1:
2: \documentclass[apj]{emulateapj}
3: \usepackage{apjfonts}
4: \usepackage{amsbsy}
5:
6: %\documentclass[apj]{../new_apjstyle/emulateapj}
7: %\usepackage{../new_apjstyle/apjfonts}
8: %\usepackage{../new_apjstyle/amsbsy}
9:
10: %\documentstyle[11pt, preprint]{../../aastex52/aastex}
11: %\documentclass[12pt, preprint]{aastex}
12:
13: %\input{../newcommands.tex}
14: \input{newcommands.tex}
15: \bibliographystyle{apj}
16:
17: \newcommand{\cmjj}{\mbox{${\rm cm^{-2}}$}}
18: \newcommand{\hI}{\mbox{${\rm H\ I}$}}
19: \newcommand{\lya}{\mbox{${\rm Ly}\alpha$}}
20: \newcommand{\lyb}{\mbox{${\rm Ly}\beta$}}
21: \def\rnb{R_{\rm nb}}
22: \def\lg{{\it l}_g}
23: \def\lstar{L_\ast}
24: \def\rv{R_{\rm void}}
25: \def\rhob{\bar{\rho}}
26:
27: \begin{document}
28:
29: \title{The Void Phenomenon Explained}
30:
31: %\author{ Authors }
32: \author{ Jeremy L. Tinker$^{1}$ \& Charlie Conroy$^{2}$}
33: \affil{$^{1}$Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics \& Department of
34: Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of Chicago\\ $^{2}$Department
35: of Astrophysical Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ
36: 08544, USA}
37:
38: \begin{abstract}
39:
40: We use high-resolution N-body simulations, combined with a halo
41: occupation model of galaxy bias, to investigate voids in the galaxy
42: distribution. Our goal is to address the ``void phenomenon'' of
43: \cite{peebles:01}, which presents the observed dearth of faint
44: galaxies in voids as a challenge to the current cosmology. In our
45: model, galaxy luminosity is determined only as a function of dark
46: matter halo mass. With this simple assumption, we demonstrate that
47: large, empty voids of $\sim 15$ \hmpc\ in diameter are expected even
48: for galaxies seven magnitudes fainter than $L_\ast$. The predictions
49: of our model are in excellent agreement with several statistical
50: measures; ($i$) the luminosity function of galaxies in underdense
51: regions, ($ii$) nearest neighbor statistics of dwarf galaxies,
52: ($iii$) the void probability function of faint galaxies. In the
53: transition between filaments and voids in the dark matter, the halo
54: mass function changes abruptly, causing the maximum galaxy
55: luminosity to decrease by $\sim 5$ magnitudes over a range of $\sim
56: 1$ \hmpc. Thus the boundary between filaments and voids in the
57: galaxy distribution is nearly as sharp for dwarfs as for $\sim
58: \lstar$ objects. These results support a picture in which galaxy
59: formation is driven predominantly by the mass of the host dark
60: matter halo, and is nearly independent of the larger-scale halo
61: environment. Further, they demonstrate that \lcdm, combined with a
62: straightforward bias model, naturally predicts the existence of the
63: void phenomenon.
64:
65: \end{abstract}
66:
67: \keywords{galaxies: halos --- large scale structure of the universe}
68:
69: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
70: \section{Introduction}
71: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
72:
73: Galaxy redshift surveys have revealed a complex network of clusters,
74: filaments and walls. They have also demonstrated that the expansive
75: regions between these structures are nearly bereft of galaxies (see
76: \citealt{gregory_thompson:78, kirshner_etal:81, vogeley_etal:94} for
77: early work, and \citealt{hoyle_vogeley:04, croton_etal:04,
78: conroy_etal:05, patiri_etal:06a, tinker_etal:07_voids} for results
79: from recent large-scale surveys). The surprisingly large size of
80: voids---up to $\sim 30$ \hmpc\ in diameter---and their apparent depth,
81: in terms of their luminosity density, have begged questions about
82: their formation mechanism. Why do faint galaxies avoid the voids
83: defined by their brighter brethren? Further, the few objects found in
84: and near underdense regions appear to represent a fair sample of the
85: overall galaxy population. Peebles (\citeyear{peebles:01}, hereafter
86: P01) presented these observations as ``the void phenomenon''. The
87: straightforward argument is that the deepest voids in the dark matter
88: distribution predicted by standard \lcdm\ are never completely empty;
89: they still contain mass and significant numbers of low-mass
90: halos. Therefore, voids should be the preferable environment of faint
91: dwarf galaxies. However, P01 demonstrates that dwarf galaxies tend to
92: be distributed similarly to brighter spirals, and the local void
93: exhibits a paucity of dwarfs. \cite{peebles:07} further shows that the
94: edge of the local void has the same sharp edge for both bright and
95: faint galaxies. If halos exist in voids, then where are the galaxies?
96:
97: In this paper we present a quantitative model of galaxy bias that
98: allows us to directly address this question. We use the Halo
99: Occupation Distribution (HOD; e.g. \citealt{seljak:00, roman_etal:01,
100: cooray_sheth:02, berlind_weinberg:02}) to specify the relationship
101: between galaxies and dark matter. In the HOD framework, this
102: relationship is quantified by $P(N|M)$, the probability that a halo of
103: mass $M$ contains $N$ galaxies of a given sample. Galaxy samples can
104: be defined by luminosity, color, star formation rate, or any other
105: galaxy property. For each sample, $P(N|M)$ will be different but can
106: be calibrated with observational data. The HOD has emerged as the
107: dominant tool for interpreting clustering measurements for a wide
108: range of redshifts and galaxy classes (see, for a tip of the iceberg,
109: \citealt{zehavi_etal:04, zehavi_etal:05, zheng_etal:07, vdb_etal:07,
110: tinker_etal:07_pvd, tinker_etal:07_voids, chen:07, white_etal:07,
111: padmanabhan_etal:08}). The results obtained from analysis of
112: observational data are in excellent agreement with the results of
113: semi-analytic models, hydrodynamic cosmological simulations, and
114: high-resolution collisionless simulations (\citealt{kravtsov_etal:04,
115: zheng_etal:05, conroy_etal:06}). Our knowledge of the mapping
116: between galaxies and halos is now well-established and can be
117: confidently extended into regimes in which observational data are
118: lacking. Here we take HOD results calibrated on observed galaxy
119: samples that occupy $\gtrsim 10^{11}$ \hmsol\ halos and extrapolate to
120: lower masses in order to model the distribution of dwarf galaxies. We
121: will demonstrate that the predictions of this model are in excellent
122: agreement with the observations of P01: deep, wide voids are expected
123: within hierarchical structure formation, even for the faintest of
124: galaxies.
125:
126: One of the difficulties in directly addressing the void phenomenon is
127: that the problem has not been clearly defined. The definition of a
128: dwarf galaxy varies in the literature, and the predictions of \lcdm\
129: in this regime have not been robustly specified. To elucidate the
130: problem, P01 compared the spatial distribution of ``ordinary''
131: galaxies to samples of ``test'' dwarf galaxies within the Optical
132: Redshift Survey (ORS; \citealt{santiago_etal:95}). The number density
133: of the ordinary sample is comparable to the number density of
134: $M_r<-16$ galaxies\footnote{For brevity, all galaxy magnitudes assume
135: a Hubble constant $h\equiv H_0/100=1$. All $r$-band magnitudes have
136: been $k$-corrected to $z=0$, as with the \cite{blanton_etal:05}
137: luminosity function.} in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS;
138: \citealt{blanton_etal:05}). Thus to give our model a fixed target we
139: stipulate that the void phenomenon begins at galaxies fainter than
140: $M_r=-16$, roughly Small Magellanic Cloud-type galaxies and fainter.
141:
142: In \cite{tinker_etal:07_voids} we used the HOD to make predictions for
143: void probability statistics for galaxies brighter than $M_r=-19$. Our
144: predictions were in excellent agreement with our measurements from
145: SDSS Data Release 4 (\citealt{dr4}). Thus we concluded that there is
146: no conflict between the observed voids and those predicted by \lcdm\
147: for galaxies down to this magnitude (roughly $0.2\lstar$, given an
148: $M_\ast$ of $-20.44$ from \citealt{blanton_etal:03}). More importantly
149: for the model presented herein, the results of
150: \cite{tinker_etal:07_voids} support a model in which the luminosities
151: of galaxies are determined entirely by the mass of the host halo,
152: independent of the environment in which the halo formed. This allows
153: us to robustly predict the distribution of void galaxies within a
154: model that connects galaxies with halos through the halo mass only.
155:
156: Several other studies have investigated galaxy voids and void galaxies
157: through a variety of techniques. \cite{mathis_white:02} and
158: \cite{benson_etal:03}, using semi-analytic models, concluded that
159: galaxies of $M_r\sim -18.5$ avoid the voids of the brighter
160: galaxies. These studies were limited by numerical resolution and were
161: not able to model the dwarf galaxies on which P01 based his
162: argument. \cite{furlanetto_piran:06} constructed an analytic framework
163: within which to explore the dependence of voids on galaxy luminosity,
164: building on earlier work modeling voids in the dark matter by
165: \cite{sheth_weygaert:04}. However, no tests with numerical
166: simulations or comparison to observational results were made. The
167: model of \cite{furlanetto_piran:06} is an excellent tool for
168: understanding the trends seen in the data, but detailed analysis of
169: voids requires a simulation to produce the correct halo
170: distribution. As we will show, the change in the halo mass function
171: along the edge of a halo is of critical importance in the resulting
172: void distribution. Additionally, observational data are all measured
173: in redshift space, which is not incorporated into these analytic
174: models.
175:
176: This paper is organized as follows: In \S 2 we present our HOD model
177: and the numerical simulations employed to create mock galaxy
178: distributions. In \S 3 we present the predicted void distribution,
179: making quantitative comparisons to several sets of observational data:
180: (a) the luminosity function of void galaxies, which has been measured
181: down to $M_r=-14$ by \cite{hoyle_etal:05}, (b) the nearest neighbor
182: statistics of P01, which probe galaxies fainter than $M_r=-16$, and
183: (c) the void probability function of galaxies down to $M_r=-17$, for
184: which we present new measurements from SDSS Data Release 6
185: (\citealt{dr6}). In \S 4 we discuss our results. In all calculations,
186: we assume a flat, \lcdm\ universe with $(\om, \s8, h, n,
187: \omb)=(0.3,0.9,0.7,1.0,0.04)$.
188:
189: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
190: % TABLE 1 %
191: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
192:
193: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccccc}
194: \tablecolumns{7}
195: \tablewidth{14pc}
196: \tablecaption{Minimum Halo Mass as a Function of $r$-band magnitude threshold}
197: \tablehead{\colhead{$M_r$} & \colhead{$\ngavg$} & \colhead{$\mmin$}&\colhead{} & \colhead{$M_r$} & \colhead{$\ngavg$} & \colhead{$\mmin$}}
198: \startdata
199:
200: -22 & $2.63 \times 10^{-5}$ & 14.16 & & -15 & $1.30 \times 10^{-1}$ & 10.60 \\
201: -21 & $1.23 \times 10^{-3}$ & 12.73 & & -14 & $2.12 \times 10^{-1}$ & 10.38 \\
202: -20 & $6.59 \times 10^{-3}$ & 11.97 & & -13 & $3.43 \times 10^{-1}$ & 10.16 \\
203: -19 & $1.58 \times 10^{-2}$ & 11.57 & & -12 & $5.57 \times 10^{-1}$ & 9.94 \\
204: -18 & $2.88 \times 10^{-2}$ & 11.29 & & -11 & $9.01 \times 10^{-1}$ & 9.72 \\
205: -17 & $4.83 \times 10^{-2}$ & 11.05 & & -10 & $1.46 \times 10^{-0}$ & 9.51 \\
206: -16 & $7.95 \times 10^{-2}$ & 10.82 & & & & \\
207:
208: \enddata
209: \tablecomments{Galaxy densities are in units of $($\hmpc$)^{-3}$. All
210: masses are in units of \hmsol. }
211: \end{deluxetable}
212:
213:
214: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
215: \section{Methods}
216: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
217:
218: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
219: \subsection{Halo Occupation Models}
220: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
221:
222: Halo occupation models generally contain two important mass
223: scales. The first is the mass at which halos become sufficiently large
224: to host a single galaxy brighter than a specified luminosity
225: threshold. The second is the mass at which halos become massive enough
226: to host additional satellite galaxies. Results from both theory and
227: observation have demonstrated that these masses scale in a
228: straightforward fashion with galaxy luminosity, allowing for confident
229: extrapolation to the dwarf galaxies on which we focus.
230:
231: Functionally, the HOD breaks down the occupation of galaxies within
232: halos into two distinct components: central galaxies and satellite
233: galaxies. We use the standard parameterization for central galaxies
234: brighter than a given magnitude limit:
235:
236: \begin{equation}
237: \label{e.ncen}
238: \ncen = \frac{1}{2}\left[ 1+\mbox{erf}\left(\frac{\log M - \log \mmin}{\sigmaM} \right)
239: \right],
240: \end{equation}
241:
242: \noindent where $\mmin$ is the mass at which a halo has a 50\%
243: probability of having a central galaxy above the defined luminosity
244: threshold, and $\slogm$ is the width of the transition between 0 and 1
245: galaxies, physically representing the scatter of mass at fixed
246: luminosity. The number of satellite galaxies scales as a power of the
247: host mass, with a cutoff scale set by the central occupation function,
248:
249: \begin{equation}
250: \label{e.nsat}
251: \nsat = \ncen \times \left(\frac{M}{M_1}\right)^{\asat}
252: \end{equation}
253:
254: \noindent where $M_1$ is the mass scale at which a halo has, on
255: average, one satellite brighter than the defined magnitude limit. The
256: inclusion of $\ncen$ in equation (\ref{e.nsat}) ensures that the
257: central galaxy is the brightest galaxy within a halo. The forms of
258: these equations are in good agreement with the results of
259: semi-analytic models of galaxy formation (\citealt{zheng_etal:05}),
260: high-resolution collisionless N-body simulations that resolve
261: substructure (\citealt{kravtsov_etal:04, conroy_etal:06}), hydrodynamic
262: simulations (\citealt{zheng_etal:05}), and analytic models of halo
263: substructure (\citealt{zentner_etal:05}).
264:
265: It has been demonstrated that the parameters of the occupation
266: functions are nearly self-similar with luminosity, i.e., that
267: $\asat\approx 1$ and $M_1/\mmin \approx 20$. These results have been
268: found both in the theoretical results listed above and analyses of
269: clustering measurements from numerous surveys at multiple redshifts
270: (\citealt{zehavi_etal:05, zheng_etal:07, tinker_etal:07_pvd,
271: vdb_etal:07}). High-resolution N-body simulations have demonstrated
272: that the subhalo mass function is nearly self-similar with parent halo
273: mass, in good agreement with the HOD results obtained from
274: observations (\citealt{kravtsov_etal:04, gao_etal:04,
275: de_lucia_etal:04}). These results extend down to subhalos of $M\sim
276: 10^7$ \hmsol\ (\citealt{diemand_etal:07a}). With the now
277: well-established connection between satellite galaxies and
278: substructure within dark matter halos (\citealt{kravtsov_etal:04,
279: conroy_etal:06, weinberg_etal:06}), the self-similarity of the HOD
280: with luminosity is expected to extend far down the mass function to
281: halos that host dwarf galaxies. In addition, because we are interested
282: in voids, the details of the $\nsat$ are largely irrelevant; as long
283: as the fraction of galaxies that are satellites is roughly correct,
284: the distribution of voids is not affected by the details of $\nsat$
285: (\citealt{conroy_etal:05, tinker_etal:06_voids}).
286:
287: For each luminosity threshold, we set the value of $\mmin$ by matching
288: the space density of galaxies from the \cite{blanton_etal:05}
289: luminosity function, ie,
290:
291: \begin{equation}
292: \int_{M_r}^\infty \,\Phi(M_r)\,dM_r = \int_0^{\infty}\left(\ncen + \nsat\right)\frac{dn}{dM}\,dM,
293: \end{equation}
294:
295: \noindent where $dn/dM$ is the halo mass function, for which we use
296: \cite{tinker_etal:08}. The \cite{blanton_etal:05} result is accurate
297: down to $M_r<-12$ galaxies. We set $M_1=22\mmin$ and $\asat=1$ for all
298: samples. For $\slogm$ we choose a value of 0.15, which is consistent
299: with the results of \cite{tinker_etal:07_voids} for $M_r<-19$
300: samples. This is somewhat smaller than that obtained by
301: \cite{vdb_etal:07}, but we note that the scatter between mass and
302: luminosity is expected to be larger for blue-selected galaxy samples
303: (which \citealt{vdb_etal:07} analyze). \cite{tinker_etal:06_voids}
304: concluded that the values of $\slogm$ ranging from 0 to 0.5 produced
305: little effect on the void distribution. We will test the dependence of
306: our results on $\slogm$ in \S 3. Table 1 lists the value of $\mmin$
307: for each luminosity threshold.
308:
309:
310:
311: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
312: % TABLE 2 %
313: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
314:
315: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccc}
316: \tablecolumns{5}
317: \tablewidth{12pc}
318: \tablecaption{Properties of the Simulation Set}
319: \tablehead{\colhead{$L_{\rm box}$} & \colhead{$\epsilon$ [\hkpc]} & \colhead{$N_p$} &\colhead{$m_p$ [\hmsol]} &\colhead{$M_r$}}
320:
321: \startdata
322:
323: 384 & 14 & $1024^3$ &$4.39\times 10^{9}$ & $-20$\\
324: 192 & 4.9 & $1024^3$ &$5.89\times 10^{8}$ & $-17$\\
325: 96 & 1.4 & $1024^3$ &$6.86\times 10^{7}$ & $-14$\\
326:
327: \enddata \tablecomments{$L_{\rm box}$ is in units of \hmpc. $\epsilon$
328: is the Plummer force softening length. $N_p$ is the total number of
329: particles in the simulation. Magnitudes in column 5 represent the
330: lowest magnitude bin modeled by each simulation.}
331: \end{deluxetable}
332:
333: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
334: % FIGURE
335: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
336: \begin{figure*}
337: \epsscale{0.8}
338: %\plotone{slice.ps}
339: \plotone{f1.ps}
340: \caption{ \label{slice} Slice through the galaxy population created
341: from the halos within the 96 \hmpc\ simulation. The depth of the
342: slice is 6 \hmpc. The point size scales with the luminosity of the
343: galaxies. $r$-band magnitudes are as follows: blue $=$ $-14$ and
344: $-15$; green $=$ $-16$ and $-17$, red $=$ $-18$ and $-19$, orange are
345: all galaxies $-20$ and brighter.}
346: \end{figure*}
347: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
348: % FIGURE
349: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
350:
351:
352:
353: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
354: \subsection{Numerical Simulations}
355: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
356:
357: To investigate the distribution of voids and void galaxies with our
358: HOD models, we populate a series of high-resolution N-body simulations
359: of various box sizes kindly provided my M. Warren. The parameters of
360: the simulations are listed in Table 2, and we will refer to each
361: simulation by its box size in \hmpc : L96, L192, and L384. The
362: simulations allow us to probe halos robustly down to $\sim 10^{10}$
363: \hmsol, the minimum mass scale of $-12$ galaxies. These simulations
364: were performed using the hashed oct-tree code of
365: \cite{warren_salmon:93}, and were described in
366: \cite{warren_etal:06}. We use the spherical overdensity halo finder of
367: \cite{tinker_etal:08} to identify halos in the simulation, defining
368: halos with an overdensity $\Delta=200$ with respect to the background
369: matter density. The mass resolution of the highest resolution
370: simulation is 18 times higher than the Millennium Simulation of
371: \cite{springel_etal:05}, and 75 times higher than the simulation
372: coupled to the semi-analytic galaxy formation model of
373: \cite{mathis_white:02}.
374:
375: To populate each simulation with galaxies, we use a Monte Carlo
376: approach based on equations (\ref{e.ncen}) and (\ref{e.nsat}),
377: assuming a nearest integer distribution for central galaxies and a
378: Poisson distribution of satellite galaxies. The nearest integer
379: approach is standard for central galaxies due to the limit of one
380: central galaxy per halo. Poisson statistics provide an excellent
381: description of the distribution of satellites in simulations
382: (\citealt{kravtsov_etal:04, zheng_etal:05}) and in observations
383: (\citealt{lin_etal:04}). By considering the HOD parameters as a
384: function of luminosity, the full conditional luminosity function of
385: each halo can be easily determined. The number of centrals in a bin
386: $M_r$ to $M_r+\Delta M_r$ is $\ncen^{(M_r)}-\ncen^{(M_r+\Delta M_r)}$. The number of
387: satellite galaxies in a magnitude bin is calculated in the same manner.
388:
389: Central galaxies are placed at the center of the halo, and satellite
390: galaxies are distributed randomly with the density profile of
391: \cite{navarro_etal:97}, with the concentration-mass relation of
392: \cite{bullock_etal:01} (using the updated parameters of the model
393: listed in \citealt{wechsler_etal:06}). Satellite velocities, relative
394: to the halo motion, are taken from a Gaussian distribution with
395: 1-dimensional dispersion of $\sigma^2 = GM_{200}/2R_{200}$. We
396: populate each simulation down to a limit of 100 particles per
397: halo. The 384 \hmpc\ simulation is ideal for $M_r<-20$ samples, the
398: 192 \hmpc\ sample resolves $M_r<-17$ samples, while the 96 \hmpc\
399: simulation probes galaxies as faint as $M_r=-14$. Although $\mmin$ for
400: $M_r=-12$ is 127 particles, we must resolve halos below $\mmin$ to
401: fully account for the scatter between mass and luminosity.
402:
403: \section{Results}
404:
405: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
406: % FIGURE
407: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
408: \begin{figure}
409: \epsscale{1.17}
410: %\plotone{void_LF.ps}
411: \plotone{f2.ps}
412: \caption{ \label{void_LF} Comparison between the luminosity function
413: of void galaxies measured by \cite{hoyle_etal:05} and predicted by
414: our HOD model. The HOD measurement, shown with the open squares, is
415: a weighted average of results from the 96 \hmpc\ and 192 \hmpc\
416: simulations (noting that all points at $M_r>-17$ are from the 96
417: \hmpc\ simulation). Errors are estimated by jackknife sampling of
418: each simulation into octants. The solid line is the Hoyle et al.\
419: data, with the shaded region representing their error bars. For
420: comparison, the full luminosity function of all galaxies from
421: \cite{blanton_etal:05} is shown with the dotted curve.}
422: \end{figure}
423:
424: \subsection{The Cosmic Web in the Faintest Galaxies}
425:
426: Figure \ref{slice} presents a slice through L96 that is typical of the
427: structure in these simulations. The galaxy positions are in redshift
428: space, assuming the distant-observer approximation with the $y$-axis
429: being the line of sight. Along the filaments, $L_\ast$ and dwarf
430: galaxies cohabitate, along with all luminosities in between. The
431: transition between filaments and voids is very sharp, however. Deep
432: voids of $\sim 10$ \hmpc\ in diameter, empty of even the
433: faintest resolved galaxies, are not uncommon in this simulation. The
434: deepest void, centered at $(x,y)=(80,48)$ \hmpc, is nearly $18$ \hmpc\
435: along its longest axis. The transition from the main filament in the
436: slice (running along the $y$-axis) into the void on either side is
437: sharp for both bright and faint galaxies, resembling the galaxy
438: distribution around the local void shown in \cite{peebles:07}. Around
439: the local void, between 5 to 7 \hmpc\ from the void center, the
440: number of galaxies $M_B<-18$ and $M_B>-18$ drops essentially to
441: zero. The abrupt transition from filament to void is ubiquitous in the
442: cosmic web, even for galaxies hosted by $10^{10}$ \hmsol\ halos. We
443: note that halo velocities are usually directed along the axis of the
444: filament, thus choosing the $x$-axis as the line of sight does not
445: noticeable change the galaxy distribution plotted in Figure
446: \ref{slice}.
447:
448:
449: \subsection{The Luminosity Function of Void Galaxies}
450:
451: The most straightforward quantifiable test of our model is the number
452: of galaxies located within voids, and their distribution as a function
453: of luminosity. \cite{hoyle_etal:05} created a sample of ``void''
454: galaxies in the SDSS by identifying galaxies with local densities
455: below a critical value of $\delta\equiv\delta\rho/\rhob= -0.6$ in a
456: top-hat sphere of 7 \hmpc. Densities were calculated with respect to
457: galaxies with $M_r<-20.5$. We have constructed a sample of void
458: galaxies in our simulations following these same criteria. All
459: densities are calculated in redshift space assuming the distant
460: observer approximation. Figure \ref{void_LF} compares the void
461: luminosity function of our HOD model to the \cite{hoyle_etal:05}
462: measurements. Our model is in excellent agreement with the data, not
463: only reproducing the overall abundance of void galaxies but also the
464: decrease in the value of $M_\ast$ in the void luminosity function
465: relative to the overall luminosity function.
466:
467: Interestingly, we find some void galaxies with magnitudes as bright as
468: $M_r=-21.5$, just as measured in Hoyle et al. These objects are {\it
469: not} scattered into void regions due to redshift space distortions,
470: but are in intrinsically low-density regions as defined by the
471: $M_r<-20.5$ galaxies. The minimum mass scale for $M_r<-21.5$ galaxies
472: is $\sim 1.8 \times 10^{13}$ \hmsol, which are never found in
473: $\delta\lesssim -0.6$ regions in the {\it dark matter}
474: distribution. When using the dark matter particles to obtain the local
475: density around each galaxy and recalculate the void luminosity
476: function, there are no void galaxies this bright. Thus, bright void
477: galaxies are due to stochastic biasing of $L_\ast$ galaxies, both from
478: Poisson fluctuations in the number of halos and fluctuations in the
479: number of $L>\lstar$ galaxies per halo. This creates a few regions in
480: which the dark matter density is above the density threshold but the
481: galaxy density is below it.
482:
483: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
484: % FIGURE
485: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
486: \begin{figure*}
487: \epsscale{1.}
488: \vspace{-1.1cm}
489: %\plotone{nnb9.ps}
490: \plotone{f3.ps}
491: \caption{ \label{nnb9} Nearest neighbor statistics for ``test''
492: galaxies, $M_r=[-14,-16)$ (solid histograms), ``control'' galaxies,
493: $M_r=[-16,-18)$, (dashed histograms), and ``bright'' galaxies,
494: $M_r<-18$, (dotted histograms). For each galaxy in a sample, $\rnb$
495: is the distance to the nearest control galaxy in redshift space. The
496: first eight panels represent random subvolumes of the 96 \hmpc\
497: simulation that match the volume of the sample in P01. In each
498: panel, the number in the bottom left is the ratio of mean $\rnb$
499: values, $\langle R_{tc}\rangle/\langle R_{cc}\rangle$. The number in
500: the top right is $\langle R_{tc}\rangle/\langle R_{bc}\rangle$. The
501: bottom right panel are the overall statistics for the entire
502: box. The shaded region represents the observational results from
503: P01.}
504: \end{figure*}
505: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
506: % FIGURE
507: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
508:
509:
510: \subsection{Nearest Neighbor Statistics}
511:
512: P01 used nearest neighbor statistics to probe the relative
513: distribution of ``ordinary'' galaxies ($M_r\le -16$) to dwarf galaxies
514: ($M_r>-16$). If dwarf galaxies preferentially occupy void regions
515: relative to their brighter counterparts, their distribution of nearest
516: neighbors will show a significant tail out to large neighbor distances
517: $\rnb$. To circumvent the problem of different galaxy samples having
518: different mean space densities, for each test object the nearest
519: neighbor in the control sample is found. This distribution is compared
520: to the distribution of $\rnb$ of the control sample to itself. P01
521: found that the distribution of nearest neighbors for test and control
522: objects are essentially the same, indicating that dwarfs avoid the
523: voids defined by the ordinary objects.
524:
525: In Figure \ref{nnb9} we present several examples of the cumulative
526: distributions of $\rnb$ taken from L96. Here we have set our control
527: sample to be $M_r=[-16,-18)$, and our test sample are galaxies with
528: $M_r=[-14,-16)$. The control and test samples are substantially
529: different in terms of their space densities, but are not too
530: dissimilar in the halo masses that they probe. To test any systematics
531: due to these choices we have an additional sample of ``bright''
532: objects containing all galaxies $M_r<-18$. The largest sample in P01
533: is roughly 1000 $($\hmpc$)^3$, so we have broken our mock galaxy
534: distribution into $9^3$ equal-volume cubes of 1225 $($\hmpc$)^3$ to
535: test for cosmic variance in this statistic. The bottom right panel
536: shows the results from the full simulation. We define $R_{tc}$ as the
537: distance to the nearest control galaxy for each test galaxy, while
538: $R_{bc}$ is the distance to the nearest control galaxy for each bright
539: galaxy, and $R_{cc}$ is the distance for each control galaxy to the
540: nearest galaxy within the control sample.
541:
542: The shaded region in each panel of Figure \ref{nnb9} approximates the
543: results from the largest dwarf sample from P01 (his Figure 4, top set
544: of curves). The upper limit of the shaded region is set by
545: $f(<R_{tc})$ while the lower edge is $f(<R_{cc})$. P01 determined the
546: ratio of mean $\rnb$ values to be $\langle R_{tc}\rangle/\langle
547: R_{cc}\rangle=1.1$. This is nearly identical to the overall value of
548: 1.06 obtained from the L96 simulation. The scatter in this statistic
549: is quite large, with a variance in mean distance ratios over the $9^3$
550: subsamples of 0.23. In many examples in Figure \ref{nnb9},
551: $f(<R_{cc})$ extends to distances significantly beyond
552: $f(<R_{tc})$. Comparing the $R_{tc}$ distributions to the nearest
553: neighbor statistics for the bright objects to the test sample,
554: $R_{bc}$, yields similar results. The mean distance ratio is 1.19 with
555: a scatter of 0.55, owing to the lower number density of brighter
556: objects. While the agreement between model and data are encouraging,
557: it is likely fortuitous given the large cosmic scatter in the P01
558: measurements. However, we conclude that the prediction of the model
559: supports the picture that dwarf galaxies and brighter galaxies have
560: similar spatial distributions in low-density regions. The slight
561: difference in nearest neighbor distributions between dwarf and regular
562: galaxies is also in agreement with the observational results of
563: \cite{lee_etal:00}.
564:
565: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
566: % FIGURE
567: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
568: \begin{figure}
569: \epsscale{1.2}
570: %\plotone{void_sizes.ps}
571: \plotone{f4.ps}
572: \caption{ \label{void_sizes} The void probability as a function of
573: luminosity at three different separations relative to the mean
574: intergalactic separation, $\lg=\ngavg^{-1/3}$. Points with errors
575: are results from SDSS DR6. Curves represent results from the HOD
576: model from the simulations listed in Table 2: L96 ({\it dotted
577: curves}), L192 ({\it solid curves}), L384 ({\it dashed
578: curves}). Data points for the $M_r=-22$ sample are not shown for
579: $r\ge 1.3\lg$ because the VPF is not measured at those distances.}
580: \end{figure}
581: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
582: % FIGURE
583: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
584:
585:
586: \subsection{Void Probabilities as a Function of Luminosity}
587:
588: The void probability function (VPF, denoted $\p0$) is defined as the
589: probability that a randomly placed sphere of radius $r$ contains no
590: galaxies. In \cite{tinker_etal:07_voids} we measured the VPF for
591: galaxies as faint as $M_r=-19$ from Data Release Four of the Sloan
592: Digital Sky Survey (\citealt{dr4}). Fainter samples were not used
593: because cosmic variance errors become large and galaxy clustering
594: measurements are not available at $M_r>-18$. In Figure
595: \ref{void_sizes} we present new measurements of the VPF from DR6. The
596: measurements are in magnitude bins, 1 magnitude wide (referenced by
597: their lower limit). We follow the procedures outlined in detail in
598: \cite{tinker_etal:07_voids} for both measurements and for comparing
599: the HOD predictions to the data. We use the HOD mocks to estimate
600: error bars on the data, also discussed in
601: \cite{tinker_etal:07_voids}. The increased sky coverage of DR6
602: attenuates (but does not eliminate) the cosmic variance considerations
603: for fainter samples. Though we are not able to probe void statistics
604: for dwarf galaxies (in our definition), we are able to make VPF
605: measurements down to $M_r=-17$, a two magnitude improvement on our
606: previous results. We use these data to test the robustness of our HOD
607: model and to extend the conclusions of \cite{tinker_etal:07_voids}
608: discussed in \S 1 to lower luminosities.
609:
610: Rather than presenting VPFs for each luminosity bin, we consolidate
611: the results by presenting void probabilities at a fixed distance scale
612: as a function of luminosity. The open circles in Figure
613: \ref{void_sizes} show $\p0$ at the mean intergalactic separation for
614: each magnitude bin, $r=\lg\equiv\ngavg^{-1/3}$. Squares and triangles
615: represent $\p0$ at $r=1.3\lg$ and $r=1.6\lg$, respectively. At
616: luminosities below $\lstar$, the void probability at any multiple of
617: $\lg$ is essentially independent of luminosity. Brighter galaxies have
618: a lower probability of finding a void, thus, in the scaled distance
619: $r/\lg$, the brightest galaxies have the smallest voids. This has also
620: been seen in the 2dFGRS data (\citealt{beckmann_muller:08}). This is
621: partially a result of the fact that brighter galaxies have fewer
622: satellite galaxies (a higher satellite fraction results in an increase
623: in $\mmin$ in order to match the number density of the galaxy sample),
624: but it is mainly due to the fact that $\lg$ for samples on the
625: exponential tail of the of the luminosity function increases much more
626: rapidly than the bias of those galaxies. For $M_r<-22$ galaxies,
627: $\lg=33$ \hmpc.
628:
629: The HOD model predictions are shown in Figure \ref{void_sizes} for all
630: three simulations. The difference in the amplitude of $\p0$ between
631: L96 and the larger simulations is consistent with cosmic variance due
632: to the small volume. Although the model is not calibrated on
633: clustering measurements as done in \cite{tinker_etal:07_voids}, it
634: matches the observed void probabilities as a function of luminosity
635: and scale. The constraints on $\mmin$ are driven primarily by $\ngavg$
636: rather than two-point clustering, therefore $\mmin$ and the resulting VPF
637: are similar between \cite{tinker_etal:07_voids} and the model
638: presented here.
639:
640: Although we cannot probe the VPF for galaxies as faint as $M_r=-14$
641: the success of our model in matching $\p0$ down to $M_r=-17$, the void
642: luminosity function down to $M_r=-14.5$, and nearest neighbor
643: statistics down to $M_r=-14$ strongly suggest that our extrapolation of
644: the HOD below halo masses of $10^{11}$ \hmsol\ is robust, and the
645: resulting galaxy distribution represents a complete picture of the
646: structure within underdense regions.
647:
648: \subsection{ The galaxy structure within voids}
649:
650: In the VPF results of Figure \ref{void_sizes}, $P_0(1.6\lg) \sim
651: {constant}$ for $-17\ge M_r\ge -20$ galaxies in both the model and the
652: data. In this magnitude range, voids are self-similar. At fainter
653: magnitudes, the void probability monotonically increases with
654: decreasing brightness. This implies that voids are not self-similar
655: for dwarf galaxies, and that the structure of the comic web itself
656: plays a role in the distribution of dwarfs in voids (as seen in Figure
657: \ref{slice}).
658:
659: The results of Figure \ref{slice} and the trend in $\p0$ for $M_r\ge
660: -17$ galaxies can be interpreted through the change in the halo mass
661: function within the void itself. Figure \ref{void_profile} plots the
662: {\it maximum} halo mass as a function of distance from the center of
663: the three deepest voids in L96 (all with radii $\sim 10$ \hmpc, and
664: central densities $\delta<-0.9$). At 10 \hmpc\ from the center of the
665: void, halos between $10^{12}$-$10^{13}$ \hmsol\ can be found. These
666: halos house the $\lstar$ galaxies that `define' the edge of the
667: void. But between 10 \hmpc\ and 5 \hmpc\ from the void center, the
668: maximum halo mass drops nearly three orders of magnitude. At the very
669: centers of the voids, only $M\sim 10^9$ \hmsol\ halos are present. The
670: points in Figure \ref{void_profile} show $\mmin$ as a function of
671: luminosity from $M_r<-21$ to $M_r<-10$ samples\footnote{We caution
672: that the \cite{blanton_etal:05} luminosity function is calibrated
673: only down to $-12$, so results at lower luminosities are an
674: extrapolation.}. The points are placed along the curve to
675: demonstrate how large the void would be in each luminosity. The steep
676: drop in the maximum mass at $R \sim 6$ \hmpc\ causes the voids to have
677: sharp boundaries in the galaxy distribution over a wide range of
678: galaxy luminosity. Figure \ref{void_profile} implies that between 5
679: and 6 \hmpc\ from the void center, the brightest galaxy luminosity
680: will plummet by nearly 5 magnitudes. The galaxies in the inner half of
681: the void (if there are any) would be well below the magnitude limit of
682: the ORS data with which P01 calculate their
683: statistics. \cite{peebles:07} finds that the abrupt transition into
684: the local void, inside of which no galaxies are observed, occurs at
685: $R\sim 5-7$ \hmpc\ from the void center. He further demonstrates that
686: this boundary is nearly identical for galaxies divided into faint and
687: bright samples (with a threshold of $M_B=-18$). The scatter between
688: halo mass and galaxy luminosity smooths out the slight change in void
689: radius with $M_r$ seen in Figure \ref{void_profile}. Thus for a
690: luminosity threshold cut, the edge of the local void should be nearly
691: the same for the two samples.
692:
693: The dashed curve in Figure \ref{void_profile} indicates the critical
694: mass threshold below which \cite{hoeft_etal:06} find that
695: photoionization significantly reduces the ability of void halos to
696: form stars. No halos at $R\le 5$ \hmpc\ are above this line,
697: suggesting that the inner half of deep voids will contain no galaxies
698: at all, becoming truly dark. \cite{gottlober_etal:03} calculated the
699: mean void mass function for all halos within 80\% of the void radius,
700: finding good agreement with the analytic predictions of
701: \cite{sheth_tormen:02}. However, they also find that the shape of the
702: void mass function depends on position within the void itself. The
703: {\it mean} void mass function in the L96 simulation (within $0.8\rv$)
704: is in good agreement with their results.
705:
706: It is important to consider scatter between mass and luminosity for
707: central galaxies. The points in Figure \ref{void_profile} represent
708: $\mmin$, the mass at which the halo has only a 50\% probability of
709: containing a galaxy of that luminosity or brighter. The error bars on
710: each point indicate the mass at which that probability is $10\%$ {\it
711: and} if we {\it double} the scatter between mass and luminosity to
712: 0.3. Random fluctuations, or larger physical scatter between mass and
713: luminosity, may place a galaxy slightly further toward the center of
714: the void (or further away), but not enough to smooth out the sharp
715: transition between filament and void seen in the simulations.
716:
717: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
718: % FIGURE
719: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
720: \begin{figure}
721: \epsscale{1.2}
722: %\plotone{void_profile.ps}
723: \plotone{f5.ps}
724: \caption{ \label{void_profile} The maximum halo mass within voids as a
725: function of distance from the void center. The solid curve
726: represents mean of the largest three voids in the 96 \hmpc\
727: simulation. The points represent $\mmin$ as a function of magnitude,
728: placed along the curve to demonstrate how large the void would be at
729: each luminosity. The dashed curve is the critical mass from
730: \cite{hoeft_etal:06}, below which star formation in void halos is
731: significantly attenuated due to delayed formation histories of void
732: halos.}
733: \end{figure}
734: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
735: % FIGURE
736: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
737:
738:
739: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
740: \section{Summary and Discussion}
741: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
742:
743: The void phenomenon consists of two observational facts: that voids
744: contain few, if any, low-luminosity galaxies, and that the few void
745: objects tend to have similar properties to the overall galaxy
746: population. The controversial aspect is whether these facts are at
747: odds with the current cosmology. Although the depth of voids and
748: homogeneity of void objects are striking features of the cosmic web,
749: they are readily explainable within the context of \lcdm, combined
750: with a straightforward model to connect galaxies and dark matter at
751: all luminosities and mass scales.
752:
753: The simple proposition within our implementation of the halo
754: occupation distribution is that galaxy properties are determined
755: solely by the mass of the halo in which the galaxy resides,
756: independent of the halo's larger scale environment\footnote{We note
757: that it is possible to create an HOD with depends on
758: environment. The model would then specify $P(N|M,\delta)$ rather
759: than $P(N|M)$, as done in \cite{tinker_etal:06_voids,
760: tinker_etal:07_voids} and \cite{wechsler_etal:06}.} Although this
761: model must break down at some high level of precision or with the
762: details of certain galaxy properties, connecting luminosity to halo
763: mass is a robust method that has passed all tests thus far
764: (\citealt{abbas_sheth:06, skibba_etal:06, tinker_etal:07_voids}, as
765: well as the tests presented in this paper). The mass-only approach to
766: galaxy bias readily explains both aspects of the void
767: phenomenon. First, void galaxies are a fair representation of the
768: field population simply by construction. A galaxy in a $10^{10}$
769: \hmsol\ halo does not know if the halo sits in a void or a
770: filament. Recent numerical results have demonstrated that the halo
771: itself does retain information about its environment (the 'assembly
772: bias'; see, e.g., \citealt{gao_etal:05, wechsler_etal:06,
773: gao_white:07}). However, this effect does not propagate into the
774: void galaxies through either luminosity or color
775: (\citealt{tinker_etal:07_voids}). \cite{patiri_etal:06b} find that
776: void galaxy properties, even star formation rate or morphology, follow
777: the same distribution as the field. This is echoed in the
778: semi-analytic results of \cite{croton_farrar:08}. Therefore, although
779: halos 'remember' their environment, the physics of galaxy formation
780: introduces an intrinsic scatter between halo formation and galaxy
781: properties that washes this signal out.
782:
783: Second, the lack of dwarf galaxies in voids is a consequence of
784: mapping galaxy luminosity to halo mass in such a way as to preserve
785: the observed abundance of galaxies at each luminosity. The halo mass
786: function scales as $M^{-2}$, while the luminosity function scales as
787: roughly $L^{-1}$. This difference in logarithmic slopes implies that
788: the mass to light ratio $M/L$ of galaxies increases as galaxies become
789: fainter. Below $\lstar$, objects with substantially different
790: luminosities will occupy halos of roughly comparable mass and will
791: trace out the same large-scale structure. In order to explain the void
792: phenomenon, we require the physical mechanism that causes the increase
793: in $M/L$ for faint objects (whatever it may be) to apply to all
794: low-mass halos, regardless of environment.
795:
796: Connecting the luminosity function to the halo mass function naturally
797: predicts that the Tully-Fisher relation becomes flatter at low
798: luminosities. \cite{geha_etal:06} confirmed this prediction by
799: measuring the rotation velocities of galaxies as faint as $M_r\approx
800: -13$. Our model places these galaxies in halos with maximum circular
801: velocities of $\sim 45$ \kms, in good agreement with the observed
802: rotation speeds of 35-60 \kms.
803:
804: As stated above, parameterizing the HOD as a function only of halo
805: mass is only an approximation of the underlying physics (although a
806: surprisingly good approximation). In the context of the void
807: phenomenon, it should be noted that any influence of environment is
808: mostly likely to {\it reduce} galaxy formation efficiency in
809: underdense regions. This is the effect of the photoionization
810: arguments in \cite{hoeft_etal:06}, and is also seen in the
811: semi-analytic model of \cite{croton_etal:07}. A reduction in formation
812: efficiency in voids makes $\mmin$ {\it higher} at fixed
813: luminosity. There is no need to invoke exotic new physics, such as
814: modified gravity models, to lower the formation efficiency of halos in
815: underdense regions to match the data. Several studies have
816: demonstrated that a long-range scalar potential acting on the dark
817: matter can accelerate the evacuation of matter from voids during the
818: growth of structure (\citealt{farrar_peebles:04, gubser_peebles:04,
819: nusser_etal:05}). Although comparison of these models to
820: observational data is difficult analytically, numerical simulations of
821: these alternative gravity models, like those by \cite{nusser_etal:05},
822: can be used in the same manner as the simulations here. The excellent
823: agreement between our HOD model and the observations may place upper
824: limits on such models, since models that produce larger voids at any
825: luminosity would come into conflict with measured void statistics.
826:
827: \vspace{1cm}
828:
829: \noindent We would like to thank Mike Warren for use of his
830: simulations. We also thank Jim Peebles for comments on the manuscript.
831: J.T. was supported by the Chandra award GO5-6120B and National Science
832: Foundation (NSF) under grant AST-0239759.
833:
834: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
835: % Bibliography
836: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
837:
838: \bibliography{../risa}
839:
840:
841: \end{document}
842:
843: %%% Local Variables:
844: %%% mode: latex
845: %%% TeX-master: t
846: %%% End:
847:
848: