# Full text of "CMB-Normalized Predictions for Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect fluctuations"

## See other formats

Submitted to ApJL July 18,2002 Preprint typeset using L^T^ style emulateapj v. 14/09/00 CMB-NORMALIZED PREDICTIONS FOR SUNYAEV-ZEL'DOVICH EFFECT FLUCTUATIONS (N O O 0^ > cn cn \o i> o (N O ■ Oh I o Gilbert P. Holder School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton NJ, 08540; holder@ias.edu Submitted to ApJL July 18,2002 ABSTRACT We predict the level of small-scale anisotropy in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) due to the Sunyaev- Zel'dovich (SZ) effect for the ensemble of cosmological models that are consistent with current measurements of large-scale CMB anisotropy. We argue that the recently reported detections of the small-scale (arcminutes) CMB anisotropy are only marginally consistent with being the SZ effect when cosmological models are calibrated to the existing primary CMB data on large scales. The discrepancy is at more than 2-2.5(7, and is mainly due to a lower CTg ^ 0.8 favored by the primary CMB and a higher > 1 favored by the SZ effect. A degeneracy between the optical depth to Thomson scattering and the CMB -derived value of erg suggests that the discrepancy is reduced if the universe was reionized very early, at redshift of ~ 25. Subject headings: cosmic microwave background — cosmological parameters — cosmology: observations 1. INTRODUCTION The current generation of cosmic microwave background (CMB) experiments are producing a wealth of information on a wide range of angular scales. With the recent measurements by BIMA (Dawson et al. 2002) and CBI (Mason et al. 2002) com- plementing earlier measurements (see Hu and Dodelson 2002, for a recent compilation), CMB anisotropy has been measured over a range of multipoles of I = 2-6000 (or angular scales of 2' -90°). At low multipoles (I < 2000) anisotropy is primarily gen- erated at z > 1000 except at very low multipoles (/ < 10) where late-time decay of gravitational potential contributes sig- nificantly. At higher multipoles (smaller angular scales) low- redshift sources generate a significant amount of fluctuation power At the observing frequencies of CBI and BIMA (^ 30 GHz), the largest sources of low-redshift anisotropy are radio point sources and the thermal Sunyaev-Zel'dovich (SZ) effect. The latter is of cosmological interest and may be large enough to be detected, depending on cosmology (e.g.. Cole and Kaiser 1988). The reported detections of power at small angular scales (I = 2000-6000) have argued that point-source contamination is not a problem, suggesting that the detected power could be due to the SZ effect (Bond et al. 2002; Dawson et al. 2002; Komatsu and Seljak 2002). Since the number density and brightness of the sources contributing to the SZ fluctuations (i.e., hot gas in galaxy clusters at z < 1) depend on the background cosmology, the level of the SZ fluctuations depends on cosmological param- eters. The SZ angular power spectrum is sensitive to the matter- fluctuation amplitude and the baryon density of the universe but relatively insensitive to the matter density of the universe (Komatsu and Kitayama 1999) or other cosmological parame- ters (Komatsu and Seljak 2002). By fitting the CBI and BIMA data to theoretical predictions, Komatsu and Seljak (2002) have found a constraint on linear r.m.s. mass fluctuations within an 8 Mpc sphere, ag, as asiflbh/OmS)"-^'^ = 1.04±0.12 at the 95% confidence level. On the other hand, observations of the primary CMB anisotropy and the large-scale structure (LSS) of the universe have already provided tight constraints on cosmological param- eters (e.g., Wang et al. 2002). By using these constraints we can predict how much SZ power ought to be seen at the CBI and BIMA multipole bands. By doing so we can see if an SZ interpretation of the small-scale fluctuations is consistent with cosmological models favored by CMB or LSS. In this Letter we estimate the level of the SZ angular power spectrum expected from cosmological models consistent with CMB data at / < 2000, and compare it with the CBI and BIMA data at 2000 < / < 10000. We use only CMB data and a prior on the Hubble constant and do not include any constraints from LSS. For the primary CMB data, we use the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) results of Lewis and Bridle (2002) as an estimate of the appropriate weighting for each cosmological model. For the SZ effect, we use a model for the SZ power spectrum as a function of cosmology from Komatsu and Sel- jak (2002). In §2 we oudine salient features of the MCMC re- sults. In §3 we sketch out our calculation of the SZ power spec- trum, including the effects of the non-Gaussian nature of the SZ fluctuations. In §4 we compare MCMC realizations of the SZ power spectrum weighted by the primary CMB data with the CBI and BIMA data, and check for consistency between them. In §5 we discuss implications for the reported detections of power at small angular scales. 2. CMB-CALIBRATED COSMOLOGICAL MODELS As a subset of cosmological models consistent with the cur- rent CMB data, we use the MCMC results of Lewis and Bridle (2002) (for details see http://cosmologist.info/cosmomc). Esti- mating cosmological parameters using MCMC methods (Chris- tensen et al. 2001) entails taking random steps in parameter space, accepting a step if the new point is more likely, other- wise accepting the step with some probability (less than one) set by how much worse the new point is than the current point. The resulting list of points should sample the likelihood func- tion in the multidimensional parameter space. An advantage of MCMC methods (besides often being faster than grids) is that the resulting list of consistent models (the "chain") provides a self-consistent sampling of the likelihood distribution. A distribution of CMB-derived cosmological pa- rameters using the MCMC chain therefore provides a maxi- mally informative CMB prior. Covariances between parameters are naturally incorporated. The chain provides more samples 2 HOLDER where the density is higher; this feature is actually a disadvan- tage when dealing with models lying in the tail of the distribu- tion, as we will return to later. The chain that we use (Lewis and Bridle 2002) assumes a flat universe, no tensor component, and an equation of state for the dark energy component of w = -1 (i.e., assumes a cos- mological constant rather than quintessence). A prior on the Hubble constant (h = 0.72 ± 0.08) consistent with the Hubble Key Project results (Freedman et al. 2001) is assumed, but no LSS priors. There are six free parameters in the chain: ^bh^, ^CDuh^, ^A, Zte, «s> and Ag, where fib is the baryon density relative to the critical density, Ocdm the cold dark- matter density, the cosmological-constant energy density, Zre the redshift of reionization, the scalar spectral index, and As the amplitude of density fluctuations. The constraint that spatial curvature is zero defines the Hubble constant as 1 /2 h = [(Q\, + QcDM)h^/(i-^A)] ■ The total matter density f^CDM + and (Tg are derived parameters for each model. There are 2,596 MCMC samples in total. For each of the cosmological models in the chain, we predict the SZ power spectrum. The resulting distribution of powers represents the prior probability of a given amount of SZ power, given the current large-angle CMB data, i.e., CMB-normjiUzed predictions for the SZ power spectrum. 3. ANGULAR POWER SPECTRUM OF THE SZ EFFECT The SZ effect arises from Compton scattering of CMB pho- tons with hot electrons in gas in halos (Sunyaev and Zel'dovich 1980). Many authors have estimated the SZ angular power spectrum Q using analytic methods or hydrodynamic simula- tions, with broad agreement between the calculations to within a factor of two at / < lO'* (e.g., see Komatsu and Seljak 2002, for a recent analytic prediction and comparison between ana- lytic methods and numerical simulations; see references therein for previous work). Komatsu and Seljak (2002) find that C; is sensitive to the baryon density and erg with an approximate scal- ing of C/ oc aliflbh)^, but is almost independent of any other cosmological parameters. We compute C; as a sum of one-halo Poisson contributions over all halos which can contribute: Q = 8ljdzfJdM'-!^\UM,z)\\ (1) where V{z) is the comoving volume of the universe at z per steradian, dn{M,z)/dM the comoving dark-matter halo mass function, and the spectral function of the SZ effect (Sunyaev and Zel'dovich 1980). We ignore the correlated contribution as it is unimportant at / > 300 (Komatsu and Kitayama 1999). The physics of gas in halos is encoded in yi{M,z), the 2D Fourier transform of the Compton y-parameter as a function of halo mass and redshift. The y-parameter is directly proportional to the integrated gas pressure along the line of sight; this leads to Q oc {n^hf. We use the method of Komatsu and Seljak (2002) for com- puting Q. In brief, we compute a gas-pressure profile using the universal gas-density and temperature profiles derived by Ko- matsu and Seljak (2001) which make three assumptions about gas in halos: (1) hydrostatic equilibrium between gas pressure and the gravitational force induced by a universal dark-matter density profile (Navarro et al. 1997), (2) the gas density tracing the dark matter density at large radii, as observed in simulated galaxy clusters (e.g., Frenk et al. 1999), and (3) a constant poly- tropic equation of state for the gas. For the mass function we use the mass function of Jenkins et al. (2001). This prescrip- tion has no free parameters, and is in broad agreement with SZ simulations to within a factor of two at / < lO'*, agreeing with simulations at least as well as different simulations agree with each other Gas coohng, energy feedback, and star formation are not in- cluded in our models; Komatsu and Seljak (2002) have argued that these effects are not very important for Q, which is dom- inated by gas outside the core of halos. Recently, White et al. (2002) have used hydrodynamic simulations to show that these effects affect Q by no more than a factor of two. These studies suggest that our theoretical prediction for Q is accurate to bet- ter than a factor of two, and thus MCMC-derived predictions for C; in the next section can be trusted up to this accuracy. The SZ fluctuations are highly non-Gaussian, as character- ized by large skewness (Seljak et al. 2001; Zhang et al. 2002; White et al. 2002); thus, sampling variance of C; for the SZ fluc- tuations differs from that for Gaussian fluctuations, and mea- surements of Ci in adjacent bins are highly correlated (Cooray 2001). We have to include the non-Gaussianity in the error analysis to interpret observational SZ data correctly. We do this by explicitly including those trispectrum configurations which contribute to the power-spectrum covariance matrix. The error of Ci in a bin of size A/ is given by sky 2{Q + Cff ^ Tu (2/+l)A/ 47r (2) where Tu is the angular trispectrum relevant for the non- Gaussian sampUng variance (Cooray 2001), dz— dz (3) The expression for AC; is correct when both C/ and Tu are suf- ficiently smooth in I as is the case here. Komatsu and Seljak (2002) have found that the predicted AC; agrees with hydrody- namic simulations to within a factor of two. For the instrumental-noise power spectrum Cf we use l{l + l)Cf /(27r) = 500, 1000, 1500, and 3000 /xK^ at / = 1703, 2183, 2630, and 3266 for CBI, and 720 and 2000 ijlK? at / = 5237 and 8748 for BIMA. For sky coverage of observations A-nf^ky we use 1 deg^ for CBI, and 0.1 deg^ for BIMA. The bin sizes are A/ = 565, 378, 612, 1000, 2870, and 4150. Alfliough we do not use the exact window functions for the experiments, C; is very flat at these multipoles, reducing the importance of the window functions. 4. RESULTS In figure 1 we show the histogram (weighted according to the weights of Lewis and Bridle (2002) for each model) of ex- pected SZ power for CBI and BIMA high-/ bins, where the three highest-/ CBI bins and the two BIMA bins are averaged to single bins for each experiment. The most likely values for the expected SZ power are less than 100 jiK?. The weighted mean values are 97 and 86 /iK^ for CBI and BIMA, respectively, while the median values are 79 and 69 /xK^. We also find that the analytic approximate scaling of Komatsu and Seljak (2002) at / - 2000-6000, /(/ + l)C//(27r) ~ 330 aliVL^h / msf , gives similar results; the weighted mean is 100 /iK^, while the median is 88 /xKl Bond et al. (2002) find 20-30% lower normalization for the scaUng relation at the CBI band, shghtly shifting the histogram leftward. CMB-NORMALIZED SZ PREDICTIONS 3 400 T3 O O 3 200 lll III lllllj 1 1 1 llllll 1 1 1 llllll 1 CBI (95%) . lll III llllll 1 1 1 lllllj 1 1 1 lllllj 1 _ BIMA (95%) _ ■ - 1 1 \ 'A ' iil-^i'iiiil 1 , , mV , 1 10 100 1000 1 10 100 1000 l(l+l)Ci/27T [AiK2] Fig. 1. — Unnormalized probability distribution of the SZ angular power spectrum in CBI (left panel) and BIMA (right panel) high-/ averaged windows (solid lines), weighted by the primary CMB likelihood. The gray areas show 95% confidence regions of the CBI (Mason et al. 2002) and BIMA (Dawson et al. 2002) data, assuming Gaussian fluctuations. Note that the true error is larger because of non-Gaussian nature of the SZ fluctuations, and depends on cosmological models. Also shown is the result using analytic approximation of Komatsu and Seljak (2002) for C; (dashed hnes). For CBI the 95% lower limit (assuming Gaussian fluctua- tions) to the observed anisotropy is 199 /xK^, making an SZ interpretation of the CBI measurement only marginally consis- tent with the CMB-cahbrated theories. We show this exphcitly in figure 2 where we plot the number of standard deviations of the CBI and BIMA data relative to the predicted levels of SZ fluctuations. We have computed the errors AC; using equa- tion (2). We find that the CBI measurements at Z = 2183 and 2630 are inconsistent with most of the models that are consis- tent with the primary CMB data at greater than 2.5 and 2a lev- els, respectively. The rest of the CBI bins and the BIMA bins are consistent with the predicted levels of the SZ effect. The cutoff at the 2.5 - 3(7 level in figure 2 is due to instrumen- tal noise. At the 2.5 -3fT level the current data are consistent with no SZ signal. Thus, lower noise experiments could extend the histograms to larger cr values. Note that the largest values of a in the figure are higher than signal-to-noise ratios of CBI quoted by Mason et al. (2002). This is because AC/ depends on the SZ power spectrum; a lower SZ power spectrum leads to lower sample variance, and therefore a smaller AC;. As a result, at the largest a the instrumental noise determines AC; entirely, making it smaller than the quoted CBI errors. Which models can account for the data at / = 2000-3000? We find that those models typically have erg > 1 and ilbfi^ higher than the BBN-aUowed value of n^h^ = 0.020 ± 0.002 (Buries et al. 2001). A simple scaling of C; oc aliClhh)^ ac- counts for this; thus, we need erg > 1 for a given BBN value of Clhh to account for the CBI data by the SZ effect. This con- clusion agrees with Bond et al. (2002) and Komatsu and Seljak (2002). In principle, it would be straightforward to do a joint like- lihood analysis of the primary CMB and the SZ effect using CMB data on all angular scales. In practice, the strong non- Gaussianity of the SZ signal, combined with the uncertain field selection effects (e.g., no bright point sources) make such a pro- cedure still premature. Furthermore, the required erg > 1 is in the tail of the CMB-preferred distribution, so the resolution of the MCMC chain is poor in this region. Importance sampling becomes unreUable in regions where the density of points is low. |Cobs_CSZ|/(^C,) Fig. 2. — Number of standard deviations of observed data points relative to predicted SZ fluctuations (each data point corresponds to a panel), weighted by the primary CMB likelihood. The top four panels are the CBI data points (Mason et al. 2002), while the bottom two panels the BIMA data (Dawson et al. 2002). The effects of non-Gaussianity have been included in the error estimation. 5. DISCUSSION We have presented estimates of the SZ angular power spec- trum at I > 2000 for cosmological models that are consistent with the current CMB anisotropy data at / < 2000. The mode of distribution of the predicted SZ power at / ~ 3000 is 50 /zK^, while we find that the weighted mean is 97 /zK^ (the median is 78.5 /iK^), still significantly lower than the reported CBI de- tection of anisotropy on these angular scales, 508 /iK^. Mov- ing out from the mode at levels of equal likelihood, the ranges of power enclosed by 68% and 95% of the distribution are 20-200 ijK^ and 5-450 /zK^ respectively. This is effec- tively a calculation of the primary CMB prior for the SZ power spectrum at the CBI band. When compared to the quoted 68% (359-624 /zK^) and 95% (199-946 /xK^) regions of flie CBI detection at face value, we find that the CBI detection is only marginally consistent with the SZ effect. The BIMA detection is fully consistent with the SZ effect. By doing a careful statistical analysis, taking into account the non-Gaussianity of SZ fluctuations and sampling variance, we find that an SZ interpretation of the CBI data is inconsis- tent at more than 2— 2.5cr for those cosmological models which are most consistent with the primary CMB data. The mod- els with the highest SZ power share several characteristics: all models with more than 400 /xK^ of power but a few exceptions have 0.95 < erg and 0.05 < Jlh- Furthermore, such models pre- fer a low Hubble constant {h < 0.7) and a high matter density (0.3 < ricDM + fib < 0.8). A reason for a low h is that the pri- mary CMB data tightly constrain il^h^ while we need a higher flbh to make the SZ effect larger. We can accomplish this by 4 HOLDER increasing while reducing h slightly within the HST-h prior. A model with large red tilt (ng < 0.95) can not produce a large amount of SZ power. The possible presence of radio point sources that partially "fill in" the SZ effect from clusters (Holder 2002) further en- hances the possible discrepancy. A rehable determination of ag significantly lower than 1 would be very difficult to reconcile with an SZ interpretation of the measured high-/ power. Uncertainty in estimates for the SZ power spectrum is not yet fully understood, making a more detailed interpretation of the excess power comphcated. A major issue is that different sim- ulations have not yet converged, even for adiabatic simulations. Although our current knowledge of missing physics such as gas cooling, star formation, or energy feedback is still limited, these effects appear to not be very important (White et al. 2002) ex- cept on very small angular scales (< 1' or / > 10"^) where other effects like non-sphericity or merging of halos may also play a role. Nevertheless, the current differences among analytic mod- els, simulations, and estimates of the effects of missing physics are at the level of a factor of two in Q, while the discrepancy between these predictions and the CBI data is about a factor of five. Given the strong dependence of Q on erg, we argue that the discrepancy is due to the difference between a low ag < 0.8 fa- vored by the primary CMB and a high trg > 1 favored by the SZ effect (Bond et al. 2002; Komatsu and Seljak 2002). Lahav et al. (2002) and Melchiorri and Silk (2002) have found simi- larly low (jg from the primary CMB data with the same prior on h. If the excess power is really due to the SZ effect, then this dis- crepancy is suggesting that there are some missing components in our analysis. Multi-band SZ observations covering several frequencies will be required to verify the apparent discrepancy. What is missing in our analysis? The chain that we have used has a strong HST prior on h. Lower values of h reduce the discrepancy, but h <0A would be required to explain the entire difference. Additional components such as massive neu- trinos would make the discrepancy worse by driving erg to even lower values. Allowing tensor modes will have competing ef- fects of reducing the overall normalization of scalar modes at large scales but also allowing a blue tilt (higher n,), leaving the effects on cluster scales largely unchanged. The effect of al- lowing a general equation of state for the dark energy will be to slightly enhance the SZ fluctuations for a fixed value of erg (Ko- matsu and Seljak 2002), but to significantly reduce the CMB- pref erred value of erg. With the SZ fluctuation power going as i7g, the latter effect will dominate and w > -1 will generally reduce the expected fluctuation power. The addition of isocur- vature fluctuations may help to reconcile the discrepancy, while it significantly expands the allowed range of many cosmologi- cal parameters (Trotta et al. 2001). A very early reionization of the universe (zre > 20) will in- crease the CMB-pref erred value of erg, helping to reduce the discrepancy. We find a broad peak in the distribution of mod- els in the chain around cge"^ ~ 0.8, where r is the Thomson- scattering optical depth of the universe; r > 0.22 or Zk 20 would comfortably allow ag > 1.0. The discrepancy thus dis- appears if the universe was reionized early. The current CMB data cannot break the degeneracy between erg and t, and allow this area of parameter space, although r > 0.3 (zre ^ 30) ap- pears to be ruled out. CMB-polarization experiments on large angular scales (e.g., MAP or Planck) should be able to break this degeneracy, and detect the signature of reionization (Zal- darriaga et al. 1997; Eisenstein et al. 1999; KapUnghat et al. 2002). We have presented an example of the ease and power of MCMC methods in applying CMB constraints to calculations that include non-trivial dependence on cosmological parame- ters. It would be worthwhile to investigate the effects of LSS priors, which should make the discrepancy worse by making ag smaller (Lewis and Bridle 2002; Bond et al. 2002). With the strong preference of the high-/ measurements for high values of erg and flbh, it would require running a new chain that in- cludes the CBI and BIMA data points, as importance sampling is unrehable in the tails of the current distribution. Measurements of CMB anisotropy will continue to improve. MCMC methods provide a natural way to incorporate strong constraints on cosmological parameters from CMB experi- ments into other cosmological studies. Using CMB information to understand the effects of cosmology will allow better under- standings of systematic errors in the measurements and insight into important astrophysical processes. Many of the calculations and some of the text were gener- ously provided by Eiichiro Komatsu, of Princeton University, who could not be a co-author due to considerations of a pos- sible conflict of interest but was an important contributor. We would like to thank David N. Spergel and Uros Seljak for useful discussions. GPH is supported by the W. M. Keck Foundation at the IAS. We are grateful to Sarah Bridle and Antony Lewis for generously providing their MCMC results publicly. REFERENCES Bond, J. R., et al. 2002, ApJ, submitted (astro-ph/0205386) Buries, S., NoUett, K. M., and Turner, M. S. 2001, ApJ, 552, LI Christensen, N., Meyer, R., Knox, L., and Luey, B. 2001, Class. Quant. Grav., 18, 2677 Cole, S., and Kaiser, N. 1988, MNRAS, 233, 637 Cooray, A. 2001, Phys. Rev. D, 64, 063514. Dawson, K. S., Holzapfel, W. L., Carlstrom, J. E., LaRoque, S. J., Miller, A., Nagai, D., and Joy, M. 2002, ApJ, submitted (astro-ph/0206012) Eisenstein, D. J., Hu, W., and Tegmark, M. 1999, ApJ, 518, 2-23. Freedman, W. L., et al. 2001, ApJ, 553, 47 Frenk, C. S., et al. 1999, ApJ, 525, 554 Holder, G. R 2002, ApJ, in press (astro-ph/0205467) Hu, W., and Dodelson, S. 2002, ARA&A, in press (astro-ph/01 10414) Jenkins, A., Frenk, C. S., White, S. D. M., Colberg, J. M., Cole, S., Evrard, A. E., Couchman, H. M. R, and Yoshida, N. MNRAS, 321, 372 KapWghat, M., Chu, M., Haiman, Z., Holder, G. P., Knox, L., and Skordis, C. ApJ, submitted (asB-o-ph/0207591) Komatsu, E., and Kitayama, T. 1999, ApJ, 526, LI Komatsu, E., and Seljak, U. 2001, MNRAS, 327, 1353 Komatsu, E., and Seljak, U. 2002, MNRAS, submitted (asn-o-ph/0205468) Lahav, O., et al. 2002, MNRAS, 333, 961 Lewis, A., and Bridle, S. 2002, Phys. Rev. D, submitted (astro-ph/0205436) Mason, B. S., et al. 2002, ApJ, submitted (astro-ph/0205384) Melchiorri, A., and Silk, J. 2002, preprint (astro-ph/0203200) Navarro, J. F, Frenk, C. S., and White, S. D. M. 1997, ApJ, 490, 493 Seljak, U., Burwell, J., and Pen, U. L. 2001, Phys. Rev. D, 63, 063001 Sunyaev, R. A., and Zel'dovich, Y. B. 1980, ARA&A, 18, 537 Trotta, R., Riazuelo, A., and Durrer, R. 2001, Phys. Rev. Lett., 87, 231301 Wang, X., Tegmark, M., and Zaldarriaga, M. 2002, Phys. Rev D, 65, 123001 White, M., Hemquist, L., and Springel, V. 2002, ApJ, submitted (astt-o-ph/0205437) Zaldarriaga, M., Spergel, D. N., and Seljak, U. 1997, ApJ, 488, 1 Zhang, R, Pen, U. L., and Wang, B. 2002, ApJ, submitted (astro-ph/0201375)