4.7 Article

Fractional polarization of extragalactic sources in the 500 deg2 SPTpol survey

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 490, Issue 4, Pages 5712-5721

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stz2905

Keywords

polarization; galaxies: active; cosmology: observations

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [PLR-1248097]
  2. NSF Physics Frontier Center grant [PHY-1125897]
  3. Kavli Foundation
  4. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation [GBMF 947]
  5. Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  6. Australian Research Council [DP150103208]
  7. STFC [ST/S00033X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We study the polarization properties of extragalactic sources at 95 and 150 GHz in the SPTpol 500 deg(2) survey. We estimate the polarized power by stacking maps at known source positions, and correct for noise bias by subtracting the mean polarized power at random positions in the maps. We show that the method is unbiased using a set of simulated maps with similar noise properties to the real SPTpol maps. We find a flux-weighted mean-squared polarization fraction < p(2)> = [8.9 +/- 1.1] x 10(-4) at 95 GHz and [6.9 +/- 1.1] x 10(-4) at 150 GHz for the full sample. This is consistent with the values obtained for a subsample of active galactic nuclei. For dusty sources, we find 95 per cent upper limits of < p(2)> 95 < 16.9 x 10(-3) and < p(2)> 150 < 2.6 x 10(-3). We find no evidence that the polarization fraction depends on the source flux or observing frequency. The 1 sigma upper limit on measured mean-squared polarization fraction at 150 GHz implies that extragalactic foregrounds will be subdominant to the CMB E and B mode polarization power spectra out to at least l less than or similar to 5700 (l less than or similar to 4700) and l less than or similar to 5300 (l less than or similar to 3600), respectively, at 95 (150) GHz.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available