4.7 Article

The impact of coupled dark energy cosmologies on the high-redshift intergalactic medium

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 409, Issue 1, Pages L89-L93

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2010.00954.x

Keywords

quasars: absorption lines; cosmology: observations; cosmology: theory

Funding

  1. DFG Cluster of Excellence
  2. TRR Transregio Collaborative Research Network on the 'Dark Universe'
  3. ASI/AAE
  4. INFN-PD51
  5. PRIN/MIUR
  6. CINECA/INAF
  7. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/H008586/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  8. STFC [ST/H008586/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present an analysis of high-resolution hydrodynamical N-body simulations of coupled dark energy cosmologies which focuses on the statistical properties of the transmitted Lyman alpha flux in the high-redshift intergalactic medium (IGM). In these models the growth of the diffuse cosmic web differs from the standard Lambda CDM case: the density distribution is skewed towards underdense regions and the matter power spectra are typically larger (in a scale-dependent way). These differences are also appreciable in the Lyman alpha flux and are larger than 5 per cent (10 per cent) at z = 2-4 in the flux probability distribution function (pdf) for high-transmissivity regions and for values of the coupling parameter beta = 0.08 (beta = 0.2). The flux power spectrum is also affected at the similar to 2 per cent (similar to 5-10 per cent) level for beta = 0.08 (beta = 0.2) in a redshift-dependent way. We infer the behaviour of flux pdf and flux power for a reasonable range of couplings and present constraints using present high-and low-resolution data sets. We find an upper limit beta less than or similar to 0.15 (at 2 sigma confidence level), which is obtained using only IGM data and is competitive with those inferred from other large-scale structure probes.

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