4.7 Article

An improved measurement of the flux distribution of the Lyα forest in QSO absorption spectra:: the effect of continuum fitting, metal contamination and noise properties

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 382, Issue 4, Pages 1657-1674

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12406.x

Keywords

intergalactic medium; quasars : absorption lines; cosmology : observations

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We have performed an extensive Voigt profile analysis of the neutral hydrogen (H I) and metal absorption present in a sample of 18 high-resolution, high signal-to-noise ratio quasi-stellar object (QSO) spectra observed with the Very Large Telescope Ultraviolet and Visual Echelle Spectrograph. We use this analysis to separate the metal contribution from the H I absorption and present an improved measurement of the flux probability distribution function (PDF) due to H I absorption alone at < z > = 2.07, 2.52 and 2.94. The flux PDF is sensitive to the continuum fit in the normalized flux range 0.8 < F < 1.0 and to metal absorption at 0.2 < F < 0.8. Our new measurements of the flux PDF due to H I absorption alone are systematically lower at 0.2 < F < 0.8 by up to 30 per cent compared to the widely used measurement of McDonald et al., based on a significantly smaller sample of Keck High Resolution Echelle Spectrometer data. This discrepancy is probably due to a combination of our improved removal of the metal absorption and cosmic variance, since variations in the flux PDF between different lines-of-sight are large. The H I effective optical depth tau(eff)(HI) at 1.7 < z < 4 is best fit with a single power law, tau(eff)(H I) = (0.0023 +/- 0.0007)(1 + z)(3.65 +/- 0.21), in good agreement with previous measurements from comparable data. As also found previously, the effect of noise on the flux distribution is not significant in high-resolution, high signal-to-noise ratio data.

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