1: \documentclass[usegraphicx,usenatbib,useAMS]{mn2e}
2:
3: \usepackage{times}
4: \citestyle{aa}
5:
6: \usepackage{graphicx,natbib}
7: % The amssymb package provides various useful mathematical symbols
8: \usepackage{amssymb}
9: \setlength{\topmargin}{10mm}
10: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
11: \newcommand{\ba}{\begin{eqnarray}}
12: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
13: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{eqnarray}}
14: \newcommand{\etal}{et al.\ }
15: \def\lesssim{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$<$}}}}
16: \def\gtrsim{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$>$}}}}
17:
18:
19: \def\simless{\mathbin{\lower 3pt\hbox
20: {$\rlap{\raise 5pt\hbox{$\char'074$}}\mathchar''7218$}}} % < or of order
21: \def\simgreat{\mathbin{\lower 3pt\hbox
22: {$\rlap{\raise 5pt\hbox{$\char'076$}}\mathchar''7218$}}} % > or of order
23: \def\apj{ApJ}
24: \def\apjs{ApJS}
25: \def\apjl{ApJL}
26: \def\aap{A\&A}
27: \def\aj{AJ}
28: \def\mnras{MNRAS}
29: \def\araa{{Ann.\ Rev.\ Astron.\& Astrophys.\ }}
30: \def\physrep{Physics Reports}
31: \def\pasj{Publ. Astron. Soc. Jpn.}
32: \def\prd{Phys. Rev. D}
33: \newcommand{\url}{\tt}%
34:
35: \begin{document}
36:
37: \title[Observability of Ly-$\alpha$ Emitters during Reionization]{The
38: Effect of the Intergalactic Environment on the Observability of
39: Ly-$\alpha$ Emitters During Reionization}
40:
41: \author[I. T. Iliev, et al.]{Ilian T. Iliev$^{1,2}$\thanks{e-mail:
42: iliev@physik.uzh.ch}, Paul R. Shapiro$^3$,
43: Patrick McDonald$^2$, Garrelt Mellema$^4$, Ue-Li Pen$^2$
44: %}\affil{
45: \\
46: $^1$ Universit\"at Z\"urich, Institut f\"ur Theoretische Physik,
47: Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057 Z\"urich, Switzerland\\
48: $^2$ Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics, University
49: of Toronto, 60 St. George Street, Toronto, ON M5S 3H8, Canada\\
50: $^3$ Department of Astronomy, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712-1083,
51: U.S.A.\\
52: $^4$ Stockholm Observatory, AlbaNova
53: University Center, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden}
54:
55: \date{\today} \pubyear{2008} \volume{000} \pagerange{1}
56: \twocolumn \maketitle\label{firstpage}
57:
58: \begin{abstract}
59: Observations of high-redshift Ly-$\alpha$ sources are a major tool for
60: studying the high-redshift Universe and are one of the most promising ways
61: to constrain the later stages of reionization. The understanding and
62: interpretation of the data is far from straightforward, however. We discuss
63: the effect of the reionizing intergalactic medium on the observability of
64: Ly-$\alpha$ sources based on large simulations of early structure formation
65: with radiative transfer. This takes into account self-consistently the
66: reionization history, density, velocity and ionization structures and
67: nonlinear source clustering. We find that all fields are highly anisotropic
68: and as a consequence there are very large variations in opacity among the
69: different lines-of-sight. The velocity effects, from both infall
70: and source peculiar velocity are most important for the luminous sources,
71: affecting the line profile and depressing the bright end of the luminosity
72: function. The line profiles are generally asymmetric and the line centers of
73: the luminous sources are always absorbed due to the high density of the local
74: IGM. For both luminous and average sources the damping wing effects are of
75: similar magnitude and remain significant until fairly late, when the IGM is
76: ionized between 30\% and 70\% by mass.
77:
78: The ionizing flux in the ionized patch surrounding a high density peak is
79: generally strongly dominated, particularly at late times, by the cluster of
80: faint sources, rather than the central massive galaxy. Our results reproduce
81: well the observed mean opacity of the IGM at $z\sim6$. The IGM absorption does
82: not change appreciably the correlation function of sources at high redshift.
83: Our derived luminosity function assuming constant mass-to-light ratio provides
84: an excellent match to the shape of the observed luminosity function at $z=6.6$
85: with faint-end slope of $\alpha=-1.5$. The resulting mass-to-light ratio
86: implies that the majority of sources responsible for reionization are too
87: faint to be observed by the current surveys.
88: \end{abstract}
89:
90: \begin{keywords}
91: cosmology: theory --- diffuse radiation --- intergalactic medium ---
92: large-scale structure of universe --- galaxies: formation --- radio lines:
93: galaxies
94: \end{keywords}
95:
96: \section{Introduction}
97:
98: The reionization of the universe was the last global transition of the
99: Intergalactic Medium (IGM), from fully-neutral after cosmic recombination at
100: $z\sim1100$ to fully-ionized as we see it today, caused by the radiation from
101: the first stars. Currently there are still only very few direct observational
102: constraints on this epoch. The lack of Gunn-Peterson trough in the spectra of
103: high-redshift sources indicates a low mean neutral fraction
104: $x_{\rm HI}\lesssim10^{-4}$ out to redshift $z\sim6$, which implies overlap
105: was achieved sometime before that, at $z_{\rm ov}>6$ .
106:
107: On the other hand, the WMAP 3-year data \citep{2007ApJS..170..377S} yielded a
108: fairly high value for the integrated Thomson electron scattering optical depth
109: to the surface of last scattering, at $\tau_{\rm es}=0.09\pm0.03$. This
110: requires a significant ionized fraction out to high redshifts, $z>12$,
111: and thus implies an extended reionization. The optical depth by itself does
112: not put very stringent constraints on the possible reionization histories,
113: however. The reason for this is the self-regulated nature of the reionization
114: process \citep{2007MNRAS.376..534I}, whereby the Jeans-mass filtering of
115: low-mass sources in the ionized regions results in the $\tau_{\rm es}$ and
116: $z_{\rm ov}$, the overlap redshift, being only loosely related. The overlap
117: redshift $z_{\rm ov}$ is determined by the abundances and efficiencies of the
118: high-mass sources, whose formation is not suppressed by reionization, while
119: $\tau_{\rm es}$ depends on both high- and low-mass sources. Thus, varying the
120: ionizing efficiencies of the small sources yields a wide range of $\tau_{\rm
121: es}$ values for the same value of $z_{\rm ov}$.
122:
123: This relative lack of observational data is set to change dramatically in the
124: near future due to a number of large observational projects which are
125: currently under way. The 21-cm data from high redshifts contains potentially
126: the richest set of information since the signal is inherently
127: three-dimensional, on the sky and in redshift/frequency \citep[e.g.][see
128: \citet{2006PhR...433..181F} for a detailed recent
129: review]{1997ApJ...475..429M,2000ApJ...528..597T,2002ApJ...572L.123I,
130: 2003MNRAS.341...81I,2004ApJ...608..622Z,2006MNRAS.372..679M,
131: 2006ApJ...646..681S,wmap3}.
132: The features that could be derived include the full reionization history,
133: geometry, statistics and individual bright features \citep{2006MNRAS.372..679M,
134: 2006PhR...433..181F,wmap3}. There are significant challenges to be overcome,
135: however, particularly related to precise subtraction of the very strong
136: foregrounds present at low frequencies
137: \citep[e.g.][]{2006PhR...433..181F,2006ApJ...648..767M,wmap3}.
138:
139: The patchiness of reionization creates secondary temperature anisotropies
140: in the CMB through the kinetic Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect
141: \citep[][]{1998ApJ...508..435G,2000ApJ...529...12H,2001ApJ...551....3G,
142: 2003ApJ...598..756S,2005ApJ...630..643M,kSZ}, as well as polarization
143: anisotropies \citep{2000ApJ...529...12H,2003ApJ...595....1H,
144: 2003ApJ...598..756S,mortonson06,cmbpol}. Unlike the 21-cm signal,
145: the reionization signatures in the CMB are integrated over the reionization
146: history and contain no frequency information. However, the typical scales
147: of reionization are reflected in a characteristic peak of the kSZ
148: anisotropy signal \citep{kSZ}, and the shape of the power spectrum is
149: dependent on the reionization parameters (source efficiencies and small-scale
150: gas clumping). CMB anisotropy observations can therefore provide us with key
151: information about the process of reionization and since its systematics are
152: different it would be an important complement to the 21-cm studies. One could
153: also combine these observations more directly, by using 21-cm observations to
154: derive the Thomson optical depth fluctuations \citep{pol21}. Small-scale CMB
155: anisotropy and polarization measurements would be quite difficult due to the
156: weakness of these signals, but are within the abilities of modern detectors
157: \citep{kSZ,cmbpol}.
158:
159: Narrow-band searches for high-redshift Ly-$\alpha$ emitters have been very
160: successful at finding sources at ever higher redshifts, currently up to $z\sim7$
161: \citep[e.g.][]{2002ApJ...568L..75H,2005pgqa.conf..363H,2003PASJ...55L..17K,
162: %2004ApJ...612L..89T,
163: 2005PASJ...57..165T,2003AJ....125.1006R,2004ApJ...604L..13S,2004ApJ...617L...5M,
164: 2006NewAR..50...94B,2006PASJ...58..313S,2006ApJ...648....7K,2008ApJ...677...12O}.
165: Together with studies of the Ly-$\alpha$ resonant absorption
166: in the IGM \citep[e.g.][]{2002AJ....123.1247F,2003AJ.126..1W,2004AJ....128..515F,
167: 2006AJ....132..117F} they provide important independent approaches for studying
168: reionization \citep[see][for a recent review]{2006ARA&A..44..415F}. The
169: optical depth for Ly-$\alpha$ resonant absorption in neutral IGM at high
170: redshifts is quite large \citep{1964AZh....41..801S,1965ApJ...142.1633G}, thus
171: absorption studies are mostly sensitive to very low hydrogen neutral
172: fractions, typically below $x_{\rm HI}\sim10^{-4}$, otherwise the absorption
173: saturates. This technique is thus best suited for studying highly-ionized
174: regions and the very end of reionization and has been very successful for
175: setting low limits for the redshift at which reionization was completed. On
176: the other hand, Ly-$\alpha$ emitter surveys do not require a very low average
177: hydrogen neutral fraction and thus in principle can probe further into the
178: reionization epoch \citep{2004ApJ...617L...5M}. Other related probes include
179: damping wing measurements \citep[e.g.][]{1998ApJ...501...15M,2004ApJ...611L..69M,
180: 2006PASJ...58..485T}, quasar HII region sizes and their evolution
181: \citep[e.g.][]{2007ApJ...660..923M,2004ApJ...610..117W,2006AJ....132..117F,
182: 2007MNRAS.374..493B,2007MNRAS.376L..34M}, and sizes of dark gaps in high-z
183: spectra \citep[e.g.][]{2006AJ....132..117F,2008MNRAS.386..359G}.
184:
185:
186: The correct interpretation of these data for reionization
187: is far from straightforward, however. The strong dependence of Ly-$\alpha$
188: absorption on the neutral fraction and gas density means that both should be
189: modelled with certain precision. High-redshift sources are rare and strongly
190: clustered \citep[see e.g.][]{2004ApJ...609..474B,2004ApJ...613....1F,2007MNRAS.376..534I}.
191: As a result, H~II regions generally contain multiple ionizing sources and grow
192: much larger than the ones created by individual sources. This minimizes the
193: effect of the damping wings and increases the transmission, allowing the
194: detection of more and fainter sources than would be naiively expected
195: \citep{2005ApJ...625....1W}. However, while this is the generic expectation,
196: the actual effect would be dependent on the exact geometry of reionization,
197: e.g. sources close behind a neutral region will be damped even if they are
198: inside a very large H~II region. Simplified models typically assume spherical
199: ionized regions and either ignore source clustering or assume linear bias
200: \citep[e.g.][]{2000ApJ...542L..75C,2004MNRAS.349.1137S,2004MNRAS.354..695F,
201: 2005ApJ...623..627H,2005ApJ...628..575W,2006ApJ...649..570K,2007MNRAS.374..960W}.
202: In practice the large ionized regions form by local percolation of multiple
203: smaller ones and as a consequence are highly nonspherical
204: \citep{2006MNRAS.369.1625I,mellema06,2007MNRAS.376..534I}. The inhomogeneous
205: cosmological density fields and non-equilibrium chemistry effects
206: (particularly in recently-ionized gas)
207: further complicate the picture and point to the need of following the
208: cosmological structure formation and the reionization history of a given
209: region. A proper account of all these effects can only be done through
210: detailed cosmological radiative transfer simulations.
211:
212:
213: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
214:
215:
216: A number of radiative transfer methods have been developed in recent
217: years and now they are reaching a certain level of maturity and are
218: producing fairly reliable results \citep{comparison1}. However,
219: performing large-scale reionization simulations, as required for
220: Ly-$\alpha$ studies is still technically very challenging. Recently
221: \citet{2007MNRAS.381...75M} used large scale structure formation
222: numerical simulations postprocessed with radiation transfer to study
223: the observability of Lyman-$\alpha$ emitters at high redshifts and what
224: these can tell us
225: about reionization. In order to achieve high dynamic range, these
226: authors employed a subgrid model for the collapse of the smallest
227: halos. Another, semi-numerical approach was used by
228: \cite{2008MNRAS.385.1348M}, who took the linear density and velocity
229: fields at early time (essentially the initial conditions for an N-body
230: simulation) and used an excursion-set approach combined with a
231: first-order Lagrangian theory to ``paint'' the H~II regions on the
232: density field. This procedure provides large dynamic range at a low cost,
233: but at the expense of making significant approximations and thus cannot
234: fully replace full numerical simulations.
235:
236: In this paper we use the results of large scale numerical simulations
237: to study the transfer of Ly-$\alpha$ through the IGM. In \S~2 we
238: briefly describe our simulation method. In \S~3 we describe the evolution
239: and environment of a rare, massive source, similar to the ones that are
240: currently observed. In \S~4 we address the observability
241: of Lyman-$\alpha$ emitters, considering the reduction of the transferred
242: line flux due to the absorption in the IGM and luminosity functions.
243: In \S~5 we describe the effects of the patchiness of reionization on the
244: angular correlation function of Lyman-$\alpha$ emitters, and, finally, in
245: \S~6 we sum up our conclusions.
246:
247: \section{Simulations}
248:
249: Our simulation results follow the full, self-consistent reionization
250: history in a large volume of $(100\,\rm h^{-1}Mpc)^3$ and were
251: described in detail in \citet{2006MNRAS.369.1625I,2006MNRAS.372..679M}
252: and \citet{2007MNRAS.376..534I}. While this volume is too small to
253: allow us to consider the rarest, most luminous sources like the SDSS
254: QSO's \citep{2002AJ....123.1247F,2006AJ....132..117F}, we have
255: sufficient resolution to locate the majority of sources responsible
256: for reionization and take explicit account of their radiation, and to
257: derive good quality absorption spectra.
258:
259: Of the range of simulations presented in \citet{2007MNRAS.376..534I} we
260: here consider one specific run, labelled f250C.
261: Our simulations were performed using a combination of two very efficient
262: computational tools, a cosmological particle-mesh code called PMFAST
263: \citep{2005NewA...10..393M} for following the structure formation, whose
264: outputs are then post-processed using our radiative transfer and
265: non-equilibrium chemistry code called C$^2$-Ray \citep{methodpaper}.
266: The parameter $f_\gamma=250$ characterizes the
267: emissivity of the ionizing sources - how many ionizing photons per gas atom in
268: the (resolved) halos are produced and manage to escape from the host halo
269: within $\sim20$~Myr, which is the time between two consecutive density
270: slices, equal to two radiative transfer timesteps, while 'C' indicates that
271: this run models the gas clumping at small (sub-radiative transfer grid)
272: scales based on a fit given by
273: \be
274: C_{\rm sub-grid}(z)= 26.2917e^{-0.1822z+0.003505\,z^2}.
275: \label{clumpfact_fit3}
276: \ee
277: based on the used WMAP3 cosmology (a good fit for $6<z<30$). This fit to
278: the small-scale clumping factor is a more precise version of the one we
279: presented in \citet{2005ApJ...624..491I}. We derived it based on a PMFAST
280: simulation with a computational mesh of $3248^3$ and with particle number
281: of $1624^3$, with computational volume of $(3.5\,\rm h^{-1}~Mpc)^3$. These
282: parameters correspond to particle mass of $10^3M_\odot$, minimum resolved
283: halo mass of $10^5M_\odot$, and a spatial resolution of $\sim1$~kpc comoving.
284:
285: Our $(100\,\rm h^{-1}~Mpc)^3$ volume simulation resolves all halos with mass
286: above $2.2\times10^9M_\odot$, higher
287: than the mass above which atomic-line cooling of hydrogen becomes effective,
288: which is $\sim10^8M_\odot$. As a consequence, our treatment does not include
289: the contribution of low-mass sources to reionization. Higher-resolution,
290: smaller-box simulations which do include all ionizing sources above the
291: atomic-line cooling limit \citep{2007MNRAS.376..534I} indicate that the
292: effects of
293: low-mass sources are primarily confined to the earliest stages of reionization,
294: when such sources are dominant. Throughout most of the reionization process,
295: and especially during its late stages, the low-mass sources, which are strongly
296: clustered around the high density peaks, are heavily suppressed due to
297: Jeans-mass filtering in the ionized regions and thus have limited effect on
298: the reionization progress and large-scale geometry. Since the Ly-$\alpha$
299: observations largely probe the later stages of reionization, where the
300: neutral gas fraction is $\sim30\%$ or less \citep{2004ApJ...617L...5M}, we do
301: not expect that our conclusions will be strongly affected by the absence of
302: low-mass sources. Larger simulations, currently in progress
303: \citep{2008arXiv0806.2887I,2008arXiv0806.3091S}, which resolve all
304: atomically-cooling halos in $\sim100$~Mpc boxes will settle these uncertainties.
305:
306: Throughout this work we assume a flat ($\Omega_k=0$) $\Lambda$CDM cosmology %\\
307: ($\Omega_m,\Omega_\Lambda,\Omega_b,h,\sigma_8,n)=(0.24,0.76,0.042,0.73,0.74,
308: 0.95)$ based on WMAP 3-year results \citep{2007ApJS..170..377S}, hereafter
309: WMAP3. Here $\Omega_m$, $\Omega_\Lambda$, and $\Omega_b$ are the total matter,
310: vacuum, and baryonic densities in units of the critical density, $\sigma_8$ is
311: the rms density fluctuations extrapolated to the present on the scale of $8
312: h^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$ according to the linear perturbation theory, and $n$ is the
313: index of the primordial power spectrum of density fluctuations.
314:
315: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
316:
317: \section{Luminous high-redshift sources and their environment: properties,
318: evolution and reionization history}
319:
320: The luminous sources at high redshift, the ones typically seen in current
321: surveys, are hosted by rare, massive halos which form at the location of
322: the highest peaks of the density field. The statistics of Gaussian fields
323: predicts that such high density peaks are rare and highly clustered in space,
324: more strongly so at high redshifts. As a consequence, each high-redshift,
325: massive galaxy should be surrounded by numerous smaller ionizing sources. The
326: self-consistent reionization history simulations of such regions require
327: following a sufficiently large volume, in order to obtain the correct statistics
328: and biasing of the rare peaks, while at the same time resolving all the low-mass
329: halos which are the main drivers of the reionization process. Our current radiative
330: transfer simulations are able to achieve this. We also note that correctly
331: modelling the nonlinear bias of the rare peaks in semi-analytical modes is a
332: difficult and still unsolved problem. As a consequence, the halo clustering in
333: semi-analytical models is typically underestimated, and in some cases even ignored.
334: This often yields incorrect results, e.g. in estimates of the suppression of
335: low-mass sources by Jeans-mass filtering \citep[e.g.][]{2007MNRAS.376..534I}.
336:
337: \begin{figure}
338: \includegraphics[width=3.5in]{mass_accr_hist_ln.eps}
339: \caption{Mass accretion history of the three most massive
340: halos found in our computational volume at redshift $z=6$. The mass
341: growth is roughly exponential in redshift, and is well-approximated by
342: $M(z)[M_\odot]=\exp(A-\alpha z)$, where $A=31.2, \alpha=0.52$ for most
343: massive halo (solid, red), $A=32.5, \alpha=0.81$ for the next most massive
344: halo (short-dashed, blue) and $A=32.0, \alpha=0.75$ for the third most
345: massive halo (long-dashed, green). Fits are shown by the thin straight lines
346: (with corresponding line types and colors).
347: \label{mass_accr}}
348: \end{figure}
349:
350: \subsection{Mass accretion history of massive halos at high redshift}
351:
352: In Figure~\ref{mass_accr} we show the mass-growth history of the three
353: most massive (at redshift $z=6$) halos found in our computational volume,
354: with final masses of $1.5\times10^{12}M_\odot$, $9\times10^{11}M_\odot$
355: and $8.2\times10^{11}M_\odot$, respectively. All correspond to very rare,
356: $\approx4.5-5-\sigma$ peaks of the density field. The first progenitors of
357: these halos resolved in our simulation ($M_{\rm halo}>2\times10^9M_\odot$)
358: form very early, at $z\sim16$. Thereafter, the halo masses grow roughly
359: exponentially with redshift, $M\propto\exp(-\alpha z)$. This behaviour is
360: in good agreement with previous results on the growth of dark matter halos
361: in hierarchical $\Lambda$CDM models \citep{2002ApJ...568...52W}, as well
362: as with similar results obtained in more generic, idealized situations
363: \citep{2004astro.ph..9173S}. The slopes $\alpha$ for our halos exhibit much
364: smaller scatter ($0.52<\alpha<0.81$; see Figure~\ref{mass_accr} caption for
365: the complete fitting formulae) than the ones found by
366: \citet{2002ApJ...568...52W} ($0.4<\alpha<1.6$). The exponential fits are
367: excellent during periods when no major mergers (i.e. mergers with halos of
368: similar mass) occur. This is the case e.g. at late times ($z<11$) by which
369: time these halos have grown enough to dominate their surroundings and no
370: similar-mass halos remain in their vicinity. The exception here is the second
371: most massive halo (short-dashed line). Its last major merger occurs at
372: $z\sim8$. At early times ($z>12$) the mass evolution of all three halos does
373: not follow the overall exponential trend. Instead, the most massive halo is
374: growing faster than its long-term trend, through series of rapid major
375: mergers, while the other two halos initially grow slower than their long-term
376: trend.
377:
378: \begin{figure*}
379: \begin{center}
380: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{simage_thin_yz_12.915.ps}
381: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{simage_thin_yz_10.078.ps}
382: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{simage_thin_yz_9.034.ps}
383: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{ionrate_v2_yz_12.915.eps}
384: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{ionrate_v2_yz_10.078.eps}
385: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{ionrate_v2_yz_9.034.eps}
386: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{simage_thin_yz_7.926.ps}
387: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{simage_thin_yz_7.042.ps}
388: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{simage_thin_yz_6.000.ps}
389: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{ionrate_v2_yz_7.926.ps}
390: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{ionrate_v2_yz_7.042.ps}
391: \includegraphics[width=2.in]{ionrate_v2_yz_6.000.ps}
392: \caption{The reionization history of a high density peak.
393: The images are centered on the most massive (at $z=6$) halo in our
394: computational volume and are of size $100\,h^{-1}$Mpc to the side. The
395: snapshots are at: (top row) $z=12.9$ (left; global mass-weighted ionized
396: fraction $x_m=0.001$), $z=10.1$ (middle; $x_m=0.10$), $z=9.0$ (right;
397: $x_m=0.28$), and (third row) $z=7.9$ (left; $x_m=0.66$), $z=7.0$ (middle;
398: $x_m=0.94$), and $z=6.0$ (right; $x_m=0.9999$). The underlying cosmological
399: density field (dark,green) is superimposed with the ionized fraction (light,
400: orange) and the cells containing ionizing sources (dark, blue dots), the
401: slices thickness of $0.5\,h^{-1}$~Mpc (1 cell) in the density and ionized
402: fraction fields and $10\,h^{-1}$~Mpc in terms of sources. The corresponding
403: images of the (non-equilibrium) photoionization rates ($0.5\,h^{-1}$~Mpc
404: thickness) are shown in the second and bottom rows.
405: \label{peak_evol}}
406: \end{center}
407: \end{figure*}
408:
409: \subsection{Reionization history}
410:
411: In Figure~\ref{peak_evol} (top and third row) we illustrate the main stages of
412: the reionization history of a high density peak and its intergalactic
413: environment. The particular peak we show here is the one surrounding the
414: largest-mass halo found in our computational volume at redshift $z=6$. For
415: clarity and convenience for the reader we have shifted the peak to the box
416: center using
417: the periodicity of our computational volume. The first resolved source in
418: this region forms at $z\sim16$. By redshift $z=12.9$ (top left; mass-weighted
419: ionized fraction is $x_m=0.001$ at this time) the central halo has already
420: undergone several major mergers with nearby halos and its total mass has grown
421: to $1.5\times10^{10}M_\odot$. The combined effect of the central halo and the
422: nearby members of the same source cluster is to create a substantial ionized
423: region (of size $R\sim1\,\rm h^{-1}Mpc$, defined as the radius at which the
424: integrated continuum optical depth from the source at the Lyman limit reaches
425: unity). At this time there are only a few ionized regions in our computational
426: volume (and just two intersect the plane shown). By $z=10.1$ (top middle;
427: $x_m=0.10$) many more H~II regions appear and both the sources and the
428: ionizing regions are strongly clustered in space. The central region still
429: remains the largest one. By redshift $z=9.0$ (top right; $x_m=0.28$) many more
430: haloes have formed, most of them in large clustered groups. The H~II region
431: surrounding the central peak remains among the largest
432: ($R\sim6\,\rm h^{-1}Mpc$), but several other ionized bubbles reach comparable
433: sizes.
434:
435: At redshift $z=7.9$ (bottom left; $x_m=0.66$) some quite sizable regions, more
436: than ten Mpc across, have percolated, reaching local overlap. The central
437: bubble has grown to a size of $R\sim8\,\rm h^{-1}Mpc$. The reionization
438: geometry becomes quite complex, with most ionized bubbles becoming
439: interconnected, while leaving large neutral patches in-between. By $z=7.0$
440: (bottom middle; $x_m=0.94$) the notion of isolated, quasi-spherical H~II
441: regions becomes rather meaningless, since all ionized regions have already
442: merged into one topologically-connected region, although substantial neutral
443: patches still remain interspersed throughout our volume. The volume remains
444: on average quite optically-thick to ionizing continuum radiation. Finally, at
445: $z=6.0$ (bottom right; $x_m=0.9999$; $R=18.7\,\rm h^{-1}Mpc$) our volume
446: is well beyond overlap (which we define by $x_m>99\%$). Only by that time the
447: volume becomes on average optically-thin to ionizing radiation.
448:
449: \begin{figure}
450: \includegraphics[width=3in]{bubble_sizes_bw.eps}
451: \caption{Histogram of the bubble size distributions along LOS. Shown are the
452: distances from the source (the most massive halo in our volume at $z=6$)
453: at which continuum optical depth (at the hydrogen ionization threshold)
454: surpasses $\tau=1$ (solid lines), or $\tau=4.6$ (dotted lines), at several
455: illustrative redshifts, as labelled.
456: \label{hist_fig}}
457: \end{figure}
458:
459: The corresponding panels in the second and fourth row of
460: Figure~\ref{peak_evol} show images of the (non-equilibrium) ionization rate
461: distribution at the same redshifts. The distribution is highly inhomogeneous,
462: following the patchiness and peaking strongly in the vicinity of large source
463: clusters. The volume-averaged photoionization rates at redshifts
464: $z=(12.9;10.1; 9.0; 7.9; 7.0; 6.0)$ in units of $10^{-12}\,s^{-1}$ are
465: $\Gamma_{-12}=(7.0\times10^{-2};1.3\times10^{-1};2.3\times10^{-1};
466: 7.6\times10^{-1};1.3;4.9)$, growing strongly with time as larger fraction of
467: the volume becomes ionized and ever more sources form. Except for the earliest
468: times, the peak photoionization rate values on the grid (corresponding to the
469: brightest points of the images) remain fairly constant with time, at the same
470: redshifts they are $\Gamma_{-12}=(1.0\times10^{2};2.0\times10^{3};
471: 2.0\times10^{3};2.5\times10^{3}; 2.8\times10^{3};5.1\times10^{3})$.
472: The photoionization rate distributions and evolution are discussed further in
473: \S~\ref{photoion_rates_sect}.
474:
475: \begin{figure*}
476: \includegraphics[width=3in]{nearby_sources_z7_1Mpc.eps}
477: \includegraphics[width=3in]{nearby_sources_z7_5Mpc.ps}
478: \caption{Projected distributions at $z=7$ of halos within 1~$\rm h^{-1}Mpc$
479: comoving (left) and within 5~$\rm h^{-1}Mpc$ comoving from the most massive
480: object in the box. Circle areas are proportional to the mass of the
481: corresponding halo.
482: \label{halo_dist_fig}}
483: \end{figure*}
484:
485: To further characterize the shape and boundary sharpness of the central H~II
486: region in Figure~\ref{hist_fig} we show a histogram of the radial distance $R$
487: from the central source at which the cumulative continuum optical depth at the
488: ionizing threshold of hydrogen along each LOS reaches unity (black) and 4.6
489: (red; this optical depth value corresponds to 1\% transmission). A
490: spherically-symmetric H~II region would correspond to a single value for the
491: radius for a given optical depth, regardless of the directionality, while any
492: scatter around the peak would be a measure of the non-sphericity of the
493: ionized region. Furthermore, a comparison between the distributions for the
494: two optical depths measures the sharpness of the H~II region boundary, as
495: follows.
496: A sharp transition from an ionized to a neutral gas along a given LOS results
497: in both optical depth values being surpassed simultaneously (since the neutral
498: gas is extremely optically-thick) and in such situation the histograms would
499: coincide. On the other hand, if the boundary of the ionized region is not
500: clearly defined due to local percolation, gas is highly ionized and the
501: optical depth along the LOS increases only slowly, thus the values of 1 and
502: 4.6 are reached at very different distances from the source.
503:
504: At redshift $z=9$ ($x_m=0.28$)the H~II region surrounding the central source
505: is largely spherical and its boundary is well-defined, albeit with some modest
506: spread around the peak, indicating some departures from sphericity, in
507: agreement with what was seen in Fig.~\ref{peak_evol}. At redshift $z=8$
508: ($x_m=0.62$) the H~II region
509: remains fairly spherical, slightly more so for $\tau=1$. The $\tau=4.6$
510: histogram has a long tail at large values of $R$, up to $\sim25 h^{-1}Mpc$,
511: meaning that a small percentage of the LOS reach 99\% opacity only at such
512: fairly large distances. Both distributions are somewhat wider than before and
513: start to depart from each other, reflecting the increasing ``fuzziness'' of
514: the bubble boundary as it merges with other nearby bubbles due to local
515: percolation.
516:
517: At $z=7$ ($x_m=0.94$) the $\tau=1$ distribution still retains a well-defined peak, albeit
518: one accompanied by a long high-$R$ tail reaching out to tens of Mpc. However,
519: the $\tau=4.6$ histogram changes its character completely, becoming very
520: broad, with only a low peak close to the $\tau=1$ peak and several
521: secondary peaks. A significant number ($\sim14\%$) of the LOS do not reach
522: $\tau=4.6$ within $50\rm\,h^{-1}Mpc$ of the central source (these are collected
523: in the last, $R=50\rm\,h^{-1}Mpc$ bin of the histogram). Finally, at $z=6$
524: ($x_m=0.9999$), well beyond the overlap epoch ($z\sim6.6$, $x_m=0.99$) there
525: is no indication of a defined
526: ionized bubble. Both distributions are very broad, with no clear peak. At
527: this time the optical depth is determined by the tiny remaining neutral
528: fraction, which in its turn is dictated by the density variations of the
529: Cosmic Web. Either value of $\tau$ is reached at a wide range of distances in
530: different directions, from $\sim10\rm\,h^{-1}Mpc$ to over $50\rm\,h^{-1}Mpc$.
531: The IGM becomes largely optically-thin to ionizing radiation and thus for most
532: LOS neither $\tau=1$ nor $\tau=4.6$ are reached within 50 $\rm\, h^{-1} Mpc$
533: from the source.
534:
535: We also note that these results on the H~II region boundaries are valid for
536: soft, stellar (either Pop. II or Pop. III) spectra. Should hard sources, e.g.
537: QSOs, contribute significantly to reionization the ionized region boundaries
538: will inevitably be thicker and the transition from ionized to neutral smoother,
539: due to the longer mean free paths of the hard photons. However, most current
540: observational indications are that stellar sources dominate reionization, in
541: which case the main effect of the relatively few hard photons present will be
542: to heat the neutral IGM, but not to ionize it significantly.
543:
544: \begin{figure}
545: \includegraphics[width=3in]{emission_r.eps}
546: \caption{Histograms in radial bins of the total cumulative emissivity from all
547: halos within distance $R$, $N_{\rm ph, tot}(R)$, measured from the central
548: object, here the most massive object in the computational volume, in units
549: of the central object's emissivity, $N_{\rm ph,central}$. Shown are (bottom
550: to top on the right) $z=12.9,9,8,7$ and 6.25 ($x_m=0.001,0.28,0.62,0.94$ and
551: 0.998). The last radial bin contains the total emissivity of the
552: computational box at that time. The vertical lines on top (corresponding
553: line types and colors) indicate the average size of the H~II region at the
554: corresponding redshift.
555: \label{emiss_fig}}
556: \end{figure}
557:
558: \subsection{Halo clustering in the vicinity of a luminous source}
559:
560: Taking a closer look at the halo clustering in the immediate vicinity
561: of a high density peak in Fig.~\ref{halo_dist_fig} we show the projected
562: spatial distribution of halos around the most massive halo at $z=7$. There
563: are 31 resolved halos within 1~$h^{-1}$Mpc from the most massive halo
564: and 360 resolved halos within 5~$h^{-1}$Mpc (both including the largest halo
565: itself). The area of each circle is proportional to the mass (and thus, in
566: accordance to our source model, to the luminosity) of the corresponding halo.
567: Halos are distributed very anisotropically, concentrating preferentially
568: along the density filaments and sheets of the local Cosmic Web.
569:
570: The mass of the most massive halo is $9\times10^{11}M_\odot$ at that time,
571: well above any other halo in its vicinity. Nonetheless, the low-mass, but
572: numerous halos surrounding the peak contribute significantly to the total
573: ionizing emissivity. In order to quantify this point further, in
574: Figure~\ref{emiss_fig} we show the cumulative emissivity vs. radial distance
575: from the central halo for several redshifts spanning the whole range of
576: interest here. At all redshifts only within $\sim2\,\rm h^{-1}Mpc$ from
577: itself does the most massive halo dominate the total photoionizing emission
578: (i.e. it contributes more than 50\% of the cumulative total emission coming
579: from that region). The exception is the highest redshift ($z=12.9$), in which
580: case the surrounding cluster of sources, rather than the central source,
581: dominate the total flux even within $1\,\rm h^{-1}Mpc$ of the peak. The reason
582: for this is the presence nearby of another halo of almost the same mass as the
583: central one, which shortly thereafter merges with it. The cumulative emission
584: is dominated by the small halo contribution beyond that distance. Within
585: $10\,\rm h^{-1}Mpc$ the central source contributes only 10-30\% of the total
586: emission. As more and more halos form and the lowest mass ones become
587: relatively common the fractional contribution of the most luminous source
588: to the total emissivity gradually decreases in time for all radii larger
589: than a few comoving Mpc. At $30\,\rm h^{-1}Mpc$ the central source is dominated
590: by the rest by 1.5-2 orders of magnitude. As fraction of the total emissivity
591: of all sources in our computational volume (shown in the last bin of the
592: histogram) the most luminous one contributes only $\sim2\%$ of the total at
593: $z=12.9$, decreasing to $\sim0.1\%$ at $z=6.25$.
594:
595: \begin{figure}
596: \includegraphics[width=3in]{ave_profiles_z6.6.eps}
597: \caption{Spherically-averaged profiles of (bottom to top on the left/right):
598: the comoving number density of hydrogen (in $cm^{-3}$; short-dashed, blue), the
599: neutral hydrogen fraction (solid, red), radial velocity, $v_r$ (in $\rm 100\,
600: km\,s^{-1}$; long-dashed, green) and continuum optical depth at $h\nu=13.6$~eV
601: integrated from the source ($R=0$) outward, all at redshift $z=6.6$
602: ($x_m=0.99$) vs. $R$, the comoving radial distance from the most massive
603: galaxy.
604: \label{spher_aver}}
605: \end{figure}
606:
607: In Figure~\ref{emiss_fig} we also indicate the current H~II region mean radius
608: (vertical lines of corresponding line types and colors). Within its own bubble
609: the central source contributes $\sim50\%$ of the emission at $z=12.9$,
610: decreasing to $\sim10\%$ at $z=7$ and $\sim1\%$ at $z=6.25$.
611:
612: Recently, \citet{2005ApJ...625....1W} presented a semi-analytical model of the
613: source clustering at high redshift. They found that a central galaxy at $z=7$
614: and with a velocity dispersion similar to our most massive source,
615: $\sigma_V\approx200\rm\,km\,s^{-1}$) contributes $\sim40-70\%$ of the H~II
616: region radius, or $\sim10-35\%$ of its volume (see their Fig. 2, right panel),
617: a factor of a few larger compared to our results where we find that the central
618: galaxy contribution to the total flux is $\sim1-10\%$. This discrepancy is most
619: probably due to underestimate of source clustering in their bias model, and
620: possibly also to the differences in the assumed source efficiencies. Furthermore,
621: we have only considered a single massive source, which of course does not account
622: for random statistical variations from source to source. Nevertheless, this result
623: underlines the importance of considering the luminous sources individually (as
624: opposed to considering an averaged ``mean'' source) and using simulations in order
625: to account for nonlinear bias effects.
626:
627: \subsection{IGM Environment of luminous sources at high redshift}
628:
629: \begin{figure}
630: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{deltav_r_z6.eps}
631: \caption{Mean radial velocity at $z=6$ of the IGM with respect to the source
632: (red solid line, negative means towards the halo, positive - away) and its rms
633: variation (error bars), both plotted vs. (comoving) radius from the source.
634: \label{vel_r_fig}}
635: \end{figure}
636:
637: The Ly-$\alpha$ absorption is strongly influenced by the local IGM environment --
638: density, velocity and ionization structure -- around the the source. As an
639: illustrative example, let us consider a particular redshift, $z=6.6$, similar to
640: the highest redshifts at which currently there are Ly-$\alpha$ source detections.
641: At this time the universe in our simulation is already highly-ionized, with a
642: mean mass-weighted ionized fraction of $x_m=0.939$, and a volume ionized fraction
643: of $x_v=0.925$. In Figure~\ref{spher_aver} we show the spherically-averaged
644: profiles around the central source of the gas number density, $n$, neutral
645: fraction, $x_{\rm HI}$, integrated continuum optical depth ($\tau$, at
646: $h\nu=13.6$~eV) and radial velocity, $v_r$. The radiative transfer cell which
647: contains the central source is highly-overdense, with $\delta=n/\bar{n}-1=256$,
648: which indicates that this cell roughly coincides with the source halo itself.
649: The radial density profile declines steeply away from the source. The overdensity
650: is $\delta=3.3$ at $R\sim1 \rm \,h^{-1}Mpc$, decreasing to $\delta=1$ at
651: $R\sim2.5 \rm \,h^{-1}Mpc$, and approaching the mean density at distances beyond
652: $R\sim10\rm \,h^{-1}Mpc$.
653:
654: The radial velocity profile shows an extended ($R\sim20\,\rm h^{-1}Mpc$) infall
655: region, with the mean radial velocity peaking at $\sim150\,\rm km\,s^{-1}$ before
656: dropping to zero inside the source halo itself. The proximity region of the central
657: source ($R<15\rm\,h^{-1}Mpc$) is highly-ionized, with neutral fraction
658: $x_{\rm HI}<10^{-4}$. The rest of the volume still has an appreciable neutral
659: fraction ($\sim0.1-1\%$), however, and is thus on average still optically-thick,
660: with the mean optical depth reaching $\tau=63$ at $R=50\rm\,h^{-1}Mpc$.
661:
662: However, the spherically-averaged quantities provide only a limited information
663: about the state of the IGM surrounding each source. All quantities are distributed
664: highly-anisotropically, and thus affect the Ly-$\alpha$ emission differently along
665: each LOS. In particularly, the effect of the relative velocities of the IGM and
666: source is relatively poorly studied at present. An optically-thick medium at rest
667: with respect to a Ly-$\alpha$ source would absorb the blue wing of the line and
668: transmit its red wing, at longer wavelengths than the line centre at
669: $\lambda_0=1215\,$\AA\, \citep[e.g.][]{1998ApJ...501...15M}. A relative motion of
670: the IGM gas and the source along the LOS would result in either more or less
671: transmission, depending on the motion direction. E.g. gas infall towards the source
672: along the LOS from the observer would redshift it, resulting in some absorption of
673: the red wing of the line. We note that in order to evaluate these velocity effects
674: with any precision much higher resolution simulations (and ones including outflows)
675: will be required. Our radiative transfer grid has cell size of $\sim0.5/h$~Mpc
676: comoving, or $\sim70/h$~kpc physical at $z=6$, which roughly corresponds to the size
677: of the largest halos found in our box. The velocity and density fields used are at
678: twice higher resolution ($\sim0.25/h$~Mpc comoving). Therefore, our results here
679: should be considered as a guidance, illustrating that the velocity effects are quite
680: important and should not be ignored.
681:
682: In Figure~\ref{vel_r_fig} we show the average IGM gas
683: velocity relative to the source (line) vs. distance from it and the variance of that
684: average velocity (error bars). As noted above, in the vicinity of the source the
685: IGM on average infalls towards the halo. However there are large variations, of order
686: hundreds of $km\,s^{-1}$ around this mean. E.g. a velocity offset of 200 $km\,s^{-1}$
687: at $z=6$ corresponds to $\Delta\lambda\sim6\,$\AA, of the same order as the typical
688: observed line widths, and thus a relative motion of the IGM and source of this order
689: could have a very significant effect on the observed line. In the next section we
690: would quantify the effect of peculiar velocities on the Ly-$\alpha$ line.
691:
692:
693: \begin{figure*}
694: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{tau12.915.ps}
695: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{spec12.915.ps}
696: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{tau9.034.ps}
697: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{spec9.034.ps}
698: \caption{Sample LOS at redshifts $z=12.9$ (top; $x_m=0.001$) and 9.0 (bottom; $x_m=0.28$) vs.
699: $\lambda$/comoving distance from the most massive galaxy. Shown are (left
700: panels) the optical depth (solid), neutral fraction $x_{\rm HI}=1-x$
701: ($\times10^5$; dotted) and density in units of the mean (dashed), and
702: (right panels) the corresponding transmission. The vertical lines show the
703: position of the central source (in redshift space, i.e. accounting for its
704: peculiar velocity along the LOS). The horizontal lines on the left
705: indicate the optical depth equivalent to 1\% transmission. On the right,
706: the shaded region is the transmission in the case where the unabsorbed
707: spectrum is flat (the horizontal dotted line).
708: \label{spectra}}
709: \end{figure*}
710:
711: \section{Observability of high-$z$ Ly-$\alpha$ sources}
712:
713: \subsection{Absorption spectra of luminous sources}
714: \label{spectra:sect}
715:
716: \begin{figure*}
717: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{tau8.072.ps}
718: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{spec8.072.ps}
719: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{tau7.042.ps}
720: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{spec7.042.ps}
721: \caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{spectra}, but at redshifts $z=8.1$ (top; $x_m=0.62$)
722: and 7.0 (bottom; $x_m=0.94$).
723: \label{spectra2}}
724: \end{figure*}
725:
726: Much of the information about high-redshift Ly-$\alpha$ sources and IGM is
727: based on absorption spectra. We thus start our discussion of the observable
728: signatures by presenting and discussing some sample spectra intersecting the
729: position of the most luminous source in our computational volume.
730: Figures~\ref{spectra}-\ref{spectra4} we show sample spectra along three
731: random lines-of-sight at a few selected redshifts spanning the complete range
732: of interest here. On the left panels we show the distributions of
733: Ly-$\alpha$ Gunn-Peterson optical depth, $\tau_{\rm GP}$, neutral fraction,
734: $x_{\rm HI}=1-x$ (multiplied by $10^5$ for clarity), and gas density in units
735: of the mean, $\Delta=n/\bar{n}$. On the right panels we show the corresponding
736: Gunn-Peterson transmission spectra for flux level of unity, $\exp(-\tau_{\rm GP})$.
737: The horizontal lines on the left panels indicate the optical depth of
738: $\tau=4.6$, which corresponds to 1\% transmission. For reference, this value is
739: roughly equal to the optical depth of a hydrogen gas with neutral fraction of
740: $x_{\rm HI}=10^{-5}$ at the mean density at redshift $z=6.6$. All quantities shown
741: are in redshift/wavelength space and in the observer ($z=0$) frame. For
742: reference, on the top axis of each figure we show the approximate corresponding
743: distances in real space. Finally, in Figure~\ref{meanF_fig} we show the mean,
744: averaged over all random LOS, transmission spectra at the same redshifts, for
745: the most massive source (left) and mean over all sources (right).
746:
747: The Lyman-$\alpha$ absorption as a function of wavelength is computed using
748: the standard procedure (e.g., \cite{1998MNRAS.301..478T}). The optical
749: depth and transmission results include the redshift-space distortions due
750: to the local peculiar velocities, relative to the peculiar velocity of the
751: source (i.e., after applying peculiar velocity distortions, the whole spectrum
752: has been shifted slightly so the source is returned to it's real space
753: position). The temperature of the gas is assumed to be $10^4$ K when computing
754: thermal broadening, consistent with the assumption adopted for the
755: simulations.
756:
757: The nominal resolution of our spectra is $R\sim6000-12000$ at $z=6$ (higher
758: at higher redshifts), based on our grid resolution of $203^3$ (radiative
759: transfer) and ($406^3$ density and velocity fields). This resolution roughly
760: corresponding to the one for medium-resolution observed spectra. In reality
761: the situation is more complicated. Due to the non-linear
762: transformations between our raw simulation data and the final spectra the
763: limited simulation resolution can affect the results even if it were better
764: than the observational resolution. A separate issue pointing in the same
765: direction is the fact that the real data has effectively infinite resolution
766: in the transverse direction (i.e., the width of the light beam), and thus in
767: order for us to be accurate we have to ensure we are resolving essentially
768: all the transverse structure, which is not the case for the current
769: simulations. As a result, our spectra should not be considered completely
770: realistic predictions, but rather as a guidance showing some important
771: features to be expected from real spectra, as discussed below. Future
772: higher-resolution, more detailed simulations will be better suited to make
773: realistic predictions of the actual detailed spectral properties.
774:
775: \begin{figure*}
776: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{tau6.585.ps}
777: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{spec6.585.ps}
778: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{tau6.254.ps}
779: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{spec6.254.ps}
780: \caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{spectra}, but at redshifts $z=6.6$ (top; $x_m=0.99$)
781: and 6.25 (bottom; $x_m=0.998$).
782: \label{spectra3}}
783: \end{figure*}
784:
785: \begin{figure*}
786: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{tau6.000.ps}
787: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{spec6.000.ps}
788: \caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{spectra}, but at redshift $z=6.0$ ($x_m=0.9999$).
789: \label{spectra4}}
790: \end{figure*}
791:
792: At early times ($z=12.9$; Figure~\ref{spectra}, top) the H~II region surrounding
793: the most massive source is still quite small (see also Figs.~\ref{peak_evol},
794: \ref{hist_fig} and \ref{emiss_fig}) and the Ly-$\alpha$ emission of the source is
795: completely suppressed by the damping wing of the Ly-$\alpha$ line profile,
796: rendering it unobservable. The ionized region grows quickly after that and by $z=9$
797: reaches size of $\sim6\rm\,h^{-1}Mpc$ (Figure~\ref{spectra}, bottom). Regardless,
798: the Ly-$\alpha$ optical depth even within the source proximity region remains quite
799: high, at few up to $\sim10$, which allows through only a very weak transmission.
800: The damping wing slightly weakens compared to the higher redshifts, but is still
801: quite substantial, and still depresses most of the red wing of the emission line.
802:
803: Some of the continuum immediately behind the source in redshift space (within a
804: few \AA) is absorbed due to gas infall towards the density peak. Because of that
805: additional velocity towards the source the gas in front of it is slightly
806: redshifted and thus absorbs at wavelengths red-ward of the source position.
807: The line center at the luminous source's position is completely dark due to the
808: high density in the middle of the density peak, regardless of the very low neutral
809: fraction there. These features persist throughout the evolution and are very
810: characteristic for all luminous sources, since these always associated with high
811: density peaks and surrounded by infall.
812:
813: At redshift $z=8.1$ (Figure~\ref{spectra2}, top) a weak damping wing is still
814: present and essentially no transmission occurs on the blue side of the line.
815: The sources at this time may be potentially visible with very deep observations.
816: Only by redshift $z=7$ (Figures~\ref{meanF_fig}) the ionized region is sufficiently
817: large for the damping wing to effectively disappear. However, the gas in the ionized
818: region still has a significant neutral fraction, and is sufficiently dense to absorb
819: all photons on the blue side of the Ly-$\alpha$ line along most LOS. On
820: average a weak transmission at a few percent level starts coming through in the
821: proximity region of the source (Figure\ref{meanF_fig}). As more and more sources
822: form and the ionizing flux rises the first transmission gaps start to appear at
823: $z<7$, both in the mean IGM away from the peak and in the source proximity
824: (Figure~\ref{spectra3}). At redshift $z=6.6$, our nominal overlap time
825: (Figures~\ref{spectra3} and \ref{meanF_fig}), the proximity region extends for
826: $\sim30$~\AA\ and has become fairly optically-thin, allowing up to 30-40\%
827: transmission. Most of the volume still remains optically-thick, but some substantial
828: transmission regions appear in the IGM away from the peak. We also note that
829: there are significant variations between the different LOS, with some allowing
830: for much more transmission than others. The size and properties of the
831: proximity region also vary due to its asymmetry and the anisotropy of nearby
832: structures. Finally, during the post-overlap epoch (Figures~\ref{spectra3},
833: bottom, \ref{spectra4} and \ref{meanF_fig}) the IGM slowly becomes more
834: optically-thin to Ly-$\alpha$ and gradually approaches the state of the
835: Ly-$\alpha$ forest. There are no more clearly-defined H~II bubbles. Only a few
836: isolated low-density regions remain neutral. This is due to the inside-out
837: character of the reionization process, whereby the high-density regions are
838: preferentially ionized first, while the voids, where structure formation is delayed
839: are ionized last.
840:
841: \begin{figure*}
842: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{meanF.ps}
843: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{allmeanF.eps}
844: \caption{Mean radially-averaged transmission around the most massive source
845: (left) and average over all sources (right) at several representative
846: redshifts, as labelled. The corresponding ionized fractions by mass are
847: $x_m=0.001, 0.105, 0.279, 0.618, 0.939, 0.992, 0.9986$ and 0.9999.
848: \label{meanF_fig}}
849: \end{figure*}
850:
851: Comparing the radially-averaged mean transmission around a luminous source (high
852: density peak) and the average for all sources (i.e. the mean behaviour around a
853: typical source; Figure~\ref{meanF_fig}) we see both some similarities and several
854: notable differences. The mean damping wing has similar evolution with redshift in
855: the two cases, strong at high redshift ($z>10$), gradually becoming weaker
856: ($z\sim8-9$) and finally disappearing at later times ($z<7$). Naiively, one might
857: expect that compared to an average source the luminous ones would suffer from
858: weaker damping since such sources typically reside in the middle of large H~II
859: regions, far from their boundaries. In fact, this expectation proves only partially
860: correct. The damping is somewhat more pronounced around an average source than
861: around a luminous one, but the differences we observe are rather modest, reflecting
862: the fact that weaker sources are strongly clustered around the same density peaks
863: that host the luminous ones, thus largely share the damping (or its lack) with the
864: central source. For the same reason the damping becomes irrelevant at about the same
865: time in both cases, which would not have been the case if the weak sources were
866: residing in smaller, isolated bubbles.
867:
868: The infall around the high density peak leads to some redshifted absorption that
869: appears behind the redshift-space position of the source. The same behaviour is not
870: seen for a typical source. Such smaller halos tend to move more in tandem with their
871: surrounding IGM, often towards the nearest high density peak. Some local infall
872: should exist also for these halos, but this is at very small scales,
873: unresolved here. However, these scales are small compared to the typical
874: emission line width (see next section) and thus we do not expect that such
875: local infall has significant effect on the emission line.
876:
877: One final important difference between a luminous and an average source is that the
878: latter does not typically have a proximity transmission region on the blue side of
879: the line. The spectra of the luminous sources, on the other hand exhibit extended
880: high-transmission (10-60\% transmission) regions within 5~Mpc$\,\rm h^{-1}$
881: ($\sim30$~\AA). This behaviour is again due to the high source clustering around
882: the density peak. The combined effect of all sources is to achieve much lower
883: neutral gas fraction regardless of the higher gas density there. The line
884: center coinciding with a high density peak remains optically-thick, however,
885: unlike the line center of a typical source. Away from the proximity region the
886: absorption is largely saturated, but there are a number of transmission gaps
887: with up to a few per cent transmission. Future work would quantify the
888: statistics of these features and its evolution.
889:
890: \begin{figure*}
891: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{line8.072.eps}
892: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{tauline8.072.eps}
893: \caption{Emission lines: (left panels) intrinsic line, assumed a Gaussian
894: with rms width of $160\,\rm km\,s^{-1}$ (black, top), and transmitted one
895: (red, bottom) for three sample LOS at redshift $z=8.1$ ($x_m=0.62$), and
896: (right panels)
897: the corresponding optical depth (solid, black), neutral fraction $x_{\rm
898: HI}=1-x$ ($\times10^5$; dotted, red) and density in units of the mean
899: (dashed, green), all in redshift space (i.e. accounting for the relative
900: velocities). The intrinsic emission line is also shown for reference.
901: \label{line8}}
902: \end{figure*}
903:
904: \begin{figure*}
905: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{line6.585.eps}
906: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{tauline6.585.eps}
907: \caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{line8}, but at redshift $z=6.6$ ($x_m=0.99$).
908: \label{line6.6}}
909: \end{figure*}
910:
911: \subsection{Emission line shape and its evolution}
912:
913: In order to study the effect of IGM absorption on the line profile shape we model
914: the intrinsic Ly-$\alpha$ line as a Gaussian with an rms width of $160\,\rm
915: km\,s^{-1}$ and peak amplitude normalized to unity. In Figures~\ref{line8},
916: \ref{line6.6} and \ref{line6} we show sample results for several LOS through
917: the most luminous source at redshifts $z=8$, 6.6 and 6, respectively. These
918: examples are picked to illustrate the typical cases for the observed line
919: shape. On the left panels we show the assumed intrinsic (black) transmitted
920: (red) emission line, while on the right panels we show the corresponding
921: distributions of Ly-$\alpha$ Gunn-Peterson optical depth, $\tau_{\rm GP}$,
922: neutral fraction, $x_{\rm HI}=1-x$ (multiplied by $10^5$ for clarity), and gas
923: density in units of the mean, $\Delta=n/\bar{n}$ and again (for reference) the
924: intrinsic emission line.
925:
926:
927: \begin{figure*}
928: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{line6.000.eps}
929: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{tauline6.000.eps}
930: \caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{line8}, but at redshift $z=6$ ($x_m=0.9999$).
931: \label{line6}}
932: %\end{figure*}
933:
934: %\begin{figure*}
935: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{meanFline.ps}
936: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{allmeanFline.eps}
937: \caption{Evolution of the mean emission lines for most massive source (left
938: panels) and average over all sources (right panels). Shown are the intrinsic
939: emission line (dotted, red; assumed a Gaussian with rms width of $160\,\rm
940: km\,s^{-1}$, normalized to one at the peak), the transmitted line
941: (solid, red), and mean absorption (solid, black) for three sample LOS
942: several redshifts, as labelled.
943: \label{meanFline_fig}}
944: \end{figure*}
945:
946:
947: At redshift $z=8.1$ (Figure~\ref{line8}) the emission line shape is fairly
948: regular and does not vary strongly for different LOS. The blue wing is
949: generally highly absorbed and no appreciable flux comes through and much of the
950: red wing is absorbed as well. The reasons for this behaviour become clear from
951: the right panels. The neutral fraction is fairly uniform throughout this
952: region, at $x_{\rm HI}\sim4\times10^{-5}$, thus the GP optical depth largely
953: follows the local density field. The high density of the peak and its
954: immediate vicinity results in optical depths of $\tau_{\rm GP}>10$ everywhere
955: and $\tau>100$ at the peak itself. The gas infall towards the peak leads to a
956: significant absorption of the red wing. The only transmitted flux comes from
957: the far red side of the line (slightly depressed by the weak remaining damping
958: wing).
959:
960: At overlap (1\% global neutral fraction by mass; $z=6.6$) the line shape
961: becomes much more irregular and varies significantly between the different LOS
962: (Figure~\ref{line6.6}). Significantly larger fraction of the flux is
963: transmitted, both on the red and on the blue side of the line. The neutral
964: fraction in the vicinity of the source is still fairly uniform, but much lower
965: than at the earlier time, at $x_{\rm HI}\lesssim\times10^{-5}$. Thus the GP
966: optical depth again largely follows the density distribution. The effect of
967: the gas infall towards the peak is still present and some of the red wing is
968: absorbed, but much less so than at higher redshifts since the infalling gas
969: is more highly-ionized. The line center remains absorbed and all damping wing
970: effects have disappeared.
971:
972: After overlap (Figure~\ref{line6}) the neutral fraction gradually declines,
973: decreasing the optical depth and allowing ever more flux to be transmitted.
974: The neutral fraction is still fairly uniform and thus the optical depth mostly
975: follows the density fluctuations. The line shapes remain rather irregular,
976: with significant variations between the different LOS. There is transmission
977: in both red and blue wing of the line.
978:
979: In Figure~\ref{meanFline_fig} we show the evolution of the mean (i.e. averaged
980: over all LOS) observed emission line shape for the most luminous source in our
981: volume (left) and average over all sources (right). In both cases the line
982: starts completely damped ($z=12.9$). The later evolution of the mean line
983: shape differs significantly, however. By redshifts $z=9-10$ a significant
984: fraction of the red wing of the line is transmitted for the luminous source,
985: except for the line center, while much less of the red wing is transmitted for
986: an average source. At later times ($z\sim7-8$) this situation is reversed -
987: practically all of the red wing of the line is transmitted for an average
988: source, but much of the flux is still absorbed for the luminous source due to
989: the high density peak in the middle and its surrounding infall. As a word of
990: caution we should note that some of this effect is in fact not physical but
991: numerical, since our simulations do not resolve well the detailed structure
992: around the smaller halos. However, as we also mentioned above, these
993: resolution effects should be modest considering that the emission line is
994: fairly wide and thus reasonably well-resolved and any corrections due to
995: smaller-scale structures will not affect much of the line.
996:
997: On the blue side of the line there are further important differences between
998: the luminous and average sources. The strong clustering of sources around the
999: density peaks result in very high fluxes and thus a more pronounced
1000: highly-ionized proximity region blue-ward of the line center. Thus,
1001: significantly more of the blue wing of the luminous source line is
1002: transmitted, up to 10\% on average at $z=6$, vs. only $\sim1-2\%$ for
1003: an average source.
1004:
1005: An interesting consequence of the very high absorption observed at
1006: the line center for massive sources and the redshift-space distortions
1007: due to the gas infall (the latter similar to the one studied
1008: theoretically in a more idealized setup by \citet{2004ApJ...601...64B})
1009: is that the Ly-$\alpha$ line naturally takes a double-peaked (or even
1010: multiple-peaked in some cases) observed profile. This suggests that in
1011: principle it might be possible to use the line profiles of bright
1012: Ly-$\alpha$ sources to study the infall surrounding their host halos. In
1013: practice this might be difficult due to a number of complications. The
1014: line structure is quite different along different LOS, partly (as we
1015: pointed above in \S~2.4) due to the very anisotropic velocity structure
1016: surrounding the source, as well as its own peculiar motion. Furthermore,
1017: our analysis only takes into account the effects of the IGM on the line
1018: shape, while realistic ones will be affected also by the host galaxy's
1019: internal structure, outflows, etc. Modelling all those effects correctly
1020: will require high-resolution radiative-hydrodynamic simulations, which
1021: is well beyond the scope of this work.
1022:
1023: \subsection{Evolution of the mean transmissivity}
1024: \label{meanFabg_sect}
1025:
1026: Figure~\ref{meanFabg} shows the mean transmission fraction as a function of
1027: redshift, for the Lyman-$\alpha$, $\beta$, and $\gamma$ transitions.
1028: The latter two are, respectively, 6.2 and 17.9 times weaker than
1029: Lyman-$\alpha$, so transmission can be seen in cases where Lyman-alpha would
1030: be opaque \citep{2006AJ....132..117F}. At the low redshift end of our
1031: simulation data these quantities have been observed in the highest redshift
1032: quasar spectra \citep{2006AJ....132..117F}. Fig.~\ref{meanFabg} shows the
1033: \citep{2006AJ....132..117F} (points with error bars). At $z>6$, the
1034: Ly-$\alpha$ and Ly-$\beta$ transmission measurements are only upper
1035: limits. It is unclear exactly what error bar should be assigned to the
1036: Ly-$\gamma$ point. Fan et al. (2006) presented two upper limits and a
1037: detection in Ly-$\gamma$, which, taken together, support a detected
1038: mean transmission level (plotted in the figure) well below our
1039: prediction, with relatively small ($\sim 40$\%) errors; however, with
1040: only these three points we can not be sure that the sample variance
1041: isn't substantially larger.
1042: It appears that the reionization model in our simulations reproduces
1043: roughly the correct tail-end of reionization, but the data favor
1044: somewhat less transmission than is present in the model, i.e., a weaker
1045: radiation background and possibly slightly later reionization.
1046:
1047: \begin{figure}
1048: \includegraphics[width=3.in]{meanFabg.eps}
1049: \caption{Overall mean transmission fraction (not necessarily near a source) in
1050: Lyman-$\alpha$ (solid, black), Lyman-$\beta$ (dashed, red), and
1051: Lyman-$\gamma$ (dotted, green). The points with horizontal error-bars show the
1052: measurements of \citep{2006AJ....132..117F}. The (black, red), (lower,
1053: upper), points with vertical error bars show Ly-($\alpha$,$\beta$), while the
1054: green dot shows Ly-$\gamma$ (see text).
1055: \label{meanFabg}}
1056: \end{figure}
1057:
1058: \begin{figure}
1059: \includegraphics[width=3.in]{PDF_Gamma_f250C.eps}
1060: \caption{PDF of the photoionization rate at at $z=10.1$ (blue; $x_m=0.105$),
1061: $z=7.0$ (red; $x_m=0.94$), and $z=6.0$ (green; $x_m=0.9999$). We show the
1062: actual, non-equilibrium
1063: rates (solid) and the corresponding equilibrium rates (dotted, same color at
1064: each redshift). All PDF's are normalized to have an area of unity below the
1065: curve.
1066: \label{Gamma_pdf}}
1067: \end{figure}
1068:
1069: \subsection{Photoionization Rates}
1070: \label{photoion_rates_sect}
1071:
1072: In Figure~\ref{Gamma_pdf} we show the normalized probability density
1073: distributions (PDFs) of the nonequilibrium photoionization rates for
1074: all cells in our computational volume at three representative redshifts
1075: - $z=10.1$ ($x_m=0.105$), 7.0 ($x_m=0.94$) and 6.0 ($x_m=0.9999$)
1076: (early times, late times and well after overlap) in linear (top) and log
1077: (bottom) scales. For comparison we also plot the photoionization rates
1078: if the corresponding cells were in ionization equilibrium.
1079:
1080:
1081: \begin{figure*}
1082: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{contours_ionrate_dens_z9.eps}
1083: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{contours_ionrate_dens_z6.eps}
1084: \vspace{-0.5cm}
1085: \caption{Photoionization rate - overdensity correlation at $z=9$ (left;
1086: $x_m=0.28$) and $z=6$ (right; $x_m=0.9999$). Contours are logarithmic,
1087: from 10 cells up every 0.5 dex.
1088: \label{Gamma_distr}}
1089: %\end{figure*}
1090: %\begin{figure*}
1091: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{lum9.034.eps}
1092: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{lum7.042.eps}
1093: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{lum6.000.eps}
1094: \caption{ (bottom panels) Ly-$\alpha$ luminosity function of high-redshift
1095: sources without (black) and with absorption included (red) at redshifts
1096: $z=9$ (left; global mass-weighted ionized fraction $x_m=0.28$), $z=7$
1097: (middle; $x_m=0.94$) and $z=6.0$ (right; $x_m=0.9999$). For reference, the
1098: green, dotted line shows the result if each source is assumed 50\% absorbed,
1099: which would be the case if e.g. all of the blue wing of the emission line
1100: were absorbed, while all of the red wing were transmitted. The error bar in
1101: each bin reflects the number of sources in that bin found in our
1102: computational volume. (top panels) Bin-by-bin ratio of the observed to the
1103: intrinsic luminosity function.
1104: \label{lum_funct:fig}}
1105: \end{figure*}
1106:
1107:
1108: The right peak of each PDF distribution reflects the most common
1109: photoionization rate values in the ionized regions. The peak position
1110: remains at $\Gamma_{-12}\sim1$ throughout the evolution, with only
1111: slight shifts. The distributions are quasi-Gaussian, but with long
1112: non-Gaussian tails at both high and (especially) low values of
1113: $\Gamma$. As could have been expected, the fraction of high-$\Gamma$
1114: cells, all of which either contain sources or are in the immediate
1115: vicinity of a source, grows strongly with time, as ever . The highest
1116: photoionization rate values we find reach $\Gamma_{-12}\sim10^3-10^4$.
1117: This peak value rises over time, as a consequence of the growth of
1118: galaxies and the large number of sources forming in and around the
1119: density peaks. In the ionized regions the equilibration time is short
1120: and photoionization equilibrium is
1121: generally a good approximation. The cells with lower values of $\Gamma$
1122: (below $\Gamma_{-12}\sim0.01-0.1$ correspond to the ionization fronts or
1123: neutral regions. There are many more cells in I-fronts at $z=10.1$ than
1124: at later times, when most of the IGM is already ionized. The equilibrium
1125: and actual rates differ widely in those regions, indicating that the
1126: assumption of ionization equilibrium would be a very poor approximation
1127: there.
1128:
1129: The photoionization rate-density correlations at $z=9$ and $z=6$ are shown in
1130: Figure~\ref{Gamma_distr} as contour plots. At high densities there is a clear,
1131: and fairly tight, correlation between the density and the photoionization rate.
1132: This reflects the fact that many more sources form in overdense regions,
1133: resulting in higher photoionization rates. At densities just above the mean
1134: the correlation becomes much less tight and around the mean densities it
1135: becomes nonexistent. At high redshifts regions with $1+\delta\sim1$ can have
1136: any value of $\Gamma_{-12}$ from $10$ (for cells close to sources) down to
1137: essentially 0 (in neutral and shielded cells). There are three broad peaks of
1138: the distribution, at $\Gamma_{-12}\sim1$ (the H~II regions),
1139: $\Gamma_{-12}\sim10^{-3}$ (cells at and around I-fronts), and
1140: $\Gamma_{-12}\sim0$ (neutral regions). By $z=6.0$, which is well after overlap
1141: both the neutral and self-shielded regions and the I-fronts have mostly
1142: disappeared and $\Gamma_{-12}>0.1$ almost everywhere, rising with time as
1143: more galaxies form. These values are fairly high compared to the
1144: photoionization rate values found from the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest at
1145: $z\sim2-4$ \citep{2002ApJ...570..457C,2004ApJ...617....1T,2006AJ....132..117F,
1146: 2007astro.ph..3306B}, in agreement with the high mean transmitted flux we
1147: found in \S~\ref{meanFabg_sect}. Both point to somewhat lower ionizing source
1148: efficiencies than the ones assumed here and to a correspondingly later end of
1149: reionization.
1150:
1151: \subsection{Luminosity function of high-z Ly-$\alpha$ sources}
1152:
1153: The luminosity function is an important statistical measure of the
1154: properties of high=redshift galaxies. It depends on both the intrinsic
1155: luminosity of the galaxies and the absorption in the surrounding IGM.
1156: In Figure \ref{lum_funct:fig} we show our results of the size of the effect of
1157: absorption on a luminosity function of high $z$ objects. For this fiducial
1158: case we assume that the Ly-$\alpha$ luminosity is simply proportional to the
1159: mass of our halos (similar to our model for the ionizing sources). We compute
1160: the reduction in luminosity of each halo due to absorption
1161: (Figures~\ref{spectra}-\ref{spectra4} show examples of this suppression). We
1162: assume that the intrinsic Lyman-$\alpha$ emission line is a Gaussian with
1163: an rms of $160\,\rm km\,s^{-1}$. Luminosity function of high-redshift sources
1164: without (in this fiducial case this is just the halo mass function; solid
1165: line) and with absorption included (dashed) at redshifts $z=9,7$ and 6. For
1166: reference, the dotted line shows the result if each source is assumed
1167: 50\% absorbed, which would be the case if e.g. all of the blue wing of the
1168: emission line were absorbed, while all of the red wing were transmitted.
1169: Top panels show the bin-by-bin ratios of the observed to the intrinsic
1170: luminosity function. Note that due to the binning at fixed luminosity
1171: (intrinsic or observed) this ratio is not the same as the average suppression
1172: per source of a given mass (i.e. the absorption shifts the curve both down and
1173: to the left).
1174:
1175: \begin{figure*}
1176: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{lum_nopecv8.072.eps}
1177: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{lum_nopecv6.000.eps}
1178: \caption{Luminosity function at redshifts z=8.1 (left; $x_m=0.62$)
1179: and z=6 (right; $x_m=0.9999$) if peculiar velocities are ignored
1180: (blue, long-dashed). For reference, we also show the data from
1181: Fig.~\ref{lum_funct:fig}, same notation.
1182: %without (black) and with suppression included (red), only the red wing
1183: %included (green, dotted)
1184: \label{lum_funct_nopecv:fig}}
1185: \end{figure*}
1186:
1187: \begin{figure*}
1188: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{lum_varwid8.072.eps}
1189: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{lum_varwid6.000.eps}
1190: \caption{Luminosity function at redshifts z=8.1 (left; $x_m=0.62$)
1191: and z=6 (right; $x_m=0.9999$) for variable emission line width
1192: (blue, long-dashed; see text for details). For reference, we also show the
1193: data from Fig.~\ref{lum_funct:fig}, same notation.
1194: %without (black) and with suppression included (red), only the red wing
1195: %included (green, dotted)
1196: \label{lum_funct_varwid:fig}}
1197: \end{figure*}
1198:
1199: The luminosity function exhibits clear evolution from high to low redshift.
1200: As we discussed in \S~\ref{spectra:sect}, at high redshift the damping wings
1201: are strong and thus not only the blue side, but also significant part of the
1202: red side of the line is absorbed, as evidenced by the significant difference
1203: between the dashed and dotted lines. As a result of this absorption, the
1204: number of sources per luminosity bin drops by one to two orders of magnitude.
1205: During the later stages of reionization the damping wing effectively
1206: disappears. As a consequence, the change in the faint end of the luminosity
1207: function due to IGM absorption is on average well-represented by simply
1208: reducing each source luminosity by 50\%, which would be the case if the blue
1209: half of the line were absorbed and the red half were not. The situation is
1210: different at the bright end of the luminosity function, however, where on
1211: average significantly more than half of the intrinsic flux is absorbed at
1212: both $z=7$ and $z=6$. The shape of the luminosity function shows some
1213: evolution, as well, which is in part due to an evolution in the shape of the
1214: halo mass function and in part to the higher mean absorption for the more
1215: massive sources. The higher average absorption levels for the luminous
1216: sources is consequence of the infall which surrounds the high density peaks
1217: they are in. In order to demonstrate this, we re-calculated the luminosity
1218: function at $z=8.1$ and $z=6$ using exactly the same data, but setting all
1219: peculiar velocities to zero. The results are shown in
1220: Figure~\ref{lum_funct_nopecv:fig}. With no peculiar velocities present the
1221: intrinsic emission of all sources is absorbed on average at roughly the
1222: same level, by factor of $\sim 10$ at $z=8.1$ and by factor of 2 at $z=6$.
1223: The resulting luminosity function at late times agrees well with the one
1224: where we simply assumed 50\% absorption. Early-on this is not the case as
1225: a consequence of the still-present damping wing.
1226:
1227: \begin{figure*}
1228: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{supdist9.034.eps}
1229: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{supdist7.042.eps}
1230: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{supdist6.000.eps}
1231: \caption{Transmission fraction as a function of luminosity at redshifts
1232: $z=9.0$ ($x_m=0.28$; left), $z=7.0$ ($x_m=0.94$; center) and $z=6.0$
1233: ($x_m=0.9999$; right). Shown are (dashed lines, top to bottom) 0.023,
1234: 0.16, 0.5, 0.84, and 0.977 percentiles (e.g., 2.3\% of points have
1235: suppression less than the uppermost line). The center line is the
1236: median of all the LOS. We required at least 50 LOS in each bin
1237: for sampling the distribution properly. There are 10 random LOS per
1238: source. We also plot the mean (solid line) for all LOS in each bin.
1239: \label{sup_dist:fig}}
1240: \end{figure*}
1241: \begin{figure*}
1242: \vspace{-0.3cm}
1243: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{supdist_nopecv9.034.eps}
1244: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{supdist_nopecv7.042.eps}
1245: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{supdist_nopecv6.000.eps}
1246: \caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{sup_dist:fig}, but ignoring any peculiar
1247: velocities of the halos and the IGM.
1248: \label{sup_dist_nopecv:fig}}
1249: \end{figure*}
1250: \begin{figure*}
1251: % \vspace{-0.3cm}
1252: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{supdist_varwid9.034.eps}
1253: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{supdist_varwid7.042.eps}
1254: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{supdist_varwid6.000.eps}
1255: \caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{sup_dist:fig}, but for a variable Ly-$\alpha$
1256: emission line width, as discussed in the text.
1257: \label{sup_dist_varwid:fig}}
1258: \end{figure*}
1259:
1260: How important is our assumption that all sources have same rms width of
1261: their intrinsic emission line profile? To check this, we replaced this
1262: assumption with one where the rms line width varies with the halo mass as
1263: $133\,\rm km/s (M/10^{11}M_{\odot})^{1/3}$ \citep{2007MNRAS.377.1175D}.
1264: Results, again
1265: at $z=6$ and in head-to-head comparison with our fiducial case of fixed
1266: line width, are shown in Figure~\ref{lum_funct_varwid:fig}. The faint end
1267: of the luminosity function proves insensitive to the line width, which is
1268: easy to understand. As we have shown above, on average the IGM completely
1269: absorbs the blue half of the line for the weaker sources and completely
1270: transmits the red half. However, the variable line width has some effect
1271: on the absorption of bright sources. Their lines become wider under this
1272: assumption and thus are less affected by the absorption due to the
1273: infalling gas, resulting in higher transmission by a factor of $\sim2$.
1274:
1275: The probability distribution of the transmission fraction per source of a
1276: given mass/luminosity is shown in Fig.~\ref{sup_dist:fig}. There are 10
1277: random LOS per source and we required at least 50 LOS in each bin for
1278: sampling the distribution properly. We also plot the bin-by-bin average
1279: transmission. For the luminosity bins which do not contain our minimum
1280: number of LOS we plot only the mean. Several interesting trends emerge.
1281: The distributions are fairly wide at all times and for all sources,
1282: reflecting the large variations in opacity from source to source and from
1283: LOS to LOS. The former is due to the different environments sources are
1284: found in, while the later reflects the anisotropies around each source.
1285: At all redshifts the mean and the median curves are very similar for all
1286: bins, and are essentially identical at the bright end.
1287:
1288: The distribution itself changes its character as the evolution progresses.
1289: At early times the distribution is much wider for the fainter sources and
1290: the mean and median are gently rising towards the bright end, reflecting
1291: the fact that bright sources are found in the middle of larger H~II
1292: regions, while fainter sources are found in a variety of environments.
1293: Thus, during the early evolution the main factor shaping the distribution
1294: is the the local variation of the neutral fraction around each source.
1295: At late times ($z<7$), however, the situation changes to the opposite,
1296: with the distribution becoming wider at the bright end and the mean and
1297: median decreasing there as well. By that time the IGM is already largely
1298: ionized and the main environmental dependence is due to the anisotropies
1299: of the density field and, even more so, of the infall around the bright
1300: peaks, as discussed above. This is clearly demonstrated in
1301: Fig.~\ref{sup_dist_nopecv:fig}, where we show the distributions as they
1302: would be if there were no peculiar velocities. At early times the results
1303: are largely unchanged, while at late times the variations between the
1304: different LOS essentially disappear and all the curves become flat, showing
1305: that the distribution is shaped mainly by the effects of the peculiar
1306: velocities.
1307:
1308: Finally, in Fig.~\ref{sup_dist_varwid:fig} we show the effect of varying
1309: intrinsic line width on the distributions. Compared to our fiducial case of
1310: constant line width, at high redshift the distributions are hardly affected,
1311: except for slightly higher absorption of the faintest sources. However, at
1312: later times the varying line width has a more significant effects. At $z=7$
1313: the mean and the median values for the majority of sources decrease from
1314: $\sim40-45\%$ down to $\sim30\%$, but the brightest sources are affected much
1315: less. As a result the curves for the mean and median become largely flat
1316: rather than decreasing towards the bright end. Furthermore, the distribution
1317: becomes wider at the faint end, with many more LOS being absorbed by factor of
1318: 10 or more. A similar effect is seen at $z=6$, except in this case the
1319: brightest sources are even less absorbed due to their wider emission lines, in
1320: agreement with what we observed in the luminosity functions.
1321:
1322: \begin{figure}
1323: \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{lum_funct_vs_observ.eps}
1324: \caption{Simulated luminosity function at $z=6.6$ (dashed; $x_m=0.99$) vs.
1325: best fits of
1326: \citet{2006ApJ...637..631K} (at $z=6.56$) for (top to bottom) faint-end
1327: slopes of $\alpha=-2,-1.5,-1)$ (solid).
1328: \label{lum_funct_vs_obs:fig}}
1329: \end{figure}
1330:
1331: Our derived luminosity functions assume a constant mass-to-light ratio and are
1332: in arbitrary units (halo mass $\times$ absorption by the IGM), proportional to
1333: a yet undetermined mass-to-observed light ratio. We can roughly determine the
1334: latter by comparing the number densities of observed and simulated objects.
1335: \citet{2006ApJ...637..631K} currently provide the best set of data at $z>6$.
1336: They have provided fits to a Schechter function:
1337: \be
1338: \phi(L)dL=\phi_*\left(\frac{L}{L_*}\right)^\alpha
1339: \exp\left(-\frac{L}{L_*}\right)\frac{dL}{L_*}
1340: \ee
1341: Since the high-redshift data still has large uncertainties, particularly in
1342: terms of the faint-end slope, the data is fit by assuming
1343: $\alpha=(-2,-1.5,-1)$, with best fit parameters at $z=6.56$ given by
1344: $log(L_*/\rm h^{-2}_{70} erg/s)=(42.74,42.60,42.48)$ and $log(\phi_*/\rm
1345: Mpc^{-3}h^{2}_{70})=(-3.14,-2.88,-2.74)$, respectively. We plot these fits in
1346: Figure~\ref{lum_funct_vs_obs:fig} against our derived luminosity function.
1347: The latter was obtained by rescaling our arbitrary luminosity units to
1348: physical ones using a constant ratio,
1349: \be
1350: L=L(M_\odot)\times10^{30.9}
1351: \label{ml_equ}
1352: \ee
1353: so as to match it to the observed luminosity function for the same number
1354: densities of objects.
1355:
1356: The fit assuming $\alpha=-1.5$ provides by far the best match to our
1357: luminosity function. The two agree in both amplitude and shape over the whole
1358: available range. The differences at both the luminous and the faint end should
1359: both be expected, the former due to cosmic variance and the latter due to both
1360: numerical resolution and lack of reliable observational data. Matching the
1361: other two faint end slopes would require us to relax our constant
1362: mass-to-light ratio assumption.
1363:
1364: Taking equation~\ref{ml_equ} at face value, we can now make an approximate
1365: correspondence between observed luminosities and masses of the underlying
1366: halos. The sources observed with Subaru at $z=6.56$
1367: \citet{2006ApJ...637..631K} have luminosities $\sim 10^{42}-10^{42.7}\rm
1368: erg\,s^{-1}h^{-2}$. This corresponds to the luminous end of our LF, for
1369: effective masses (halo mass $\times$ absorption by the IGM) of order
1370: $10^{11}M_\odot$ or larger, or relatively rare halos. The observations are not
1371: yet sufficiently sensitive to detect the faint end, which contributes most of
1372: the ionizing emissivity during reionization. Hence, claims that observations
1373: show that there are not enough ionizing photons at $z\sim6$ to reionize the
1374: universe appear premature.
1375:
1376: \section{Correlation Functions}
1377:
1378: \begin{figure*}
1379: \vspace{-5cm}
1380: % \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{yz_image_z9_9.5.eps}
1381: % \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{corr_z9_9.5.eps}
1382: \includegraphics[width=4.2in]{corr_images_z9.eps}
1383: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{corr_z9_9.5.eps}
1384: \caption{Projection of the sources as seen by a mock flux-limited
1385: survey with $L>10^{9.5}M_\odot$ (198 sources in total) at $z=9$ (left panel;
1386: $x_m=0.28$) and sources with the same number density if the IGM
1387: absorption were ignored (middle panel) and the 2-point 3D
1388: correlation functions (right panels) of the distribution with IGM absorption
1389: (solid) and without (dashed) and their ratio (top).
1390: \label{corr_z9}}
1391: \end{figure*}
1392:
1393: \begin{figure*}
1394: \vspace{-5cm}
1395: % \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{yz_image_z6.0_10.0.ps}
1396: % \includegraphics[width=3.2in]{corr_z6_10.eps}
1397: \includegraphics[width=4.2in]{corr_images_z7.eps}
1398: \includegraphics[width=2.3in]{corr_z7_10.eps}
1399: \caption{Projection of the sources as seen by a mock flux-limited
1400: survey with $L>10^{10}M_\odot$ (1617 sources in total) at $z=7$ (left panel;
1401: $x_m=0.94$) and sources with the same number density if the IGM
1402: absorption were ignored (middle panel) and the 2-point 3D
1403: correlation functions (right panels) of the distribution with IGM absorption
1404: (solid) and without (dashed) and their ratio (top).
1405: \label{corr_z7}}
1406: \end{figure*}
1407:
1408: As we discussed above, the high-redshift haloes are highly clustered in
1409: space, and Ly-$\alpha$ sources should be clustered as well. The latter
1410: clustering has been recently observed at $z\sim5.7$
1411: \citep{2007ApJS..172..523M}. An interesting question to ask is if the
1412: absorption due to the surrounding IGM affects this clustering. If this were
1413: the case, then measuring the correlation function of high-redshift Ly-$\alpha$
1414: sources can give us information about the state of the IGM at that time.
1415:
1416: We derive the correlation functions as follows. First we calculate the total
1417: luminosity of each source with and without IGM absorption using the same
1418: method as above, but instead of random LOS directions we only consider
1419: parallel LOS, as would be seen by far away observer. For simplicity we
1420: consider LOS parallel to the axes of our computational box.
1421: We mock a flux-limited survey by imposing a cutoff on the observed
1422: luminosity. We compare the resulting correlation function to the one obtained
1423: for the same number, but now of the brightest sources based on their intrinsic
1424: luminosity (i.e. the ones hosted by the most massive halos, thus ignoring IGM
1425: absorption in this latter case). We calculate the 3D correlation functions
1426: by direct summation over all pairs of halos as described in
1427: \citet{1991ApJ...366..353M}. The results at redshift $z=9$ (with cutoff
1428: $L_{\rm min}(M)=10^{9.5}M_\odot$) and $z=7$ (with cutoff
1429: $L_{\rm min}(M)=10^{10}M_\odot$) are shown in Figs.~\ref{corr_z9} and
1430: \ref{corr_z7}. In both cases the luminosity cutoffs were chosen so as to
1431: maximize the difference in the correlation functions with and without IGM
1432: absorption, while at the same time allowing for sufficient number of halos
1433: above the cutoff to reduce the noise of the correlation.
1434:
1435: In Figure~\ref{corr_z9} we show the projection at $z=9$ of the two source
1436: distributions onto the Y-Z plane (left), and the corresponding 3D correlation
1437: functions and their ratio (right). The projection shows that the two source
1438: populations differ, but cluster in the same spatial regions. This visual
1439: impression is confirmed by the correlation functions. We find that IGM
1440: absorption introduces only small variations in the correlation of sources. The
1441: difference is largest at small scales, for separations below 1 comoving
1442: Mpc. Even there they never exceed 10\%. At intermediate scales, $R\sim2-10$~Mpc
1443: the departures are up to 5\%. There are no appreciable differences at large
1444: scales.
1445:
1446: At redshift $z=7$, close to overlap (Figure~\ref{corr_z7}) there are many
1447: more sources, even with the low luminosity cutoff raised to $10^{10}M_\odot$.
1448: The two source distributions remain different, but are still clustered in a
1449: very similar way, resulting in largely identical correlation functions,
1450: which never differ by more than 0.7\%.
1451:
1452: The small effect of IGM absorption on the correlation function appears
1453: counter-intuitive. The reason for this is that the sources at high redshift,
1454: especially the most massive/luminous ones are strongly clustered and the
1455: ionization field is closely correlated with the galaxy field. The luminous
1456: sources are typically found in the inner parts of the largest ionized bubbles,
1457: where they are typically unaffected by damping from the remaining (few)
1458: neutral patches. This is also supported by the profiles in
1459: Fig.~\ref{meanF_fig} which show the damping wing effect being important over
1460: the same time interval for both luminous and average sources. The damping
1461: affects average sources more strongly, since these are more often found closer
1462: to a neutral patch than the more massive sources. However, this does not
1463: change the correlation function significantly. Basically, the reionization
1464: patchiness has little effect on the source clustering properties. The reason
1465: is that while the IGM absorption diminishes the flux from all sources, the
1466: same source clusters (although not necessarily the same individual sources)
1467: are seen as would be without IGM absorption.
1468:
1469: At late times any clearly defined ionized regions have already disappeared and
1470: the effect of IGM absorption is to replace some sources above the luminosity
1471: cutoff with other ones essentially at random, due to small local variations of
1472: the residual neutral fraction and the gas velocities. Therefore, the
1473: reionization patchiness ultimately has little effect on the correlation
1474: function. That of course does not mean that the source population is not
1475: modified by the IGM - a flux-limited survey will see many fewer sources
1476: than if IGM absorption were not present, but the clustering properties of
1477: those sources are almost the same as with no absorption for the same number
1478: density of sources.
1479:
1480: Recently, \citet{2007MNRAS.381...75M} claimed that reionization patchiness
1481: has a significant effect on observed source clustering, in apparent
1482: contradiction to our results
1483: \citep[see also][]{2006MNRAS.365.1012F,2008MNRAS.386.1990M}. However, they
1484: compared the clustering properties of Ly-$\alpha$ sources with and without
1485: (i.e. intrinsic) IGM absorption for {\it a fixed} luminosity cutoff, rather
1486: than at fixed number density of sources, as we did. When the IGM absorption
1487: is accounted for, the sources remaining above the imposed flux limit are
1488: many fewer than in the case without absorption and they are also much
1489: brighter on average, hosted by more massive halos. This naturally results
1490: in higher bias of the observed sources compared to all sources with
1491: intrinsic luminosity above that cutoff. However, it is not necessarily
1492: related to reionization patchiness. E.g. source bias will increase also
1493: if the small residual neutral fraction in the ionized IGM increases,
1494: boosting the IGM opacity and causing dimmer, less clustered sources
1495: to fall below the luminosity cutoff, thus no neutral patches are required
1496: for this to happen. In fact, our simulation results show almost no neutral
1497: patches below $z\sim6.6$ (at which time the global mean ionized fraction
1498: by mass is below 1\%). Therefore, while our conclusions disagree with the
1499: ones of \citet{2007MNRAS.381...75M}, at least some of the differences
1500: could be attributed to the different comparisons we make, but some of the
1501: variations are possibly real, since \citet{2007MNRAS.381...75M} claimed
1502: that the trend is present even for fixed number densities, albeit with
1503: no quantitative details. We would like to stress, however, that we observe
1504: the same qualitative trend of enhanced clustering of Ly-$\alpha$ sources
1505: due to patchiness during the early stages of reionization, but the
1506: quantitative level of the effect is different, being much weaker in our
1507: case.
1508:
1509: There are a number of possible explanations. In particular, in our
1510: simulations the pre-absorption clustering between ionized regions and
1511: sources appears to be more important than in the simulations of
1512: \citet{2007MNRAS.381...75M}. There are also notable differences between
1513: our and their modeling of the Ly-$\alpha$ sources and the IGM absorption.
1514: \citet{2007MNRAS.381...75M} (as many other current studies do) assume
1515: complete resonance absorption of the blue side of the Ly-$\alpha$ line,
1516: and only study the suppression due to the IGM damping wing and do not
1517: include velocity effects in their analysis. They also assume a particular
1518: duty cycle for their Ly-$\alpha$ emitters (that only 25\% of halos host
1519: emitters), which we do not do in this work. \citet{2007MNRAS.381...75M}
1520: also ran simulations with different minimum source halo mass cutoffs,
1521: either significantly higher ($M_{\rm min}=4\times10^{10}M_\odot$) or
1522: significantly lower ($M_{\rm min}=10^{8}M_\odot$) than the one we have
1523: here ($M_{\rm min}=2.2\times10^{9}M_\odot$). It is possible, therefore,
1524: that our results are more relevant than these previous works, if the
1525: low-mass sources missing in our current simulation are in fact strongly
1526: suppressed during the late stages of reionization due to Jeans-mass
1527: filtering. This can only be resolved conclusively by detailed simulations
1528: which actually follow the complicated radiative feedback effects on
1529: low-mass halos, which is well beyond the scope of this work. We have run
1530: several tests in order to try to understand these differences, following
1531: suggestions by the referee. One possibility we investigated was that
1532: our H~II regions
1533: size distribution is more strongly peaked and narrower than the one found
1534: in the above works, which, if it were the case might have explained some
1535: of the clustering differences. We found, however, that the H~II region
1536: size distributions derived from our simulations is in fair agreement with
1537: the one from the \citet{2007MNRAS.381...75M} simulations, and hence this
1538: offers no plausible explanation of the differences. We also compared the
1539: Ly-$\alpha$ damping wing optical depth distributions for sources of
1540: different mass at a range of reionization stages, as derived by
1541: \citet{2008MNRAS.386.1990M} (their Figures 2 and 3) and again found no
1542: significant differences between our results and theirs. We conclude that
1543: more detailed and direct comparisons will be required in order to evaluate
1544: and understand any differences between our results.
1545:
1546: \section{Summary and Conclusions}
1547:
1548: We considered the effects which the reionizing IGM has on the observations of
1549: high-redshift Ly-$\alpha$ sources. For this we utilized detailed structure
1550: formation and radiative transfer simulations, which allowed us to evaluate
1551: many features which can only be studied by detailed simulations, as well as to
1552: quantify better a number of previously-proposed effects. We followed the full
1553: reionization history self-consistently and accounted for the actual source
1554: distribution, neutral fraction, density and velocity fields.
1555:
1556: We find that the density, neutral fraction and velocity fields are all highly
1557: anisotropic, which results in large variations in the IGM transmission and
1558: source visibility among different LOS. The velocity effects, both gas infall
1559: and source peculiar velocity are most important for massive, luminous sources.
1560: The most luminous sources are found in highest peaks of the density field,
1561: which at late times are significantly overdense out to $\sim10$~comoving Mpc
1562: (cMpc) and are surrounded by infall extending to $\sim20$~cMpc.
1563: The infall of gas blueshifts it in frequency space and results in significant
1564: absorption on the red side of the line center, while the peculiar velocity of
1565: the source itself can either alleviate or exacerbate this effect, depending on
1566: the halo- and infall velocity alignment.
1567:
1568: The spherically-averaged local density enhancement and gas infall have been
1569: modelled analytically in approximate ways \citep{2004MNRAS.347...59B}, and
1570: thus can be incorporated in semi-analytical models
1571: \citep[e.g.][]{2007MNRAS.377.1175D}. However, such models are unable to
1572: account for the strong intrinsic anisotropies of the neutral fraction, density
1573: and velocity fields. The analytical and semianalytical models typically assume
1574: spherical symmetry and full ionization inside the H~II regions, both of which
1575: assumptions are quite unrealistic.
1576:
1577: The Ly-$\alpha$ lines we derive are generally asymmetric and vary hugely from
1578: LOS to LOS. The luminous sources form at the highest density peaks and as a
1579: consequence their line centers are always highly-absorbed even though their
1580: proximity regions are very highly ionized, with typical neutral fractions
1581: $x_{\rm HI}\sim10^{-5}-10^{-6}$. The luminous sources also more affected by
1582: infall and exhibit more pronounced proximity region with higher transmission
1583: of the blue wing of the line.
1584:
1585: High-redshift sources are strongly clustered around the high peaks of the
1586: density field. The central source contributes the majority of the ionizing
1587: flux only in its immediate vicinity, within 1-2 comoving Mpc. Beyond
1588: that distance the
1589: ionizing flux is dominated by the fainter sources clustered around it. This
1590: dominance is particularly strong at late times, when both many more sources
1591: form and the ionized regions become larger, resulting in the fainter sources
1592: contributing up to 2 orders of magnitude more photons than the central source.
1593:
1594: Compared to single-source ionized bubbles, the larger H~II regions from
1595: clustered sources diminish the effects from the damping wing of the
1596: line. Nevertheless, these remain significant until fairly late (ionized mass
1597: fraction $x_m=0.3-0.7$, which for the simulation considered here corresponds
1598: to redshifts $z\sim9-8$). Interestingly, the average damping wing effect is
1599: similar for luminous and typical sources, even though naiively one might
1600: expect that damping could be weaker for the former, since they are typically
1601: in the middle of large bubbles, away from the neutral patches, unlike the
1602: fainter sources, which are more evenly distributed.
1603:
1604: Both the mean IGM transmission and the typical photoionization rates we find
1605: are high compared to observations at $z\sim6$, indicating that our adopted
1606: source efficiencies are also high. The mean IGM transmissivity
1607: decreases only slowly towards the higher redshifts and the GP transparency
1608: occurs significantly after the actual overlap epoch. For the simulation
1609: considered here overlap (defined as 1\% neutral fraction) occurs at $z=6.6$,
1610: while average neutral fraction of $10^{-4}$ is reached only by $z=6$ and even
1611: then relatively small fraction (few to 10\%) of the flux is transmitted.
1612: By overlap the spectra start showing significant transmission gaps in the mean
1613: IGM (i.e. away from the proximity region of a luminous source).
1614:
1615: We find that for a given number density of sources (e.g. as determined by
1616: observations) the clustering of these sources depends only weakly on the IGM
1617: absorption during reionization. As a consequence, the reionization patchiness
1618: has little effect on the observed Ly-$\alpha$ source clustering, which implies
1619: that source clustering is not a good indicator for reionization patchiness.
1620:
1621: Our derived luminosity function assuming constant mass-to-light ratio provides
1622: an excellent match to the shape of the observed luminosity function at $z=6.6$
1623: with faint-end slope of $\alpha=-1.5$. The resulting mass-to-light ratio
1624: implies that the majority of sources responsible for reionization are too
1625: faint to be observed by the current surveys.
1626:
1627: \section*{Acknowledgments} % MNRAS
1628:
1629: We thank Hugo Martel for letting us use and modify his correlation function
1630: code and X. Fan for useful discussions. This work was partially supported by
1631: NASA Astrophysical Theory Program grants NAG5-10825 and NNG04G177G, Swiss
1632: National Science Foundation grant 200021-116696/1, and Swedish Research
1633: Council grant 60336701.
1634:
1635: %\bibliographystyle{mn} \bibliography{../../../../refs}
1636: %\bibliography{cosmo,cosmo_preprints}
1637: \bibliography{lum}
1638:
1639: \end{document}
1640: