Top arXiv papers from Week 37, 2020

After a much needed 3-week break in Spain and 2 weeks “at” the Cosmology from Home conference (great talks, great format, great work by the organizers, 5+ stars from my side), the weekly arXiv synopses return! This week I cover the first constraints on small-scale non-Gaussianity from the UV galaxy luminosity function, astrophysical signatures of black holes carrying magnetic charge, and the HMCODE-2020 code for modelling the non-linear matter power spectrum. Enjoy!

#1 2009.01245: First Constraints on Small-Scale Non-Gaussianity from UV Galaxy Luminosity Functions by Nashwan Sabti, Julian Muñoz, and Diego Blas

In the literature one often reads about constraints on non-Gaussianity (NG) from Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) and large-scale structure (LSS) data, often condensed into constraints on a single number, fNL. What one often glosses over is that these constraints are obtained at some particular relatively large scale, with corresponding wavenumber somewhere between 10^-3 and 10^-1 Mpc^-1. However, one would generally expect NG features, which typically would arise from non-standard inflationary scenarios, to be scale-dependent (particularly in the case where there is a relevant scale during inflation). It is therefore interesting to consider whether it is even possible to constrain NG at smaller scales.

In this week’s paper, Sabti and collaborators consider an interesting way to obtain such constraints, by making use of the UV galaxy luminosity function (GLF), which quantifies the relation between observed number density of such galaxies and their flux in a particular band. Early galaxies contained young stars which emitted in the UV: such UV light is then redshifted to the IR on its journey to us, and can be detected by optical and IR-band telescopes such as the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). The key observation which allows one to make use of the UV GLF to constrain NG is that the UV GLF is related to the halo mass function. Departures from Gaussianity alter precisely the abundance of these halos, particularly the rarest ones. The galaxies observed by HST are even more interesting in this respect, since they are hosted in halos which were extremely rare at their redshifts.

Using GLFs from the HST Hubble Legacy Field catalog, Sabti and collaborators find a 2σ bound on local NG of fNL=71^+426_-237. Of course, this constraint is nominally not competitive with current constraints from the CMB whose error bars are approaching order unity, but it is of paramount importance to recall that this constraint is obtained at much smaller scales (approximately 0.1<k*Mpc<2.0). It is also the first time that NG on such small scales has ever been constrained. Future experiments such as JWST and 21-cm experiments will also be able to probe small-scale NG, although the expected improvement over current GLF constraints is not exactly huge (it is estimated to be a factor of 3-4). Overall, this was a cool paper and an important proof-of-principle for the possibility of constraining NG on very small scales.

#2 2009.03363: Astrophysical hints for magnetic black holes by Diptimoy Ghosh, Arun Thalapillil, and Farman Ullah

Magnetic black holes (MBHs) are simply black holes carrying magnetic charge, and can be thought of as being gigantic magnetic monopoles. While extremely exotic, they can in principle emerge from the Standard Model invoking no new physics, provided the associated magnetic charge is very large. However, in general MBHs appear to be very hard to produce. While usually seen as a somewhat niche topic, recently MBHs have experienced renewed interest thanks to a recent preprint (2004.06084) by Maldacena reviewing their mathematical foundation and some of their peculiar physical properties. Some of these include MBHs being extremely long lived, and the huge magnetic fields to them associated potentially restoring electroweak symmetry near their horizons. Maldacena’s paper, however, leaves several open questions as outlined in his conclusions: “Can MBHs be created in the early universe, via a plausible mechanism? Could MBHs be the dark matter or a fraction of the dark matter? What are their astrophysical signatures?“ Ghosh and collaborators try to address some of these questions in this week’s paper.

This is a long and rather technical paper which examines various aspects of the astrophysical phenomenology of MBHs. One important example is the fact that the horizons and stable circular orbits around MBHs are quite different from their counterparts with no magnetic charge. On an asymptotically de Sitter background, an outermost stable circular orbit actually appears as well. Such differences would show up in the gravitational wave (GW) signal arising from the merger of a binary MBH system, should we ever be able to detect one. Aside from differences in the GW waveform, the energy released by MBH mergers is also expected to be enormous. Ghosh and collaborators also examine the question Maldacena posed about MBHs possibly constituting a fraction of the dark matter (DM). The answer, unfortunately, is no, as current galactic magnetic fields and DM density measurements constrain this scenario too much. It is also speculated that MBHs might have some bearings as to the origin of fast radio bursts. While to some (not to me) this might all sound like fantasy, I definitely think that further exploration of MBHs is definitely warranted. If such objects exist, they would allows us to probe hitherto unexplored realms of physics, including electroweak symmetry restoration and non-perturbative QTF phenomena.

#3 2009.01858: HMcode-2020: Improved modelling of non-linear cosmological power spectra with baryonic feedback by Alex Mead et al.

In the era of precision cosmology from LSS clustering and weak lensing, it is of paramount importance to be able to model the non-linear matter power spectrum accurately, in order to 1) be able to fully exploit the wealth of information present in the data and 2) hope to obtain reliable constraints when doing so. There are two main routes in this sense: expensive numerical simulations, or semi-analytical models. An extremely important example of the latter is the so-called halo model, first developed by Seljak in astro-ph/0001493 and by Peacock and Smith in astro-ph/0005010. However, the halo model becomes quickly inaccurate at sufficiently small scales, and is only able to match simulations to ~30% precision, definitely not enough for precision cosmology. This led to the development of halo model-based fitting functions such as the popular HALOFIT code. An interesting hybrid alternative to the HALOFIT approach is the other well-known HMCODE code, where the hybrid bit reflects the fact that HMCODE starts exactly from the halo model (rather than from a fitting function based on the halo model itself), which is tweaked by adding additional fitted parameters which improve the agreement with simulations, at the cost of a debatable physical origin.

In this week’s paper, Mead and collaborators update HMCODE to improve its performance. The resulting HMCODE-2020 is able to fit the matter power spectrum from simulations to 2.5% accuracy up to k~10 h^*Mpc^-1 for z<2 over a wide range of cosmologies. One advantage of the HMCODE augmented halo model being parametrized in terms of the linear matter power spectrum rather than directly caring about the individual cosmological parameters is that the framework is particularly suited for exploring alternative models, including models which are yet to be invented, something which instead is more difficult with HALOFIT. Of course, the precision of HMCODE might degrade if these models are quite extreme, as this week’s paper results seem to suggest (the worst-case 2.5% error is in fact reached for models with unusual dark energy equation of state). Another important milestone in this week’s paper is the development of a halo model which illustrates the response of the matter power spectrum to baryonic feedback. HMCODE-2020 is now available on Github and will soon be available within CAMB and CLASS. As a heads-up, it is important to note that the quoted 2.5% precision is on the matter power spectrum. However, if one were instead interested in the power spectrum of a tracer of the LSS, the non-linear matter power spectrum is only the starting point, as additional complications such as non-linear galaxy bias and so on also have to be taken into account.