1: %For emulateapj:

2: %\documentclass{aastex}

3: %\usepackage[onecolumn]{emulateapj5}

4: %\topmargin=0.4in

5: 

6: %For preprint:

7: \documentstyle[11pt,epsf,aaspp4]{article}

8: 

9: %For manuscript:

10: %\documentstyle[12pt,aasms4]{article}

11: 

12: \def\etal   {{et~al.}\ }

13: \def\ni{\noindent}        %No Indent%

14: \def\ub{\underbar}

15: \def\hi{\noindent \hangindent=2.5em}

16: \def\et{{\it et\thinspace al.}}    %et al.%

17: \def\pc{{\rm\,pc}}

18: \def\kpc{{\rm\,kpc}}

19: \def\Mpc{{\rm\,Mpc}}

20: \def\mpc{{\rm\,Mpc}}

21: \def\hnot{{\rm\,km/s/Mpc}}

22: \def\kmsec{{\rm\,km/s}}

23: \def\kms{{\rm\,km/s}}

24: \def\msun{{\rm\,M_\odot}}

25: \def\lsun{{\rm\,L_\odot}}

26: \def\mdot{{\rm\,M_\odot}}

27: \def\zdot{{\rm\,Z_\odot}}

28: \def\vol#1  {{{#1}{\rm,}\ }}

29: \def\lya{{\rm Ly}$\alpha$\ }

30: \def\mytau{\tau_{{\rm Ly}\alpha}}

31: \def\hi{{H\thinspace I}\ }

32: \def\hii{{H\thinspace II}\ }

33: \def\hei{{He\thinspace I}\ }

34: \def\heii{{He\thinspace II}\ }

35: \def\heiii{{He\thinspace III}\ }

36: \def\nhi{N_{HI}}

37: \def\nheii{N_{\heii}}

38: \def\jhi{J_{\hi}}

39: \def\jhiu{J_{-21}}

40: \def\jheii{J_{\heii}}

41: \def\shi{\sigma_{\hi}(\nu)}

42: \def\shia{\bar\sigma_{\hi}}

43: \def\etal{et al.\ }

44: \def\Sec{\S }

45: \def\eqs{eqs.\ }

46: \def\cf{{cf.}\ }

47: \def\refset{\parindent=0pt\hangafter=1\hangindent=1em}

48: \newcount\refno

49: \refno = 1

50: \newcount\rfno

51: \rfno = 1

52: \def\eq{$^{\the\refno\ }$\advance\refno by 1}

53: \def\ad{\advance\rfno by 1}

54: 

55: \def\clock{\count0=\time \divide\count0 by 60

56:      \count1=\count0 \multiply\count1 by -60 \advance\count1 by \time

57:      \number\count0:\ifnum\count1<10{0\number\count1}\else\number\count1\fi}

58: \def\draft{

59:    \rightline{DRAFT: \today \quad\quad \clock}}

60: 

61: 

62: \begin{document}

63: \title{Metal Enrichment and Temperature of the Intergalactic Medium}

64: \author{Renyue Cen\altaffilmark{1} and 

65: Greg L. Bryan\altaffilmark{2,3}}

66: \altaffiltext{1} {Princeton University Observatory, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544; cen@astro.princeton.edu}

67: \altaffiltext{2} {Dept. of Physics, MIT; gbryan@mit.edu}

68: \altaffiltext{3} {Hubble Fellow}

69: 

70: \begin{abstract}

71: 

72: Hydrodynamic simulations of \lya clouds based on {\it ab inito}

73: cosmological models have produced results that are in broad agreement

74: with observations.  However, further analyses have revealed that, with

75: progressively higher numerical resolution, the median or cutoff line

76: width of the simulated \lya clouds (i.e. the Doppler parameter)

77: appears to converge to a value significantly below what is observed at

78: $z \sim 3$ (by about a factor of $1.5$).  These convergence

79: test simulations do not

80: include feedback from star formation. 

81: Given the observed metallicity in the Lyman alpha clouds

82: we suggest that supernovae, 

83: which presumably polluted the IGM with metals, may have

84: deposited a sufficient amount of energy in the IGM to reconcile the

85: theory with observations.  Simple arguments immediately narrow the

86: redshift range of pollution down to $4<z_{dep}<9$.  

87: It seems quite

88: certain that dwarf and sub-dwarf galaxies with total 

89: masses in the range

90: $10^{6.5-9.0}\msun$ have to be largely responsible for the pollution.

91: Furthermore, it is implied that either star formation is very

92: efficient or metal yield is very high for these early dwarf

93: galaxies, if the mean metallicity in the universe at $z=3$ is

94: as high as $<Z>=10^{-2}\zdot$.

95: Finally, assuming 

96: the specific supernova heating energy is proportional to

97: the metallicity of a gas, we note that the picture proposed here

98: would be consistent with supernovae being

99: the apparently needed heating source for intra-cluster gas 

100: if the required 

101: heating of the intra-cluster gas is no greater

102: than $1$keV per particle.

103: 

104: 

105: 

106: \end{abstract}

107: 

108: \keywords{Cosmology: large-scale structure of Universe

109: -- galaxies: formation

110: -- hydrodynamics

111: -- intergalactic medium

112: -- supernovae: general}

113: 

114: 

115: \section{Introduction}

116: 

117: Recent cosmological hydrodynamic simulations have shifted the paradigm

118: of \lya cloud formation.  Several independent groups have consistently

119: shown that \lya clouds are an integral part of the cosmic structure,

120: resulting from the gravitational growth of density fluctuations on

121: small-to-intermediate scales at $z\sim 2-4$ ($\sim 100$ kpc to a few

122: comoving megaparsecs) with most of the clouds in the form of

123: filamentary structures of moderate overdensity ($\delta_\rho \sim

124: 1-10$) (Cen \etal 1994; Zhang \etal 1995; Hernquist \etal 1996;

125: Miralda-Escud\'e \etal 1996;

126: Wadsley \& Bond 1996; Cen \& Simcoe 1997;

127: Theuns \etal 1998;

128: Bryan \etal 1999; Dav\'e \etal 1999).

129: 

130: While the best agreement between model computations and observations

131: is seen in the column density distribution, a close examination

132: reveals that the Doppler width distribution shows a disturbingly large

133: discrepancy.  Specifically, Bryan \etal (1999) and Theuns \etal (1998)

134: have done convergence tests and shown that higher resolution

135: simulations predict a median Doppler width $b_{med,comp}\sim 20$km/sec

136: versus the observed $b_{med,obs}\sim 30$km/sec.  A comparable

137: difference is found between the low cutoff width of simulated and

138: observed clouds.  If this is interpreted as being due to a difference

139: in temperature, it means that the computed clouds are colder than the

140: real ones by approximately a factor of two, translating to a temperature

141: deficit of approximately $10^4~$K in the computed low column density clouds.

142: 

143: There are several ways to raise the temperature in the simulations to

144: bridge the gap.  First, increasing the baryonic density $\Omega_b$

145: allows more photoelectric heating and thus a higher IGM temperature,

146: with the scaling being $T\propto (\Omega_b h)^{1/1.7}$ (Hui \& Gnedin

147: 1997), where $h$ is the Hubble constant in units of $100$ km/sec/Mpc.

148: Second, reionizing helium at a lower redshift will help somewhat (Hui

149: \& Gnedin 1997; Haehnelt \& Steinmetz 1998).  Third, Compton heating

150: by the high energy background may be important, if most of the

151: observed background at $z=0$ is produced at high redshift ($z>4$)

152: (Madau \& Efstathiou 1999).  

153: Oh (2000) has suggested that

154: X-rays from the first star clusters could provide this high energy

155: X-ray background.

156: Fourth, radiative transfer effects, which

157: are neglected in the simulations, may provide additional heating (Abel

158: \& Haehnelt 1999).

159: Finally,

160: photoelectric heating by dust grains (Nath, Sethi, \& Shchekinov 1999)

161: provides yet another mechanism and is more closely related to 

162: what is proposed in this paper. 

163: %although it is somewhat more 

164: %uncertain due to the uncertainty on the dependence

165: %of dust to metal ratio on metallicity.

166: 

167: In this {\it Letter} we examine the possibility that feedback due to

168: early star formation in dwarf galaxies with masses $M\le 10^9\msun$

169: forming in the redshift range $7\le z_{f} \le 15$ may have played a

170: significant role in changing the thermodynamic state of the

171: intergalactic gas at moderate density.

172: The idea of supernova (SN) feedback into IGM 

173: can be traced back at least two and a half decades 

174: (Schwarz, Ostriker, \& Yahil 1975)

175: and many authors have subsequently addressed this

176: issue in various contexts 

177: (e.g., Ikeuchi \& Ostriker 1986;

178: Couchman \& Rees 1986;

179: Silk, Wyse, \& Shields 1987; 

180: Tegmark, Silk, \& Evrard 1993;

181: Shapiro, Giroux, \& Babul 1994).

182: While the basic physical process is by no means new, 

183: we address its effect in the new context

184: of the temperature of the \lya clouds.

185: In particular, we adopt the standard picture of re-ionization

186: due to radiation from quasars or massive stars, but argue that a

187: subsequent (or slightly overlapping) phase of energy ejection

188: from galaxies provides an additional source of heat for the IGM.

189: 

190: 

191: 

192: 

193: \section{Metal Enrichment and IGM Temperature}

194: 

195: Recent observations indicate that the metallicity in \lya forest

196: absorption lines with column density $N_{HI}\ge 3\times

197: 10^{14}\;\hbox{cm}^{-2}$ is $\sim 10^{-2}\; \zdot$

198: at redshift $z\sim 3$ (Tytler \etal 1995; Songaila \& Cowie 1996).  We

199: show the possible implications of this observed metallicity on the

200: temperature of the \lya clouds.

201: In order to estimate the heating due to the supernovae which enriched

202: the IGM, we use the well measured carbon abundance to parameterize the

203: specific thermal energy increase:

204: \begin{equation}

205: e_{SN} = \frac{\eta E_{SN}}{M_{gas}}

206:        = \frac{\eta E_{SN}}{M_C} \frac{M_C}{M_{gas}}, 

207: \end{equation}

208: where $M_C$ is the mass of carbon ejected by one supernova; $M_{gas}$

209: is the total gas mass polluted by one supernova; $E_{SN}$ is the total

210: energy output of one supernova; $\eta$ is the fraction of that energy

211: that is eventually deposited in the IGM in the form of thermal energy.

212: It is useful to rewrite the term $M_C/M_{gas}$ as follows:

213: \begin{equation}

214: \frac{M_C}{M_{gas}} = 

215: \left(\frac{M_H}{M_{gas}}\right) 

216: \left(\frac{M_C}{M_{H}}\right) =

217: f_H \left[\frac{M_C}{M_H}\right]_\odot 

218: \left[\frac{C}{H}\right],

219: \end{equation}

220: where $f_H=0.76$ is the fractional mass in hydrogen;

221: $\left[{M_C/M_H}\right]_\odot=4.0\times 10^{-3}$ is the standard

222: ratio of carbon mass to hydrogen mass at solar abundance; $[C/H]$ is

223: the ratio of carbon number density to hydrogen number density of the

224: gas in solar units.  The temperature increase seen at redshift $z$

225: corresponding to this specific energy is given by:

226: \begin{eqnarray}

227: T_{SN}(z)&=&\frac{(\gamma - 1) \mu m_p e_{SN}}{k} 

228:         \left( \frac{1+z}{1+z_{dep}} \right)^2,

229: \end{eqnarray}

230: in the limit that the metal rich gas is deposited at redshift

231: $z_{dep}$ and adiabatic cooling dominates thereafter

232: (which may be a reasonable assumption since the IGM under consideration

233: has about the mean density).  Here $\mu$ is

234: the mean mass per particle in units of the proton mass $m_p$; $k$ is

235: the Boltzmann constant; $\gamma = 5/3$ is the ratio of specific heats.

236: Combining equations (1-3) we obtain the following expression

237: \begin{eqnarray}

238: T_{SN}(z)&=& 1.3 \times 10^4 

239: 	\left( \frac{E_{SN}}{1.2\times 10^{51}{\rm erg}} \right)

240: 	\left( \frac{M_C}{0.2\msun} \right)

241: 	\left( \frac{\eta}{0.1} \right)

242: 	\left( \frac{[C/H]}{3\times 10^{-3}} \right)

243: 	\left( \frac{1+z}{1+z_{dep}} \right)^2 {\rm K}.

244: \end{eqnarray}

245: %Taking $E_{SN} = 1.2 \times 10^{51}$ erg, 

246: %we parameterize the fraction of this energy which is transferred to the

247: %intergalactic medium (IGM) as $\eta$.  

248: Here we have denominated $E_{SN}$ and $M_C$ by their respective,

249: reasonable values, following Woosley \& Weaver (1995); $M_C$ is

250: computed by averaging

251: metallicity yields over a Salpeter IMF.  We assume that most of the

252: carbon present comes from type II SNe, which, given the high

253: redshift of the enrichment, seems reasonable.

254: %The carbon to hydrogen

255: %ratio ($n_C/n_H$) comes from Hellsten et al. (1997), who determined

256: %that for reasonable ionization conditions, the observed amount of CIV

257: %in the low column density Ly$\alpha$ forest implies that the abundance

258: %of carbon, relative to solar, is $A_C = 3 \times 10^{-3}$ (i.e. [C/H]

259: %= -2.5).  The hydrogen mass fraction, $f_H$ is set to 0.76.

260: 

261: It is clear from equation (4) that, if the metallicity [C/H] lies in

262: the range $10^{-3}-10^{-2}\zdot$, feedback from SNe can

263: increase the temperature of the IGM by the required $\sim 10^4$ K

264: (Schaye \etal 1999; Bryan \& Machacek 2000; Ricotti, Gnedin \& Shull

265: 2000; McDonald \etal 2000).

266: 

267: 

268: \section{Discussion}

269: 

270: When did the metal and energy deposition into the IGM from stellar

271: systems take place?  To answer this question in Figure 1 we plot the

272: required $\eta$ (left vertical axis) versus the deposition epoch

273: $z_{dep}$ (solid curve), such that the IGM temperature at $z=3$

274: (equation 4) is $2\times 10^{4}$K as observed in moderate density

275: regions (McDonald \etal 2000), where $E_{SN}=1.2\times 10^{51}$erg,

276: $M_C=0.2\msun$ and $[C/H]=3\times 10^{-3}$ are used.  Since $\eta$

277: cannot exceed unity, it is clear that energy and metals must have been

278: deposited at $z_{dep}<9$ in these regions.  The dashed curve shows the

279: corresponding required minimum initial temperature of the IGM (right

280: vertical axis) at $z_{dep}$, under the assumption that there is no

281: additional cooling or heating.  Other, associated cooling (primarily

282: hydrogen recombination cooling) will further reduce the temperature,

283: which would reduce $z_{dep}$.

284: 

285: What kind of stellar systems are likely to be responsible for the

286: contamination of metals and energy, if $z_{dep}$ is confined to the

287: range $3 < z_{dep} < 9$?  To answer this question, we adopt a very

288: simple, empirical model for the feedback.  We assume that galaxies of

289: a given mass form at $z_f$ and eject their metals and energy

290: instantaneously.  The exact mechanism for the ejection is likely to be

291: complicated and spherical blastwave models are inappropriate 

292: (e.g. Mac Low \& Ferrara 1999). 

293: In fact, it's not even clear if shock waves are

294: the primary mechanism for dispersal; other possibilities include

295: merging, turbulence, bulk flows and radiation pressure.  Instead, we

296: simply assume a constant dispersal velocity, $v_{disp}$ = 300 km/s.

297: In Figure 2 we plot the comoving separation of

298: halos as a function of halo mass, using Press-Schechter theory (Press

299: \& Schechter 1974).  Four curves are shown corresponding to

300: $z_{dep}=(3,5,7,9)$, with each curve being intersected by a horizontal

301: line to indicate the maximum distance a parcel of material could

302: travel with a dispersing speed $v_{disp}=300~$km/s within $1/2$ of the

303: respective Hubble time. 

304: We adopt a cosmological

305: constant dominated cold dark matter model with $H_0=65$km/sec/Mpc,

306: $\Omega_M=0.3$, $\Omega_\Lambda=0.7$ and $\sigma_8=0.90$ (Ostriker \&

307: Steinhardt 1995). 

308: Note that the corresponding halo formation

309: redshifts are somewhat higher due to the lag between the epoch of halo

310: formation and epoch of SN metal/energy deposition, with

311: $z_f=(5.4,8.5,11.7,14.9)$, respectively.  

312: We see that halos with masses $M_{halo} \le (30, 7,

313: 1.8, 0.5) \times 10^8 \msun$ have to be responsible for injecting

314: metals and energy into the IGM   

315: at $z_f=(5.4,8.5,11.7,14.9)$,

316: respectively (it is assumed that the halo formation time and SN

317: injection time coincide while the energy deposition time in the

318: moderate density region is 1/2 Hubble time later).  Also shown in

319: Figure 2 are vertical arrows which indicate the minimum mass of halos

320: below which more than half of the gas cannot condense into the halos

321: due to the effect of gas pressure, at the four epochs (Gnedin 2000).

322: This further reduces the allowed range of halo masses which can heat

323: the IGM, constraining the epoch of formation/injection to be $z_{f}

324: \ge 7$.  It is fairly safe to conclude that dwarf and sub-dwarf

325: galaxies with masses in the range $10^{6.5-9.0}\msun$, forming in the

326: redshift range $z_f=7-15$ have taken a leading role in polluting the

327: IGM with metals and energy.

328: 

329: %Many of the previous papers on the astrophysics of intergalactic

330: %shockwaves have no doubt presented more detailed treatments.

331: %Our approach to the problem in hand, namely the Doppler width

332: %of the Lyman alpha forest clouds, is intended to be as conservative

333: %and simple as possible in the sense that, while we intend to allow the

334: %metals from dwarf galaxies to travel as far as possible to maximize

335: %their ability to contaminate the low density IGM, we condense our

336: %lack of precise knowlegde of energy transfer rate from SNe to 

337: %IGM into an adjustable parameter called $\eta$ (eq. 1).

338: %Metals, for example, may escape more easily and with much

339: %high speeds than total blown out gas (e.g., MacLow and Ferrara 1999).

340: %Thus it is not entirely clear whether one should use traditional

341: %spherical blastwave treatment to characterize the dynamics of

342: %ejected metals. We could perhaps have replaced, for example, the energy $E$ in 

343: %the spherical blastwave treatment by $4\pi E/\Omega$ ($\Omega$ is the total 

344: %solid angle covered by the exploding metals) to attempt a 

345: %``better" treatment. We choose to give the responsible metals a 

346: %large (constant) travelling speed through the IGM to more clearly 

347: %make the point in a conservative manner.

348: 

349: If the dwarf galaxies in the indicated redshift ranges are responsible

350: for the pollution, what is the implication for the star formation in

351: them?  Assuming the mean metallicity in the IGM is $<Z>$, we have

352: the following relation:

353: \begin{eqnarray}

354: Y f_* = {<Z>\over f_{col}},

355: \end{eqnarray}

356: where $Y$ is the overall yield of metals,

357: defined as the mass of metals

358: produced per mass of stars created,

359: $f_*$ is the star formation

360: efficiency of baryons within the collapsed halos (since SNe

361: from the first generation of stars in the dwarf galaxies may

362: completely disrupt the dwarf galaxies themselves, $f_*$ is essentially

363: the star formation efficiency of a primordial gas) and

364: $f_{col}$ is the fraction of mass in these dwarf galaxies.

365: Note that neither $Y$ nor $f_*$ can exceed unity.  

366: We integrate the mass function from the vertical arrow to the

367: intersection point

368: between each curve and its respective horizontal line in Figure (2)

369: to obtain $f_{col}$.

370: %the fraction of mass in the respective dwarf galaxies.

371: We summarize the various quantities in Table 1, for 

372: $<Z> = 10^{-2}-10^{-3}\zdot$.

373: Clearly we see that if $<Z> \sim 10^{-2}\zdot$ and the yield $Y$

374: is conventional ($\sim 0.02$), the efficiency of star formation in

375: these early dwarf galaxies must be quite high.

376: Conversely, a higher

377: yield $Y$, which would have profound implications for the initial

378: stellar mass function, can alleviate some burden on the star formation

379: efficiency.  But if $Z\sim 10^{-3}\zdot$, then no particularly high

380: star formation efficiency or unconventional yield is required. 

381: It would be most economical

382: if most of the polluting dwarf galaxies formed at $z_f\sim 8$.

383: 

384: %Can collisional ionization be important?  We note that at $T=2\times

385: %10^4$ K collisional ionization can only ionize hydrogen to $x \sim

386: %0.1$ (neutral fraction), while the photoionized hydrogen has a neutral

387: %fraction of $10^{-5}-10^{-4}$ at $z\sim 3$.  Therefore, collisional

388: %ionization is unimportant at $z\sim 3$.  However, if $z_{dep}=8$, the

389: %initial temperature may be $T=10^5$K, in which case $x=3.6\times

390: %10^{-5}$.  In other words, collisional ionization may be important at

391: %higher redshift.  Perhaps a more dramatic effect is that a somewhat

392: %collisionally ionized universe can be much more swiftly ionized by the

393: %photons, since the average optical depth would be reduced by a factor

394: %proportional to $x$ induced by collisional ionization.  

395: %This is an issue which was known a long time 

396: %(e.g., Schwarz, Ostriker, \& Yahil 1975)

397: %and is worth further study.

398: 

399: If SN injection at these redshifts is important, it is not

400: obvious how it can occur and still retain the excellent agreement

401: between the observed and predicted column density distribution

402: previously mentioned.  As was noted, however, we do not

403: necessarily require that SN winds be the primary metal/energy mixing;

404: i.e., we do not require SN winds to have a traveling speed of 300

405: km/s.  It is likely that various processes are at work, including

406: SN winds, turbulent gas motions, bulk flows, and the

407: interactions of stellar systems (such as mergers and tidal

408: interactions).  It should be noted that the assumed dispersing speed

409: of $v_{disp}=300~$km/s is quite generous, since both galactic wind

410: speed and the bulk velocity of gas at high redshift are likely to be

411: less than that.

412: %not substantially disrupt the \lya clouds themselves, which have

413: %typical internal peculiar velocities of $\sim 10-20$ km/s.

414: It seems that detailed simulations will be required to address this

415: point since it is unlikely that simple spherical winds can

416: reproduce the observations of metal distributions at high redshift

417: (Ferrara, Pettini \& Shchekinov 2000; Theuns, Mo \& Schaye 2000).

418: 

419: A word on the effect of feedback on subsequent galaxy formation is

420: relevant here.  Originally suggested by Efstathiou (1992) as a

421: mechanism to suppress galaxy formation in small galaxies, detailed

422: simulations indicate that photoionization heating alone fails to solve

423: the over-cooling problem (e.g. Navarro \& Steinmetz 1997).  It has

424: been noted recently by Gnedin (2000) that the effect of pre-heated gas

425: (by photoionization in his case) on the accretion of gas onto galaxies

426: is larger (by a factor of $\sim 10$ in galaxy mass) than expected

427: based on a simple Jeans' analysis.  The feedback heating discussed

428: here increases the temperature of photonized gas by a factor of two

429: %($2\times 10^4~$K vs $10^4~$K) 

430: and so would raise the filtering mass to $\sim 1.5\times 10^{10}\msun$

431: at $z\sim 4$ (see Figure 3a of Gnedin 2000), a factor of $\sim 4$

432: higher than found in Quinn, Katz, \& Efstathiou (1996).

433: %$4\times 10^9$ ---> 37km/s

434: %Therefore it is possible that additional heating from feedback

435: %may solve the over-cooling problem in hierarchical structure

436: %formation models.

437: This may be sufficient to solve the over-cooling problem.

438: Another possible benefit is a

439: %benefits of heating the intergalactic gas includes 

440: delay in the accretion of gas onto larger galaxies,

441: which may alleviate the angular momentum problem in spiral disks

442: found in simulations (e.g. Navarro \& Steinmetz 1997)

443: 

444: 

445: Comparison with previous work is useful.  Gnedin \& Ostriker

446: (1997), Gnedin (1998) and Cen \& Ostriker (1999) have studied the

447: issue of metal enrichment using direct numerical simulation including

448: heuristic galaxy formation and metal enrichment prescriptions, as does

449: the recent work by Aguirre \etal (2000) who focus on larger galaxies

450: at $z\sim 3$.  Our work is complementary in terms of both methodology

451: and scale/epoch 

452: %to that of Cen \& Ostriker (1999) and Aguirre \etal (2000) 

453: in that we focus on the possibility of metal and energy

454: enrichment by smaller galaxies at higher redshift.  The work of Cen \&

455: Ostriker (1999) hints that the high redshift universe may not have

456: been sufficiently enriched in metals due, possibly, to the

457: lack of numerical resolution to adequately simulate the formation of

458: small galaxies at high redshift.  The results in Aguirre \etal (2000)

459: again indicate that large galaxies at relatively low redshift

460: %($z\sim 3$) 

461: may have difficulty in fulfilling the task of enriching

462: the universe uniformly, consistent with our results.  Our work is

463: similar to that of Gnedin \& Ostriker (1997) and Gnedin (1998) in that

464: both focus on smaller galaxies at high redshift, but using different

465: methods.  While our treatment cannot study the detailed metal/energy

466: enrichment process (i.e. we do not know how the metals get

467: out of galaxies), current simulations without a model for the

468: multi-phase interstellar medium have to make similar assumptions and

469: parameterizations (e.g., the yield parameter and wind speed).  What is

470: possible with current simulations is to explore the various possible

471: metal dispersing mechanisms including SN winds (Cen \& Ostriker

472: 1999; Aguirre \etal 2000) and mergers (Gnedin \& Ostriker 1997; Gnedin

473: 1998 among others), once metals do get out of galaxies.  In any case,

474: our treatment does not advocate to/require any specific metal/energy

475: dispersing mechanism, rather we only need to assume an average

476: dispersing velocity. 

477: 

478: The galaxy masses which we identify as responsible for the heating are

479: generally smaller than typical present-day galactic systems.  In fact,

480: the smallest systems which can cool and so form stars are around

481: $10^{6} M_{\odot}$ (Tegmark \etal 1997; Haiman, Abel \& Rees 2000).

482: These first stellar systems would correspond to the lower end of the

483: range of systems we discuss.  If, as recent simulations indicate

484: (Abel, Bryan \& Norman 2000; Bromm, Coppi \& Larson 1999), such

485: systems form predominantly massive stars, $\sim 100 M_{\odot}$, and

486: the energy and metal feedback expected from the resulting SNe

487: would indeed pollute much of the IGM.  On the other hand, some of

488: these same simulations show that the efficiency of such star formation

489: may be very small ($< 1\%$), in which case more massive (but still

490: dwarf) galaxies could play the role suggested in this paper.  There

491: are indications that their star formation efficiency may be

492: considerably larger (Machacek, Bryan \& Abel 2000).

493: 

494: \section{Conclusions}

495: 

496: We suggest that energy feedback from supernovae in dwarf or sub-dwarf

497: galaxies with masses in the range $10^{6.5-9.0}\msun$ forming at

498: $z_{f}=7-15$ could raise the temperature of the \lya clouds at $z\sim 3$

499: by $\sim 10^4$K, given the observed metals in the \lya clouds at $z\sim

500: 3$.  This provides an alternative mechanism to bring the results of

501: recent hydrodynamic simulations into agreement with the observed 

502: Doppler width distribution of \lya clouds.

503: 

504: 

505: This scenario may be tested in a number of ways.  First, since metals

506: are a sign of heating, we would expect a correlation between

507: metallicity and temperature (i.e. Doppler width).  A search for this

508: effect should be restricted to low column density lines ($N_{HI} <

509: 10^{14}$ cm$^{-2}$ at $z \sim 3$) where hydrogen line cooling is

510: unimportant.  Since it is difficult to detect metal lines in such

511: systems, a statistical search may be necessary (e.g. Cowie \& Songalia

512: 1998).  Another test would be to examine the evolution of the

513: temperature of Ly$\alpha$ clouds at high redshift $z \ge 4$.  In

514: particular, the mean temperature should not increase with redshift as

515: rapidly as in the case with only photoionization heating and adiabatic

516: cooling.  This is because heating (and subsequent cooling) due to

517: contamination is likely to be continuous over the entire redshift

518: range.  A third prediction would be a larger spread in the temperature

519: of the gas at a given density, since heating would no longer depend

520: just on density (as it does for radiative heating) but instead would

521: occur suddenly.  This might show up as a larger scatter in the joint

522: $N_{HI}-b$ distribution for the Ly$\alpha$ forest.  Since we require

523: strong outflows from dwarf galaxies, a fourth suggestion would be to

524: attempt to directly observe these outflows.  This would be difficult

525: at the relatively high redshifts we predict, but may be possible if

526: the outflows are driven by strong starbursts.  

527: Finally, at low

528: redshift we predict that the metallicity in the low column density

529: Ly$\alpha$ forest clouds should remain approximately constant at $Z

530: \sim 10^{-2} - 10^{-3} Z_{\odot}$, since later, larger galaxies are

531: unlikely to be able to signficantly contaminate the regions further.

532: An interesting aside is that collisional ionization at earlier times

533: could be significant if energy feedback from SNe raised the IGM

534: temperature, and may significantly alter the reionization picture of

535: the universe.  This issue will be examined in detail subsequently.

536: 

537: We note that the SN heating scenario for the high redshift

538: IGM may be related to the apparently wanted additional 

539: heating of intra-cluster gas,

540: {\it if the latter is also due to SNe}.

541: If we take the apparently required specific energy per baryonic particle 

542: of $0.3$keV for the intra-cluster gas

543: (e.g., Lloyd-Davies, Ponman, \& Cannon 2000)

544: and simply assume that specific heating energy is linearly 

545: proportional to metallicity, we obtain

546: the specific energy per baryonic particle 

547: for the high redshift IGM to be 

548: $Z_{IGM}/Z_{ICM}\times 0.3$keV$=3\times 10^{-3}/0.3\times 0.3$keV$=3$eV,

549: not inconsistent with the results presented in this paper.

550: However, a specific heating 

551: energy per baryonic particle for the intra-cluster gas

552: greater than $1$keV is unattainable within our picture.

553: 

554: 

555: 

556: \acknowledgments

557: We would like to thank an anonymous referee for useful comments.

558: This research is supported in part by grants AST93-18185

559: and ASC97-40300.

560: Support for this work was also provided by NASA through Hubble 

561: Fellowship grant HF-01104.01-98A from the Space Telescope Science

562: Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for

563: Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS6-26555.

564: 

565: \begin{thebibliography}{DUM}

566: \bibitem[Abel \& Haehnelt 1999]{a99} Abel, T. \& Haehnelt, M.G. 1999,

567: \apjl, 520, 13L 

568: \bibitem[Abel, Bryan \& Norman 2000]{abe00} Abel, T., Bryan, G.L.,

569: Norman, M.L. 2000, \apj, 540, 39

570: \bibitem[Aguirre \etal 2000]{a00} Aguirre, A., Hernquist, L., Weinberg, D.H., Katz, N., \& Gardner, J. 2000, preprint, astro-ph/0006345

571: \bibitem[Bromm, Coppi \& Larson 1999]{bro99} Bromm, V., Coppi, P.S.,

572: Larson, R.B. 1999, \apjl, 527, L5

573: \bibitem[Bryan \etal 1999]{b99}Bryan, G.L., Machacek, M., Anninos, P. Norman,

574: M.L. 1999, \apj, 517, 13

575: \bibitem[Bryan \& Machacek 2000]{bm00}Bryan, G.L. \& Machacek, M. 2000, \apj, 534, 57

576: \bibitem[Cen \etal 1994]{cmor94} Cen, R., Miralda-Escud\'e, J., Ostriker, J.~P., \& Rauch, M. 1994, \apj, 437, L9

577: \bibitem[Cen \& Ostriker 1999]{co99}  Cen, R., \&  Ostriker, J.~P. 1999, \apj, 519, L109

578: \bibitem[Cen \& Simcoe 1997]{cs97}  Cen, R., \&  Simcoe, R.A. 1997, ApJ, 483, 8

579: \bibitem[Couchman \& Rees 1986]{cr86} Couchman, H.M.P., \& Rees, M.J. 1986, MNRAS, 221, 53

580: \bibitem[Cowie \& Songalia 1998]{cow98} Cowie, L.L. \& Songalia,

581:  A. 1998, Nature, 394, 44

582: \bibitem[Dav\'e \etal 1999]{d99} Dave, R., Hernquist, L., Katz, N., \& Weinberg, D.H. 1999, \apj, 511, 521

583: \bibitem[Efstathiou 1992]{e92} Efstathiou, G. 1992, MNRAS, 456, 43p

584: \bibitem[Ferrara]{f00} Ferrara, A., Pettini, M. \& Shchekinov, Y.

585: preprint, astro-ph/0004349

586: \bibitem[Gnedin]{g98} Gnedin, N.Y. 1998, MNRAS, 294, 407

587: \bibitem[Gnedin]{g00} Gnedin, N.Y. 2000, preprint, astro-ph/0002151

588: \bibitem[Gnedin \& Ostriker 1997]{go97} Gnedin, N.Y., \& Ostriker, J.P. 1997, ApJ, 486, 581

589: \bibitem[Haehnelt \& Steinmetz 1998]{hs98} Haehnelt, M.G., \& Steinmetz, M. 1998, MNRAS, 298, L21

590: \bibitem[Haiman, Abel \& Rees 2000]{hai00} Haiman, Z., Abel, T., Rees,

591: M.J. 2000, \apj, 534

592: \bibitem[Hui \& Gnedin 1997]{hg97} Hui, L., \& Gnedin, N.Y. 1997, MNRAS, 292, 27

593: \bibitem[Abell 1958]{h96} Hernquist, L., Katz, N., Weinberg, D.H., \& Miralda-Escud\'e 1996, \apjl, 457, L51

594: \bibitem[Ikeuchi \& Ostriker 1986]{io86} Ikeuchi, S., \& Ostriker, J.P. 1986, ApJ, 301, 522

595: \bibitem[Machacek, Bryan \& Abel 2000]{mac00}

596: Machacek, M., Bryan, G.L., Abel, T. 2000, preprint, astro-ph/0007198

597: \bibitem[Mac Low \& Ferrara 1999]{mac99} Mac Low, M.-M. \& Ferrara,

598: A. 1999, \apj, 513, 142

599: \bibitem[Madau \& Efstathiou 1999]{me98} Madau, P., \& Efstathiou, G. 1999, ApJ,517, L9

600: \bibitem[McDonald \etal 2000]{m00} McDonald, P., \etal 2000, preprint, astro-ph/0005553

601: \bibitem[Miralda-Escud\'e \etal 1996]{mcor96} Miralda-Escud\'e, J., Cen, R., Ostriker, J.~P., \& Rauch, M. 1996, \apj, 471, 582

602: \bibitem[Miralda-Escud\'e \& Rees 1997]{mr97} Miralda-Escud\'e, J., \& Rees, M.J. 1997, \apj, 478, 57

603: \bibitem[Nath, Sethi, \& Shchekinov 1998]{nss98} Nath, B.B., Sethi, S.K., \& Shchekinov, Y. 1998, MNRAS, 303, 1

604: \bibitem[Navarro, Frenk, \& White 1995]{nfw95} Navarro, J.F., Frenk, C.S., \& White, S.D.M. 1995, MNRAS, 275, 56

605: \bibitem[Navarro \& Steinmetz 1997]{ns97} Navarro, J.F., \& Steinmetz, M. 1997, ApJ, 478, 13

606: \bibitem[Oh 2000]{o20} Oh, S.P. 2000, preprint, astro-ph/00005262

607: \bibitem[Ostriker \& Steinhardt 1995]{os95} Ostriker, J.P., \& Steinhardt, P. 1995, Nature, 377, 600

608: \bibitem[Press \& Schechter 1974]{ps74} Press, W.H., \& Schechter, P. 1974, ApJ, 187, 425

609: \bibitem[Quinn, Katz, \& Efstathiou 1996]{qke96} Quinn, T., Katz, N., \& Efstathiou, G. 1996, MNRAS, 278, L49

610: \bibitem[Ricotti 2000]{ric00} Ricotti, M., Gnedin, N.Y. \& Shull,

611: J.M. 2000, \apj, 534, 41

612: \bibitem[Schaye \etal 1999]{j00} Schaye, J., \etal 1999, preprint, astro-ph/9912432

613: \bibitem[Schwarz, Ostriker, \& Yahil 1975]{soy75} Schwarz, J., Ostriker, J.P., \& Yahil, A. 1975, 202, 1

614: \bibitem[Shapiro, Giroux, \& Babul 1994]{sgb94} Shapiro, P.R., Giroux, M.L., \& Babul, A. 1994, 427, 25

615: \bibitem[Silk, Wyse, \& Shields 1987]{sws87} Silk, J., Wyse, R.F.G., \& Shields, G.A. 1987, ApJ, 322, L59

616: \bibitem[Songaila \& Cowie 1996]{sc96} Songaila, A., \& Cowie, L.L. 1996, AJ, 112, 335

617: \bibitem[Tegmark, Silk, \& Evrard 1993]{tse93} Tegmark, M., Silk, J.,

618: \& Evrard,A. 1993, ApJ, 417, 54

619: \bibitem[Tegmark \etal 1997]{teg97} Tegmark, M. Silk, J., Rees, M.J.,

620: Blanchard, A., Abel, T., Palla, F. 1997, \apj 474, 1

621: \bibitem[Abell 1958]{t98} Theuns, T., Leonard, A., Efstathiou, G., Pearce, F.R., \& Thomas, P.R. 1998, MNRAS, 301, 478

622: \bibitem[Theuns 2000]{t00} Theuns, T. Mo, H.J., \& Schaye, J. 2000,

623: preprint, astro-ph/0006065

624: \bibitem[Tytler \etal 1995]{t95} Tytler, D., \etal 1995, in {\it QSO Absorption Lines}, Proc. ESO Workshop, ed. G. Meylan (Heidelberg: Springer), p. 289

625: \bibitem[Abell 1958]{wb96} Wadsley, J.W., \& Bond, J.R. 1996, preprint, astro-ph/9612148

626: \bibitem[Abell 1958]{z95} Zhang, Y., Anninos, P., \& Norman, M.L. 1995, \apjl, 453, L57

627: \end{thebibliography}

628: 

629: 

630: 

631: %\clearpage

632: 

633: \begin{figure}

634: \epsfxsize=5in

635: \centerline{\epsfbox{fb_fig1.ps}}

636: \caption{

637: Shows the required $\eta$ (left vertical axis) versus the

638: deposition epoch $z_{dep}$ (solid curve), such that the IGM

639: temperature at $z=3$ (equation 4) is $2\times 10^{4}$K for moderate

640: density regions (McDonald \etal 2000), where $E_{SN}=1.2\times

641: 10^{51}$erg, $M_C=0.2\msun$ and $[C/H]=3\times 10^{-3}$ are used.  The

642: dashed curve shows the required minimum initial temperature of the IGM

643: (right vertical axis) at $z_{dep}$, under the assumption that there is

644: no additional cooling.  }

645: \label{fig1}

646: \end{figure}

647: 

648: \begin{figure}

649: \epsfxsize=5in

650: \centerline{\epsfbox{fb_fig2.ps}}

651: \caption{ 

652: The curves show, for four redshifts, the mean comoving

653: separation between collapsed objects as a function of their virial

654: mass for a $\Lambda$CDM cosmology.  Horizontal lines show the maximum

655: distance that a parcel of material with a velocity 300 km/s could

656: travel in 1/2 of the Hubble time at that redshift.  The vertical

657: arrows indicate the minimum mass of halos below which more than half

658: of the gas cannot condense into the halos, at the four epochs (Gnedin

659: 2000).  }

660: \label{fig2}

661: \end{figure}

662: 

663: %\clearpage

664: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccccccc} %{l,r}

665: \tablewidth{0pt}

666: \tablenum{1}

667: \tablecolumns{12}

668: \tablecaption{Characteristics of Polluting Dwarf Galaxies} %\label{tab1}}

669: \tablehead{

670: \colhead{$z_{dep}$} &

671: \colhead{$z_{f}$} &

672: \colhead{Halo Mass} &

673: \colhead{Total mass fraction} &

674: \colhead{$Y f_*$\footnote{Assuming the mean metallicity $<Z>=10^{-3}-10^{-2}\zdot$}} &

675: \colhead{$f_*(Y=0.02)$}}

676: 

677: \startdata

678: $3$ & $5.4$ & $3.0\times 10^9-3.0\times 10^9$ & $0.0$ & $>1$ & $>1$ \nl 

679: $5$ & $8.5$ & $1.0\times 10^8-7.0\times 10^8$ & $0.030$ & $0.0067-0.067$ & $0.033-0.33$ \nl 

680: $7$ & $11.7$ & $2.0\times 10^7-2.0\times 10^8$ & $0.013$ & $0.015-0.15$ & $0.077-0.77$ \nl 

681: $9$ & $14.9$ & $4.0\times 10^6-6.0\times 10^7$ & $0.010$ & $0.020-0.20$ & $0.1-1.0$ \nl 

682: \enddata

683: \end{deluxetable}

684: \end{document}

685: 

686: