4.7 Article

21-cm signatures of residual H I inside cosmic H II regions during reionization

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 449, Issue 3, Pages 3202-3211

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stv499

Keywords

methods: statistical; intergalactic medium; cosmology: theory; dark ages, reionization, first stars

Funding

  1. STFC
  2. FP7-PEOPLE-CIG grant [321933-21ALPHA]
  3. STFC [ST/K001051/1]
  4. STFC [ST/K001051/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Science and Technology Facilities Council [1094841, ST/K001051/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We investigate the impact of sinks of ionizing radiation on the reionization-era 21-cm signal, focusing on one-point statistics. We consider sinks in both the intergalactic medium and inside galaxies. At a fixed filling factor of H II regions, sinks will have two main effects on the 21-cm morphology: (i) as inhomogeneous absorbers of ionizing photons they result in smaller and more widespread cosmic H II patches; and (ii) as reservoirs of neutral gas they contribute a non-zero 21-cm signal in otherwise ionized regions. Both effects damp the contrast between neutral and ionized patches during reionization, making detection of the epoch of reionization with 21-cm interferometry more challenging. Here we systematically investigate these effects using the latest seminumerical simulations. We find that sinks dramatically suppress the peak in the redshift evolution of the variance, corresponding to the mid-point of reionization. As previously predicted, skewness changes sign at mid-point, but the fluctuations in the residual HI suppress a late-time rise. Furthermore, large levels of residual HI dramatically alter the evolution of the variance, skewness and power spectrum from that seen at lower levels. In general, the evolution of the large-scale modes provides a better, cleaner, higher signal-to-noise probe of reionization.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available