Paper detail

Investigating MgII Absorption in Paired Quasar Sight-Lines

We test whether the Tinker & Chen model of MgII absorption due to the gaseous halo around a galaxy can reproduce absorption in quasar pairs (both lensed and physical) and lensed triples and quads from the literature. These quasars exhibit absorption from a total of 38 MgII systems spanning z=0.043 - 2.066 with mean redshift <z>=1.099 and weighted mean rest-frame equivalent width of 0.87 Ang. Using the Tinker & Chen model to generate simulated sight-lines, we marginalize the unknown parameters of the absorbing galaxies: dark matter halo mass, impact parameter, and azimuthal angle on the sky. We determine the ability of the model to statistically reproduce the observed variation in MgII absorption strength between paired sight-lines for different values of the gas covering fraction f_c and the characteristic length scale ell_c, within which the variation in absorption equivalent widths between sight-lines exponentially decreases. We find a best-fit f_c=0.60 \pm 0.15 and ell_c<8/h_70 kpc (1σconfidence limits), with smaller f_c allowed at larger ell_c. At 99.7% confidence, we are able to rule out f_c>0.87 for all values of ell_c and the region where ell_c<1.0/h_70 kpc and f_c<0.3.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.