DOCSLIB.ORG

The Structure of the Universe Joel Primack, UCSC

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Structure of the Universe Joel Primack, UCSC Friday January 12, 2018 Panofsky Auditorium The Structure of the Universe Joel Primack, UCSC ΛCDM - the Double Dark Theory of Cosmology Large Scale Structure of the Universe The Galaxy - Halo Connection How Galaxies Form - Hubble Space Telescope + Simulations Science and Technology Policy Cosmic Horizon (The Big Bang) Cosmic Background Radiation Cosmic Dark Ages Bright Galaxies Form Big Galaxies Form Earth Forms Today When we look Cosmic out in space we look back Spheres in time… of Time Matter and Energy Content of the Dark Universe Matter Ships on a ΛCDM Dark Double Energy Dark Ocean Imagine that the entire universe is an ocean of dark Theory energy. On that ocean sail billions of ghostly ships made of dark matter... Cosmic Inlation: matter luctuations enter the horizon with about the same amplitude scale factor a =1/(1+z) M⦿, 4 Matter Distribution Agrees with Double Dark Theory! Planck Collaboration: Cosmological parameters PlanckPlanck Collaboration: Collaboration: The ThePlanckPlanckmissionmission Planck Collaboration: The Planck mission 6000 6000 Angular scale 5000 90◦ 500018◦ 1◦ 0.2◦ 0.1◦ 0.07◦ Planck Collaboration: The Planck mission European 6000 ] 4000 2 ] 4000 2 K Double K µ [ µ 3000 [ 3000Dark TT Space TT 5000 D D 2000 2000Theory Agency 1000 1000 ] 4000 2 Cosmic 0 K 0 PLANCK 600 Variance600 60 µ 60 [ 3000 300300 30 TT 30 TT 0 0 Satellite D 0 0 D ∆ D Fig. 7. Maximum posterior CMB intensity map at 50 resolution derived from the joint baseline-30 analysis of Planck, WMAP, and ∆ -300 -300 408 MHz observations. A small strip of the Galactic plane, 1.6 % of the sky, is filled in by-30 a constrained realization that has the same statistical properties as the rest of the sky. 2000 -600 -60-60 Data -600 Temperature-Temperature 22 1010 3030 500500 10001000 15001500 20002000 25002500 Released 1000The Planck 2015 temperature power spectrum. At multipoles ` 30 we show the maximum likelihood frequency averaged Fig.Fig.Fig. 9. 9. 10.ThePlanckPlanck TT2015power temperature spectrum. power The points spectrum. in the At upper multipoles panel show` 30 the we maximum-likelihood show the maximum estimateslikelihood of frequency the primary averaged CMB temperature spectrum computed from the Plik cross-half-mission likelihood≥≥ with foreground and other nuisance parameters deter- temperaturespectrum computed spectrum{ as computed described from in the the textPlik forcross-half-mission the best-fit foreground likelihood and nuisance with foreground parameters and of other the Planck nuisance+WP parameters+highL fit deter- listed February 9, mined from the MCMC analysis of the base ⇤CDM cosmology. In the multipole range 2 ` 29, we plot the power spectrum minedin Table from5. The the red MCMC line shows analysis the of best-fit the base base⇤⇤CDMCDM cosmology. spectrum. The In the lower multipole panel shows range the 2 residuals` 29, with we plot respect the powerto the theoretical spectrum 2015 estimatesestimates from the Commander component-separationcomponent-separation algorithm algorithm computed computed over over 94 94 % % of of the the sky. sky. The The best-fit best-fit base base⇤CDM⇤CDM theoretical theoretical spectrummodel. The fitted0 error to barsthe Planck are computedTT+lowP from likelihood the full covariance is plotted in matrix, the upper appropriately panel. Residuals weighted with across respect each to band this (see model Eqs. are36a shownand in spectrum fitted to the Planck TT+lowP likelihood is plotted in the upperFig. 8. Maximum panel. posterior Residuals amplitude Stokes Q ( withleft) and U ( respectright) maps derived to from thisPlanck observations model between are 30 and shown 353 GHz. in 36b), and include2 beam uncertainties10 and50σ uncertainties500 in the foregroundThese1000 model mapS have been parameters. highpass-filtered with1500 a cosine-apodized filter between ` = 202000 and 40, and the a 17 % region of the Galactic2500 thethe lower lower panel. The error error bars bars show show 11σ uncertainties.uncertainties. From FromPlanckPlanck Collaborationplane Collaboration has been replaced with a XIII constrained XIII( Gaussian2015(2015 realization). ). (Planck Collaboration IX 2015). From Planck Collaboration X Agrees with Double Dark Theory!±± Multipole moment,(2015). viewed as work in progress. Nonetheless, we find a high level of 8.2.2. Number of modes consistency in results between the TT and the full TT+TE+EE likelihoods. Furthermore, the cosmological parameters (which One way of assessing the constraining power contained in a par- 100 ticular measurement of CMB anisotropies is to determine the 140 do not depend strongly on ⌧) derived from the TE spectra have comparable errors to the TT-derived parameters, and they are e↵ective number of a`m modes that have been measured. This The temperature angular power spectrum of the primary CMB from Planck] , showing a precise measurement of seven acoustic peaks,/ that Fig. 19. consistent to within typically 0.5 σ or better. Polarization-is equivalent to estimatingPolarization 2 times the square of the total S N Temperature-Polarization 2 are well fit by a simple six-parameter ⇤CDM theoretical model (the model plotted80 is the one labelled [Planck+WPin the power+highL] spectra, a measure in Planck that contains all Collaborationthe available K ] 70 2 XVI (2013)). The shaded area around the best-fit curve represents cosmic variance,µ 16 including the sky cut used. The error bars on individual points 5 K 60 − also includeµ cosmic variance. The horizontal axis is logarithmic up to ` = 50, and linear beyond. The vertical scale is `(` + 1)Cl/2⇡. The measured [ 0 spectrum shown here is exactly the same as the one shown in Fig. 1 of Planck[10 Collaboration40 XVI (2013), but it has been rebinned to show better TE the low-` ` region. D EE -70 ` 20 Double Dark Theory C 0 Double Dark Theory -140 Angular scale tected by Planck over the entire sky, and which therefore con- 9010◦ 18◦ 1◦ 0.2◦ 0.1◦ tains both4 Galactic and extragalactic objects. No polarization in- EE ` 6000TE ` 0 0 formationC is provided for the sources at this time. The PCCS D ∆ 5000 ∆ -10 di↵ers-4 from the ERCSC in its extraction philosophy: more e↵ort has been made on the completeness of the catalogue, without re- 30 500 1000 1500 2000 30 500 1000 1500 2000 ] 4000 ducing notably the reliability of the detected sources, whereas 2 ` ` K the ERCSC was built in the spirit of releasing a reliable catalog µ [ 3000 Fig. 10. Frequency-averaged TE (left) and EE (right) spectra (withoutsuitable fitting for quick for T– follow-upP leakage). (in The particular theoretical withTE theand short-livedEE spectra Fig.Fig. 10. 11.Frequency-averagedPlanck T E (left) andTEEE(leftspectra) and (right)EE (right computed) spectra as (withoutdescribed fitting in the for text.T– TheP leakage). red lines The show theoretical the polarizationTE and spectraEE spectra from plottedD in the upper panel of each plot are computed from the best-fitHerschel modeltelescope). of Fig. 9. Residuals The greater with amount respect of to data, this theoretical di↵erent selec- model plottedthe2000 base in⇤ theCDM upperPlanck panel+ ofWP each+highL plot aremodel, computedwhich from is fitted the to best-fit the TT model data only of Fig.. 9. Residuals with respect to this theoretical model areare shown shown in the lower panel panel in in each each plot. plot. The The error error bars bars show show 1tionσ1 σerrors. processerrors. The The and green thegreen improvementslines lines in inthe the lower lower in thepanels panels calibration show show the and the best-fit map-best-fit temperature-to-polarization leakage model, fitted separately to the±± TE and EE spectra. From Planck Collaboration XIII (2015). temperature-to-polarization1000 leakage model, fitted separately to the makingTE and EE processingspectra. (references)From Planck help Collaboration the PCCS XIII to( improve2015). the performance (in depth and numbers) with respect to the previ- 0 2 10 50 500 1000 1500 2000 ous ERCSC. 4 cosmologicalcosmological informationMultipole if if we we assume assumemoment, that that the the anisotropies anisotropies are are andandThe 96 96 000 sources 000 modes, modes, were respectively. respectively. extracted4 fromFromFrom the this 2013 this perspective perspectivePlanck thefrequency the2015 2015 purelypurely Gaussian Gaussian (and hence hence ignore ignore all all non-Gaussian non-Gaussian informa- informa- mapsPlanckPlanck (Sect.datadata 6), constrain constrain which approximatelyinclude approximately data acquired 55 %55 more % over more modes more modes than than intwo in Fig.tiontion 20. coming comingThe temperature from lensing, angular the the power CIB, CIB, cross-correlations cross-correlationsspectrum of the CMB, with with other esti- other skythethe coverages.2013 2013 release. release. This Of Of implies course course this that this is the not is flux not the thedensities whole whole story, of story, most since since of matedprobes,probes, from etc.). etc.). the SMICA CarryingPlanck out outmap. this this procedure The procedure model for plotted for the the isPlanckPlanck the one20132013 la- somesome pieces pieces of of information information are are more more valuable valuable than than others, others, and and TT power spectrum data provided in Planck Collaboration XV thein sources fact Planck are anis able average to place of three considerably or more tighter di↵erent constraints observa- on belledTT [Planckpower+ spectrumWP+highL] data in provided Planck Collaboration in Planck Collaboration XVI (2013). The XV tionsin fact overPlanck a periodis able of to 15.5 place months. considerably The tighterMexican constraints Hat Wavelet on shaded((20142014 area)) and and aroundPlanck the Collaboration best-fit curve XVI represents XVI((20142014 cosmic),), yields yields variance, the the number number in- particularparticular parameters parameters (e.g., (e.g., reionization reionization optical optical depth depth or certain or certain 24 algorithm (Lopez-Caniego´ et al. 2006) has been selected as the cluding826826 000 000 the sky (which (which cut used. includes The error the the e ebars↵↵ectsects on of ofindividual instrumental instrumental points noise, do noise, not cos- in- cos- mic variance and masking).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fine-Tuning, Complexity, and Life in the Multiverse*
    Fine-Tuning, Complexity, and Life in the Multiverse* Mario Livio Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA E-mail: [email protected] and Martin J. Rees Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0HA, UK E-mail: [email protected] Abstract The physical processes that determine the properties of our everyday world, and of the wider cosmos, are determined by some key numbers: the ‘constants’ of micro-physics and the parameters that describe the expanding universe in which we have emerged. We identify various steps in the emergence of stars, planets and life that are dependent on these fundamental numbers, and explore how these steps might have been changed — or completely prevented — if the numbers were different. We then outline some cosmological models where physical reality is vastly more extensive than the ‘universe’ that astronomers observe (perhaps even involving many ‘big bangs’) — which could perhaps encompass domains governed by different physics. Although the concept of a multiverse is still speculative, we argue that attempts to determine whether it exists constitute a genuinely scientific endeavor. If we indeed inhabit a multiverse, then we may have to accept that there can be no explanation other than anthropic reasoning for some features our world. _______________________ *Chapter for the book Consolidation of Fine Tuning 1 Introduction At their fundamental level, phenomena in our universe can be described by certain laws—the so-called “laws of nature” — and by the values of some three dozen parameters (e.g., [1]). Those parameters specify such physical quantities as the coupling constants of the weak and strong interactions in the Standard Model of particle physics, and the dark energy density, the baryon mass per photon, and the spatial curvature in cosmology.
    [Show full text]
  • Cosmology Slides
    Inhomogeneous cosmologies George Ellis, University of Cape Town 27th Texas Symposium on Relativistic Astrophyiscs Dallas, Texas Thursday 12th December 9h00-9h45 • The universe is inhomogeneous on all scales except the largest • This conclusion has often been resisted by theorists who have said it could not be so (e.g. walls and large scale motions) • Most of the universe is almost empty space, punctuated by very small very high density objects (e.g. solar system) • Very non-linear: / = 1030 in this room. Models in cosmology • Static: Einstein (1917), de Sitter (1917) • Spatially homogeneous and isotropic, evolving: - Friedmann (1922), Lemaitre (1927), Robertson-Walker, Tolman, Guth • Spatially homogeneous anisotropic (Bianchi/ Kantowski-Sachs) models: - Gödel, Schücking, Thorne, Misner, Collins and Hawking,Wainwright, … • Perturbed FLRW: Lifschitz, Hawking, Sachs and Wolfe, Peebles, Bardeen, Ellis and Bruni: structure formation (linear), CMB anisotropies, lensing Spherically symmetric inhomogeneous: • LTB: Lemaître, Tolman, Bondi, Silk, Krasinski, Celerier , Bolejko,…, • Szekeres (no symmetries): Sussman, Hellaby, Ishak, … • Swiss cheese: Einstein and Strauss, Schücking, Kantowski, Dyer,… • Lindquist and Wheeler: Perreira, Clifton, … • Black holes: Schwarzschild, Kerr The key observational point is that we can only observe on the past light cone (Hoyle, Schücking, Sachs) See the diagrams of our past light cone by Mark Whittle (Virginia) 5 Expand the spatial distances to see the causal structure: light cones at ±45o. Observable Geo Data Start of universe Particle Horizon (Rindler) Spacelike singularity (Penrose). 6 The cosmological principle The CP is the foundational assumption that the Universe obeys a cosmological law: It is necessarily spatially homogeneous and isotropic (Milne 1935, Bondi 1960) Thus a priori: geometry is Robertson-Walker Weaker form: the Copernican Principle: We do not live in a special place (Weinberg 1973).
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1707.01004V1 [Astro-Ph.CO] 4 Jul 2017
    July 5, 2017 0:15 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE coc2ijmpe International Journal of Modern Physics E c World Scientific Publishing Company Primordial Nucleosynthesis Alain Coc Centre de Sciences Nucl´eaires et de Sciences de la Mati`ere (CSNSM), CNRS/IN2P3, Univ. Paris-Sud, Universit´eParis–Saclay, Bˆatiment 104, F–91405 Orsay Campus, France [email protected] Elisabeth Vangioni Institut d’Astrophysique de Paris, UMR-7095 du CNRS, Universit´ePierre et Marie Curie, 98 bis bd Arago, 75014 Paris (France), Sorbonne Universit´es, Institut Lagrange de Paris, 98 bis bd Arago, 75014 Paris (France) [email protected] Received July 5, 2017 Revised Day Month Year Primordial nucleosynthesis, or big bang nucleosynthesis (BBN), is one of the three evi- dences for the big bang model, together with the expansion of the universe and the Cos- mic Microwave Background. There is a good global agreement over a range of nine orders of magnitude between abundances of 4He, D, 3He and 7Li deduced from observations, and calculated in primordial nucleosynthesis. However, there remains a yet–unexplained discrepancy of a factor ≈3, between the calculated and observed lithium primordial abundances, that has not been reduced, neither by recent nuclear physics experiments, nor by new observations. The precision in deuterium observations in cosmological clouds has recently improved dramatically, so that nuclear cross sections involved in deuterium BBN need to be known with similar precision. We will shortly discuss nuclear aspects re- lated to BBN of Li and D, BBN with non-standard neutron sources, and finally, improved sensitivity studies using Monte Carlo that can be used in other sites of nucleosynthesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Primack-Phys205-Feb2
    Physics 205 6 February 2017 Comparing Observed Galaxies with Simulations Joel R. Primack UCSC Hubble Space Telescope Ultra Deep Field - ACS This picture is beautiful but misleading, since it only shows about 0.5% of the cosmic density. The other 99.5% of the universe is invisible. Matter and Energy Content of the Universe Imagine that the entire universe is an ocean of dark energy. On that ocean sail billions of ghostly ships made of dark matter... Matter and Energy Content of the Dark Universe Matter Ships on a ΛCDM Dark Double Energy Dark Ocean Imagine that the entire universe is an ocean of dark Theory energy. On that ocean sail billions of ghostly ships made of dark matter... Matter Distribution Agrees with Double Dark Theory! Planck Collaboration: Cosmological parameters PlanckPlanck Collaboration: Collaboration: The ThePlanckPlanckmissionmission Planck Collaboration: The Planck mission 6000 6000 Angular scale 5000 90◦ 500018◦ 1◦ 0.2◦ 0.1◦ 0.07◦ Planck Collaboration: The Planck mission European 6000 ] 4000 2 ] 4000 2 K Double K µ [ µ 3000 [ 3000Dark TT Space TT 5000 D D 2000 2000Theory Agency 1000 1000 ] 4000 2 Cosmic 0 K 0 PLANCK 600 Variance600 60 µ 60 [ 3000 300300 30 TT 30 TT 0 0 Satellite D 0 0 D ∆ D Fig. 7. Maximum posterior CMB intensity map at 50 resolution derived from the joint baseline-30 analysis of Planck, WMAP, and ∆ -300 -300 408 MHz observations. A small strip of the Galactic plane, 1.6 % of the sky, is filled in by-30 a constrained realization that has the same statistical properties as the rest of the sky.
    [Show full text]
  • Structure Formation in a CDM Universe
    Structure formation in a CDM Universe Thomas Quinn, University of Washington Greg Stinson, Charlotte Christensen, Alyson Brooks Ferah Munshi Fabio Governato, Andrew Pontzen, Chris Brook, James Wadsley Microwave Background Fluctuations Image courtesy NASA/WMAP Large Scale Clustering A well constrained cosmology ` Contents of the Universe Can it make one of these? Structure formation issues ● The substructure problem ● The angular momentum problem ● The cusp problem Light vs CDM structure Stars Gas Dark Matter The CDM Substructure Problem Moore et al 1998 Substructure down to 100 pc Stadel et al, 2009 Consequences for direct detection Afshordi etal 2010 Warm Dark Matter cold warm hot Constant Core Mass Strigari et al 2008 Light vs Mass Number density log(halo or galaxy mass) Simulations of Galaxy formation Guo e tal, 2010 Origin of Galaxy Spins ● Torques on the collapsing galaxy (Peebles, 1969; Ryden, 1988) λ ≡ L E1/2/GM5/2 ≈ 0.09 for galaxies Distribution of Halo Spins f(λ) Λ = LE1/2/GM5/2 Gardner, 2001 Angular momentum Problem Too few low-J baryons Van den Bosch 01 Bullock 01 Core/Cusps in Dwarfs Moore 1994 Warm DM doesn't help Moore et al 1999 Dwarf simulated to z=0 Stellar mass = 5e8 M sun` M = -16.8 i g - r = 0.53 V = 55 km/s rot R = 1 kpc d M /M = 2.5 HI * f = .3 f cosmic b b i band image Dwarf Light Profile Rotation Curve Resolution effects Low resolution: bad Low resolution star formation: worse Inner Profile Slopes vs Mass Governato, Zolotov etal 2012 Constant Core Masses Angular Momentum Outflows preferential remove low J baryons Simulation Results: Resolution and H2 Munshi, in prep.
    [Show full text]
  • The High Redshift Universe: Galaxies and the Intergalactic Medium
    The High Redshift Universe: Galaxies and the Intergalactic Medium Koki Kakiichi M¨unchen2016 The High Redshift Universe: Galaxies and the Intergalactic Medium Koki Kakiichi Dissertation an der Fakult¨atf¨urPhysik der Ludwig{Maximilians{Universit¨at M¨unchen vorgelegt von Koki Kakiichi aus Komono, Mie, Japan M¨unchen, den 15 Juni 2016 Erstgutachter: Prof. Dr. Simon White Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Jochen Weller Tag der m¨undlichen Pr¨ufung:Juli 2016 Contents Summary xiii 1 Extragalactic Astrophysics and Cosmology 1 1.1 Prologue . 1 1.2 Briefly Story about Reionization . 3 1.3 Foundation of Observational Cosmology . 3 1.4 Hierarchical Structure Formation . 5 1.5 Cosmological probes . 8 1.5.1 H0 measurement and the extragalactic distance scale . 8 1.5.2 Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) . 10 1.5.3 Large-Scale Structure: galaxy surveys and Lyα forests . 11 1.6 Astrophysics of Galaxies and the IGM . 13 1.6.1 Physical processes in galaxies . 14 1.6.2 Physical processes in the IGM . 17 1.6.3 Radiation Hydrodynamics of Galaxies and the IGM . 20 1.7 Bridging theory and observations . 23 1.8 Observations of the High-Redshift Universe . 23 1.8.1 General demographics of galaxies . 23 1.8.2 Lyman-break galaxies, Lyα emitters, Lyα emitting galaxies . 26 1.8.3 Luminosity functions of LBGs and LAEs . 26 1.8.4 Lyα emission and absorption in LBGs: the physical state of high-z star forming galaxies . 27 1.8.5 Clustering properties of LBGs and LAEs: host dark matter haloes and galaxy environment . 30 1.8.6 Circum-/intergalactic gas environment of LBGs and LAEs .
    [Show full text]
  • Week 5: More on Structure Formation
    Week 5: More on Structure Formation Cosmology, Ay127, Spring 2008 April 23, 2008 1 Mass function (Press-Schechter theory) In CDM models, the power spectrum determines everything about structure in the Universe. In particular, it leads to what people refer to as “bottom-up” and/or “hierarchical clustering.” To begin, note that the power spectrum P (k), which decreases at large k (small wavelength) is psy- chologically inferior to the scaled power spectrum ∆2(k) = (1/2π2)k3P (k). This latter quantity is monotonically increasing with k, or with smaller wavelength, and thus represents what is going on physically a bit more intuitively. Equivalently, the variance σ2(M) of the mass distribution on scales of mean mass M is a monotonically decreasing function of M; the variance in the mass distribution is largest at the smallest scales and smallest at the largest scales. Either way, the density-perturbation amplitude is larger at smaller scales. It is therefore smaller structures that go nonlinear and undergo gravitational collapse earliest in the Universe. With time, larger and larger structures undergo gravitational collapse. Thus, the first objects to undergo gravitational collapse after recombination are probably globular-cluster–sized halos (although the halos won’t produce stars. As we will see in Week 8, the first dark-matter halos to undergo gravitational collapse and produce stars are probably 106 M halos at redshifts z 20. A typical L galaxy probably forms ∼ ⊙ ∼ ∗ at redshifts z 1, and at the current epoch, it is galaxy groups or poor clusters that are the largest ∼ mass scales currently undergoing gravitational collapse.
    [Show full text]
  • Cosmic Microwave Background
    1 29. Cosmic Microwave Background 29. Cosmic Microwave Background Revised August 2019 by D. Scott (U. of British Columbia) and G.F. Smoot (HKUST; Paris U.; UC Berkeley; LBNL). 29.1 Introduction The energy content in electromagnetic radiation from beyond our Galaxy is dominated by the cosmic microwave background (CMB), discovered in 1965 [1]. The spectrum of the CMB is well described by a blackbody function with T = 2.7255 K. This spectral form is a main supporting pillar of the hot Big Bang model for the Universe. The lack of any observed deviations from a 7 blackbody spectrum constrains physical processes over cosmic history at redshifts z ∼< 10 (see earlier versions of this review). Currently the key CMB observable is the angular variation in temperature (or intensity) corre- lations, and to a growing extent polarization [2–4]. Since the first detection of these anisotropies by the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite [5], there has been intense activity to map the sky at increasing levels of sensitivity and angular resolution by ground-based and balloon-borne measurements. These were joined in 2003 by the first results from NASA’s Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP)[6], which were improved upon by analyses of data added every 2 years, culminating in the 9-year results [7]. In 2013 we had the first results [8] from the third generation CMB satellite, ESA’s Planck mission [9,10], which were enhanced by results from the 2015 Planck data release [11, 12], and then the final 2018 Planck data release [13, 14]. Additionally, CMB an- isotropies have been extended to smaller angular scales by ground-based experiments, particularly the Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT) [15] and the South Pole Telescope (SPT) [16].
    [Show full text]
  • Dark Energy Survey Year 3 Results: Multi-Probe Modeling Strategy and Validation
    DES-2020-0554 FERMILAB-PUB-21-240-AE Dark Energy Survey Year 3 Results: Multi-Probe Modeling Strategy and Validation E. Krause,1, ∗ X. Fang,1 S. Pandey,2 L. F. Secco,2, 3 O. Alves,4, 5, 6 H. Huang,7 J. Blazek,8, 9 J. Prat,10, 3 J. Zuntz,11 T. F. Eifler,1 N. MacCrann,12 J. DeRose,13 M. Crocce,14, 15 A. Porredon,16, 17 B. Jain,2 M. A. Troxel,18 S. Dodelson,19, 20 D. Huterer,4 A. R. Liddle,11, 21, 22 C. D. Leonard,23 A. Amon,24 A. Chen,4 J. Elvin-Poole,16, 17 A. Fert´e,25 J. Muir,24 Y. Park,26 S. Samuroff,19 A. Brandao-Souza,27, 6 N. Weaverdyck,4 G. Zacharegkas,3 R. Rosenfeld,28, 6 A. Campos,19 P. Chintalapati,29 A. Choi,16 E. Di Valentino,30 C. Doux,2 K. Herner,29 P. Lemos,31, 32 J. Mena-Fern´andez,33 Y. Omori,10, 3, 24 M. Paterno,29 M. Rodriguez-Monroy,33 P. Rogozenski,7 R. P. Rollins,30 A. Troja,28, 6 I. Tutusaus,14, 15 R. H. Wechsler,34, 24, 35 T. M. C. Abbott,36 M. Aguena,6 S. Allam,29 F. Andrade-Oliveira,5, 6 J. Annis,29 D. Bacon,37 E. Baxter,38 K. Bechtol,39 G. M. Bernstein,2 D. Brooks,31 E. Buckley-Geer,10, 29 D. L. Burke,24, 35 A. Carnero Rosell,40, 6, 41 M. Carrasco Kind,42, 43 J. Carretero,44 F. J. Castander,14, 15 R.
    [Show full text]
  • Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Cosmological Constraints from Galaxy Clustering and Weak Lensing
    University of North Dakota UND Scholarly Commons Physics Faculty Publications Department of Physics & Astrophysics 8-27-2018 Dark Energy Survey year 1 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing T. M. C. Abbott F. B. Abdalla A. Alarcon J. Aleksic S. Allam See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.und.edu/pa-fac Part of the Astrophysics and Astronomy Commons, and the Physics Commons Recommended Citation Abbott, T. M. C.; Abdalla, F. B.; Alarcon, A.; Aleksic, J.; Allam, S.; Allen, S.; Amara, A.; Annis, J.; Asorey, J.; Avila, S.; Bacon, D.; Balbinot, E.; Banerji, M.; Banik, N.; and Barkhouse, Wayne, "Dark Energy Survey year 1 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing" (2018). Physics Faculty Publications. 13. https://commons.und.edu/pa-fac/13 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Physics & Astrophysics at UND Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Physics Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UND Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors T. M. C. Abbott, F. B. Abdalla, A. Alarcon, J. Aleksic, S. Allam, S. Allen, A. Amara, J. Annis, J. Asorey, S. Avila, D. Bacon, E. Balbinot, M. Banerji, N. Banik, and Wayne Barkhouse This article is available at UND Scholarly Commons: https://commons.und.edu/pa-fac/13 DES-2017-0226 FERMILAB-PUB-17-294-PPD Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Cosmological Constraints from Galaxy Clustering and Weak Lensing T. M. C. Abbott,1 F.
    [Show full text]
  • 19. Big-Bang Cosmology 1 19
    19. Big-Bang cosmology 1 19. BIG-BANG COSMOLOGY Revised September 2009 by K.A. Olive (University of Minnesota) and J.A. Peacock (University of Edinburgh). 19.1. Introduction to Standard Big-Bang Model The observed expansion of the Universe [1,2,3] is a natural (almost inevitable) result of any homogeneous and isotropic cosmological model based on general relativity. However, by itself, the Hubble expansion does not provide sufficient evidence for what we generally refer to as the Big-Bang model of cosmology. While general relativity is in principle capable of describing the cosmology of any given distribution of matter, it is extremely fortunate that our Universe appears to be homogeneous and isotropic on large scales. Together, homogeneity and isotropy allow us to extend the Copernican Principle to the Cosmological Principle, stating that all spatial positions in the Universe are essentially equivalent. The formulation of the Big-Bang model began in the 1940s with the work of George Gamow and his collaborators, Alpher and Herman. In order to account for the possibility that the abundances of the elements had a cosmological origin, they proposed that the early Universe which was once very hot and dense (enough so as to allow for the nucleosynthetic processing of hydrogen), and has expanded and cooled to its present state [4,5]. In 1948, Alpher and Herman predicted that a direct consequence of this model is the presence of a relic background radiation with a temperature of order a few K [6,7]. Of course this radiation was observed 16 years later as the microwave background radiation [8].
    [Show full text]
  • UA 128 Inventory Photographer Neg Slide Cs Series 8 16
    Inventory: UA 128, Public Information Office Records: Photographs. Photographer negatives, slides, contact sheets, 1980-2005 Format(s): negs, slides, transparencies (trn), contact sheets Box Binder Title/Description Date Photographer (cs) 39 1 Campus, faculty and students. Marketing firm: Barton and Gillet. 1980 Robert Llewellyn negatives, cs 39 2 Campus, faculty, students 1984 Paul Schraub negatives, cs 39 2 Set construction; untitled Porter sculpture (aka"Wave"); computer lab; "Flying Weenies"poster 1984 Jim MacKenzie negatives, cs 39 2 Tennis, fencing; classroom 1984 Jim MacKenzie negatives, cs 39 2 Bike path; computers; costumes; sound system; 1984 Jim MacKenzie negatives, cs 39 2 Campus, faculty, students 1984 Jim MacKenzie negatives, cs 39 2 Admissions special programs (2 pages) 1984 Jim MacKenzie negatives, cs 39 3 Downtown family housing 1984 Joe ? negatives, cs 39 3 Student family apartments 1984 Joe ? negatives, cs 39 3 Downtown Santa Cruz 1984 Joe ? negatives, cs 39 3 Special Collections, UCSC Library 1984 Lucas Stang negatives, cs 39 3 Sailing classes, UCSC dock 1984 Dan Zatz cs 39 3 Childcare center 1984 Dan Zatz cs 39 3 Sailing classes, UCSC dock 1984 Dan Zatz cs 39 3 East Field House; Crown College 1985 Joe ? negatives, cs 39 3 Porter College 1985 Joe ? negatives, cs 39 3 Porter College 1985 Joe ? negatives, cs 39 3 Performing Arts; Oakes; Porter sculpture (The Wave) 1985 Joe ? negatives, cs Jack Schaar, professor of politics; Elena Baskin Visual Arts, printmaking studio; undergrad 39 3 chemistry; Computer engineering lab
    [Show full text]