4.6 Article

On the renormalization of the effective field theory of large scale structures

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1475-7516/2013/08/037

关键词

power spectrum; cosmic flows; cosmic web

资金

  1. Department of Energy [DE-FG02-91ER-40671]
  2. National Science Foundation [PHY-0855425, AST-0907969, PHY-1213563]
  3. David Lucile Packard
  4. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [0907969] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  5. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  6. Division Of Physics [1213563] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  7. Division Of Astronomical Sciences [0907969] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Standard perturbation theory (SPT) for large-scale matter inhomogeneities is unsatisfactory for at least three reasons: there is no clear expansion parameter since the density contrast is not small on all scales; it does not fully account for deviations at large scales from a perfect pressureless fluid induced by short-scale non-linearities; for generic initial conditions, loop corrections are UV-divergent, making predictions cutoff dependent and hence unphysical. The Effective Field Theory of Large Scale Structures successfully addresses all three issues. Here we focus on the third one and show explicitly that the terms induced by integrating out short scales, neglected in SPT, have exactly the right scale dependence to cancel all UV-divergences at one loop, and this should hold at all loops. A particularly clear example is an Einstein deSitter universe with no-scale initial conditions P-in similar to k(n). After renormalizing the theory, we use self-similarity to derive a very simple result for the final power spectrum for any n, excluding two-loop corrections and higher. We show how the relative importance of different corrections depends on n. For n similar to -1.5, relevant for our universe, pressure and dissipative corrections are more important than the two-loop corrections.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据