4.7 Article

Statistical effects of the observer's peculiar velocity on source number counts

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 107, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.107.103514

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The velocity of the Sun with respect to the cosmic microwave background (CMB) can be determined by studying the correlations between neighboring CMB multipoles induced by the observer's velocity. However, the source number count dipole measurements suggest a larger observer velocity, indicating a significant tension. In this study, we analyze the effect of the observer's peculiar velocity on correlations of nearby multipoles in the source number counts and provide an unbiased estimator for the kinematic dipole amplitude, indicating future experiments can achieve better constraints on the Sun's velocity.
The velocity of the Sun with respect to the cosmic microwave background (CMB) can be extracted from the CMB dipole, provided its intrinsic dipole is assumed to be small in comparison. This interpretation is consistent, within fairly large error bars, with the measurement of the correlations between neighboring CMB multipoles induced by the velocity of the observer, which effectively breaks isotropy. In contrast, the source number count dipole was reported to privilege a velocity of the observer with an amplitude that is about twice as large as the one extracted from the entirely kinematic interpretation of the CMB dipole, with error bars that indicate a more and more significant tension. In this work, we study the effect of the peculiar velocity of the observer on correlations of nearby multipoles in the source number counts. We provide an unbiased estimator for the kinematic dipole amplitude, which is proportional to the peculiar velocity of the observer and we compute the expected signal-to-noise ratio. Assuming full sky coverage, near future experiments can achieve better than 5% constraints on the velocity of the Sun with our estimator.

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

4.7
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