Moving mesh cosmology: numerical techniques and global statistics

TL;DR

This study compares moving mesh and SPH hydrodynamical simulations in cosmology, revealing significant differences in galaxy formation predictions and highlighting the impact of numerical methods on results.

Contribution

First direct comparison of moving mesh and SPH methods in cosmological simulations, showing how hydro-solver choices affect galaxy formation and baryon statistics.

Findings

AREPO shows higher late-time star formation rates.

Lower mean temperatures and different gas phase fractions in AREPO.

More disk-like galaxy morphologies with AREPO.

Abstract

We present the first hydrodynamical simulations of structure formation using the new moving mesh code AREPO and compare the results with GADGET simulations based on a traditional smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) technique. The two codes share the same Tree-PM gravity solver and include identical sub-resolution physics, but employ different methods to solve the equations of hydrodynamics. This allows us to assess the impact of hydro-solver uncertainties on the results of cosmological studies of galaxy formation. We focus on predictions for global baryon statistics, such as the cosmic star formation rate density, after we introduce our simulation suite and numerical methods. Properties of individual galaxies and haloes are examined by Keres et al. (2011), while a third paper by Sijacki et al. (2011) uses idealised simulations to analyse the differences between the hydrodynamical schemes. We find that the global baryon statistics differ significantly between the two simulation approaches. AREPO shows higher star formation rates at late times, lower mean temperatures, and different gas mass fractions in characteristic phases of the intergalactic medium, in particular a reduced amount of hot gas. Although both codes use the same implementation of cooling, more gas cools out of haloes in AREPO compared with GADGET towards low redshifts. We show that this is caused by a higher heating rate with SPH in the outer parts of haloes, owing to viscous dissipation of SPH's inherent sonic velocity noise and SPH's efficient damping of subsonic turbulence injected in the halo infall region, and because of a higher efficiency of gas stripping in AREPO. As a result of such differences, AREPO leads also to more disk-like morphologies compared to GADGET. Our results indicate that inaccuracies in hydrodynamic solvers can lead to comparatively large systematic differences.