Paper detail

On The Source of Ionization of The Intergalactic Medium at $z \sim 2.4$

We use the recent detection of He II absorption at $z=2.2-2.6$ in the line of sight of the quasar HS1700+64 to put bounds on the sources of ionization. We find that given the uncertainty in $\tauhgp$ and the model of absorption in the intergalactic medium (IGM), a wide range of possible sources of ionization is still allowed by the observations. We show that a significant contribution from star forming galaxies is allowed and is consistent with the proximity effect. In the case of photoionization by the UV background radiation, the contribution of star forming galaxies to the intensity at $912 > Å$ can be within a range of $\sim 1 - 15$ times that of the quasars. We also investigate the case of a collisionally ionized intergalactic medium. We show that although collisional ionization can be a dominant source of ionization at $z \sim 2.4$ (taking into account the upper limit on Compton y-parameter of the microwave background radiation), the thermal state of the IGM cannot yet be determined. We also consider Sciama's model of radiatively decaying neutrinos and show that the model of decaying neutrino is consistent with the observations.

preprint1997arXivOpen 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.