This seems like a really neat result.
Apparently the old way of writing redshift space distortions (Kaiser formula  eqn 10 in this paper) was a good way to write down the redshift space power spectrum compactly. But it makes it look like the only thing you can measure from redshift space power spectra is the parameter \beta \simeq \Omega_m^{0.6} / b, and thus you learn a degenerate combination of cosmology and bias (the 0.6 is replaced by a function of w in dark energy models).
This paper shows that you can actually write things in a different way (e.g. their eqn 12) in which the cosmology and bias parts have different dependencies on the direction in kspace (mu) and thus can be separated.
I think this paper deserves some sort of prize for a very nice result, but also some sort of antiprize for having the most boring figures ever! We just had a journal club on it at JPL and would have been happy with an even more userfriendly qualitative explanation of the effect, with accompanying figure, e.g. something as a function of mu? and maybe also just show the good old butterfly diagram again? In fact I would still be happy to read a nice paragraph on why this works (no equations).
Finally  the paper makes a bold statement in the abstract, and I am falling for the bait laid out for lensers by quoting it here:
"This places redshift space distortion measurements on the same footing as weak lensing measurements in the sense that they both allow us to test the matter distribution directly."
The qualification in the second half of the sentence is clear, and this paper cannot be expected to do a full analysis of constraints from future surveys. But it will be interesting to see how tight the constraints actually are on the growth rate from future surveys using this method (e.g. as compared to weak lensing).
[0808.0003] Testing cosmological structure formation using redshiftspace distortions
Authors:  Will J Percival, Martin White 
Abstract:  Observations of redshiftspace distortions in spectroscopic galaxy surveys offer an attractive method for observing the buildup of cosmological structure. In this paper we develop and test a new statistic based on anisotropies in the measured galaxy power spectrum, which is independent of galaxy bias and matches the matter power spectrum shape on large scales. The amplitude provides a constraint on the derivative of the linear growth rate through f.sigma_8. This demonstrates that spectroscopic galaxy surveys offer many of the same advantages as weak lensing surveys, in that they both use galaxies as test particles to probe all matter in the Universe. They are complementary as redshiftspace distortions probe nonrelativistic velocities and therefore the temporal metric perturbations, while weak lensing tests the sum of the temporal and spatial metric perturbations. The degree to which our estimator can be pushed into the nonlinear regime is considered and we show that a simple Gaussian damping model, similar to that previously used to model the behaviour of the power spectrum on very small scales, can also model the quasilinear behaviour of our estimator. This enhances the information that can be extracted from surveys for LCDM models. 
[PDF] [PS] [BibTex] [Bookmark] 

 Posts: 144
 Joined: September 24 2004
 Affiliation: University College London (UCL)
 Contact:

 Posts: 49
 Joined: December 17 2004
 Affiliation: Perimeter Institute/ University of Waterloo
 Contact:
[0808.0003] Testing cosmological structure formation using r
Predictions for future measurements of f\sigma_8 from redshift distortions (as well as current constraints) can be found in Fig.2 of 0807.0810.

 Posts: 11
 Joined: November 05 2005
 Affiliation: Ohio University
[0808.0003]
Am I correct in reading this paper that their strongest constraints depend on the assumption that the bias is linear? Once that breaks down, they have the relations depend on functions of [tex]k[/tex] and [tex]\mu^2[/tex], but only have limits for those functions.