Paper detail

The effect of intergalactic helium on hydrogen reionisation: implications for the sources of ionising photons at z > 6

We investigate the effect of helium on hydrogen reionisation using a hydrodynamical simulation combined with the cosmological radiative transfer code CRASH. The simulations are run in a 35.12/h comoving Mpc box using a variety of assumptions for the amplitude and power-law extreme-UV (EUV) spectral index, alpha, of the ionising emissivity. We use an empirically motivated prescription for ionising sources which ensures all of the models are consistent with constraints on the Thomson scattering optical depth and the hydrogen photo-ionisation rate at z=6. The inclusion of helium slightly delays reionisation due to the small number of ionising photons which reionise neutral helium instead of hydrogen. However, helium has a significant impact on the thermal state of the IGM. Models with alpha=3 produce IGM temperatures at the mean density at z=6 which are about 20 % higher compared to models without helium photo-heating. Harder EUV indices produce even larger IGM temperature boosts. A comparison to recent observational estimates of the IGM temperature at z=5 - 6 suggests that hydrogen reionisation was primarily driven by pop-II stellar sources with a soft EUV index, alpha<3. We also find that faint, as yet undetected galaxies, characterised by a luminosity function with a steepening faint-end slope and an increasing Lyman continuum escape fraction (fesc=0.5), are required to reproduce the ionising emissivity used in our simulations at z>6. Finally, we note there is some tension between recent observational constraints which indicate the IGM is > 10% neutral by volume z=7, and estimates of the ionising emissivity at z=6 which indicate only between 1 and 3 ionising photons are emitted per hydrogen atom over a Hubble time. This tension may be alleviated by either a lower neutral fraction at z=7 or an IGM which still remains a few % neutral by volume at z=6.

preprint2012arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.