![]() | Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 1992. 30:
653-703 Copyright © 1993 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved |
In the absence of any proven theory for the origin and evolution of structure it is important that searches for possible anisotropy be carried out on all angular scales. Sensitive searches have therefore been made with a wide variety of techniques from angular scales of arc seconds to tens of degrees. We discuss below separately observations on scales < 1', on scales of 1'-1°, and on scales of 1-20°.
3.1 Observations on Angular Scales < 1'
3.1.1
However, aperture synthesis observations have their own peculiar
problems, the most severe of which are antenna shadowing and
cross-talk and systematic offsets in the correlator. Such problems
severely affected some of these studies
(Fomalont et al 1984,
Knoke et al 1984)
but were significantly reduced or eliminated in the later
work
(Martin & Partridge 1988,
Fomalont et al 1988,
Hogan & Partridge 1989).
A further difficulty which besets all high
resolution observations, and which causes problems at the VLA
especially in observations at frequencies below ~ 10 GHz, is that
due to confusion by discrete sources. All of the VLA studies with the
exception of that carried out at 14.9 GHz by
Hogan & Partridge
(1989)
were made at 4.9 GHz, and were, therefore, dominated by discrete sources.
In spite of these difficulties, impressive limits have been placed on
anisotropy of the microwave background radiation on sub-arc minute
scales. These limits are summarized in Table 2.
In all of the 4.9 GHz observations excess variance was observed. In
the work of
Fomalont et al (1984)
and Knoke et al (1984)
the excess
was interpreted in terms of discrete sources, but in their study
Martin and Partridge
(1988),
after a careful analysis of the expected
level of contribution from discrete sources, based on 20 cm source
counts
(Mitchell & Condon 1985),
concluded that it was unlikely that
the excess signal was entirely due to discrete sources.
The most detailed treatment of the effects of discrete sources is that
of Fomalont et al (1988).
In an elegantly designed series of
observations in 1987 they observed a single field for 10 hours a day
on each of five consecutive days and they then analyzed the first 2.5
days and the remaining 2.5 days separately. From the resulting two
images they then formed the sum image and the difference image. The
sum image provided the most sensitive measure of the actual sky
variations while the difference image provided a very useful measure
of all of the various noise terms apart from actual sky
signals. To take account of the effects of discrete sources they
carried out a Monte Carlo analysis which mimicked their observations
including the effects of the missing zero spacings in the VLA data.
They assumed a variety of power laws for the number-flux density
differential counts of the form:
where n is the number of sources per steradian per Jansky and flux
density S, and ne is the static Euclidean count of
90S2.5
sources sr-1 Jy-1. Hence, by fitting the simulations to
the overall variance,
3.1.2
T/T at angular scales <
1'
Experiment
Angular
Scale
T/T x
105
Comments
Fomalont et al. 1984
18"
30"
60"
95
80
50
4.9 GHz; monochromatic W(k)
monochromatic W(k)
monochromatic W(k)
Knobe
et al. 1984
6"
12"
18"
320
170
120
4.9 GHz; Gaussian W(k)
Gaussian W(k)
Gaussian
W(k)
Martin & Partridge
18"-160"
40
4.9 GHz; monochromatic W(k)
Fomalont et al. 1988
12"
18"
30"
60"
85
12
8
6
4.9 GHz; monochromatic W(k)
monochromatic W(k)
monochromatic W(k)
monochromatic W(k)
Hogan
& Partridge
5".4-48"
10"-48"
18"-50"
63
32
16
14.9 GHz; monochromatic W(k)
monochromatic W(k)
monochromatic W(k)
Kreysa & Chini
30"
26
230 GHz; monochromatic W(k); LR test.
2, and to the variance of the
intensities greater than the average,
2+, and the variance
of the intensities less than the average,
2-, they determined
the acceptable limits on
and
k. Their best-fitting model
has
= 1.0 and k =
0.0058. An important result of these
simulations was that the observed increase in the
2- near
the center of the field is found to be due to the effects of
missing spatial frequencies and discrete sources. This provides a
convincing explanation of the excess variance discussed by
Kellermann et al (1986)
and by
Martin & Partridge
(1988).
The upper limits on anisotropy derived by
Fomalont et al (1988)
are therefore the best
understood and the most stringent limits on the anisotropy on angular
scales less than one arc minute. In the following section we combine
these results with more recent observations by Partridge (private
communication) and results from the
Owens Valley Radio
Observatory and
from the South Pole to derive upper limits on the anisotropy over the
interval from 0.1-100', over which a Gaussian
distribution is a reasonable approximation, to some of the more
favored models of galaxy formation.