Paper detail

Stochastic Absorption of the Light of Background Sources due to Intergalactic Neutral Hydrogen I. Testing different line-number evolution models via the cosmic flux decrement

[Abridged] We test the accuracy of different models of the attenuation of light due to resonant scattering by intergalactic neutral hydrogen by comparing their predictions of the evolution of the mean cosmic flux decrement, D_A, to measurements of this quantity based on observations. To this end, we use data available in the literature and our own measurements of the cosmic flux decrement for 25 quasars in the redshift range 2.71 < z < 5.41 taken from the SDSS Data Release 5. In order to perform the measurements of D_A, we fit a power-law to the continuum redward of the Lya emission line, and extrapolate this fit to region blueward of it, where the flux is severely affected by absorption due to intervening HI absorbers. We compute, using numerical simulations, the redshift evolution of D_A accounting for the presence of Lya Forest absorbers and Lyman limit systems randomly distributed along the line-of-sight, and compute its intrinsic scatter at the 1-, 2-, and 3-sigma level due to fluctuations in the absorber properties (column density, Doppler parameter, redshift) along different lines-of-sight. The numerical simulations consist of Monte Carlo realizations of distributions of the absorber properties constrained from observations. The results from the models considered here confirm our theoretical expectation that the distribution of D_A at any given redshift be well described by a lognormal distribution function. This implies that the effective optical depth, usually defined as the negative logarithm of the average flux, 1 - D_A, is very accurately Gaussian distributed, in contrast to previous studies. This result is independent to the form of the input distribution functions, and rather insensitive to the presence of high-column density absorbers, such as the Lyman limit systems.

preprint2007arXivOpen 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.