English

The galaxy power spectrum on the lightcone: deep, wide-angle redshift surveys and the turnover scale

Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics 2022-10-07 v5

Abstract

We derive expressions for the survey-window convolved galaxy power spectrum in real space for a full sky and deep redshift survey, but taking into account the geometrical lightcone effect. We investigate the impact of using the standard mean redshift approximation as a function of survey depth, and show that this assumption can lead to both an overall amplitude suppression and scale-dependent error when compared to the `true' spectrum. However, we also show that by using a carefully chosen `effective fixed-time', one can find a range of scales where the approximation to the full model is highly accurate, but only on a more restricted set of scales. We validate the theory by constructing dark matter and galaxy lightcone mock surveys from a large NN-body simulation with a high cadence of snapshots. We do this by solving the light cone equation exactly for every particle, where the particle worldlines are obtained in a piecewise fashion with cubic interpolation between neighbouring snapshots. We find excellent agreement between our measurements and the theory (±5%\sim \pm 5\%) over scales (0.004hMpc1k0.54hMpc1)(0.004 h{\rm Mpc}^{-1} \leq k \leq 0.54 h {\rm Mpc}^{-1}) and for a variety of magnitude limits. Finally, we look to see how accurately we can measure the turnover scale of the galaxy power spectrum k0k_0. Using the lightcone mocks we show that one can detect the turnover scale with a probability P95%P \geq 95\% in an all-sky catalogue limited to an apparent magnitude mlim21m_{\rm lim}\sim 21. We also show that the detection significance would remain high for surveys with mlim22m_{\rm lim}\sim22 and 20%20\% sky coverage.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.2111.01811,
  title  = {The galaxy power spectrum on the lightcone: deep, wide-angle redshift surveys and the turnover scale},
  author = {Daniel Pryer and Robert E. Smith and Robin Booth and Chris Blake and Alexander Eggemeier and Jon Loveday},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.01811},
  year   = {2022}
}

Comments

31 + 11 pages, 12 figures. Closely matches version published in JCAP -- 2022JCAP...08..019P