CosmoCoffee

 FAQ   Search  SmartFeed   Memberlist    Register Profile   Log in Arxiv New Filter | Bookmarks & clubs | Arxiv ref/author:

 What is the meaning of bias and galaxy overdensity?
Author Message
YinZhe Ma

Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 11
Affiliation: University of KwaZulu-Natal

 Posted: April 13 2013 Hi Guys, I am confused about the bias and galaxy overdensity. First, galaxy overdensity is related to matter density contrast through: δg = b * δm, where b is the bias. δm cannot be less than −1, because it is defined as $(\rho-\overline{\rho})/\overline{\rho}$, since $\rho \geq 0$, $\delta_{\rm{m}} \geq -1$. However, b can take any value. It can be − 3, − 2 (void), or very positive number, such as 2 in Table 5 and 6 of 1303.4486. Therefore, δg can be any value. For example, If δm = − 0.8, b = 2, then δg = − 1.6. Then what is the definition of δg if it can take any value? It certainly cannot be defined as the matter density contrast because it can be less than −1. Then how to understand its physical meaning? Thanks.
Maciej Bilicki

Joined: 12 May 2010
Posts: 19
Affiliation: University of Cape Town

 Posted: April 14 2013 The bias as defined here is linear. Voids with δ=−0.8 are pretty non-linear. Galaxy underdensity, as any other underdensity, cannot – by definition – be smaller than −1. You can find more basics on the bias in for instance the classic review by Strauss & Willick (1995). I am quite sure that the bias can't be negative.
Wojciech Hellwing

Joined: 17 May 2006
Posts: 1
Affiliation: Institute for Computational Cosmology, Durham

 Posted: April 14 2013 A negative bias would be totally unphysical when one concerns density. However an anti-bias (0 1 and δ < 0.8 rest of the bias parameters will have values making the $\delta_g\geq -1$ in the end.
YinZhe Ma

Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 11
Affiliation: University of KwaZulu-Natal

 Posted: April 17 2013 However, what if b=3 (positive bias), but delta_m=−0.5? In this case, delta_g=b*delta_m=−1.5, still < − 1.
Boud Roukema

Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Posts: 84
Affiliation: Torun Centre for Astronomy, University of Nicolaus Copernicus

 Posted: July 16 2013 As Maciej and Wojciech said, the discussion concerns linear perturbation theory, meaning $|\delta| \ll 1$. Your value of δm = − 0.5 is highly non-linear, so the linear theory is no longer valid. If you apply it anyway, then you get unphysical results. Similarly, when the overall virialisation fraction at low redshifts fvir(z) fails to satisfy $f_{vir}(z) \ll 1$, the underlying homogeneity assumption fails and an artefact - would-be "dark energy" - arises if the homogeneous (FLRW) metric is used to interpret the observations despite the invalidity of the homogeneity assumption (1303.4444).
 Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First
 All times are GMT + 5 Hours Page 1 of 1

 Jump to: Select a forum Arxiv paper discussion----------------arXiv papers Topic discussion----------------Early UniverseCosmological ModelCosmological Observations  Projects and Resources----------------Computers and softwareTeaching, Papers and PresentationsResearch projectsiCosmo Coming up----------------Job vacanciesConferences and meetings Management----------------CosmoCoffee
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum