planck 's main results

CosmoRenata meeting, Valencia, June 3rd 2013

Planck's Main Results

Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo

Centro de Estudios de Física del Cosmos de Aragón (CEFCA), Teruel, SpainOn behalf of the Planck collaboration

Carlos Hernandez-Monteagudo

Outline

Introduction: CMB intensity and polarisation anisotropies. Context of Planck observations

Planck frequency maps. Computation of angular power spectra. Systematic tests.

Lensing of the CMB. Correlation to matter probes. Cosmological constraints.

Planck and other data sets. Cosmological constraints


# of

col

d/ho

t spo

ts in

the

CM

B

1/ Spot angular size

In the hot, dense, ionized universe, just before hydrogen recombination, matter and radiation are in thermal EQ. (black body spectrum) and radiation pressure induced by Thomson scattering competes with gravitational attraction in slightly overdense regions, creating an acoustic oscillation pattern both in CMB photon intensity and polarization

From W.Hu (1998)

RadiaciónMateria

Gravitational potential well size

Ya.B.Zel’dovich R.A.Sunyaev

One slide on CMB angular anisotropies …


THE OVERALL PICTURE:


PLANCK, with many more frequency channels and better angular resolution, should:

Improve CMB measurements to smaller angular scales Remove more efficiently the contaminants (mostly due to the Milky Way or point sources) Characterize secondary effects much more accurately Map the E mode of the polarization to much better precision and smaller angular scales Set constraints on the amount of B-mode polarization Establish stronger constraints on primordial non-Gaussianity Provide much more complete tSZ source catalog Etc ...

All this should translate into better precision in the cosmological parameters...

PLANCK VERSUS WMAP

5 different channels at 22, 33, 44, 63, 94 GHz Maximum angular resolution of ~0.23 degrees Max. sensitivity of ~5 muK per square degree (94 GHz)

10 different channels at 30, 44, 70, 100, 143, 217, 353, 545 and 857 GHz Maximum angular resolution of ~0.075 degrees Max. sensitivity of ~0.25 muK per square degree (143 GHz)


OLD SLIDE !!


WMAP 5 bands

K band (23 GHz) Ka band (30 GHz)

Q band (41 GHz) V band (61 GHz)

W band (94 GHz)


PLANCK 9 BANDS

Galactic and extra-galactic (Cosmic Infrared emission) dust emission

“Cosmological channels”


Planck 4 algorithms for clean map production

MAP COMPARISON(S)


The angular power spectrum


WMAP 7th year



Planck

How Planck got there …


• Two different elle regimes: l < 50 and l \in [50,1500]

• l<50: Gibbs sampling on all Planck channels

• l>50: Two different likelihood estimators: CamSpec & Plik, using cosmological channels only [100, 143 and 217 GHz]o CamSpec is more accurate and CPU demanding. o Plik does not account for C_l correlation so accurately, but still very useful

for running consistency tests

• Systematic test at two levels: o Intra-pair level (pair of frequencies, after combining different subsets of

detectors belonging to same frequency pair ) – probing issues like detector calibration, beam and noise characterisation

o Inter-pair level (involving detectors of different frequencies) – probing foreground related issues

Getting rid of galactic dust …


Use 857 GHz as template for galactic dust + CIB template (derived from data) + theoretically motivated templates for Poisson, clustered, tSZ & kSZ

Anisotropic, galactic signal!

Contribution from the Cosmic Infrared Background (CIB)

CamSpec channel pairs …


Camspec VS Plick


Camspec VS Plick (II)


Camspec VS Plick (III)


More consistency tests: 4 clean maps


The low elle part … (Commander)


(slight power defect at l ~20, see Vielva’s talk!)

The Final angular power spectrum


Planck vs other exps.



The case of polarization:

Basic LCDM cosmological parameter set


Strong limits on NG


Very Gaussian universe, no hint for non Gaussianity after correcting for the coupling of the lensing with the ISW …

A lot of inflationary models ruled out …

See Vielva’s talk!

Cosmological parameter set


The case of H0 : some tension with direct estimates of Hubble constant

LCDM PARAMETER COMPARISON


From http://lambda.gsfc.nasa.gov

There is a lot of secondary Science …


• Firm detection of lensing of CMB temperature anisotropies

• Firm detection of the correlation of CMB lensing to high-z, dusty sources spanning the redshift range z \in [1,5]

• Detection of clusters by means of the thermal Sunyaev Zel’dovich effect

Secondary anisotropies == Anisotropies introduced along the CMB photon’s way to us by gravitational potential wells, scattering with electrons, etc

CMB Lensing


CMB light rays become deflected by the matter distribution along the line of sight by typically 2—3 arcmins.

The 2D potential field generating this deflection has been detected, and its angular power spectrum measured with unprecedented accuracy:

CMB Lensing (II)


(Left) Simulated 2D potential field reconstruction

(Below) Real 2D potential field reconstruction

CMB Lensing (III)


(Left) Good consistency between different measurements of potential power spectrum

(Below) Measured lensing power spectrum has its own preferences wrt neutrino mass and other cosmological parameters …

CMB Lensing x CIB from HFI


CMB T and lensing is correlated to CIB sources at z \in [2,5]

The Cosmic Infrared Background (CIB) is generated by high-z dusty galaxies and can be probed with the 545 and 857 GHz Planck channels

CMB Lensing x galaxy surveys


CMB T lensing is correlated to LSS surveys sources at z \in [2,5]


Planck identifies clusters via the tSZ effect …

If however the CMB encounters a hot electron plasma, then there is a net transfer of energy from the hot electrons to the cold photons. As a result, we have fewer cold low energy photons and more hot high frequency photons. This results in a distortion of the black body CMB spectrum, i.e., in frequency dependent brightness temperature fluctuations.

The symbol y is known as the Comptonization parameter

Thermal Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect (tSZ)

Catalogue of >1,227 SZ Galaxy Clusters


New thermal Sunyaev-Zel’dovich clusters are mostly nearby, massive objects that are un-relaxed and hence with low X-ray emission


And in combination with other data …


And in combination with other data (II)…

Lensing in TT angular power spectrum sets stronger constraints on neutrino masses

But

Lensing in its power spectrum favours massive neutrinos …

???


And in combination with other data (III)…

Expected value of Neff ~ 3.046, but current data favours it only for a little

When included in H0 test, it alleviates tension between local Hubble estimates and estimates from the CMB


Conclusions

• Simple 6-parameters LCDM model fits Planck data beautifully.

• Strong consistency and systematic tests. Better understanding of contaminants

• Temporary polarization data largely compatible with TT (temperature) best fit model. Coherent picture.

• Strong constraints on non-Gaussianity (Vielva’s talk). Presence of anomalies

• Detection of CMB lensing: moderate z – universe very well described by model based upon observations at z~1,100 !!

• Detection of clusters and hot baryons at low redshift.

• Absence of large scale peculiar motions: direct confirmation of Copernican principle

The scientific results that we present today are a product of the Planck Collaboration, including individuals from more than 100 scientific institutes in Europe, the USA and Canada

Planck is a project of the

European Space Agency, with instruments

provided by two scientific

Consortia funded by ESA member

states (in particular the

lead countries: France and Italy)

with contributions

from NASA (USA), and telescope

reflectors provided in a collaboration

between ESA and a scientific

Consortium led and funded by

Denmark.


planck 's main results

Documents

ghzcosmorenata meeting

better angular resolution

maximum angular resolution

smaller angular scales

cmb intensity

different channels

cmb measurements

cmb1 spot angular sizein