4.7 Review

The detectability of baryonic acoustic oscillations in future galaxy surveys

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 383, Issue 2, Pages 755-776

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12587.x

Keywords

methods : N-body simulations; cosmology : theory; large-scale structure of Universe

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We assess the detectability of baryonic acoustic oscillation (BAO) in the power spectrum of galaxies using ultralarge volume N-body simulations of the hierarchical clustering of dark matter and semi-analytical modelling of galaxy formation. A step-by-step illustration is given of the various effects (non-linear fluctuation growth, peculiar motions, non-linear and scale-dependent bias) which systematically change the form of the galaxy power spectrum on large scales from the simple prediction of linear perturbation theory. Using a new method to extract the scale of the oscillations, we nevertheless find that the BAO approach gives an unbiased estimate of the sound horizon scale. Sampling variance remains the dominant source of error despite the huge volume of our simulation box (=2.41 h(-3) Gpc(3)). We use our results to forecast the accuracy with which forthcoming surveys will be able to measure the sound horizon scale, s, and, hence constrain the dark energy equation of state parameter, w (with simplifying assumptions and without marginalizing over the other cosmological parameters). Pan-STARRS could potentially yield a measurement with an accuracy of Delta s/s = 0.5-0.7 per cent (corresponding to Delta w approximate to 2-3 per cent), which is competitive with the proposed WFMOS survey (Delta s/s = 1 per cent Delta w approximate to 4 per cent). Achieving Delta w <= 1 per cent using BAO alone is beyond any currently commissioned project and will require an all-sky spectroscopic survey, such as would be undertaken by the SPACE mission concept under proposal to ESA.

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