A Poisson noise on ##a_{\ell m}## complex number: real or complex?

AI Thread Summary
In the context of cosmology, the discussion revolves around the nature of Poisson noise added to the complex coefficients ##a_{\ell m}##. It questions whether this noise is considered a complex or real number, with the variance of the Poisson noise defined as ##\text{Var}(\bar{a}_{\ell m}^{p}) = \dfrac{1}{n_{gal}\,f_{sky}}##. Additionally, the variance of the real and imaginary parts of ##a_{\ell m}## is examined, suggesting that each has a variance of ##\dfrac{C_\ell}{2}##, given that ##a_{\ell m}## is complex. The relationship between the magnitudes and variances of these components is also discussed, emphasizing the need for clarification on these points. Overall, the thread seeks to clarify the implications of Poisson noise on the statistical properties of the coefficients in cosmological analyses.
fab13
Messages
300
Reaction score
7
TL;DR Summary
I try to get clarifications about the Poisson's noise with spherical harmonics of Legendre transformation
1) In a cosmology context, when I add a centered Poisson noise on ##a_{\ell m}## and I take the definition of a ##C_{\ell}## this way :

##C_{\ell}=\dfrac{1}{2\ell+1} \sum_{m=-\ell}^{+\ell} \left(a_{\ell m}+\bar{a}_{\ell m}^{p}\right)\left(a_{\ell m}+\bar{a}_{\ell m}^{p}\right)^* ##

Is Poisson noise a complex number or is it simply a real number ? knowing that variance of Poisson is equal in my case :

##\text{Var}(\bar{a}_{\ell m}^{p}) = \dfrac{1}{n_{gal}\,f_{sky}}## where ##n_{gal}## the density of galaxies and ##f_{sky}## the fraction of sky observed.

I work with fluctuations of matter density (not temperature fluctuations).

2) What is the variance of real part and imaginary part of an ##a_{\ell m}## : usually, one says that :

##\text{Var}(a_{\ell m}) = C_{\ell}## but given the fact that ##a_{\ell m}## is a complex number, we could say that :

##\text{Var}(\text{Re}(a_{\ell m}))## has a variance equal to ##\dfrac{C_\ell}{2}##

and

##\text{Var}(\text{Im}(a_{\ell m}))## has a variance equal to ##\dfrac{C_\ell}{2}##

since :

##\begin{aligned}
& \left|a_{\ell m}\right|^2=\operatorname{Re}\left(a_{\ell m}\right)^2+\operatorname{Im}\left(a_{\ell m}\right)^2 \\
& E\left[\left|a_{\ell m}\right|^2\right]=E\left[\operatorname{Re}\left(a_{\ell m}\right)^2\right]+E\left[\operatorname{Im}\left(a_{\ell m}\right)^2\right]=C_{\ell}
\end{aligned}##

Is it correct ?

Any clarification is welcome.
 
Abstract The Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) has significantly advanced our ability to study black holes, achieving unprecedented spatial resolution and revealing horizon-scale structures. Notably, these observations feature a distinctive dark shadow—primarily arising from faint jet emissions—surrounded by a bright photon ring. Anticipated upgrades of the EHT promise substantial improvements in dynamic range, enabling deeper exploration of low-background regions, particularly the inner shadow...
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##.
Back
Top