A Coefficient correlation between 2 cosmological probes

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on determining the correlation coefficient between two cosmological probes, specifically a spectroscopic probe (A) and a photometric probe (B). The user seeks clarification on whether the correlation coefficient is closer to 0 or 1 based on the dominance of Poisson noise in the spectroscopic probe compared to its cosmological component. The document referenced suggests that the cosmological part is significantly larger than the noise, implying a correlation closer to 1, but the user expresses uncertainty about this conclusion. The conversation emphasizes the importance of clearly articulating complex concepts in cosmology for better understanding. Overall, the correlation analysis remains a critical aspect of evaluating the relationship between these probes.
fab13
Messages
300
Reaction score
7
TL;DR Summary
I would like to assess the importance of spectroscopic Poisson noise compared to the cosmological contribution of Dark matter
Hello,

I have the demonstration below. A population represents the spectroscopic proble and B the photometric probe. I would like to know if, from the equation (13), the correlation coeffcient is closed to 0 or to 1 since I don't know if ##\mathcal{N}_{\ell}^{A}## Poisson noise of spectroscopic dominates or not the cosmological part ##b_A\,C_{\ell}^{DM}## with ##b_A## the cosmological bias of spectroscopic probe.

In this document, the authot states that cosmological part ##b_A\,C_{\ell}^{DM}## is very larger compared to ##\mathcal{N}_{\ell}^{A}## : this causes the correlation coefficient to be closed to 1 but I have doubts.

Any help is welcome

Capture d’écran 2022-11-01 à 04.26.20.png
 
Space news on Phys.org
I put in attachment the capture in PDF for more lisibility
 

Attachments

This is like your fourth thread on this.

If you aren't violating the PF rules on personal theories, you might want to try and make your point more clearly and concisely.
 

Thread 'Matter density right after the decoupling'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
View full post »

Thread 'Rutgers finds a transparent Einstein Cross - apparently a dark matter "halo".'

The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
View full post »

Thread 'Big Bang and Infinite Universe'

Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
View full post »

Similar threads

A Calculating the variance of integrated Poisson noise on a defined quantity
Replies
36
Views
4K
A Combining 2 probes in order to increase Figure of Merit
Replies
5
Views
1K
A Need help about a demo with inverse weighted variance average
Replies
1
Views
1K
A Computing a variance in astrophysics context
Replies
1
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top