4.7 Article

History of hydrogen reionization in the cold dark matter model

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 610, Issue 1, Pages 1-8

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/421378

Keywords

cosmology : theory; diffuse radiation; galaxies : formation; intergalactic medium

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We calculate the reionization history in CDM (cold dark matter) models. The epoch of the end of reionization and the Thomson scattering optical depth to the cosmic microwave background depend on the power spectrum amplitude on small scales and on the ionizing photon emissivity per unit mass in collapsed halos. We calibrate the emissivity to reproduce the measured ionizing background intensity at z = 4. Models in which all CDM halos have either a constant emissivity or a constant energy emitted per Hubble time per unit mass predict that reionization ends near z similar to 6 and that the optical depth is in the range 0.05 < tau(e) < 0.09, consistent with Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe ( WMAP) results at the 1-2 sigma level. If the optical depth is as high as 0.17 (as suggested by WMAP), halos of velocity dispersion similar to3-35 km s(-1) at z > 15 must have ionizing emissivities per unit mass larger by a factor greater than or similar to50 compared with the more massive halos that produce the ionizing emissivity at z = 4. This factor increases to 100 if the CDM power spectrum amplitude is required to agree with the recent Croft et al. measurement from the Lyalpha forest. If tau(e) greater than or similar to 0.17 is confirmed, a higher ionizing emissivity at z > 15 compared with z = 4 might arise from an enhanced star formation rate or quasar abundance per unit mass and an increased escape fraction for ionizing photons; the end of reionization could have been delayed to z similar to 6 because of the suppression of gas accretion and star formation in low-mass halos as the medium was reionized.

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