Paper detail

Evidence of Gunn-Peterson damping wings in high-z quasar spectra: strengthening the case for incomplete reionization

The spectra of several high-redshift (z>6) quasars have shown evidence for a Gunn-Peterson (GP) damping wing, indicating a substantial mean neutral hydrogen fraction (x_HI > 0.03) in the z ~ 6 intergalactic medium (IGM). However, previous analyses assumed that the IGM was uniformly ionized outside of the quasar's HII region. Here we relax this assumption and model patchy reionization scenarios for a range of IGM and quasar parameters. We quantify the impact of these differences on the inferred x_HI, by fitting the spectra of three quasars: SDSS J1148+5251 (z=6.419), J1030+0524 (z=6.308), and J1623+3112 (z=6.247). We find that the best-fit values of x_HI in the patchy models agree well with the uniform case. More importantly, we confirm that the observed spectra favor the presence of a GP damping wing, with peak likelihoods decreasing by factors of > few - 10 when the spectra are modeled without a damping wing. We also find that the Ly alpha absorption spectra, by themselves, cannot distinguish the damping wing in a relatively neutral IGM from a damping wing in a highly ionized IGM, caused either by an isolated neutral patch, or by a damped Ly alpha absorber (DLA). However, neutral patches in a highly ionized universe (x_HI < 0.01), and DLAs with the large required column densities (N_HI > few x 10^{20} cm^{-2}) are both rare. As a result, when we include reasonable prior probabilities for the line of sight (LOS) to intercept either a neutral patch or a DLA at the required distance of ~ 40-60 comoving Mpc away from the quasar, we find strong lower limits on the neutral fraction in the IGM, x_HI > 0.1 (at 95% confidence). This strengthens earlier claims that a substantial global fraction of hydrogen in the z~6 IGM is in neutral form.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.