1 / 26

Supernova Legacy Survey (SNLS) Goal: Characterize the Dark Energy equation of state “w” parameter

Supernova Legacy Survey (SNLS) Goal: Characterize the Dark Energy equation of state “w” parameter. A component of the CFHT Legacy Survey. SNLS Collaboration. Toronto Group : Carlberg * , Mark Sullivan, Andy Howell, Kathy Perrett, Alex Conley

ranee
Download Presentation

Supernova Legacy Survey (SNLS) Goal: Characterize the Dark Energy equation of state “w” parameter

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Supernova Legacy Survey (SNLS)Goal: Characterize the Dark Energy equation of state“w” parameter A component of the CFHT Legacy Survey

  2. SNLS Collaboration • Toronto Group: Carlberg*, Mark Sullivan, Andy Howell, Kathy Perrett, Alex Conley • Victoria Group: Chris Pritchet*, Don Neill, Dave Ballam • French Group: Reynald Pain, Pierre Astier, Julien Guy, Nicolas Regnault, Jim Rich, Stephane Basa • Follow-up Collaborators: • Oxford: Isobel Hook (Gemini & VLT) • LBL: Saul Perlmutter & Peter Nugent (Keck) • Caltech: Richard Ellis* (Keck) • Carnegie: Wendy Freedman*, Mark Phillips (Magellan) • PLUS many students and associates • * CIAR

  3. H2(z) = Ho2[ΩM(1+z)3 + ΩR(1+z)2 + ΩΛ(1+z)3(1+w)]Distancer = ∫c /H(z) dzinfer w.relative distances!

  4. Supernova scary for dark energy?

  5. Secondary SNLS goal: understanding Supernovae Ia

  6. Survey Design: Increasing the Precision • Goal – to boost the S/N per sne to ~1-2. • Single telescope “Always on” rolling survey • 5 epochs per lunation • Multi-filter (g, r, i, z SDSS) • Careful calibration effort (goal 1%, current 3%) • New k-correction details (redshift of spectrum) • Depth sufficient to get to z=1+ • After five Years: • 2000 detected (to z~1.1-1.2) • 1000 sent for spectroscopy (optimized) • 700 confirmed Ia • Currently only reduced 1st year.

  7. Gemini: success of SN photo-z • Before implementation: • Consistent with previously published rates: • Lidman et al. (SCP): 50-62% • Matheson et al. (ESSENCE): 44% • Median z=0.5 • Using photo-z: ~70-80% confirmed as SNe Ia at Gemini (median z=0.81) • Only 3% (1/38) non-Ia SNe when using photo-z Howell et al. (2005)

  8. Typical light-curve z=0.36

  9. The supernova distance model Peak B luminosity depends on: • Colour: Bluer-brighter relation (B-V)0 • Rate of fading: Slower-brighter relation • Fit w, ΩM, M, α, β, σint (extra: ΩR and w(z)) Χ2=1 requiresσint = 0.14 magnitudes (i.e. last 14% jitter not yet understood)

  10. First Results – Hubble Diagram (Astier et al. 2005)

  11. Comparison with previous SN results Comparison of SNLS first year (72 SNe; solid contours) to previous SN results – Knop et al 2003 (~50 SNe; dotted contours). Shaded area shows projected end of survey constraints The superior colour and time sampling of SNLS allows tighter constraints on the cosmological parameters.

  12. The Baryon Acoustic Oscillation scale Data provides an angular scale which measures the ratio of the distances to the SDSS galaxies at z=0.35 and the CMB at z=1089 We use A=0.469±0.017

  13. Sne Ia plus BAOw = -1.02 ± 0.09 (stat)

  14. Systematic Errors Checks • No colour residual • (there is a distance-colour relation at z>0.8) • (very noisy photometry at z>0.8) • No “stretch” residual, yet • No significant malmquist bias • Independent analyses confirm “clean” data • But, upcoming data is much better. • Better sampling in time and colour • Lower noise for z band • Calibration improvements

  15. Colour trouble at z>0.8 (noise induced)low significance distances

  16. The Motivation for variable w • Widely used model for Dark Energy (and inflation) is a quantum scalar field, φ(x,t). • Energy density, ρ = ½ [dφ/dt]2 + V(φ). • Pressure, P = ½ [dφ/dt]2 - V(φ). • w = P/ρ is near -1 for slowly varying φ.

  17. Empirical fit for w(z) Two common models: • w(z) = w0 + w1 z • Taylor series, • behaves badly at high z • Works well over accessible range • Preferred here for comparison to others • w(a) = w0 + w1 (1-a), a = 1/(1+z) • Similar to above, weaker constraints.

  18. 1001 Bootstrap resamplings, fitting for all parameters, displaying only two. Green contours are SNLS Ia constraint Red contours are the Baryon Acoustic Oscillation constraint of Eisenstein et al. Black (very similar to green, Ia, alone) are joint constraint. Median z~0.6. Ellipse orientation is approx w0 ≈ -1 -0.6w1. (flatness constraint from WMAP makes barely detected difference)

  19. Marginal stretch dependence Split at median stretch, using only s<0.97 (left), and s>0.97 (right). Restricted to z<0.7 to avoid higher z color correction complications at higher z. Sample is reduced to 53 and 35, for low and high s, respectively.

  20. w = wo+ w1z w = wo + w1(1-a)

  21. Statistical Error only! End of SNLS result, assuming 8x more data at both high and low redshift. Comparable to WFMOS, but...systematics are problematic.

  22. Conclusions • Current data consistent with constant DE • w = -1.02 ± 0.09 • Future work will improve limit 2-3x • If <0.02 mag “all-in” systematics, then SNLS will provide dw/da to ± 0.3 (1 sigma) • Systematic errors are the challenge. • New results coming: “3rd year” analysis

More Related