Large-Scale Flows: A historical overview Manolis Plionis Bernard’s 60 birthday, Valencia, 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Florent Rostagni 1.  Context  Sample  Algorithm for detection and classification  Star formation  X-ray – optical study  Perspectives - Conclusion.
Advertisements

Our CMB Motion: The Local Void influence Voids Devoid of Dwarfs: Cosmology or Gastrophysics? Brent Tully Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii.
COLD FRONTS IN CLUSTERS AND THE PECULIAR VELOCITY OF THEIR BCGs FABIO GASTALDELLO INAF-IASF MILAN & UC IRVINE M. MESSA S. GHIZZARDI, M. ROSSETTI, D. ECKERT,
Clusters & Super Clusters Large Scale Structure Chapter 22.
Observational tests of an inhomogeneous cosmology by Christoph Saulder in collaboration with Steffen Mieske & Werner Zeilinger.
PRESENTATION TOPIC  DARK MATTER &DARK ENERGY.  We know about only normal matter which is only 5% of the composition of universe and the rest is  DARK.
Universe in a box: simulating formation of cosmic structures Andrey Kravtsov Department of Astronomy & Astrophysics Center for Cosmological Physics (CfCP)
L. Perivolaropoulos Department of Physics University of Ioannina Open page.
WMAP CMB Conclusions A flat universe with a scale-invariant spectrum of adiabatic Gaussian fluctuations, with re-ionization, is an acceptable fit to the.
Detection of the effect of cosmological large- scale structure on the orientation of galaxies Ignacio Trujillo, Conrado Carretero & Santiago G. Patiri.
Measuring the local Universe with peculiar velocities of Type Ia Supernovae MPI, August 2006 Troels Haugbølle Institute for Physics.
“the great attractor” mia kumagai astr
Relating Mass and Light in the COSMOS Field J.E. Taylor, R.J. Massey ( California Institute of Technology), J. Rhodes ( Jet Propulsion Laboratory) & the.
2. Cosmologia Despues de WMAP. 1.Historia del descubrimiento del CMB 2.Fisica del CMB - Radiacion de Cuerpo negro T=2.73 K - Dipolo (Doppler) - Fluctuaciones.
Lens Galaxy Environments Neal Dalal (IAS), Casey R. Watson (Ohio State) astro-ph/ Who cares? 2.What to do 3.Results 4.Problems! 5.The future.
Type Ia Supernovae on a glass: The bread and butter of peculiar velocities Lunch meeting Aarhus, March 2007 Troels Haugbølle Institute.
The Structure of the Universe AST 112. Galaxy Groups and Clusters A few galaxies are all by themselves Most belong to groups or clusters Galaxy Groups:
NOTES: Characteristics of Galaxies Classification: The Hubble Tuning Fork Elliptical: E0--E7 Spheroids, E0 is spherical, E7 least spherical. Population.
Cosmological Tests using Redshift Space Clustering in BOSS DR11 (Y. -S. Song, C. G. Sabiu, T. Okumura, M. Oh, E. V. Linder) following Cosmological Constraints.
Connecting the Galactic and Cosmological Length Scales: Dark Energy and The Cuspy-Core Problem By Achilles D. Speliotopoulos Talk Given at the Academia.
Cosmological Reconstruction via Wave Mechanics Peter Coles School of Physics & Astronomy University of Nottingham.
Cosmic Flows Cosmic Flows Mike Hudson U. Waterloo / IAP.
1 Edmund Bertschinger MIT Department of Physics and Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research Testing Gravity on Large Scales Dekel 1994 Ann.
Σπειροειδείς γαλαξίες
L. Perivolaropoulos Department of Physics University of Ioannina Open page.
Robust cosmological constraints from SDSS-III/BOSS galaxy clustering Chia-Hsun Chuang (Albert) IFT- CSIC/UAM, Spain.
, Tuorla Observatory 1 Galaxy groups in ΛCDM simulations and SDSS DR5 P. Nurmi, P. Heinämäki, S. Niemi, J. Holopainen Tuorla Observatory E. Saar,
Intrinsic ellipticity correlation of luminous red galaxies and misalignment with their host dark matter halos The 8 th Sino – German workshop Teppei O.
Cosmological studies with Weak Lensing Peak statistics Zuhui Fan Dept. of Astronomy, Peking University.
Clustering in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Bob Nichol (ICG, Portsmouth) Many SDSS Colleagues.
Lecture 5: Matter Dominated Universe: CMB Anisotropies and Large Scale Structure Today, matter is assembled into structures: filaments, clusters, galaxies,
Cosmological parameters from peculiar velocities
The 6dF Galaxy Survey Design and Goals Matthew Colless The 6dFGS Workshop AAO, Sydney, May 2002.
PHY306 1 Modern cosmology 4: The cosmic microwave background Expectations Experiments: from COBE to Planck  COBE  ground-based experiments  WMAP  Planck.
Studying Dark Energy with Nearby Dwarf Galaxies Arthur D. Chernin Sternberg Astronomical Institute Moscow University In collaboration with I.D. Karachentsev,
Testing the Shear Ratio Test: (More) Cosmology from Lensing in the COSMOS Field James Taylor University of Waterloo (Waterloo, Ontario, Canada) DUEL Edinburgh,
SUNYAEV-ZELDOVICH EFFECT. OUTLINE  What is SZE  What Can we learn from SZE  SZE Cluster Surveys  Experimental Issues  SZ Surveys are coming: What.
AY202a Galaxies & Dynamics Lecture 17: Galaxy Groups & Clusters continued.
Dipole of the Luminosity Distance: A Direct Measure of H(z) Camille Bonvin, Ruth Durrer, and Martin Kunz Wu Yukai
 SIM-Lite: 6 m baseline optical interferometer in space for precision/deep astrometry.  Pointing mode not survey (spinning).  SIM concept is finishing.
Γαλαξίες – 3 Υπερμαζικές Μαύρες Τρύπες στα κέντρα γαλαξιών 15 Ιανουαρίου 2013.
Luminosity Functions from the 6dFGS Heath Jones ANU/AAO.
 Acceleration of Universe  Background level  Evolution of expansion: H(a), w(a)  degeneracy: DE & MG  Perturbation level  Evolution of inhomogeneity:
6dF Workshop April Sydney Cosmological Parameters from 6dF and 2MRS Anaïs Rassat (University College London) 6dF workshop, AAO/Sydney,
Observational Test of Halo Model: an empirical approach Mehri Torki Bob Nichol.
Measuring clustering …
Bwdem – 06/04/2005doing cosmology with galaxy clusters Cosmology with galaxy clusters: testing the evolution of dark energy Raul Abramo – Instituto de.
E  L Comma galaxies. The Cosmic Runner (Park et al. 2005; Choi et al. 2010)
Xiaohu Yang (SJTU/SHAO) With: H. Wang, H.J. Mo, Y.P. Jing, F.C van den Bosch, W.P. Lin, D. Tweed… , KIAS Exploring the Local Universe with re-
The Mass has to do with? Mass implies light More mass, the more light. A detailed calculation shows the relation is that the Luminosity is proportional.
Bulk Motions of Spiral Galaxies within z = 0.03 I.D.Karachentsev (SAO RAS ), S.N.Mitronova (SAO RAS), V.E.Karachentseva (Kiev Univ.), Yu.N.Kudrya (Kiev.
Probing Cosmology with Weak Lensing Effects Zuhui Fan Dept. of Astronomy, Peking University.
Galaxy Distances - Then and Now Brent Tully, University of Hawaii with the essential collaboration of Rick Fisher, Ed Shaya, and Helene Courtois “I have.
Three theoretical issues in physical cosmology I. Nonlinear clustering II. Dark matter III. Dark energy J. Hwang (KNU), H. Noh (KASI)
Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo CE F CA 1 CENTRO DE ESTUDIOS DE FÍSICA DEL COSMOS DE ARAGÓN (CE F CA) J-PAS 10th Collaboration Meeting March 11th 2015 Cosmology.
Large Scale Anisotropy in the Universe Pankaj Jain I.I.T. Kanpur.
AY202a Galaxies & Dynamics Lecture 16: Galaxy Groups & Clusters.
The Dipole Anisotropy of the 2MASS Redshift Survey Pirin Erdoğdu (University of Nottingham) and the 2MRS Team MNRAS, in press.
Mapping the Mass with Galaxy Redshift-Distance Surveys Martin Hendry, Dept of Physics and Astronomy University of Glasgow, UK “Mapping the Mass”: Birmingham,
MEASUREING BIAS FROM UNBIASED OBSERVABLE SEOKCHEON LEE (KIAS) The 50 th Workshop on Gravitation and Numerical INJE Univ.
Cosmic Momentum Field and Matter Fluctuation Study of Matter through Motions of Galaxies Changbom Park (Korea Institute for Advanced Study)
Some bonus cosmological applications of BigBOSS ZHANG, Pengjie Shanghai Astronomical Observatory BigBOSS collaboration meeting, Paris, 2012 Refer to related.
2MTF and Future TF Surveys Lister Staveley-Smith International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research University of Western Australia Vietnam 4 July
2MASS Tully-Fisher Survey
Aileen O’Donoghue (SLU),
Density and Velocity Fields from the 2MASS Redshift Survey
Dept of Physics and Astronomy University of Glasgow, UK
Mapping the Dark Matter in the Local Universe
Shintaro Nakamura (Tokyo University of Science)
Chengliang Wei Purple Mountain Observatory, CAS
Presentation transcript:

Large-Scale Flows: A historical overview Manolis Plionis Bernard’s 60 birthday, Valencia, 2006

Large-Scale Flows predicted Stewart & Sciama (Nat., 216, 748) in 1967 predicted the dipole anisotropy of the CMB due to motion of Sun with respect to cosmic rest frame and attempt for the first time to estimate this motion with respect to galaxy distribution (that of the Local Supercluster). Conklin 1969, Nat., 222, 971, measured for the first time the CMB dipole anisotropy which provided a LG velocity of 590 km/sec towards l=282 o, b=18 o, very close to today’s value ! The 60’s

Large-Scale Flows de Vaucouleurs & Peters in 1968 attempt for the first time a very systematic study of the motion of the Sun with respect to the galaxy distribution (Nat, 220, 868) and its effect on the estimates of the Hubble constant. Wolfe in 1969 (ApJ, 156, 803) attempts to connect an inhomogeneity in the distribution of high-z QSO’s with the anisotropy in the CMB.

Large-Scale Flows In the ’70s Rubin & Ford and Tammann, Sandage & Yahil, as well as Peebles start investigating deviations from Hubble flow and the Local Group motion with respect to the galaxy distribution. The 70’s Detection of Virgo-centric infall by Peebles (1976) and of flows (VLG ~ 450 km/sec, within 3500<cz<6500 km/sec using 96 Sc galaxies) by Rubin et al. (1976) However, Fall & Jones 1976 argue against the Rubin-Ford effect:

Large-Scale Velocity Fields From continuity, Euler’s and Poisson equations, in comoving coordinates and after linearizing, we have that:  v   and the relation between velocity and acceleration: v = g From continuity, Euler’s and Poisson equations, in comoving coordinates and after linearizing, we have that:  v   and the relation between velocity and acceleration: v = β g First attempts to derive Cosmological Density Parameter: Peebles (1976) find that Virgo-centric infall of LG is consistent with both open and flat Cosmological models. Tammann, Yahil, Sandage (1979), from motion of LG relative to Virgo Cluster using RSA catalog derived: v Virgo ~60 km/sec, / =1900 q o. Yahil, Sandage & Tammann (1980), calculated acceleration of LG due to Virgo which induces a v LG ~3700 q o, from which the derived q o <<0.5. Clutton-Brock & Peebles (1981), found that the Rubin-Ford flow was consistent with Ω m ~1 for the observed level of density (galaxy-number) fluctuations. Davis & Huchra (1982) found from estimating the LG acceleration that 0.3<Ω m <0.5

Large-Scale Velocity Fields Contradicting results:  Aaronson et al. (1986) from IR TF 4000<cz<11000 km/sec  no bulk flow,  Collins, Joseph, Robertson (1986) using Rubin-Ford Sc’s ~5000 km/sec  find streaming motion of ~1000 km/sec and  Lilje, Yahil, Jones (1986) find shear in the LSC pointing towards Hydra- Centaurus (l~308, b~13), while the bulk velocity of LSC is ~500 km/sec towards l~288, b~-9.  Dressler et al. (1987) andLynden-Bell et al. (1988) [8 Samurai]: Large streaming motion with ~520 km/sec towards a hidden supercluster with M~5 x M o (l~307, b~9).  Dressler et al. (1987) and Lynden-Bell et al. (1988) [8 Samurai]: Large streaming motion with ~520 km/sec towards a hidden supercluster with M~5 x M o (l~307, b~9). “The Great Attractor” Saga begins….. “The Great Attractor” Saga begins….. Searching for the GAIs the GA really a Great Wall ? Voyage to the GAIs the Cosmic Drift a Cosmic Myth? The Core of the GABehind the GA Bulk flows, Shear and the GAGoodbye GA Velocity field studies get a strong kick… The 80’s : Velocity field studies get a strong kick…

Large-Scale Velocity Fields End ’80s: “The Great Attractor” Saga continues….. Attempts to verify or refute the GA model provide contradicting results:  Lucey & Carter (1988) do not support GA  Staveley-Smith & Davies (1989) point in Hydra-Centaurus as the GA.  Dressler & Faber (1990) confirm GA (outflow of Hydra-Centaurus)  Willick (1990) find strong flow of PP galaxies towards the LG (-450 km/sec)  Huge numbers of publications appear estimating velocity fields using TF, FJ, D n -σ relations, etc (……)  Theoretical modelling intense: Vittorio, Juszkiewicz, Davis 1986; Bertschinger & Juszkiewicz 1988; Bertschinger & Dekel 1989; Juszkiewicz & Yahil 1989; Juszkiewicz, Vittorio & Wyse 1990, Kaiser 1991; etc etc IRAS whole sky survey

Large-Scale Dipole (Acceleration field)  IRAS flux-weighted dipole (Yahil, Walker & Rowan-Robinson (1986), Meiksin & Davis 1986, Harmon, Lahav & Meurs 1987; Villumsen & Strauss 1987) or using redshift samples (1.94Jy, QDOT-0.6Jy, 1.2Jy):, Strauss & Davis 1988; Rowan- Robinson et al [2100 z’s], Strauss et al [5300 gals]).  Simultaneously, optical whole-sky galaxy catalogues have been constructed (ESO,UGC,MCG, zCAT) and their dipole analysed: Lahav 1987, Lahav, Lynden- Bell & Rowan-Robinson 1988; Lynden-Bell, Lahav & Burstein 1988, Pellegrini & da Costa 1990; Hudson DIPOLES: DIPOLES: First whole sky dipole studies appear to support that the LG motion with respect to the CMB is determined by joint gravitational influence of matter fluctuations within ~4000 – 5000 km/sec ! mid ’80s and early ’90s….. Main Results: 1.Galaxy & CMB dipole misalignment angles < 20 o. 2.Galaxy dipole seems to converge at ~5000 km/sec 3.β g ~  consistent with Ω m ~1

Large-Scale Dipole We are still in the end of the ’80s and early ’90s….. and there are some indications for much deeper contributions to the LG acceleration (depths ~15000 – km/sec)  Melnick & Moles (1987) identify a huge concentration of galaxies in Shapley and discuss possible influence on LG motion  Plionis (1988) find Lick dipole aligned (within ~35 deg. with CMB) that could only be produced by mass fluctuations on depths comparable to ~D* (200 Mpc)  Scaramella et al. (1989) discuss the possibility for the Shapley concentration to be a major contributor to the LG motion.  Plionis & Valdarnini (1991), Scaramella, Vettolani & Zamorani (1991) analyse Abell cluster dipole and find significant contributions from ~16000 km/sec to LG motion! Main Results: 1.Cluster & CMB dipole misalignment angles < 20 o. 2.Cluster dipole has significant contributions from ~16000 km/sec 3.β c ~ 0.2 (±0.1)  consistent with Ω m ~1

Large-Scale Dipole ISSUE No 1: ISSUE No 1: There seems to be a dichotomy between Galaxy and Cluster results: Although both are aligned with CMB there is a difference in the dipole amplitude build-up, while if linear biasing was valid, on the corresponding scales, there should have been a constant difference in their respective dipole amplitudes. Analyses of the QDOT and PSCz dipoles also indicate deeper contributions (eg. Rowan-Robinson et al. 1999; Schmoldt et al. 1999; Branchini et al. 1999; Basilakos & Plionis 1997, 2006) while recent whole sky X-ray cluster samples verify previous cluster results: Plionis & Kolokotronis 1998; Kocevski, Mullis & Ebeling 2004; Kocevski & Ebeling 2006 However, 2MASS dipole also verified previous (optical) galaxy results of shallow convergence (Erdogdu et al. 2006). However N(z) is dominated by lower-z’s with respect to PSCz.

Large-Scale Velocity Fields The 90’s : Major development  POTENT Bertschinger & Dekel (1989; 1990 ….) Basic idea: In the linear regime we can assume that the velocity field is irrotational, i.e., the peculiar velocities can be considered as resulting from a potential field: v = -  Then the Potential field can be recovered from the peculiar velocity along the line of sight.  (r)  -  v(r,θ,φ) dr  Then the three components of the velocities can be found by differentiation: v(r) = -  (r) From l.p.t. in comoving coordinates we have: δ v (r) =β -1  v (r) β~ 1.28

Large-Scale Velocity Fields The 90’s : Reconstruction algorithms Yahil 1988; Strauss & Davis 1988 Basic idea: In the linear regime we can use iterative procedure to recover real- space from z-space distribution of galaxies solving in closed loop: cz=H o |r|+ [u(r)-u(0)] ·r/|r| and u(r) = g(r) cz=H o |r|+ [u(r)-u(0)] ·r/|r| and u(r) = β g(r) BP96 Abell/ACO cluster velocity field in supergalactic plane (BPS 1996) Peebles 1989; 1990; Shaya, Peebles, Tully 1995 Based on least action principle: Galaxy orbits that correspond to the minimum of the action can be recovered by fixing present day coordinates and requiring the three Cartesian peculiar velocity components to vanish at early times. Local Group galaxy orbits

Large-Scale Velocity Fields Meanwhile in the ’90s more observations of velocity fields with yet contradicting results…  Bothun et al (1992) attempt to find back-infall to GA with inconclusive results  Mathewson, Ford & Buchhorn (1992), Mathewson & Ford (1994) analysing 1355 and 2400 spirals respectively, find no back-infall in GA but bulk flow of 600 km/sec on scales >60 h -1 Mpc. They conclude that GA does not exist (fail to point out that it could exist and participate in bulk flow).  Han & Mould (1992) using TF in PP region find that local infall is as good as a bulk flow model.  Courteau et al. (1993) using 3000 gals find streaming motion of 360 km/sec ( km/sec volume) that extends beyond the GA in the direction l=273, b=0 !  Lauer & Postman (1994) using BCG and volume ~15000 km/sec find 690 km/sec bulk flow of whole volume but towards l=343, b=52 !!  Wegner et al. 1996, Colless et al EFAR, (736 ellipticals in 84 clusters to 9000 km/sec), find no bulk flow (but restricted sky coverage in 2 superclusters).  Giovanelli et al. 1997, 1998, 1999… SCI (782 spirals in 24 clusters), SC2 (522 spirals in 52 clusters out to km/sec) and SFI (1631 field galaxies ~9000 km/sec) and find very small bulk flow ( km/sec).

Large-Scale Velocity Fields

Meanwhile in late ’90s and early 2000 more observations of velocity fields with yet contradicting results…  Hudson et al. (1999) SMAC … 699 early-type gals in 56 clusters ( km/sec) find bulk-flow 630 km/sec towards l=260, b=-1 (effective radius~8000 km/sec)  Willick (1999) LP10K survey analysing spirals and elliptical in an effective volume of km/sec, find bulk flow of ~700 km/sec towards l=272, b=10 (in agreement with SMAC).  Courteau et al. (2000) Shellflow using TF of 274 Sb/Sc gals between km/sec find bulk flow ~70±70 km/sec… in disagreement with SMAC & LP10K but in agreement with SCI, SC2, SFI  Tonry et al. (2000) using the SBF method of 300 early types within 3000 km/sec find the local volume at rest with respect to CMB.  Hudson (1999) using Tonry et al. (2003) 65 SNIa 6000<cz<30000 km/sec find ~610 km/sec towards l=311, b=9 (effective depth ~10000 km/sec)  Hudson et al. (2004) analysing all data sets find bulk flow of ~230 km/sec toward l=300, b=10… but…

Large-Scale Velocity Fields ISSUE No 2: There is a dichotomy between different bulk flow measurements ! What is going on ? Has the L&P result been explained ?.

Cosmological Density parameter from v-v, δ-δ and v-g comparisons ISSUE No 3: ISSUE No 3: Is there a consistent estimation of β from different data sets and methods ?

OPEN ISSUES ISSUE No 3: ISSUE No 3: There is a consistent estimation of β from different data’seta and methods ? ISSUE No 2: There is a dichotomy between different bulk flow measurements ! Has the L&P result been explained ?. ISSUE No 1: ISSUE No 1: There seems to be a dichotomy between Galaxy and Cluster results: Although both are aligned with CMB there is a difference in the dipole amplitude build-up, while if linear biasing was valid, on the corresponding scales, there should have been a constant difference in their respective dipole amplitudes.