Testing Gravity using Void Profiles

We investigate void properties in $f(R)$ models using N-body simulations, focusing on their differences from General Relativity (GR) and their detectability. In the Hu-Sawicki $f(R)$ modified gravity (MG) models, the halo number density profiles of voids are not distinguishable from GR. In contrast, the same $f(R)$ voids are more empty of dark matter, and their profiles are steeper. This can in principle be observed by weak gravitational lensing of voids, for which the combination of a spectroscopic redshift and a lensing photometric redshift survey over the same sky is required. Neglecting the lensing shape noise, the $f(R)$ model parameter amplitudes $|f_{R0}|=10^{-5}$ and $10^{-4}$ may be distinguished from GR using the lensing tangential shear signal around voids by 4 and 8$sigma$ for a volume of 1~(Gpc/$h$)$^3$. The line-of-sight projection of large-scale structure is the main systematics that limits the significance of this signal for the near future wide angle and deep lensing surveys. For this reason, it is challenging to distinguish $|f_{R0}|=10^{-6}$ from GR. We expect that this can be overcome with larger volume. The halo void abundance being smaller and the steepening of dark matter void profiles in $f(R)$ models are unique features that can be combined to break the degeneracy between $|f_{R0}|$ and $sigma_8$.

Void Dynamics

Cosmic voids are becoming key players in testing the physics of our Universe. Here we concentrate on the abundances and the dynamics of voids as these are among the best candidates to provide information on cosmological parameters. Cai, Padilla & Li (2014) use the abundance of voids to tell apart Hu & Sawicki $f(R)$ models from General Relativity. An interesting result is that even though, as expected, voids in the dark matter field are emptier in $f(R)$ gravity due to the fifth force expelling away from the void centres, this result is reversed when haloes are used to find voids. The abundance of voids in this case becomes even lower in $f(R)$ compared to GR for large voids. Still, the differences are significant and this provides a way to tell apart these models. The velocity field differences between $f(R)$ and GR, on the other hand, are the same for halo voids and for dark matter voids. Paz et al. (2013), concentrate on the velocity profiles around voids. First they show the necessity of four parameters to describe the density profiles around voids given two distinct void populations, voids-in-voids and voids-in-clouds. This profile is used to predict peculiar velocities around voids, and the combination of the latter with void density profiles allows the construction of model void-galaxy cross-correlation functions with redshift space distortions. When these models are tuned to fit the measured correlation functions for voids and galaxies in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, small voids are found to be of the void-in-cloud type, whereas larger ones are consistent with being void-in-void. This is a novel result that is obtained directly from redshift space data around voids. These profiles can be used to remove systematics on void-galaxy Alcock-Pacinsky tests coming from redshift-space distortions.

Testing Gravity using Cosmic Voids

We explore voids in dark matter and halo fields from simulations of $Lambda$CDM and Hu-Sawicki $f(R)$ models. In $f(R)$ gravity, dark matter void abundances are greater than that of general relativity (GR). However, when using haloes to identify voids, the differences of void abundances become much smaller, but can still be told apart, in principle, at the 2, 6 and 14 $sigma$ level for the $f(R)$ model parameter amplitudes of $|f_{R0}|=10^{-6}$, $10^{-5}$ and $10^{-4}$. In contrast, the abundance of large voids found using haloes in $f(R)$ gravity is lower than in GR. The more efficient halo formation in underdense regions makes $f(R)$ voids less empty of haloes. This counter intuitive result suggests that voids are not necessarily emptier in $f(R)$ if one looks at galaxies in voids. Indeed, the halo number density profiles of voids are not distinguishable from GR. However, the same $f(R)$ voids are more empty of dark matter. This can in principle be observed by weak gravitational lensing of voids, for which the combination of a spec-$z$ and a photo-$z$ survey over the same sky is necessary. For a volume of 1~(Gpc/$h$)$^3$, neglecting the lensing shape noise, $|f_{R0}|=10^{-5}$ and $10^{-4}$ may be distinguished from GR using the lensing tangential shear signal around voids by 4 and 8$sigma$. The line-of-sight projection of large-scale structure is the main systematics that limits the significance of this signal, limiting the constraining power for $|f_{R0}|=10^{-6}$. The halo void abundance being smaller and the steepening of dark matter void profiles in $f(R)$ models are unique features that can be combined to break the degeneracy between $|f_{R0}|$ and $sigma_8$. The outflow of mass from void centers and velocity dispersions are greater in $f(R)$. Model differences in velocity profiles imply potential powerful constraints of the model in phase space and in redshift space.