4.7 Article

Mixing metals in the early Universe

期刊

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03857.x

关键词

intergalactic medium; quasars : absorption lines; cosmology : theory

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigate the evolution of the metallicity of the intergalactic medium (IGM) with particular emphasis on its spatial distribution. We propose that metal enrichment occurs as a two-step process. First, supernova (SN) explosions eject metals into relatively small regions confined to the surroundings of star-forming galaxies. From a comprehensive treatment of blowout we show that SN by themselves fail by more than one order of magnitude to distribute the products of stellar nucleosynthesis over volumes large enough to pollute the whole IGM to the metallicity levels observed. Thus, an additional (but as yet unknown) physical mechanism must be invoked to mix the metals on scales comparable to the mean distance between the galaxies that are most efficient pollutants. From this simple hypothesis we derive a number of testable predictions for the evolution of the IGM metallicity. Specifically, we find that: (i) the fraction of metals ejected over the star-formation history of the Universe is about 50 per cent at z = 0; that is, approximately half of the metals today are found in the IGM; (ii) if the ejected metals were homogeneously mixed with the baryons in the Universe, the average IGM metallicity would be [Z] = Omega (ej)(Z)/Omega (b) similar or equal to 1/25Z. at z = 3. However, due to spatial inhomogeneities, the mean of the distribution of metallicities in the diffusive zones has a wide (more than 2 orders of magnitude) spread around this value; (iii) if metals become more uniformly distributed at z less than or similar to 1, as assumed, at z = 0 the metallicity of the IGM is narrowly confined within the range Z approximate to 0.1 +/- 0.032.. Finally, we point out that our results can account for the observed metal content of the intracluster medium.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据