large impact on galaxies

II. The Universe Around Us. ASTR378 Cosmology : II. The Universe Around Us 23

Cosmology ASTR 2120 Sarazin. Hubble Ultra-Deep Field

dt 2 = 0, we find that: K = 1 2 Ω (2)

The fine-scale structure of dark matter halos

FURTHER COSMOLOGY Book page T H E M A K E U P O F T H E U N I V E R S E

arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.co] 4 Sep 2009

Theory of galaxy formation

astro-ph/ Oct 1994

Chapter 9. Perturbations in the Universe

Clusters: Context and Background

HOMEWORK 10. Applications: special relativity, Newtonian limit, gravitational waves, gravitational lensing, cosmology, 1 black holes

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IN MODIFIED GRAVITY MODELS

Cosmological Perturbation Theory

Probing Dark Matter Halos with Satellite Kinematics & Weak Lensing

Signatures of MG on. linear scales. non- Fabian Schmidt MPA Garching. Lorentz Center Workshop, 7/15/14

Physical Cosmology 12/5/2017

Unication models of dark matter and dark energy

Simulating non-linear structure formation in dark energy cosmologies

f GR (z) dlng GR dlna

Testing General Relativity with Redshift Surveys

R. K. Sheth, H. J. Mo & G. Tormen collapses at time z if the initial overdensity within it exceeds a critical value, sc(z). This critical value depend

halo formation in peaks halo bias if halos are formed without regard to the underlying density, then δn h n h halo bias in simulations

A Universal Density Profile from Hierarchical Clustering

Cosmological Issues. Consider the stress tensor of a fluid in the local orthonormal frame where the metric is η ab

Cosmology from Topology of Large Scale Structure of the Universe

Astronomy 422. Lecture 15: Expansion and Large Scale Structure of the Universe

TESTING GRAVITY WITH COSMOLOGY

I Structure formation 2

dark matter haloes and galaxy formation

PONT 2011 Avignon - 20 Apr 2011 Non-Gaussianities in Halo Clustering properties. Andrea De Simone

Beyond BAO: Redshift-Space Anisotropy in the WFIRST Galaxy Redshift Survey

arxiv:astro-ph/ v2 29 Jan 1998

BAO & RSD. Nikhil Padmanabhan Essential Cosmology for the Next Generation December, 2017

Ay1 Lecture 17. The Expanding Universe Introduction to Cosmology

Transcription:

Cosmological Structure Formation Beyond linear theory Lagrangian PT: Zeldovich approximation (Eulerian PT: Spherical collapse) Redshift space distortions

Recall linear theory: When radiation dominated (H = 1/2t): (d 2 δ/dt 2 ) + 2H (dδ/dt) = (d 2 δ/dt 2 ) + (dδ/dt)/t = 0 δ(t) = C 1 + C 2 ln(t) (weak growth) In distant future (H = constant): (d 2 δ/dt 2 ) + 2H Λ (dδ/dt) = 0 δ(t) = C 1 + C 2 exp(-2h Λ t) If flat matter dominated (H = 2/3t): δ(t) = δ + t 2/3 + δ - t -1 a(t) at late times Linear growth just multiplicative factor, so if initial conditions Gaussian, linearly evolved field is too, with P(k,t) = D 2 (t)/d 2 (t init ) P(k,t init )

At small k, only amplitude grows At high k, shape also changes Bumps and wiggles = cosmic variance Ratio of Pk not sensitive to cosmic variance

Linear theory shape Nonlinear evolution changes shape

Initially Gaussian fluctuation field becomes very non- Gaussian Linear growth just multiplicative factor, so cannot explain non- Gaussianity at late times

Variance of δ R (δ smoothed on R) depends on R: σ 2 (R) = dk/k (k) W 2 (kr)

Variance of δ R (δ smoothed on R): σ 2 (R) = dk/k (k) W 2 (kr) Correlations in smoothed field (k) = k 3 P(k)/2π 2 R 1R2 (k) = (k) W(kR 1) W(kR 2 ) ξ R 1R2 (r) = dk/k R1R2 (k) j 0(kr)

E.g. Power-law P(k) ξ(r) = dk/k [k 3 Ak n /2π 2 ] j 0 (kr) r -3-n if n>-3 σ 2 (R) = (A/2π 2 ) dk/k k n+3 exp(-k 2 R 2 ) = (A/2π 2 ) Γ[(n+3)/2]/2 R -3-n ξ R (r) = (A/2π 2 ) dk k 2+n exp(-k 2 R 2 ) j 0 (kr) = (A/2π 2 ) (π/2r) erf(r/2r) if n=-2 ξ 0 (r) when r R (smoothing irrelevant on large scales? BAO )

Estimate of nonlinear scale <δ 2 (t)> = dk/k 4π k 3 P(k,t) W 2 (kr) If P(k) = Ak n then <δ 2 (t)> ~ R -(3+n) ~ M -(3+n)/3 converges only for n>-3. Convergence of potential fluctuations only if n=1. Note: P(k,t) = D + 2 (t) P(k), so <δ 2 (t)> ~ 1 means nonlinear structure on scales smaller than R nl ~ D + 2/(3+n) ~ t (4/3)/(3+n) Hierarchical structure formation for -3<n<1

In general 2 r φ = 4πG ρ δ (Poisson equation) ρ/ t = - r (ρv) (Continuity equation) Since ρ = ρ 0 (1 + δ)/a 3 we have ρ/ t = -3ρH + ρ ( δ/ t)/(1 + δ) = - ρ (Hr) + ρ ( δ/ t)/(1 + δ) (ρv) = ρ /(1 + δ) (1+δ)(v-Hr) + ρ/(1 + δ) (1+δ)(Hr) = ρ /(1 + δ) (1+δ)v pec +ρ (Hr) + ρ/(1 + δ) Hr δ δ/ t - r v pec = - x (v pec /a) = - x u (x = r/a)

Fourier transform δ(x,t) = k δ k (t) e -ik x and u(x,t) = k u k (t) e -ik x r 2 φ = 4πG ρδ = (3Ω 0 H 02 /2a 3 ) δ (matter domination) - k 2 φ k = (3Ω 0 H 02 /2a) δ k When Ω=1 then δ k a so the potential does not evolve! δ/ t = - x u δ k / t = -iku k δ k / t = lnd/ t δ k = ( lnd/ lna) H δ k = fh δ k So u k /(fh) = i (k/k) (δ k /k) Note that u/h has units of distance Velocities are more sensitive to small k (large scales), because of the factor of 1/k In practice, this means that once φ k is set, then u k and δ k are completely determined.

The Zeldovich Approximation I. The physical displacement of a particle in time dt is dr = v dt so comoving displacement is dx = dr/a = (dr/dt)/a dt = (v/a) dt. Hence, in linear theory, dx/dd = (v/a) (dt/dd) ~ δ i (v/a) (dt/dδ) ~ δ i (v/a) (r/v) ~ δ i x = constant Hence, if initial comoving position was q, then comoving position x at a later time, when the growth factor is D, is x = q + D(t) u(q)/(fh) (note that u/h is a distance)

Structure grows because of perturbations in the initial velocity field

Because of these motions, the fluctuation field can become very non-gaussian (even though the displacements themselves are Gaussian)

The Zeldovich Approximation II. x = q + D(t) u(q)/(fh) = q + D(t) S(q) How are Zeldovich displacements S (for shift) related to density? dx i /dq j = δ ij + D(t) ds i /dq j = δ ij - D(t) d[dφ/dq i ]/dq j Evidently, displacements are related to one derivative of potential so Jacobian of x-q transformation involves second derivatives of potential: a 3x3 matrix. The 3 eigenvalues of Φ ij, say λ 1, λ 2, λ 3, describe the principal axes of an ellipsoid (not a sphere!): in this respect, Zeldovich is more general than spherical.

Zeldovich approximation III. In principal axis frame: dx i /dq i = 1 - D(t) λ i Thus D(t) λ describes how the axis shrinks (or expands). Hence, the density is 1 + δ(t) = Π i=13 (1 D(t)λ i ) 1 To lowest order this is 1 + δ(t) = 1 + D(t) λ i + D 2 (t) (λ 1 λ 2 + λ 1 λ 3 + λ 2 λ 3 ) + = 1 + D(t) δ initial + D 2 (t) (λ 1 λ 2 + λ 1 λ 3 + λ 2 λ 3 ) + Evidently, δ Linear is just the trace of Φ ij. This is why it can be arbitrarily negative, and even when it is, the true overdensity is still sensible. Second order is combination of δ 2 Linear and tidal effects.

N-body simulations of gravitational clustering in an expanding universe

It s a capitalist s life Most of the action is in the big cities Newcomers to the city are rapidly stripped of (almost!) all they have Encounters generally too high-speed to lead to long-lasting mergers Repeated harassment can lead to change Real interactions take place in the outskirts A network exists to channel resources from the fields to feed the cities

Nonlinear evolution Assume a spherical cow. (Gunn & Gott 1972)

Zeldovich sphere Expansion/contraction same in all directions means λ 1 =λ 2 =λ 3 1 + δ(t) = [1 D(t) λ] 3 = [1 D(t) δ/3] 3 There is a critical density: δ = 3 Is this generic? Compare with exact sphere

Spherical evolution model d 2 R/dt 2 = GM/R 2 + ΛR = ρ (4πG/3H 2 ) H 2 R + ΛR = ½ Ω(t)H(t) 2 R + ΛR Note: currently fashionable to modify gravity. Should we care that only 1/R 2 or R give stable circular orbits?

decaying mode growing mode Excise a sphere and replace with smaller one of same mass Perturbing time of big bang decaying mode Perturbing energy of sphere growing mode

Spherical evolution model Initially, E i = GM/R i + (H i R i ) 2 /2 (Λ = 0) Shells remain concentric as object evolves; if denser than background, object pulls itself together as background expands around it At turnaround : E = GM/r max = E i So GM/r max = GM/R i + (H i R i ) 2 /2 Hence (R i /r) = 1 H i2 R i3 /2GM = 1 (3H 2 i /8πG) (4πR i3 /3)/M = 1 1/(1+ i ) = i /(1+ i ) i

Virialization Final object virializes: W = 2K E vir = W+K = W/2 = GM/2r vir = GM/r max so r vir = r max /2: Ratio of initial to final size = (density) ⅓ final density determined by initial overdensity To form an object at present time, must have had a critical over-density initially Critical density same for all objects! To form objects at high redshift, must have been even more over-dense initially

Spherical evolution model Collapse depends on initial over-density i ; same for all initial sizes Critical density depends on cosmology Final objects all have same density, whatever their initial sizes Collapsed objects called halos are ~ 200 denser than critical (background?!), whatever their mass Tormen 1997 (Figure shows particles at z~2 which, at z~0, are in a cluster)

Nonlinear evolution: Spherical collapse Turnaround: E = -GM/r max R(t) R init Virialize: -W=2K E = W+K = W/2 r vir = r max /2 t/t init Modify gravity modify collapse

Exact Parametric Solution (R i /R) vs. θ and (t/t i ) vs. θ very well approximated by (R initial /R) 3 = Mass/(ρ com Volume) = 1 + δ (1 D Linear (t) δ i /δ sc ) δsc Dependence on cosmology from δ sc (Ω,Λ), but this is rather weak

1 + δ (1 δ Linear /δ sc ) δsc As δ Linear δ sc ( 1.686), δ infinity This is virialization limit Zeldovich (approximation) has δ sc = 3 Standard perturbation theory has δ sc = 21/13 = 1.61 As δ Linear 0, δ δ Linear If δ Linear = 0 then δ = 0 This does not happen in modified gravity models where D(t) D(k,t) Related to loss of Birkhoff s theorem when r 2 lost? Note 1+δ 0 as δ Linear - Why is δ Linear < -1 sensible?

1 + δ (1 δ Linear /δ sc ) δsc 1 + δ Linear + (1+1/δ sc ) δ Linear2 /2 + j a j δ Linear j SPT has δ sc = 21/13 so δ δ Linear + (17/21) δ Linear2 + Terms like δ Linear2 being products in real space are convolutions in k-space Therefore k-modes of nonlinear δ are coupled, so evolved density field is non-gaussian Spherical evolution not the full story

Only very fat cows are spherical. (Lin, Mestel & Shu 1963; Icke 1973; White & Silk 1978; Bond & Myers 1996; Sheth, Mo & Tormen 2001; Ludlow, Boryazinski, Porciani 2014)

size Triaxial collapse: initial sphere evolves because of triaxial shear time Evolution of 2 nd axis very similar to spherical model of same initial density Collapse of 1 st axis sooner than in spherical model; collapse of all 3 axes takes longer

Tri-axial (ellipsoidal) collapse Evolution determined by properties of initial deformation field, described by 3 3 matrix at each point (Doroshkevich 1970) Tri-axial because 3 eigenvalues/invariants; Trace = initial density δ in = quantity which determines spherical model; other two (e,p) describe anisotropic evolution of patch Critical density for collapse no longer constant: On average, δ ec (δ in,e,p) larger for smaller patches low mass objects

Convenient Approximations Zeldovich Approximation (1970): (1 + δ) Zel = Π i=13 (1 D(t)λ i ) 1 Zeldovich Sphere (λ 1 = λ 2 = λ 3 = δ Linear /3): (1 + δ) ZelSph = (1 δ Linear /3) 3 (1 + δ) EllColl (1 + δ) SphColl (1 + δ) Zel /(1 + δ) ZelSph

Redshift space distortions

Redshift space distortions: peculiar velocities driven by gravity cz obs = Hd + v pec

Linear redshift space distortions The same velocities which lead to Zeldovich displacements make redshift space position different from real space position. x s = x + [v(x).d los / d los ]/H = q + v(q)/(afh) + [v(q) d los / d los ]/H Hence, same Jacobian trick yields δ (Kaiser 1987) δ s = (1 + fµ 2 ) δ where µ is angle wrt los, so P s (k,µ) = (1 + fµ 2 ) 2 P(k) and averaging over µ (1 + 2f/3 + f 2 /5) P(k)

Virial Motions (within halos ) (R i /r vir ) ~ f( i ): ratio of initial and final sizes depends on initial overdensity Mass M ~ R i3 (since initial overdensity «1) So final virial density ~ M/r vir3 ~ (R i /r vir ) 3 ~ function of critical density: Hence, all virialized objects have the same density, vir ρ crit (z), whatever their mass V 2 ~ GM/r vir ~ (Hr vir ) 2 vir ~ (HGM/V 2 ) 2 vir ~ (HM) 2/3 : massive objects have larger internal velocities or temperatures; H decreases with time, so, for a given mass, virial motions (or temperature) higher at high z

Nonlinear Fingers-of-God Virial equilibrium: V 2 = GM/r = GM/(3M/4π200ρ) 1/3 Since halos have same density, massive halos have larger random internal velocities: V 2 ~ M 2/3 V 2 = GM/r = (G/H 2 ) (M/r 3 ) (Hr) 2 = (8πG/3H 2 ) (3M/4πr 3 ) (Hr) 2 /2 = 200 ρ/ρ c (Hr) 2 /2 = Ω (10 Hr) 2 Halos should appear ~ten times longer along line of sight than perpendicular to it: Fingers-of-God Think of V 2 as Temperature; then Pressure ~ V 2 ρ

Two redshift space distortions: Linear + nonlinear

Redshift space distortions On large scales, use Gaussian statistics to compute (Fisher 1995)

Alcock-Paczynski