Paper detail

Non-equilibrium effects on line-of-sight size estimates of QSO absorption systems

Estimates of the linear extent of heavy-element absorption systems along the line-of-sight to a QSO often assume that the cloud is photoionized and that the temperature takes the equilibrium value where photo-heating balances line cooling. We show that rather small deviations from this photoionization equilibrium temperature caused by additional heating processes will lead to an overestimate of the neutral hydrogen fraction and thus to an underestimate of the thickness of the absorber by about two orders of magnitude. Such temperature deviations are indicated both by observations and numerical simulations. This interpretation reconciles the discrepancy between the rather small extent of heavy-element-absorption systems parallel to the line-of-sight obtained from a standard photoionization analysis and the much larger transverse sizes estimates inferred from the observation of common absorption in the spectra of close quasar pairs.

preprint1996arXivOpen 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.