Difference between revisions of "W and gamma"
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
Polarization only CMB Halo mass calibration | Polarization only CMB Halo mass calibration | ||
| + | |||
| + | gamma = 0.55 + 0.05(1 + w) and Delta gamma equivalent to 0.05(1 + w) so w = -0.8 corresponds to delta gamma 0.01. | ||
Note that a lot of the constraint for w (and mnu) is just coming from pinning down sigma8 today. Not so much from knowing its z dependence. Although if there were some motivation for a general w(z) or delta gamma (z), those would be better constrained by this. | Note that a lot of the constraint for w (and mnu) is just coming from pinning down sigma8 today. Not so much from knowing its z dependence. Although if there were some motivation for a general w(z) or delta gamma (z), those would be better constrained by this. | ||
Latest revision as of 11:10, 15 March 2017
(Nick writing on behalf of Mat)
From the sigma8(z) constraints posted (sigma 8 of z constraints link), we looked into how well we can constrain w and delta gamma, where delta gamma quantifies a departure from the GR growth rate gamma (see Weinberg et al. 2012).
Temperature plus polarization CMB Halo mass calibration. The error bands are for z-bins of width 0.1
Polarization only CMB Halo mass calibration
gamma = 0.55 + 0.05(1 + w) and Delta gamma equivalent to 0.05(1 + w) so w = -0.8 corresponds to delta gamma 0.01.
Note that a lot of the constraint for w (and mnu) is just coming from pinning down sigma8 today. Not so much from knowing its z dependence. Although if there were some motivation for a general w(z) or delta gamma (z), those would be better constrained by this.
