Logo image
Back
Two-Dimensional Topology of the 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey
Preprint   Open access

Two-Dimensional Topology of the 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey

Fiona Hoyle, Michael S Vogeley and J. Richard GottIII
ArXiv.org
28 Nov 2001
DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0111546
url
https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0111546View
Preprint (Author's original)arXiv.org - Non-exclusive license to distribute,  Open

Abstract

Physics - Astrophysics of Galaxies Physics - Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics Physics - Earth and Planetary Astrophysics Physics - High Energy Astrophysical Phenomena Physics - Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics Physics - Solar and Stellar Astrophysics
Astrophys.J.570:44-53,2002 We study the topology of the publicly available data released by the 2dFGRS. The 2dFGRS data contains over 100,000 galaxy redshifts with a magnitude limit of b_J=19.45 and is the largest such survey to date. The data lie over a wide range of right ascension (75 degree strips) but only within a narrow range of declination (10 degree and 15 degree strips). This allows measurements of the two-dimensional genus to be made. The NGP displays a slight meatball shift topology, whereas the SGP displays a bubble like topology. The current SGP data also have a slightly higher genus amplitude. In both cases, a slight excess of overdense regions are found over underdense regions. We assess the significance of these features using mock catalogs drawn from the Virgo Consortium's Hubble Volume LCDM z=0 simulation. We find that differences between the NGP and SGP genus curves are only significant at the 1 sigma level. The average genus curve of the 2dFGRS agrees well with that extracted from the LCDM mock catalogs. We compare the amplitude of the 2dFGRS genus curve to the amplitude of a Gaussian random field with the same power spectrum as the 2dFGRS and find, contradictory to results for the 3D genus of other samples, that the amplitude of the GRF genus curve is slightly lower than that of the 2dFGRS. This could be due to a a feature in the current data set or the 2D genus may not be as sensitive as the 3D genus to non-linear clustering due to the averaging over the thickness of the slice in 2D. (Abridged)

Metrics

8 Record Views

Details

Logo image