160 likes | 291 Views
Cosmological Parameters and the WMAP data. Antony Lewis CfA, Harvard / CITA, Toronto http://cosmologist.info. Standard assumptions – what are the parameters? Unexpected features, validity of assumptions? Low quadrupole, cut-off/running/dark energy Asymmetries
E N D
Cosmological Parameters and the WMAP data Antony Lewis CfA, Harvard / CITA, Toronto http://cosmologist.info • Standard assumptions – what are the parameters? • Unexpected features, validity of assumptions? • Low quadrupole, cut-off/running/dark energy • Asymmetries • ‘features’ of WMAP analysis
MCMC sampling for parameter estimation • MCMC sample points in cosmological parameter space drawn from the posterior distribution given the data P(parameters|data) • Each sample gives an equally likely set of parameters given the data. “possible universes” • Number density of samples proportional to probability density • Just requires a function to compute likelihood for each set of parameters • CosmoMC code at http://cosmologist.info/cosmomcuses CAMB (http://camb.info) to generate Cl • Lewis, Bridle: astro-ph/0205436
Cosmological Parameters:combining CMB+Weak Lensing WMAP+ACBAR+CBI+VSA with RCS + weak BBN prior Contaldi, Hoekstra, Lewis: astro-ph/0302435
Vanilla Universe marginalized parameter constraints flat, massless neutrinos, cosmological constant, power law power spectrum, … large compared to WMAPext+2dF (0.134±0.006) Good agreement with more conservative independent CMB+2dF analysis
WMAP TT power spectrum at low l compared to theoretical power law model (mean over realizations) Pseudo-Cl data points from http://lambda.gsfc.nasa.gov/
Likelihood of theoretical value given observed value Observed Standard models Low quadrupole? WMAP Pseudo-Cl: C2 = 123 Tegmark cleaned map: C2 = 184 (kp2 cut, Pseudo-Cl estimator on map from astro-ph/0302496) Foreground uncertainty: Likelihood modelling:
Running ns? WMAP+CMB+2dF, with and without l =2,3,4 multipoles Low quadrupole and octopole drive ~1 sigma evidence for running Need small scale data more reliable than Lyman-α
Cut-off in initial power spectrum? Bridle, Lewis, Weller, Efstathiou: astro-ph/0302306 P(k)=0 for k<kc ~ 3 x 10-4Mpc-1Slightly favoured by the dataDoes not give very low quadrupolebecause of ISW contribution from larger k>kc
Total ISW Δk Last scattering k MPc Contributions to the quadrupole
Changing ISW is tricky… E.g. Dark energy with w > -1,cs2 <1 orw<-1, cs2≥1 give less ISW than cosmological constant Weller, Lewis: astro-ph/0307104 Bean, Doré: astro-ph/0307100 No simple theoretical model gives a very low quadrupoleThe low value is not that unlikelyin a realisation of a standard model
P(k) on smaller scales Bridle, Lewis, Weller, Efstathiou: astro-ph/0302306
Asymmetry of low multipoles? after Eriksen et al astro-ph/0307507:l <~31 shows unlikely asymmetry:evaluate binned Cl on half sky as a function of axis: the lowest ratio of power on opposite two halves is small compared to simulations. Low power in N ecliptic hemisphere. Also astro-ph/0307282 find quadrupole and octopole alignment is unlikely at 1/60 level
WMAP is great, but… • Foreground uncertainties significant at low l – e.g. different analyses of TE power spectrum. Foreground uncertainties not included in likelihoods • Pseudo-Cl estimators combined with maximum likelihood error bars not strictly correct • Noise not included in TT likelihood at l<100, even though larger at l~<100 than l>~100 • Significant correlation between TT and TE power spectra neglected – bias on e.g. • Likelihood approximation not valid for outlier points • Is it valid to do parameter estimation with usual assumptions when Cl not consistent with Gaussian expectations? Do outliers bias results? ... Versions of TE power spectrum
Conclusions • Standard ΛCDM cosmology fits the overall shape of the WMAP power spectrum and is consistent with other data • Low quadrupole is not that unlikely in standard models, but favours models predicting low values by factor <~ 10 • Outlier points/asymmetries – quite strong evidence for analysis problems, foregrounds, or new physics • Parameter constraints from naïve analysis may be misleading – should really understand unexpected features first.
In two bins… 1<l<18 17<l<31
No power in northern hemisphere 3-point function? Measured and marginalized errors from simulations: Eigenmodes: