1: %\documentclass[prd,aps,eqsecnum,tightenlines,nofootinbib]{revtex4}
2: %\documentclass[aps,prd,eqsecnum,showpacs,amsmath]{revtex4}
3: %\documentstyle[epsf,prd,aps,epsf]{revtex}\documentstyle[preprint,prd,aps,epsfig]{revtex}
4: %\documentclass[aps,floats,prd,psfig]{revtex4}
5: \documentclass[aps,twocolumn,floats,prl,psfig]{revtex4}
6: \input epsf
7: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
8:
9:
10: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}
11: \newcommand{\beqa}{\begin{eqnarray}}
12: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}
13: \newcommand{\eeqa}{\end{eqnarray}}
14:
15: \newcommand{\etal}{{\it et al. }}
16: \newcommand{\siml}{\lesssim}
17: \newcommand{\simg}{\gtrsim}
18: \newcommand{\lsim}{\lesssim}
19: \newcommand{\gsim}{\gtrsim}
20: \newcommand{\psim}{\mbox{\raisebox{-1.0ex}{$~\stackrel{\textstyle \propto}
21: {\textstyle \sim}~$ }}}
22: \newcommand{\vect}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath${#1}$}}
23: \newcommand{\lmk}{\left(}
24: \newcommand{\rmk}{\right)}
25: \newcommand{\lnk}{\left\{ }
26: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
27: \newcommand{\rnk}{\right\} }
28: \newcommand{\lkk}{\left[}
29: \newcommand{\rkk}{\right]}
30: \newcommand{\lla}{\left\langle}
31: \newcommand{\p}{\partial}
32: \newcommand{\rra}{\right\rangle}
33: \newcommand{\so}{M_\odot}
34: \newcommand{\mch}{{\cal M}}
35: \newcommand{\vex}{{\vect x}}
36: \newcommand{\ver}{{\vect r}}
37: \newcommand{\mb}{M_\bullet}
38: \newcommand{\vue}{\hat{\vect e}}
39: \newcommand{\vel}{\vect l}
40: \newcommand{\ven}{\vect n}
41: \newcommand{\veC}{\vect C}
42: \newcommand{\vev}{\vect v}
43: \newcommand{\vep}{{\vect p}}
44: \newcommand{\veq}{{\vect q}}
45: \newcommand{\veo}{{\vect \Omega}}
46:
47:
48: \begin{document}
49: %\baselineskip 7mm
50: %\if0
51: %\draft
52: %\tighten
53: \title{Probing the largest scale structure in the universe with
54: polarization map of galaxy clusters}
55:
56: \author{Naoki Seto}
57: %\email{seto@tapir.caltech.edu}
58: \author{Elena Pierpaoli}
59: %\email{pierpa@caltech.edu}
60: \affiliation{Theoretical Astrophysics, MC 130-33, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena,
61: CA 91125
62: }
63: %\fi
64: \begin{abstract}
65: We introduce a new formalism to describe the polarization signal of
66: galaxy clusters on the whole sky.
67: We show that a sparsely sampled,
68: half--sky map of the cluster polarization signal at $z\sim 1$
69: would allow to better characterize the very large scale density fluctuations.
70: While the horizon length is smaller in the past, two other competing
71: effects significantly remove the contribution of the small scale
72: fluctuations from the quadrupole polarization pattern at $z\sim 1$. For the standard
73: $\Lambda$CDM universe with vanishing tensor mode, the quadrupole moment
74: of the
75: temperature anisotropy probed by WMAP is expected to have a
76: $\sim32\%$ contribution from fluctuations on scales below
77: $6.3h^{-1}$Gpc. This percentage would be reduced to
78: $\sim 2\%$ level for the quadrupole moment of polarization
79: pattern at $z\sim 1$.
80: A cluster polarization map at $z \sim 1$ would
81: shed light on the potentially anomalous features of the
82: largest scale structure in the observable universe.
83: \end{abstract}
84: \pacs{PACS number(s): 98.70.Vc 98.80.Es }
85: \maketitle
86: %\fi
87:
88:
89:
90: \underline{\em 1) Introduction}
91: One of the most intriguing features of the temperature anisotropy
92: measured by WMAP \cite{Bennett:2003bz}
93: is the extremely low value of the estimated quadrupole moment.
94: According to the WMAP team, the probability of
95: observing such a low value, given their best--fit
96: cosmological model, is $\sim 0.7\%$ \cite{Spergel:2003cb}.
97: Independent analysis of the WMAP data have somewhat reduced the significance of
98: this finding (see {\it e.g.} \cite{Tegmark:2003ve}), but have also
99: evidenced other curious results, such as the indication of a
100: preferred direction for the quadrupole and octopole modes
101: \cite{deOliveira-Costa:2003pu}.
102: These discoveries have raised speculations
103: on possible non--standard
104: topology of the Universe \cite{deOliveira-Costa:2003pu,
105: Cornish:2003db} or
106: inflationary physics (see {\it e.g.} \cite{Contaldi:2003zv}), and
107: at the same time, evidenced the importance
108: of independent observational methods to probe
109: the largest scale structure in the Universe.
110:
111:
112: The
113: low-$l$ moments
114: of the present temperature anisotropies
115: are usually assumed to probe the largest scales, but in fact
116: they carry information about perturbations on a fairly broad
117: range of scales.
118: It would be highly preferable to
119: find an observable which probes the largest
120: scales with less contamination from intermediate ones.
121: In this {\it Letter} we point out that the polarization signal
122: from high--redshift clusters could be such observable.
123:
124:
125: Light scattered off a free electron
126: is polarized, if the electron sees a
127: quadrupole anisotropy of its incident light.
128: This effect gives rise to interesting observable phenomena,
129: like, for example,
130: the large--scale polarization signal in a reionized Universe
131: \cite{Zalda97,Skordis}.
132: The same effect is responsible for the major polarization signal
133: in Sunyaeve--Zeldovich (SZ) galaxy clusters.
134: As first pointed out by \cite{Kamionkowski:1997na} ,
135: the polarization pattern of clusters at different redshifts
136: may
137: shed light on the quadrupole amplitude at earlier times and at different
138: positions
139: (see also
140: \cite{Baumann:2003xb} in
141: relation to the low observed quadrupole moment).
142: %potentially allowing for a reduction of the cosmic variance (see also
143: %\cite{Skordis}).
144: The cluster polarization has also been
145: investigated as a potential tool to determine the
146: nature of dark energy
147: that is sensitive to the Integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect
148: \cite{Baumann:2003xb,Cooray:2003hd}.
149:
150:
151:
152: In this {\it Letter} we develop a transparent formalism for the calculation of
153: the
154: relevant
155: observable quantities of the cluster's polarization signal, and
156: show that the polarization pattern at $z\sim 1$ could be a promising
157: probe of the largest scale structure in the universe, compared with the
158: quadrupole temperature
159: anisotropies observed today.
160: This finding contrasts with the naive expectation
161: that the polarization signal of distant clusters are generated
162: by fluctuations whose spatial scales are
163: well within the horizon at
164: the present \cite{Port}.
165: We also estimate how well the
166: dark energy equation of state can be measured by the sole cluster polarization
167: signal.
168:
169:
170: \underline{\em 2) Formulation}
171: In this section we review the formalism to analyze the polarization signals
172: of galaxy clusters.
173: Throughout this {\it Letter}, we only discuss linear scalar
174: perturbations in a flat background universe.
175: We first introduce a fixed spherical coordinate system $\veC_0$ centered on
176: an
177: observer at $z=0$. In the coordinate system $\veC_0$ we denote the angular
178: variables with $\Omega=(\theta, \phi)$ and use
179: redshift $z$ as a radial coordinate for our past
180: light cone.
181: Let us consider the linear polarization
182: generated by the local temperature anisotropy seen by a cluster labeled
183: by $i$
184: at a redshift $z_i$ and direction $\Omega_i$.
185: Such polarization can be expressed as a linear combination of the
186: quadrupole anisotropy $a_{2m}(\Omega_i,z_i)$ seen by the cluster as \cite{Kamionkowski:1997na, Seto, Port}:
187: \beq
188: X_i=\frac{Q_i+iU_i}{F(z_i)\tau_{ci}}=\sum_{m=-2}^2 a_{2m}(\Omega_i,z_i){}_2
189: Y_{2m} (\Omega_i), \label{obs}
190: \eeq
191: where $F(z)=-\sqrt{6}/10 T_{CMB}(z)$ is a normalization factor
192: ($T_{CMB}(z)$: CMB temperature
193: at redshift $z$), $\tau_{ci}$ is the effective
194: optical depth
195: of the
196: cluster, and ${}_2
197: Y_{2m} (\Omega)$ is the spin-weighted spherical harmonics
198: \cite{Hu:1997hp,Zaldarriaga:1996xe} defined in the $\veC_0$ system.
199: The coefficient $a_{2m}(\Omega_i,z_i)$ in eq.(\ref{obs}) is defined in
200: a spherical coordinate system $\veC_i$ whose orientation is obtained by a
201: parallel transport of $\veC_0$ to the cluster's
202: position $(\Omega_i,z_i)$.
203: We shall
204: assume that we can make a three dimensional polarization map
205: $X(\Omega,z)$ on our past light cone by observing many clusters at
206: different redshifts and directions. In eq.(\ref{obs}) we only include the
207: primary temperature quadrupole anisotropy as the source for
208: the cluster polarization, since the contribution of
209: the secondary polarized incident light
210: is expected to be much weaker.
211: We also neglect the
212: effects of the peculiar velocity field \cite{Kamionkowski:1997na,
213: Cooray:2003hd}, assuming that the typical comoving distance between the
214: surveyed clusters is larger than the correlation length of the peculiar
215: velocity field $\lsim 50 h^{-1}$Mpc \cite{gorski88}. To make the map
216: $X(\Omega, z)$ we need to estimate the optical depth $\tau_{ci}$ of each
217: cluster. This would be performed by using other observations like the SZ spectral distortion or the X-rays.
218:
219: One way to characterize the statistical properties of the polarization
220: map $X(\Omega, z)$ is through its correlation function $\lla
221: X(\Omega_i,z_i) X(\Omega_j,z_j) \rra$. This function is written in
222: terms of
223: the correlation $\lla a_{2m}(\Omega_i,z_i)
224: a_{2m'}(\Omega_j,z_j) \rra $ for the information given at two
225: positions $i$ and $j$ \cite{Port}. But this representation has two disadvantages.
226: First, it is given by different frames of reference. Second, it is not a
227: diagonal matrix with respect to $m$ and $m'$. As a result its expression
228: is very complicated and hard
229: to relate to basic theoretical inputs (e.g. the primordial power
230: spectrum).
231:
232: \if0
233: Our final goal is to analyze a polarization map constructed by combining
234: the polarization information of many clusters.
235: To this aim we choose to express the polarization information
236: for all clusters in a single spherical coordinate system (which we take to be
237: $\veC_0$) rather than use cluster--dependent coordinates as in eq.~(\ref{obs}).
238: If we use
239: $a_{2m}(\Omega,z)$ for representing the effects of the cosmic
240: fluctuations, the basic statistical quantities for analyzing the map
241: would be expressed
242: by means of the correlation function $\lla a_{2m}(\Omega_i,z_i)
243: a_{2m'}(\Omega_j,z_j) \rra$ \cite{Port}. The latter has no geometrical
244: symmetry, and its expression is very complicated and hard
245: to relate to basic theoretical inputs (e.g. the primordial power
246: spectrum).
247: Our approach, on the contrary,
248: takes advantage of the apparent geometrical symmetries of
249: our past light cone, which
250: considerably simplify the calculation of the relevant statistical quantities.
251: As a result, the information we can extract from the polarization signal
252: is more transparent.
253: \fi
254:
255: Here, we extensively use the properties of the spin-weighted spherical
256: harmonics for analyzing tensor quantities.
257: This kind of approach is widely used in both CMB and weak lensing
258: studies \cite{Hu:1997hp,Zaldarriaga:1996xe,lens}, and especially useful
259: for dealing with statistically isotropic fluctuations that are analyzed in this {\it
260: Letter}.
261: Our goal here is to write the map $X(\Omega, z)$ in the orthonormal form;
262: \beq
263: X(\Omega,z)=\sum_{l=2}^\infty
264: \sum_{m=-l}^l{}_2Y_{lm}(\Omega)b_{lm}(z),\label{map}
265: \eeq
266: and to present the basic formulas that relate the coefficients
267: $b_{lm}(z)$ to the spectrum $P(k)$ of the primordial density
268: fluctuations.
269: In order to cast eq.(\ref{obs}) as in (\ref{map}), we
270: first
271: separate the radial information $z$ and the directional information
272: $\Omega$ for the coefficient $a_{2m}(\Omega, z)$. Then
273: we combine the
274: angular
275: information with that of the spin-weighted harmonics $_2Y_{2m}(\Omega)$
276: in eq.(\ref{obs})
277: to get the expansion with the orthonormal angular basis ${}_2Y_{lm}(\Omega)$
278: as in eq.(\ref{map}).
279: The latter process is similar to the unification
280: of the spin
281: and orbital angular momentum in Quantum Mechanics ({\it e.g.}
282: \cite{Sakurai}), whose application to CMB is discussed in Hu \& White
283: \cite{Hu:1997hp} (see also \cite{lens}).
284: Following the analysis for the CMB polarization in a reionized universe
285: \cite{Hu:1997hp,Zaldarriaga:1996xe},
286: we find
287: \beqa
288: \lla b_{lm}(z)b^*_{l'm'}(z') \rra&=&\delta_{ll'}\delta_{mm'}(4\pi)^2
289: \label{amp} \\
290: & &\times \int
291: \frac{dk}k (P(k)k^{-1})
292: h_l(k,z) h_l(k,z'),\nonumber
293: \eeqa
294: where $P(k)=Ak^n$ ($A$: a normalization factor) is the primordial
295: power spectrum with $n=1$
296: corresponding to the scale invariant spectrum. Due to the assumption
297: of the statistical isotropy, the correlation (3) has diagonal form.
298: This expression is given for E-mode (electronic parity) polarization
299: generated by
300: scalar perturbations that would not produce B-mode (magnetic parity)
301: polarization. Tensor (gravitational wave) or vector perturbations can
302: generate both E, and B-mode polarizations, and we can determine or
303: constrain their amplitudes by measureing B-mode
304: polarization.
305: %In the case of weak lensing, the shear field has purely
306: %E-mode component \cite{lens}.
307:
308:
309: In eq.(\ref{amp})
310: the function $h_l(k,z)$ is defined as
311: \beq
312: h_l(k,z)=\Delta_2(z,k) f_l[k(\tau(0)-\tau(z))],\label{hl}
313: \eeq
314: where $\tau$ is the conformal time, $\Delta_2(z,k)$ is the transfer function for the quadrupole
315: temperature
316: anisotropies at a given $z$, and $f_l[k(\tau(0)-\tau(z))]$ is a
317: geometrical factor which relates the scale of the fluctuation with the
318: distance of the cluster
319: from the observer. We will return to this factor later on.
320: %One can also derive eq.(\ref{amp}) with some appropriate
321: %modifications to the standard analysis of the CMB polarization in a
322: %reionized universe \cite{Hu:1997hp,Zaldarriaga:1996xe}.
323:
324: The transfer function $\Delta_2(z,k)$ is related to the linear
325: growth rate
326: $D$ and to the
327: scale factor $a$ as:
328: \beqa
329: \Delta_2(z,k)&=&\frac3{10}j_2[k(\tau(z)-\tau(z_{rec}))]\nonumber \\
330: & &+\frac{9}{5}\int_{\tau_{rec}}^{\tau(z)}
331: d\tau j_2[k(\tau(z)-\tau)]\frac{\p}{\p
332: \tau}\lmk\frac{D(\tau)}{a(\tau)}\rmk, \label{trans}
333: \eeqa
334: where $j_2(x)$ is the spherical Bessel function and
335: $\tau_{rec}$ is the conformal time at recombination $z_{rec}\sim
336: 1100$.
337: Note that the
338: function $\Delta_2(z,k)$ represents the
339: evolution and the projection effects
340: of each Fourier mode $k$, but it does not depend on the power
341: spectrum.
342: The first term on the r.h.s. of eq.~(\ref{trans}) is the Sachs-Wolfe
343: (SW) effect, and
344: conveys information including the
345: largest scale structure (comparable to the horizon size) at redshift $z$.
346: The
347: second term is the Integrated Sachs-Wolfe (ISW) effect, and is
348: sensitive to the
349: recent expansion history of the universe. The ISW term typically probes
350: smaller scales than the horizon size.
351:
352:
353: The function $f_l(x)$ in eq.(\ref{hl})
354: represents projection effects for scales of the order of the cluster's distance from the observer
355: and it is expressed in terms of spherical
356: Bessel functions as
357: $
358: f_l(x)\equiv\sqrt{\frac{(l+2)!}{6(l-2)!}}\frac{j_l(x)}{30 x^2}. \
359: $
360:
361: Note that eq.(\ref{obs}) only contains the expression of
362: the local quadrupole $(l=2)$
363: mode at the cluster's location, while the expression in
364: eq.(\ref{map}) also contains higher modes $(l\ge
365: 3)$. This is due to the
366: power transfer from $l=2$ to $l\ge 3$ which is caused by the
367: spin-orbit angular momentum coupling.
368: The function $f_l(x)$ regulates such transfer,
369: preserving the total power ($\sum_{l=2}^\infty f_l(x)^2(2l+1)=1$).
370:
371:
372:
373: \if0%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
374: We also have $f_2(0)=1$ and
375: $f_{l>2}(0)=0$. The latter means that
376: only the quadrupole mode exists in the polarization map at $z=0$.
377: In paper \cite{Seto} the polarization map was perturbatively dealt
378: by expanding the redshift for coefficients $b_{lm}(z)$, and
379: the first order term $z \cdot db_{lm}/dz|_{z=0}$
380: was explicitly presented. This term has both $l=2$ and $l=3$ modes as
381: indicated by the asymptotic behavior $f_l(x)\propto x^{l-2}$ around
382: $x=0$.
383: \fi%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
384:
385:
386: We can now build a natural estimator of
387: the total angular power spectrum for each $l$-mode from the observed map as follows:
388: $
389: H_l(z)\equiv \sum_{m=-l}^l |b_{lm}(z)|^2.
390: $
391: We assume that the primordial potential fluctuations are random Gaussian
392: distributed. Then, it is straightforward to
393: calculate
394: the covariance of the spectrum
395: \beq
396: Cov(H_l(z),H_{l'}(z'))=2\delta_{ll'} /(2l+1)\lmk\sum_m \lla b_{lm}(z)b^*_{lm}(z') \rra \rmk^2 \label{cov},
397: \eeq
398: where $\lmk\lla b_{lm}(z)b^*_{lm}(z') \rra \rmk$ is given by
399: eq.(\ref{amp}). At $z=z'$ this expression trivially allows to evaluate
400: the
401: cosmic variance for $H_l(z)$, leading to the familiar expression
402: $Cov(H_l(z),H_{l}(z)={2/(2l+1)} H_l(z)^2$.
403:
404: \underline{\em 3) Results}
405: In this section we present the general features of
406: the power spectrum $H_l(z)$.
407: We first discuss how the observed quadrupole spectrum $H_2(z)$ is related
408: to the
409: matter fluctuations at different wave number $k$.
410: As shown in eq.(\ref{amp}) the term $h_2(k,z)^2$ represents the weight for the
411: function $P(k)/k$ which is constant for the scale
412: invariant model. Therefore, we shall use $h_2(k,z)$ as
413: a measure of the spatial scale probed by the spectrum $H_2(z)$.
414:
415: In figure 1 we plot the function $h_2(k,z)$ at three different epochs
416: $z=0$, 0.5 and 1 for our fiducial cosmological parameters
417: $\Omega_m=0.3$ and
418: $\Omega_\lambda=0.7$.
419: Note that the curve for $z=0$ can also be a regarded as the
420: weight for the quadrupole
421: moment of the temperature anisotropies observed today. This curve shows that
422: the temperature quadrupole receives a contribution from fluctuations
423: on a broad range of scales $\sim 10^{-4}h$Mpc$^{-1}$
424: to
425: $\sim 10^{-2}h$Mpc$^{-1}$. The wiggles in the curve reflect the oscillatory behavior
426: of the spherical Bessel function in the first term on the r.h.s.
427: of eq.(\ref{trans}) (related to
428: the SW effect), while the negative mean value
429: around $10^{-3}h$Mpc$^{-1} \lsim k
430: \lsim 10^{-2}h$Mpc$^{-1}$ is due to the second term (ISW effect).
431:
432:
433: Let us discuss the redshift evolution of the function $h_2(k,z)$.
434: The wave number of the
435: first peak of the curves $h_2(k,z)$ is determined by the horizon scale
436: at each redshift.
437: As expected, such wave number increases as we move to higher redshift.
438: This scale, however, does not change much at $z \lsim 1$:
439: for our fiducial cosmological model the comoving length of the
440: horizon is reduced only by $14\%$ ($ 24\%$)
441: at $z=0.5$ ($z=1$) compared with the horizon size at $z=0$.
442:
443:
444: Let us now discuss two other important effects that tend to increase the
445: weight of large
446: spatial scales probed by
447: $H_2 (z)$ at redshift $z \sim 1$.
448: The first effect is due to the presence of dark energy.
449: In general, our Universe
450: becomes
451: very close to the Einstein de-Sitter one at a relatively low
452: redshift $z\sim 1$.
453: As a consequence, the weight associated with scales
454: smaller than the horizon
455: (which are the ones typically affected by the ISW effect)
456: is significantly reduced at $z\sim 1$.
457:
458:
459: The other important effect that suppresses $h_2(k,z=1)$
460: at
461: small scale is the transfer of power from $l=2$
462: mode to higher modes.
463: This effect is characterized by the function
464: $f_2(x)$ that has a profile $f_2(x)\sim 1$ at $x\lsim 1$ and $f_2(x)\sim
465: -15\sin(x)/x^3$ at
466: $x\gsim 2$.
467: The typical scale below which this suppression occurs
468: is proportional to the distance to the cluster. However, as we are
469: dealing with our past light cone, this
470: distance coincides with
471: the difference in the horizon sizes at the present and at
472: the cluster's redshift.
473: % and is nothing but the shrink of the horizon length
474: %as discussed earlier.
475: As noted above, this length is 24 $\%$
476: of the present horizon for clusters at $z= 1$, so that fluctuations
477: on scales smaller than this one cannot make a important contribution to the
478: observed quadrupole moment $H_2(z=1)$.
479: %This is an important result, since it means that cluster polarization
480: %measurements may provide a clean probe of the power spectrum at largest
481: %scales.
482: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
483: The present result is
484: straightforward in our new formalism, while it has been
485: overlooked in previous works \cite{Port} because of the complications
486: introduced by
487: the use of multiple coordinate systems (see also \cite{Skordis}).
488: %We can now interpret figure 1 better: here we can see
489: % wiggles at large $k$ for $z=0$ curve, as we mentioned.
490: %%This is due to the projection
491: %%effect of the SW term
492: %% by the spherical Bessel function $j_2(x)$ in the first term of
493: %eq.(\ref{trans}).
494: %For $z=1$ curve the wiggles almost disappear, due
495: %to the power transfer. The small scale weight due to the ISW effect
496: %becomes also very small.
497: From figure 1, it is apparent that the polarization map around $z=1$ would
498: be a powerful tool to study the largest scale fluctuations avoiding the
499: small scale contamination.
500:
501:
502: \begin{figure}
503: \begin{center}
504: \epsfxsize=8.cm
505: \begin{minipage}{\epsfxsize} \epsffile{fig1.eps} \end{minipage}
506: \end{center}
507: \caption{ Redshift evolution of the function $h_2(k,z)$ for the fiducial
508: cosmological model with $\Omega_m=0.3$ and
509: $\Omega_\lambda=0.7 $. Overall scale
510: is irrelevant here. There are
511: three effects that change the contribution of $k$-mode to the
512: quadrupole pattern $H_2(z)$. Arrows show how these effects change the
513: shape of the curve $h_2(k,z)$ with increasing $z$.}
514: \label{f1}
515: \end{figure}
516:
517:
518:
519: We will now attempt a
520: quantitative analyses aimed to determine which wave number $k$ provides
521: the dominant contribution to the function $h_l(k,z)$.
522: We define a function $R(z)$
523: that is the mean of $ \log_{10}[k]$
524: weighted by the weight $h_2(k,z)^2$ as follows
525: %\beq
526: $
527: R(z)=\frac{\int
528: \frac{dk}k \log_{10}[k]~
529: h_2(k,z)^2}{\int
530: \frac{dk}k
531: h_2(k,z)^2}.
532: $
533: %\label{logk}
534: %\eeq
535: If we define $\log_{10}[k_*] \equiv R(z)$, the wavelength $k_*$ can be
536: regarded as a typical scale probed by the moment $H_2(z)$.
537: We obtained $R(0)=-3.16$, $R(0.6)=-3.42$, $R(1.0)=-3.41$ and
538: $R(2.0)=-3.38$ (with $k$ is in units of $h{\rm Mpc^{-1}}$). Roughly
539: speaking, we can
540: reduce the effective wave number by a factor of $\sim 2$ by using a
541: map at
542: $z\sim 1$, compared with the quadrupole temperature anisotropies observed
543: today.
544: For the sake of comparison we also calculated the same kind of quantity
545: for the temperature anisotropies at $z=0$,
546: % we also calculated
547: %same kind of quantities
548: %as eq.(\ref{logk}) but for $l\ge 3$ modes.
549: %We had
550: and found
551: $R=-3.08$ ($R=-3.00$) for $l=3$ ($l=4$).
552:
553: In addition to $R(z)$, we also studied the contributions of fluctuations below
554: and above
555: $k=10^{-3} h{\rm Mpc^{-1}}$ to the spectrum $H_2(z)$. In figure 1 the
556: wave number $k=10^{-3}h{\rm
557: Mpc^{-1}}$ is given by the vertical long-dashed line, and corresponds to
558: $\sim 6.3h^{-1}$Gpc in real scale. At $z=0$ about
559: $32\%$ of the
560: power is coming from $k>10^{-3}h{\rm Mpc^{-1}}$, but its contribution
561: decreases to
562: $\sim 2\%$ at $z=1$.
563: We conclude that the quadrupole of the cluster polarization signal
564: at $z \sim 1$ would allow to probe the large scale power of the
565: Universe in a cleaner way.
566: %Therefore the cluster polarization signal at $z \sim 1$ would allow to
567: %probe potential
568: %anomalities of the large scale power spectrum
569: % with higher statistical
570: %confidence.
571:
572: So far, we mainly discussed the quadrupole mode. As we commented
573: earlier, we expect
574: higher modes $(l\ge 3)$ to be generated by the spin-orbit coupling.
575: In figure 2 we show the spectrum $H_l(z)$ as a function of redshift.
576: At
577: $z= 0$ the polarization map $X$ simply reflects our local quadrupole
578: mode so that $H_{l\ge 3}=0$. The total power $\sum_{l=2}^\infty H_l(z)$ (dashed curve) is
579: the averaged local temperature quadrupole moment $\sum_m\lla
580: a_{2m}a^*_{2m} \rra $ at each
581: redshift (see eq.(\ref{obs})). At $z\gsim
582: 1$ it becomes a constant value due to the scale invariance of the matter
583: power spectrum. The quadrupole mode $H_2(z)$ decreases
584: continuously with increasing redshift due to
585: the power transfer to higher-$l$ modes.
586: However, the $l=2$ mode remains the largest signal at redshifts
587: $z\lsim
588: 2$ where the cluster polarization map would be observationally
589: available.
590: % It would be more difficult
591: %to detect the higher modes, as the signal is expected to be weaker.
592:
593:
594: \begin{figure}
595: \begin{center}
596: \epsfxsize=8.cm
597: \begin{minipage}{\epsfxsize} \epsffile{fig2.eps} \end{minipage}
598: \end{center}
599: \caption{ Redshift evolution of the spectrum $H_l(z)$ for parameters $\Omega_m=0.3$,
600: $\Omega_\lambda=0.7 $ and $n=1$.}
601: \label{f1}
602: \end{figure}
603:
604: We shall now consider if the redshit dependence of the polarization
605: signal can be used to constrain cosmology. In particular we
606: investigate possible constraints on the equation of state of dark energy.
607: %how well the information of dark energy that
608: %which governs the evolution of the ISW effect.
609: We evaluate the parameter estimation errors using
610: the Fisher matrix approach applied to $H_2(z)$.
611: We combine information on $H_2(z)$ from different redshift shells
612: between $0\le
613: z \le 2 $ binned
614: in
615: $\delta z=0.2$ intervals, and assume cosmic
616: variance with appropriate bin correlations
617: (see eq.(\ref{cov}), and also \cite{Port}),
618: as the sole source of the error.
619:
620:
621: We constrain a single fitting parameter
622: $w=P/\rho=$constant around the fiducial model ($\Omega_m=0.3$,
623: $\Omega_\lambda =0.7$ and $n=1$),
624: % the cosmic variance limit for the determination
625: %error is
626: and find $\Delta w\simeq 0.6$ ($1\sigma$).
627: Such a large error is due to the large cosmic variance in each redshift
628: bin
629: and to the strong correlations between bins.
630: % is very large
631: %and errors at different redshift bins are correlated,
632: %the error on the estimated parameter
633: %becomes large.
634: Indeed the SW effect is not important for dark energy studies,
635: but it contributes to the above correlation. Thus, in the attempt of
636: removing the SW contribution,
637: we also applied the Fisher matrix approach to the estimator
638: %one might expect that
639: %a combination like
640: $\sum_m\lla| b_{2m}(z)-b_{2m}(0)|^2\rra$,
641: %would
642: %be useful to constrain the
643: %dark energy parameters.
644: % With this combination, the cosmic variance limit for
645: %the parameter $w$ becomes
646: and found
647: $\Delta w\simeq 0.4$ ($1\sigma$).
648: In order to improve this result we could also include, in principle,
649: information of the higher order modes $l\ge 3$.
650: %and the estimation error for the dark
651: %energy parameters would not be
652: %improved significantly with these additional information in an actual
653: %observational
654: %analysis.
655: In an actual observational analysis, we need a lot of efforts to detect
656: these weak signals around at $z\lsim 1$ where the effect of
657: the dark energy is important (see figure 2).
658: We conclude that cluster polarization alone would not be
659: a powerful observational method to constrain dark energy.
660:
661:
662: Finally let us make an order of magnitude estimate for observational
663: requirement needed to measure the moment $H_2(z)$ at $z\sim 1$ (see also
664: \cite{Cooray:2003hd}). Suppose we
665: measure the polarization signal for $N$ clusters distributed on the whole sky at
666: $z\sim 1$ with an observational error $\sigma$ on the polarization intensity
667: for each cluster.
668: The total error for $H_l$ is $\Delta
669: H_l=\sqrt{2(2l+1)}[H_l/(2l+1)+4\pi \sigma^2/N]$ with the first term
670: representing the cosmic variance and the second term being the measurement
671: error. For $l=2$ the two errors are equal if
672: $\sigma\sim
673: 0.3(\tau_c /10^{-2})(N/10^3)^{1/2}\mu$K.
674: % with using eq.(\ref{obs}), figure 2
675: %and a rms quadrupole temperature fluctuations $\sim 20\mu$K.
676: % ($\lla \tau_c \rra$;
677: %the averaged optical depth).
678: A part from the sensitivity considerations, there is also
679: the issue of separating the cluster polarization signal
680: from the other competing ones, like, for example, the CMB lensing.
681: This is best achieved if the cluster is spatially resolved, which typically
682: requires observations with resolution
683: of $\sim 1$ arcmin.
684: %On the other hand, the required angular resolution is $0.5{\rm
685: %kpc}/3{\rm Gpc}\sim
686: %1$arcmin.
687: Planck, for example, is an all sky survey mission with sensitivity $\sim
688: 5\mu$K per pixel (for combined polarization channels and 14 months integration)
689: and $\sim 5$ arcmin angular resolution.
690: Because of the low resolution, it may not be the
691: most suited experiment to detect $H_2$ around $z\sim1$.
692: % However, most of its observational time is directed
693: %toward sky without a cluster.
694:
695: %For measuring $H_2$, we need a telescope-like detector to observe
696: %targeted clusters.
697:
698: As the polarization pattern
699: is dominated by the low-$l$ modes, a fine sky sampling is not necessary to map it.
700: Furthermore, in order to probe only $l=2$ mode at $z\lsim 1$ where
701: $l\ge 3$ modes are weak, we
702: just need to observe
703: half of the sky ($2\pi$[sr]) due to the parity symmetry of scalar
704: perturbations (though, in this case, the power transfer in figure 1
705: does not work).
706: A ground--based telescope performing targeted cluster observations
707: in small areas sparsely distributed on half sky may be an adequate
708: tool to achieve this task.
709: %This would be a good news for ground-based
710: %instruments like the South Pole Telescope (SPT).
711:
712:
713:
714: The authors would like to thank A. Cooray and M. Sasaki for discussions.
715: N.S. is supported by NASA grant NNG04GK98G and the Japan Society
716: for the
717: Promotion of Science.
718: E.P. is an ADVANCE fellow (NSF grant AST-0340648) and also supported by NASA grant NAG5-11489.
719:
720: %\baselineskip 8mm
721: %\input{ref}
722:
723: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
724: %
725:
726: %\cite{Bennett:2003bz}
727: \bibitem{Bennett:2003bz}
728: C.~L.~Bennett {\it et al.},
729: %``First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations:
730: %Preliminary Maps and Basic Results,''
731: Astrophys.\ J.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 148}, 1 (2003).
732: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0302207;%%
733:
734: %\cite{Spergel:2003cb}
735: \bibitem{Spergel:2003cb}
736: D.~N.~Spergel {\it et al.},
737: %``First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations:
738: %Determination of Cosmological Parameters,''
739: Astrophys.\ J.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 148}, 175 (2003).
740: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0302209;%%
741:
742:
743: %\cite{Tegmark:2003ve}
744: \bibitem{Tegmark:2003ve}
745: M.~Tegmark, {\it et al.},
746: %``A high resolution foreground cleaned CMB map from WMAP,''
747: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 123523 (2003);
748: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0302496;%%
749: %\cite{Efstathiou:2003wr}
750: %\bibitem{Efstathiou:2003wr}
751: G.~Efstathiou,
752: %``The Statistical Significance of the Low CMB Multipoles,''
753: Mon.\ Not.\ Roy.\ Astron.\ Soc.\ {\bf 346}, L26 (2003);
754: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0306431;%%
755: I.~J.~O'Dwyer {\it et al.},
756: %``Bayesian Power Spectrum Analysis of the First-Year WMAP data,''
757: Astrophys.\ J.\ {\bf 617}, L99 (2004).
758: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0407027;%%
759:
760:
761:
762: %\cite{deOliveira-Costa:2003pu}
763: \bibitem{deOliveira-Costa:2003pu}
764: A.~de Oliveira-Costa, M.~Tegmark, M.~Zaldarriaga and A.~Hamilton,
765: %``The significance of the largest scale CMB fluctuations in WMAP,''
766: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 063516 (2004);
767:
768:
769: %\cite{Cornish:2003db}
770: \bibitem{Cornish:2003db}
771: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0307282;%%
772: N.~J.~Cornish {\it et al.},
773: %``Constraining the Topology of the Universe,''
774: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 92}, 201302 (2004).
775: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0310233;%%
776:
777:
778:
779: \bibitem{Contaldi:2003zv}
780: C.~R.~Contaldi {\it et al.},
781: %``Suppressing the lower Multipoles in the CMB Anisotropies,''
782: JCAP {\bf 0307}, 002 (2003).
783: % [arXiv:astro-ph/0303636].
784: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0303636;%%
785:
786:
787:
788:
789:
790: %\cite{Zaldarriaga:1997ch}
791: \bibitem{Zalda97}
792: M.~Zaldarriaga, D.~N.~Spergel and U.~Seljak,
793: %``Microwave Background Constraints on Cosmological Parameters,''
794: Astrophys.\ J.\ {\bf 488}, 1 (1997);
795: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9702157;%
796: %\cite{Dore:2003wp}
797: %\bibitem{Dore:2003wp}
798: O.~Dore, G.~P.~Holder and A.~Loeb,
799: %``The CMB Quadrupole in a Polarized Light,''
800: Astrophys.\ J.\ {\bf 612}, 81 (2004).
801:
802:
803: %\cite{Skordis}
804: \bibitem{Skordis}
805: C.~Skordis and J.~Silk,
806: %``A new method for measuring the CMB temperature quadrupole with an accuracy
807: %better than cosmic variance,''
808: arXiv:astro-ph/0402474.
809: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0402474;%%
810:
811:
812:
813: %\cite{Kamionkowski:1997na}
814: \bibitem{Kamionkowski:1997na}
815: M.~Kamionkowski and A.~Loeb,
816: %``Getting Around Cosmic Variance,''
817: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56}, 4511 (1997).
818: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9703118;%%
819:
820:
821: %\cite{Baumann:2003xb}
822: \bibitem{Baumann:2003xb}
823: D.~Baumann and A.~Cooray,
824: %``CMB-induced Cluster Polarization as a Cosmological Probe,''
825: New Astron.\ Rev.\ {\bf 47}, 839 (2003).
826: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0304416;%%
827:
828:
829:
830: %\cite{Cooray:2003hd}
831: \bibitem{Cooray:2003hd}
832: A.~Cooray, {\it et al.},
833: %``Growth Rate of Large Scale Structure as a Powerful Probe of Dark Energy,''
834: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 027301 (2004).
835: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0304268;%%
836:
837:
838:
839: %\cite{Port}
840: \bibitem{Port}
841: J.~Portsmouth,
842: %``Beating cosmic variance with CMB polarization,''
843: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 063504 (2004).
844: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0402173;%%
845:
846:
847: %\cite{Seto}
848: \bibitem{Seto}
849: N.~Seto and M.~Sasaki,
850: %``Polarization Signal of Distant Clusters and Reconstruction of Primordial
851: %Potential Fluctuations,''
852: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62}, 123004 (2000);
853: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0009222;%
854: A.~Amblard and M.~J.~White,
855: %``Sunyaev Zel'dovich polarization simulation,''
856: arXiv:astro-ph/0409063.
857:
858:
859:
860:
861: %\cite{Hu:1997hp}
862: \bibitem{Hu:1997hp}
863: W.~Hu and M.~J.~White,
864: %``CMB Anisotropies: Total Angular Momentum Method,''
865: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56}, 596 (1997).
866: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9702170;%%
867:
868:
869: %\cite{Zaldarriaga:1996xe}
870: \bibitem{Zaldarriaga:1996xe}
871: M.~Zaldarriaga and U.~Seljak,
872: %``An All-Sky Analysis of Polarization in the Microwave Background,''
873: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 1830 (1997);
874: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9609170;%%
875: M.~Kamionkowski, A.~Kosowsky and A.~Stebbins,
876: %``Statistics of Cosmic Microwave Background Polarization,''
877: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 7368 (1997).
878: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9611125;%%
879:
880: \bibitem{gorski88}
881: K.~Gorski,
882: %``Bayesian Power Spectrum Analysis of the First-Year WMAP data,''
883: Astrophys.\ J.\ {\bf 332}, L7 (1988).
884: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0407027;%%
885:
886: %\cite{Castro:2005bg}
887: \bibitem{lens}
888: P.~G.~Castro, A.~F.~Heavens and T.~D.~Kitching,
889: %``Weak lensing analysis in three dimensions,''
890: arXiv:astro-ph/0503479.
891: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0503479;%%
892:
893:
894:
895:
896:
897: \bibitem{Sakurai}
898: J. J. Sakurai, {\it Modern Quantum Mechanics} (Addison-Wesley, New York, 1985).
899:
900: \end{thebibliography}
901:
902:
903:
904:
905:
906: \end{document}
907:
908: \lmk\frac{}{} \rmk
909:
910:
911:
912:
913: \end{document}
914:
915: