4.7 Article

Weak lensing shear and aperture mass from linear to non-linear scales

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07553.x

关键词

gravitational lensing; methods : analytical; methods : numerical; methods : statistical; cosmology : theory; large-scale structure of Universe

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We describe the predictions for the smoothed weak lensing shear, gamma(s), and aperture mass, M-ap, of two simple analytical models of the density field: the minimal tree model and the stellar model. Both models give identical results for the statistics of the three-dimensional density contrast smoothed over spherical cells and only differ by the detailed angular dependence of the many-body density correlations. We have shown in previous work that they also yield almost identical results for the probability distribution function (PDF) of the smoothed convergence, kappa(s). We find that the two models give rather close results for both the shear and the positive tail of the aperture mass. However, we note that at small angular scales (theta(s)less than or similar to2 arcmin) the tail of the PDF, P (M-ap), for negative M-ap shows a strong variation between the two models, and the stellar model actually breaks down for theta(s)less than or similar to0.4 arcmin and M-ap<0. This shows that the statistics of the aperture mass provides a very precise probe of the detailed structure of the density field, as it is sensitive to both the amplitude and the detailed angular behaviour of the many-body correlations. On the other hand, the minimal tree model shows good agreement with numerical simulations over all the scales and redshifts of interest, while both models provide a good description of the PDF, P (gamma(is)), of the smoothed shear components. Therefore, the shear and the aperture mass provide robust and complementary tools to measure the cosmological parameters as well as the detailed statistical properties of the density field.

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