Galaxy bias and redshift-space distortions
Derive a linear anisotropic clustering prediction and expose its bias, velocity, amplitude, and survey-window assumptions.
On this page
The question for today
What you’ll understand
- Calculate linear Kaiser power for different wavevector directions.
- Separate density bias, growth rate, and matter amplitude.
- Identify nonlinear and survey effects omitted from a plane-parallel prediction.
A galaxy redshift contains both background expansion and line-of-sight peculiar motion. Converting it into a radial coordinate therefore distorts the apparent clustering pattern. Those distortions carry information about structure growth, but only through a model connecting galaxies, matter, and velocities. We will derive the simplest linear plane-parallel prediction, compare transverse and radial modes, and identify its degeneracies. The exercise also explains why counting ever more galaxies in the same footprint does not eliminate uncertainty from the finite realization of large-scale structure.
Galaxies trace matter with an effective response
Define matter contrast as density minus its mean divided by that mean. On sufficiently large scales, a deterministic linear bias model sets galaxy contrast equal to b times matter contrast. This is an effective approximation for a selected tracer population, not a fundamental law identifying galaxies with all mass. Bias can depend on redshift, scale, and sample selection, and stochastic contributions need not follow exactly the simplest Poisson prescription.
Observed redshift coordinates differ from real comoving coordinates by peculiar velocity divided by a H along the line of sight. Number conservation contributes a Jacobian between those coordinates. Linear continuity connects coherent velocity divergence to density growth, producing an angular dependence in Fourier space. The familiar compact formula assumes a common line of sight, small perturbations, an appropriate growing mode, and negligible velocity bias. It cannot be applied unchanged inside a virialized galaxy cluster.
Anisotropy measures combinations rather than isolated parameters
A transverse mode has wavevector perpendicular to the line of sight, so the coherent velocity contribution vanishes in this approximation. A radial mode receives the full growth term. Their ratio depends on beta, the growth rate divided by bias, rather than on the matter normalization separately. Angular multipoles summarize this anisotropy; integrating the squared angular factor produces the monopole coefficients below. The angle in this formula is a Fourier-mode direction, not the angular separation of a galaxy pair.
The overall amplitude mixes bias and the matter fluctuation normalization at the bin’s redshift. Redshift-space analyses therefore often constrain and . Here is the linear matter root-mean-square contrast at redshift z in spheres of radius eight inverse-h megaparsecs; h is H zero divided by one hundred km per second per megaparsec. For scale-independent growth, , with the present-day value. Converting a fitted bin amplitude to that value requires an assumed growth history and power-spectrum shape.
The window and nonlinear velocities matter
Random virial velocities smear radial positions on small scales and generate fingers of God, which differ from the coherent linear compression. Nonlinear bias, velocity dispersion, wide-angle geometry, and relativistic projection corrections require additional modeling in their relevant regimes. A wrong fiducial distance-redshift relation also creates anisotropy through the Alcock–Paczynski effect. Separating geometric anisotropy from velocities is part of the inference, rather than something guaranteed by measuring an anisotropic correlation function.
A finite survey multiplies the density field by its angular and radial window, convolving Fourier modes and correlating estimated powers. The measured mean density imposes an integral constraint, while incompleteness and redshift failures alter the effective selection. Random catalogs and forward-convolved models address these effects. More tracer density reduces shot noise, but the number of accessible large-scale modes is limited by volume and geometry. Multiple tracers can exploit shared modes under controlled bias and noise assumptions, without creating an unlimited number of independent universes.
Work it through
Compare transverse and radial Fourier modes
Use the noiseless linear model with b = 2, f = 1, and P m = 1000 Mpc cubed at one wave number. Compute transverse and radial redshift-space power, their ratio, beta, and the monopole.
For a transverse mode , so . For a radial mode , it is .
The radial-to-transverse ratio is , with . This ratio alone does not fix the matter normalization.
The angular average is . Averaging powers gives a different result from squaring an averaged contrast factor.
The transverse/radial powers are 4000/9000 Mpc³, their ratio is 9/4, beta is one half, and the monopole is about 5533 Mpc³.
The living notebook
Explore the model
Interactive lab · vectors
Project a velocity onto a line of sight
Treat the x axis as a chosen line of sight. Reset, set Angle = 0° and Magnitude = 2, and predict x projection 2. For a fresh comparison Reset, set Angle = 60° and Magnitude = 2, and predict x projection 1. Check the numerical projection readout.
- x component
- 1.393
- y component
- 0.975
- Magnitude
- 1.7
Playback traces a fixed vector and its projections. Angle and magnitude set the geometry; the moving marker does not change them. Parameter changes pause playback and recompute the model at the current elapsed time. Reset restores both parameters and returns time to zero. Playback starts paused. Adjust either parameter, then choose Play or Step.
Look forThe vector demonstrates one line-of-sight projection. It has no density field, velocity-divergence relation, Fourier power, selection function, or expansion history, and cannot infer a cosmological growth rate.
Pause & reason
Check your understanding
Your turn
Try it yourself
A different synthetic tracer has b = 1 and f = 0.5, with P m = 100 Mpc cubed and no stochastic power. Find transverse and radial powers and their ratio. Does the same anisotropy ratio as the worked example imply the same f?
Take a moment to make a prediction or work it out on paper. Open a hint when you need one.
Give me a hint
Keep the contrast amplification and its square distinct. Compare the bias and growth separately after calculating beta.
Compare with the solution
The transverse power is and the radial power is . Their ratio is again 9/4 because beta is again one half. The growth rates differ: 0.5 here versus 1 before. Matching this ratio therefore does not independently establish the same growth or matter amplitude.
Keep the idea
Take it with you
- Coherent peculiar velocities produce a calculable linear anisotropy.
- Bias, growth, and matter normalization enter observable combinations.
- Survey windows, nonlinear velocities, and geometric distortions limit the compact Kaiser formula.
Read further
Original sources and deeper explanations to follow at your own pace.
Optional progress, saved in this browser when available. Revisit any lesson at any time.
Lesson not marked complete.