4.6 Article

The pairwise and cross-pairwise y-type polarised kinetic Sunyaev Zeldovich effect from transverse velocity of galaxy clusters

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1475-7516/2023/11/072

关键词

CMBR experiments; CMBR polarisation; CMBR theory; galaxy clusters

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new theoretical framework is developed to study the pairwise and crosspairwise polarised kinetic Sunyaev Zeldovich (pkSZ) effect caused by the transverse peculiar velocity of galaxy clusters. The detectability of the pkSZ effect depends on the sensitivity and frequency channels of the survey, and can be used to explore the large-scale structure of the Universe.
We develop a new theoretical framework for studying the pairwise and crosspairwise polarised kinetic Sunyaev Zeldovich (pkSZ) effect arising from the transverse peculiar velocity of galaxy clusters. The pkSZ effect is second order in peculiar velocities and has a spectrum that can be decomposed into y-type and blackbody components, whereas the unpolarised linear kSZ effect has only the blackbody component. Thus, the detectability of the pkSZ effect depends only on the sensitivity and the number of frequency channels of the survey and not on the other primary and secondary CMB anisotropies. We consider pairing of clusters with other clusters as well as cross-pairing of clusters with galaxies from spectroscopic galaxy surveys. The pairwise pkSZ signal is a function of intra-pair spatial separation. We develop and compare estimators of the pairwise pkSZ effect and study the detectability of the pairwise signal with cluster catalogs consisting of a few hundred thousand clusters expected from surveys such as eROSITA and CMB-S4. We find that cross-pairing clusters with galaxies from a large overlapping spectroscopic survey having a few billion galaxies will enable us to detect the pairwise pkSZ effect with CMB-S4. The pairwise pkSZ effect will thus open up a new window into the large-scale structure of the Universe in the coming decades.

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