1: \documentclass[11pt, preprint]{aastex}
2: \usepackage{amssymb,amsbsy}
3: \makeatletter
4: \newenvironment{inlinetable}{%
5: \def\@captype{table}%
6: \noindent\begin{minipage}{0.999\linewidth}\begin{center}\footnotesize}
7: {\end{center}\end{minipage}\smallskip}
8:
9: \newenvironment{inlinefigure}{%
10: \def\@captype{figure}%
11: \noindent\begin{minipage}{0.999\linewidth}\begin{center}}
12: {\end{center}\end{minipage}\medskip}
13: \makeatother
14:
15: \def\***#1{{\sc #1}}
16: \def\plan#1{\relax}
17: \def\Plan#1{\relax}
18: \def\PLAN#1{\relax}
19:
20: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
21: %
22: % User's macros
23: %
24: \DeclareSymbolFont{euletters}{U}{eur}{m}{n}
25: \DeclareMathSymbol{\alpha}{\mathord}{euletters}{'013}
26: \def\Ka{K{\small$\alpha$}}
27: \def\Kaone{\Ka$_1$}
28: \def\Katwo{\Ka$_2$}
29:
30: \def\etal{{\it et al.}}
31: \def\hi{{\rm HI}}
32: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
33: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
34: \def\b{\boldsymbol{\beta}}
35: \def\t{\boldsymbol{\theta}}
36: \def\dO{\Delta\Omega}
37: \def\M{M_{\rm HI}}
38: \def\DLA{{\rm DLA}}
39: \def\mb{\bar{\mu}}
40: \def\la{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}}
41: \begin{document}
42:
43: \title{Using Gravitational Lensing to study HI clouds at high redshift}
44:
45: \author{Tarun Deep Saini, }
46: \affil{Inter-University Center for Astronomy \& Astrophysics,
47: Pun\'e 411 007, India; saini@iucaa.ernet.in}
48:
49: \author{Somnath Bharadwaj}
50: \affil{Department of Physics and Meteorology \& Center for Theoretical
51: Studies, I.I.T. Kharagpur, 721 302, India; somnath@phy.iitkgp.ernet.in}
52: \and
53: \author{Shiv K. Sethi}
54: \affil{Harish Chandra Institute, Chhatnag Road, Jhusi, Allahabad
55: 211 019, India; sethi@mri.ernet.in}
56:
57: \begin{abstract}
58: We investigate the possibility of detecting HI emission from
59: gravitationally lensed HI clouds (akin to damped Lyman-$\alpha$
60: clouds) at high redshift by carrying out deep radio observations in
61: the fields of known cluster lenses. Such observations will be possible
62: with present radio telescopes only if the lens substantially magnifies
63: the flux of the HI emission. While at present this holds the only
64: possibility of detecting the HI emission from such clouds, it has the
65: disadvantage of being restricted to clouds that lie very close to the
66: caustics of the lens. We find that observations at a detection
67: threshold of $50\,\,\mu {\rm Jy}$ at $320 \,\,\rm MHz$ (possible with
68: the GMRT) have a greater than $20\%$ probability of detecting an HI
69: cloud in the field of a cluster, provided the clouds have HI masses in
70: the range \mbox{$5\times 10^8 \,\,{\rm M}_{\odot} \le \M \le 2.5 \times
71: 10^{10}\,\, {\rm M}_{\odot}$}. The probability of detecting a cloud
72: increases if they have larger HI masses, except in the cases where the
73: number of HI clouds in the cluster field becomes very small. The
74: probability of a detection at $610\,\,{\rm MHz}$ and $233 \,\, {\rm
75: MHz}$ is comparable to that at $320 \,\, {\rm MHz}$, though a definitive
76: statement is difficult owing to uncertainties in the HI content at the
77: redshifts corresponding to these frequencies. Observations at a
78: detection threshold of $2\,\, \mu {\rm Jy}$ (possible in the future
79: with the SKA) are expected to detect a few HI clouds in the field of
80: every cluster provided the clouds have HI masses in the range $2
81: \times 10^7\,\, {\rm M}_{\odot} \le M_{\rm HI}
82: \le 10^9 \,\,{\rm M}_{\odot}$. Even if such observations do not result
83: in the detection of HI clouds, they will be able to put useful
84: constraints on the HI content of the clouds.
85: \end{abstract}
86:
87: {\it subject headings}: cosmology: gravitational
88: lensing; theory: galaxies; large-scale structure of the
89: universe; radio lines: HI
90:
91: \section{Introduction}
92: Quasar spectra reveal a variety of absorption features superposed on
93: the continuum emission, indicating the existence of HI clouds with a
94: wide range of neutral hydrogen column densities distributed at
95: different redshift. Among these the damped Lyman-$\alpha$ clouds
96: (DLA) which have HI column densities in the range $2 \times 10^{20}
97: \le N_{\hi} ({\rm cm^{-2}}) \le 10^{22}$ are the main repository of
98: neutral hydrogen at high redshift $(z \simeq 3)$. It has been
99: speculated that these systems are the progenitor of present day
100: spiral galaxies (for details see Wolfe 1995 and references therein).
101:
102: In addition to the column densities, absorption
103: studies have determined the detailed velocity structure of the
104: DLAs (Prochaska \& Wolfe 1998), and different models
105: have been proposed for DLAs in order to explain these observations.
106: The DLAs have been modeled as thick rotating disks with rotation
107: velocities in the range $200 \hbox{--}300 \,\, \rm km \, s^{-1}$
108: (Prochaska \& Wolfe 1998). Another model proposes that DLAs are
109: made up of gaseous protogalactic clumps undergoing in-fall
110: (Haehnelt, Steinmetz \& Rauch 1997).
111:
112: Despite very detailed absorption studies, the exact nature of the DLAs
113: is still not fully understood. A part of the uncertainty arises from
114: the fact that absorption studies give information along a single line
115: of sight through a DLA, and this cannot be used to determine the total
116: HI content or the physical extent of these systems. In a few cases
117: there exist multiple lensed images of a quasar from which we can infer
118: that the angular size of the DLAs is $\simeq 3''$ (Smette 1995 and
119: reference therein). Observations of DLAs in HI absorption and
120: deep-imaging of the DLA fields in the optical band have also been used
121: to infer the size of DLAs (Lane {\it et al.} 2000; Fynbo {\it et al.}
122: 2000; Fynbo {\it et al.} 1999; Moller {\it et al.} 1998; Warren \&
123: Moller 1996; Moller \& Warren 1993; Briggs {\it et al.} 1989; Briggs
124: 1988), but such observations only give lower limits on the physical
125: size of DLAs.
126:
127:
128: In a few cases it has been possible to use deep optical imaging and
129: spectroscopy to identify counterparts (in emission) of the systems
130: that produce the damped Lyman-$\alpha$ lines.
131: While most of these observations have been performed on low redshift
132: DLA fields (see e.g. Brun {\it et al.} 1997 and references therein)
133: there also exist several cases of positive detection of DLAs at high
134: redshift (Kulkarni {\it et al.} 2000;
135: Djorgovski {\it et al.}
136: 1996; Fynbo {\it et al.} 2000; Fynbo {\it et al.} 1999; Moller {\it
137: et al.} 1998; Warren \& Moller 1996; Moller \& Warren 1993).
138:
139: Here we consider the possibility of detecting HI emission from
140: hydrogen clouds whose column densities are sufficiently high to
141: qualify as DLAs, if they were located along the line of sight to
142: quasars. This allows the properties of the HI clouds to be inferred
143: from the observed properties of DLAs. These observations will also
144: enable the total HI content of the DLAs to be determined.
145: Unfortunately, the very small angular extent of the DLAs leads us to
146: expect HI flux from these clouds to be below the detection threshold
147: of existing radio telescopes.
148:
149: Optical observations of background galaxies (typically $\la 1''$)
150: lensed by cluster of galaxies reveal arc-like images which could be as
151: large as $20''$ (see e.g. Schneider {\em et al. \/} 1992). Detailed
152: models have been constructed for these cluster lenses; and it is
153: possible to predict the magnification of the image of HI clouds if
154: they were located at different positions behind the cluster. The
155: lensing of HI clouds by clusters of galaxies holds the possibility of
156: magnifying them sufficiently, rendering the HI emission detectable by
157: presently available radio telescopes. In this paper we investigate
158: the possibility of detecting the redshifted $1420 \,\, \rm MHz$ HI
159: emission from lensed HI clouds by carrying out deep radio observations
160: centered on known cluster lenses.
161:
162: Our investigation is largely motivated by the fact that the Giant
163: Meterwave Radio Telescope (GMRT; G. Swarup {\it et al.\/} 1991) which
164: has several bands in the frequency range $150 \hbox{--} 1420 \, \,
165: {\rm MHz}$ has recently started functioning. In this paper we
166: consider frequency bands of width $16 \,\,{\rm MHz}$ centered at $233,
167: \, 320$ and $ 620 \,\, {\rm MHz}$. These correspond to the redshifted
168: $1420 \,\, {\rm MHz}$ emission from HI at $z \simeq 1.3, \, 3.4$ and
169: $5.1$ respectively. Most of the discussion in this paper refers to
170: $320 \,\, {\rm MHz}$ which we have used as the fiducial frequency. In
171: addition we use a spatially flat $\Omega_m=1$ model, and a Hubble
172: parameter $H_0=100 \,\, h
173: \, {\rm km \, s^{-1}}$. We shall use $h=0.5$ whenever a numerical
174: result is reported.
175:
176: The absorption studies of DLAs have yielded a maximum HI column
177: density of $\la 10^{22}$ (Lanzetta, Wolfe \& Turnshek 1995). It is
178: possible that clouds with higher column densities contain larger
179: amount of dust that obscures the background quasar, in which case
180: these clouds would not be detected in absorption (Fall \& Pei
181: 1995). This possibility has been taken into account while analyzing
182: the possibility of detecting the HI emission by setting the maximum HI
183: column density of the clouds to a value which is a few times larger than
184: the maximum HI column densities observed in absorption.
185:
186: In \S~2 we review the observed properties of HI clouds which are
187: relevant for our analysis and describe two simple models for the HI
188: cloud mass and flux distribution. In \S~3 we briefly discuss a few
189: relevant features of gravitational lensing by a cluster of galaxies
190: and outline the method of our calculation. We present our results in
191: \S 4 and in \S 5 we give our conclusions.
192:
193: \section{Mass and flux distribution of HI clouds}
194: We begin this section with a brief discussion of some of the
195: observational features of DLAs which we use to determine the properties
196: of the distribution of HI clouds.
197:
198: Absorption studies directly give the velocity dispersion $\Delta V$ of
199: the HI along lines of sight through DLAs and these observations
200: indicate rotational velocities in the range $200 \hbox{--} 250 \,\, {\rm
201: km \,s^{-1}}$ (Prochaska \& Wolfe 1998). This along with the HI
202: column density can be used to calculate the specific intensity of the
203: redshifted $1420 \,\, \rm MHz$ emission from the HI along the line of
204: sight through a HI cloud. This gives (for derivation see Appendix A):
205: \be
206: I_{\nu}= 40 \,\, \mu {\rm Jy \, arcsec^{-2}} (1+z)^{-3}
207: \left( \frac{N_{\rm HI}}{10^{22} \,{\rm cm^{-2}}} \right) \,
208: \left( \frac{200 \,\, {\rm km \, s^{-1}}}{\Delta V} \right)
209: \,.
210: \label{eq:a1}
211: \ee
212: Integrating the specific intensity over the angular extent of the HI cloud
213: gives the total flux from the cloud:
214: \be
215: F_{\nu} \propto
216: \int N_{\rm HI}(\b) \,\, d^2 \beta \,\,,
217: \label{eq:a2}
218: \ee
219: where $\b$ (in arc-seconds) refers to different angular positions on
220: the sky, and the integral is over the angular extent of the HI cloud.
221:
222: In a situation where there is gravitational lensing a source which
223: would otherwise appear at $\b$ is seen at a different angular
224: position $\t$ (see e.g. Schneider {\it et al.} 1992), and the flux from the
225: lensed image of the HI cloud can be calculated by performing a similar
226: integration over the angular extent of the image as in Eq.~(\ref{eq:a2}).
227:
228: Estimating the flux expected from a HI cloud (lensed or unlensed)
229: requires knowledge about its angular extent and the variation in the
230: column density across the HI cloud. As these facts are not available,
231: we have adopted two simple models for our calculations in this paper.
232: We describe these models below.
233:
234: \subsection{Uniform disk (UD)}
235: In this model the HI clouds are assumed to be face on circular disks, all
236: of the same physical radius $r_{\rm DLA}$ and with uniform column density
237: across the disk.
238: We consider different values of $r_{\rm DLA}$ in the range $10\,\, {\rm
239: kpc}$ to $30 \,\, {\rm kpc}$. The solid angle subtended by a HI cloud is
240: $\dO_{\rm DLA}=\pi r^2_{\rm DLA}/d^2_s(z)$ where $d_s(z)$ is the
241: angular diameter distance to the HI cloud (see e.g. Peebles 1993).
242: In this model the flux from an unlensed HI cloud is
243: $F_{\nu}=I_{\nu} \dO_{\rm DLA}$ and we have, for $\nu = 320 \,\, {\rm
244: MHz}$,
245: \be
246: F_{\nu}= 12 \,\, \mu {\rm Jy} \, h^2 \left(\frac{N_{\rm HI}}{10^{22} \,
247: {\rm cm^{-2}}}
248: \right) \left(\frac{200 \, {\rm km \, s^{-1}}}{\Delta V}\right)
249: \left( \frac{r_{\rm DLA}}{10 \, {\rm kpc}} \right)^2.
250: \label{eq:a7}
251: \ee
252:
253: The distribution of the column densities of the HI clouds is assumed to be
254: a power law $F(N_{\rm HI})= B N^{-\alpha}_{\rm HI}$ with values in the
255: range $2 \times 10^{20} \, {\rm cm^{-2}}< N_{\rm HI} < 10^{22} \,
256: {\rm cm^{-2}}$, where $F(N_{\rm HI})\, d N_{\rm HI}$ gives the
257: number of HI clouds per unit volume with column density in the range $d
258: N_{\rm HI}$. Observations indicate that the column density
259: distribution changes with redshift implying that both
260: $\alpha$ and $B$ change with $z$. The
261: DLA population shows a marked increase in the HI column densities
262: at higher redshifts (Lanzetta {\it et al.} 1995) and $75 \%$
263: of the DLAs in the redshift range $3 \le z \le 3.5$ have column
264: densities $N_{\rm HI} \ge 10^{21} {\rm cm^{-2}}$. This is consistent
265: with $\alpha=0.5$. In our work we consider values of $\alpha$ in the range
266: $0.5$ to $1.0$.
267:
268: In this model the HI mass of a cloud is given by
269: \begin{equation}
270: \M = 2.5 \times 10^{10} \, {\rm M_{\odot}} \left ({r_{\DLA}
271: \over 10 \, {\rm kpc}} \right )^2 \left ( {N_{\rm HI} \over
272: 10^{22} \, {\rm cm^{-2}}} \right ).
273: \label{eq:a8}
274: \end{equation}
275: This relation permits us to interchangeably use either a column
276: density distribution function or a HI mass distribution function
277: $f(\M)=A \M^{-\alpha}$ where $f(\M) d \M$ is the number of HI clouds
278: per unit volume with HI mass in the range $d \M$. The mass range
279: corresponding to the column density range $2 \times 10^{20} \, {\rm
280: cm^{-2}}< N_{\rm HI} < 10^{22} \, {\rm cm^{-2}}$ depends on the value
281: of $r_{\DLA}$, and for $r_{\DLA}= 10 \,\, {\rm kpc}$ we have $\M[{\rm
282: min}] = 5 \times 10^8 \,\,{\rm M}_\odot$ and $\M[{\rm max}] = 2.5
283: \times 10^{10} \,\, \rm M_\odot$.
284: At any redshift $z$ the HI mass distribution function can be used to
285: calculate the HI density
286: \be
287: \int_{\M[{\rm min}]}^{\M[{\rm max}]} \M \, f(\M) \, d \M = \rho_c \,
288: \Omega_{\rm HI} \,\,,
289: \label{eq:a5}
290: \ee
291: where $\rho_c$ is the critical density at redshift $z$ and
292: $\Omega_{\rm HI}$ is the contribution to the density parameter from
293: the HI in DLAs at that redshift. Absorption studies (Lanzetta
294: {\it et al.} 1995) have shown that in a flat cosmological model, in
295: the redshift range $z \la 3.5$, the total mass density contributed by
296: the HI in DLAs can be fitted by the function
297: \be
298: \Omega_{\rm HI}(z) = 0.19 \times 10^{-3} h^{-1}\exp (0.83 z)\,\,.
299: \label{eq:a4}
300: \ee
301: We use this to fix the normalization constant $A$ for the HI mass
302: distribution function.
303:
304:
305: \subsection{Exponential disk (ED)}
306: Recent studies of the velocity structure of the DLAs show that the HI
307: density across the cloud is consistent with a thick, rotating disk of
308: exponential profile (Prochaska \& Wolfe 1998)
309: \begin{equation}
310: n(R,Z) = n_0 \exp\left(-\frac{R}{R_{\rm d}} -
311: \frac{|Z|}{Z_{\rm d}} \right)\,\,,
312: \label{eq:a9pp}
313: \end{equation}
314: where $n(R,Z)$ is the number density of HI atoms in the disk, $R$ is
315: the radial coordinate in the plane of the disk and $Z$ is the
316: coordinate along the thickness of the disk. Observations suggest that
317: disks have $R_{\rm d}/Z_{\rm d} \simeq 3$, and are rotating with $v_c
318: \simeq {200\hbox{--}250} \,\, \rm km \, s^{-1}$.
319: Excluding the effect of rotation, the gas in the disks has negligible
320: velocity dispersion. Absorption studies do not fix $R_{\rm d}$ and
321: they are only mildly dependent on the central column density $N_{\rm
322: HI}(0) = 2\, Z_{\rm d} n_0$. In our analysis we assume that all the
323: disks are observed face-on. As a consequence the column density
324: distribution in each HI cloud is circularly symmetric around the
325: center and falls off exponentially in the radial direction. For $\nu
326: = 320 \,\,\rm MHz$, the flux from a HI cloud is
327: \be
328: F_{\nu} = 24 \,\, \mu {\rm Jy} \, h^2 \left(\frac{N_{\rm HI}(0)}{
329: 10^{22} \,
330: {\rm cm^{-2}}}
331: \right) \left(\frac{200 \,\,{\rm km \,s^{-1}}}{\Delta V} \right)
332: \left( \frac{R_{\rm d}}{10 \,\,{\rm kpc}} \right)^2 \,\,,
333: \label{eq:a9}
334: \ee
335: and the HI mass is
336: \begin{equation}
337: \M = 6 \times 10^{10}\,\, {\rm M}_\odot \left
338: ({N_{\rm HI}(0) \over 10^{22} \,\, {\rm cm^{-2}} } \right ) \left
339: ({R_{\rm d} \over 10 \,\, {\rm kpc} }\right)^2 \,\,.
340: \label{eq:a10}
341: \end{equation}
342: We choose the central column density, $N_{\rm HI}(0)$ to have a fixed
343: value in the range $5 \times 10^{21} \, \rm cm^{-2}$ to $2 \times
344: 10^{22} \, \rm cm^{-2}$ and allow $R_{\rm d}$ to vary from $2\, \, \rm
345: kpc$ to $10 \, \, \rm kpc$. For a fixed value of $N_{\rm
346: HI}(0)=10^{22} \,\, \rm cm^{-2}$ this corresponds to a mass range
347: $\M[{\rm min}] = 2\times 10^9 \,\, {\rm M_\odot}$ and $\M[{\rm max}] = 5
348: \times 10^{10}\,\, {\rm M_\odot}$.
349: The treatment of the mass distribution function for the ED model has
350: been carried out in exactly the same way as for the UD model, and we
351: consider values in the range $0.5$ to $1.0$ for the slope $\alpha$.
352:
353:
354:
355:
356: \subsection{The flux distribution of HI clouds}
357: For both the UD and the ED model the HI mass distribution function can
358: be converted to a flux distribution function using either
359: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:a7}) and~(\ref{eq:a8}) or Eqs.~(\ref{eq:a9})
360: and~(\ref{eq:a10}). This requires assuming a value for $\Delta V$
361: which we take to be $200 \,\, \rm km \, s^{-1}$. The GMRT channel at
362: $320 \,\, {\rm MHz }$ $(z=3.4)$ has a bandwidth of $16 \,\, {\rm
363: MHz}$. This corresponds to a redshift range of $3.33$ to $3.55$. We
364: use the flux distribution function to calculate the number of clouds
365: per unit flux per $\rm arcsec^2$ within the redshift range
366: covered by the GMRT bandwidth.
367:
368: For the UD model where the value of $r_{\DLA}$ is fixed this
369: gives us
370:
371: \begin{eqnarray}
372: \nonumber
373: &&{d^2 n \over d F_{\nu} d\Omega} \simeq 1.2 \times 10^{-3} {\rm \mu Jy^{-1} \, arcsec^{-2}} \times\\
374: && \,(2-\alpha) \left ({r_{\DLA} \over 10 \,
375: {\rm kpc}} \right)^{-4 + 2 \alpha} \left ( { F_{\nu} \over 1\, \rm \mu Jy}
376: \right)^{-\alpha} \,\,.
377: \label{eq:a11}
378: \end{eqnarray}
379: For this model the different fluxes correspond to different values of
380: the column density. For the ED model where the central column density
381: $N_{\rm HI}(0)$ is fixed,
382: the number of clouds per unit flux per $\rm arcsec^2$
383: is
384: \begin{eqnarray}
385: \nonumber
386: &&{d^2 n \over dF_{\nu} d\Omega} \simeq 4.25 \times 10^{-4} {\rm \mu Jy^{-1} \, arcsec^{-2}} \times \\
387: &&\,(2-\alpha) \left ({N_{\rm HI}(0) \over 10^{22}
388: \, {\rm cm^{-2}}} \right)^{-2 + \alpha} \left ( { F \over 1\, \rm \mu
389: Jy} \right)^{-\alpha} \,\,.
390: \label{eq:a12}
391: \end{eqnarray}
392: (In Eqs.~(\ref{eq:a11}) and~(\ref{eq:a12}) the normalization has a weak
393: dependence on the parameter $\alpha$, which is not shown for brevity)
394: In this model the variation of flux corresponds to different values of
395: the radial scale length $R_{\rm d}$. For $\nu = 320 \,\, {\rm MHz }$,
396: the total number of clouds expected above a given flux in a $1'\times
397: 1'$ region of the sky and within the GMRT bandwidth is shown in
398: Figure~\ref{fig:ud1} for the UD and ED models.
399:
400: \section{Gravitational Lensing by clusters}
401: Here we give a brief summary of the salient features of gravitational
402: lensing relevant to this work. A more thorough exposition can be found
403: in Schneider {\em et al. \/} (1992).
404:
405: An object which is gravitationally lensed appears at a position which
406: is different from its unlensed position. This information is
407: encoded in the lens equation which relates the unperturbed position of
408: the source to its perturbed position. If the angular coordinates of
409: the source are $\boldsymbol \beta$ and the angular coordinates of the image
410: are $\boldsymbol \theta$, then the lens equation is given by
411: \begin{equation}
412: \boldsymbol{\beta } = \boldsymbol {\theta } - \boldsymbol{{\nabla}} \psi
413: (\boldsymbol{ \theta }) \,\,.
414: \label{eq:lens}
415: \end{equation}
416: The dimensionless relativistic lens potential $\psi$ satisfies the
417: two-dimensional Poisson equation $ \nabla ^2 \psi ( \boldsymbol{ \theta }) = 2
418: \kappa( \boldsymbol{\theta })$, where the convergence $\kappa( \boldsymbol
419: { \theta}) = \Sigma ( \boldsymbol { \theta })/ \Sigma _{\rm cr}$ and
420: $\Sigma (\boldsymbol{\theta})$ is the two-dimensional surface mass
421: density of the lens, $\Sigma _{\rm cr}= (c^2/4 \pi G)(d_s/d_ld_{ls})$
422: being the critical density. The quantities $d_s$, $d_l$, and $d_{ls}$
423: are the angular-diameter distances from the observer to source, the
424: observer to lens, and the lens to source respectively. Gravitational
425: lensing does not effect the specific intensity along a light ray. The
426: flux received by an observer is proportional to the solid angle
427: subtended by the image at the observer; and since the solid angle of
428: the image after lensing is, in general, different from that of the
429: source, an observer can receive more (or less) flux in the lensed case
430: than in the unlensed case.
431:
432:
433: The shape and size of the image are related to those of the source by
434: the transformation matrix $ M^{-1}_{ij} = \partial \beta_i/ \partial
435: \theta_j$. The infinitesimal area $d^2 \theta$ in the image plane
436: is mapped to an area $d^2 \beta=
437: \mu^{-1}(\boldsymbol{\theta}) d^2 \theta$ in the source plane, where $
438: \mu = {\rm det}[M_{ij}]$ is the magnification. The regions (curves)
439: in the source plane where $\det[\partial \beta_i/
440: \partial \theta_j] = 0$ are called caustics. Magnification is
441: infinite for point sources which are placed on the caustics. For
442: finite sources the amplification remains finite, though the caustics still
443: remain the points in the source plane where the magnification is large.
444:
445:
446:
447: For this paper we model clusters of galaxies as single component
448: Pseudo Isothermal Elliptical Mass Distribution (PIEMD) after Kassiola
449: \& Kovner (1993). These are characterized by a core radius $R_{\rm c}$,
450: one-dimensional velocity dispersion $\sigma$, and ellipticity
451: parameter $\epsilon$. In addition to these parameters, the lens
452: redshift $z_l$ and the source redshift $z_s$ completely specify the
453: dimensionless potential $\psi$. Real clusters can have
454: substantial sub-structure and are best modeled as multi-component
455: PIEMDs, but for simplicity we consider only single component lenses.
456:
457: For our case the source redshift, $z_s =\nu_e/\nu_o -1$ with $\nu_e =
458: 1420 \, \rm MHz$, and $\nu_o = \{ 233,\, 320, \, 620\} \, \rm MHz$.
459: For our study we consider the following range of parameters: $1200 \,\,
460: {\rm km \,s^{-1}} \le \sigma \le 1800 \,\, {\rm km \,s^{-1}}$; $40
461: \,\, {\rm kpc} \le R_{\rm c} \le 60 \,\, {\rm kpc}$; $0 \le \epsilon \le 0.3$,
462: and $0.1 \le z_l \le 0.3$. This choice of parameters is motivated by
463: the observed properties of known clusters and their abundances
464: (e.g. Mazure \etal, 1996).
465:
466:
467: \subsection{Lensing of HI clouds}
468: The flux from a lensed HI cloud can be expressed in
469: terms of the source coordinates $\b$ and the magnification
470: $\mu(\b)$ as:
471: \begin{eqnarray}
472: F_{\nu}&=& 40 \,\,\mu {\rm Jy\, arcsec^{-2}} (1+z)^{-3}
473: \left( \frac{200 \,\, {\rm km \, s^{-1}}}{\Delta V} \right) \nonumber \\
474: {}&& \times \int \left( \frac{N_{\rm HI}(\b)}{10^{22}\,\, {\rm cm^{-2}}}
475: \right) \, \, \mu(\b) d^2 \beta \,\,.
476: \label{eq:b1}
477: \end{eqnarray}
478: This can be expressed in terms of the flux of the unlensed source
479: \be
480: F_{\nu}[{\rm Lensed}] =F_{\nu}[{\rm Source}]~\times~\bar{\mu} \,\,,
481: \ee
482: where $\bar{\mu}$ is the magnification averaged over the angular
483: extent of the source
484: \begin{equation}
485: \bar{\mu}(\b,R) = \int d^2 \beta^{'} \, \mu(\b -\b') \, W(\b', R)\,\,.
486: \label{eq:b2}
487: \end{equation}
488: The normalized window function $W(\b,R)$ represents the radial
489: profile of the HI cloud and for the UD and ED models we use
490:
491: \begin{eqnarray}
492: W(\b,r_{\rm DLA})& =&
493: \frac{d_s^2}{\pi r_{\rm DLA}^2} \Theta \left (|\b| - \frac{r_{\rm DLA}}{d_s}\right )
494: \qquad ~~ ({\rm UD}) \nonumber \\
495: W(\b, R_d)&=& \frac{d_s^2}{ 2 \pi R_{\rm d}^2}
496: \exp \left(- \frac{|\b|}{R_d/d_s}\right)
497: \qquad ({\rm ED})\,\,,
498: \end{eqnarray}
499: where $\Theta$ is the Heaviside step function. In our calculations we
500: have evaluated $\bar{\mu}(\b,R)$ by first calculating $\mu(\b)$ on a
501: finely-spaced grid in the source plane. This is then convolved with
502: the window function using the Fast Fourier Transform algorithm (Press
503: {\it et al. \/} 1992) to obtain $\bar{\mu}(\b,R)$. We have tested the
504: convergence of this procedure with respect to variation of the grid
505: size. In situations where there are multiple images we have added up
506: the magnification of all the magnified images; because the typical
507: image separation is less than the beam width of the GMRT and the
508: observations which we are discussing here will not be able to resolve
509: the multiple images.
510:
511:
512:
513: We use the procedure discussed above to calculate $\bar{\mu}(\b,R)$ on
514: a grid. This is used to calculate $A( > \bar{\mu}_0)$
515: ($\bar{\mu}_0$ is any fiducial average magnification) which is the
516: area (in ${\rm arc\hbox{-}second^2}$) in the source plane for which the
517: condition $\bar{\mu}(\b,R) > \bar{\mu}_0 $ is satisfied. For
518: observations with a detection threshold of $F_{\nu}[{\rm min}]$,
519: a HI cloud with unlensed flux $F_{\nu}$ will have a lensed flux greater
520: than $F_{\nu}[{\rm min}]$ for any position within the area
521: $A(>F_{\nu}[{\rm min}]/F_{\nu})$. Summing up the contributions from
522: HI clouds with all possible values of the unlensed flux gives us
523: $ {\cal N}({>} F_{\nu}[{\rm min}])$ the total number of HI clouds that
524: can be detected in the field of a cluster
525: \begin{equation}
526: {\cal N}({>} F_{\nu}[{\rm min}]) = \int d F_{\nu} \,
527: {d^2 N \over d\Omega d F_{\nu}} \,
528: A \left( >F_{\nu}[{\rm min}]/F_{\nu} \right) \,.
529: \end{equation}
530:
531: It should be pointed out that throughout the analysis we have assumed
532: all the HI clouds to be oriented face-on. In reality the HI clouds
533: will occur at
534: all possible angles. In this case
535: the mean magnification $\bar{\mu}(\b,R)$ will differ
536: with the orientation of the cloud. However,
537: the projected area is maximum when the cloud is face-on
538: and the mean magnification will be lower relative to the situation
539: where the cloud is located at the same position with an edge-on
540: orientation. This means that our analysis gives an underestimate of
541: the magnification and we may expect larger magnifications when all
542: possible orientations are taken into account.
543:
544:
545: \section{Results}
546: We first discuss our results for observations centered at $320 \,\, {\rm
547: MHz}$. The results for $620$ and $233 \, {\rm MHz}$ are summarized at
548: the end of this section.
549:
550: We have calculated $A({>}\mb)$ and ${\cal N}({>} F_{\nu}[{\rm min}])$
551: for several cluster parameters with the disk parameters varying over
552: the allowed range discussed earlier for the UD and ED models. The
553: effect of varying the cluster parameters is to change $A({>}\mb)$
554: which in turn affects the number of detected HI clouds. The regions
555: of high magnification ($\mu>10$) are restricted along the caustics and
556: all the contribution to $A({>}\mb)$ is from a narrow strip along the
557: caustics. Although the length of the caustic curve increases as the
558: ellipticity $\epsilon$ is increased, this is accompanied by a fall in
559: the values of the magnification. The value $\epsilon=0.1$ is a good
560: compromise between these two effects and the results are presented for
561: this value. The $\epsilon$ dependence of the results is rather weak
562: in the range $0.1 \le \epsilon \le 0.3$. The values of $A({>}\mb)$ and
563: ${\cal N}({>} F_{\nu}[{\rm min}])$ decrease by around $10 \%$ as the
564: value of $\epsilon$ changes from $0.1$ to $0.3$. Amongst the cluster
565: parameters, changing the velocity dispersion $\sigma$ has the
566: strongest effect on $A({>}\mb)$ and this is shown in
567: Figures~\ref{fig:ud2} and \ref{fig:ed2}. Varying the cluster redshift
568: from $0.1$ to $0.5$ causes $A({>}\mb)$ to decrease by nearly $30\%$.
569:
570:
571: Varying the radius of the HI clouds has a few distinct
572: effects. First, an increase in the size of the HI clouds
573: decreases the average magnification $\bar{\mu}(\b,R)$.
574: The area $A({>}\mb)$ also decreases as the radius of
575: the HI cloud is increased and this is clearly seen in Figures~\ref{fig:ud2}
576: and~\ref{fig:ed2}. The second effect is that a larger
577: cloud radius gives a larger value of the unlensed flux (Eqs.~( \ref{eq:a7})
578: and~(\ref{eq:a9})). The third effect is that as the radius of the HI clouds
579: is increased, the number of clouds in the field decreases.
580: This is seen in Figure~\ref{fig:ud1} for the UD model.
581: All these effects combine to determine how the number of detected HI
582: clouds depends
583: on the radius of the clouds.
584: As is seen in Figure~\ref{fig:ud3} for the UD model, an increase in
585: the cloud radius generally increases the number of detected
586: HI clouds. Only for large values of $r_{\DLA}$ do
587: we find a decrease in the number of HI clouds causing a decrement in the
588: number of detections.
589: The results for the ED model shown in Figure~(\ref{fig:ed3}) are
590: qualitatively similar to those for the UD model.
591: In this case the parameter that controls the number of clouds
592: in a field is $N_{\rm HI}(0)$, and
593: the number of clouds in a field falls as $N_{\rm HI}(0)$ is increased
594: (Figure~\ref{fig:ud1}).
595: As in the UD case, this generally leads to an
596: increase in the number of detected clouds
597: because a fall in the number of clouds is often
598: over-compensated by an increase in the unlensed flux.
599: An important parameter in both the cloud models is the spectral
600: index, $\alpha$ (Eqs.~(\ref{eq:a11}) and~(\ref{eq:a12})). The number
601: of detected clouds decreases by $\la 25\%$ as $\alpha$ is increased
602: from $0.5$ to $1$.
603:
604:
605: For a detection threshold of $50 \,\, \mu {\rm Jy}$, for observations
606: centered on a cluster with $\sigma=1200 \,\, \rm km \, s^{-1}$, the
607: expected number of detected clouds is in the range $ 0.1$ to $0.5$ for
608: $r_{\DLA} \ge 10\,\, {\rm kpc}$ in the UD model and for $N_{\hi}(0)
609: \ge 5 \times 10^{21} {\rm \, cm^{-2}}$ in the ED model. For both the
610: UD and the ED models the lower limit for detection approximately
611: corresponds to the mass range $5
612: \times 10^8 \,\,{\rm M}_{\odot} \le \M \le 2.5 \times 10^{10} \,\,{\rm M}_{\odot}$.
613:
614: The number of detections will go up if the observations are
615: centered on a cluster with a higher velocity dispersion, since ${\cal N}(>
616: 50 \,\,\mu {\rm Jy})$ goes up by a factor of $2$ to $3$ if $\sigma=1800 \,\,
617: {\rm km\, s^{-1}}$ instead of $\sigma=1200 \,\, {\rm km\,s^{-1}}$
618: (Figures~\ref{fig:ud3} and~\ref{fig:ed3}).
619: In addition it will be possible to detect the HI clouds even if they have lower
620: HI masses.
621:
622:
623: Future radio telescopes will reach sensitivities of around $2 \, \rm
624: \mu Jy$.
625: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:a7}) and~(\ref{eq:a9}) show that it may then be
626: possible to detect the HI clouds without the aid of gravitational lensing.
627: In the UD model if $r_{\DLA} \ge 20 \,\, {\rm kpc}$ then a substantial
628: fraction of the HI clouds will be detected without any gravitational
629: lensing. While a small fraction of the HI clouds may be detected without
630: gravitational lensing if $10\,\, {\rm kpc} < r_{\DLA} < 20 \,\,{\rm
631: kpc}$, it will not be possible to observe the clouds without the aid of
632: gravitational lensing if $r_{\DLA} \le \, {10 \,\,\rm kpc}$.
633: Figure~\ref{fig:ska} shows that observations with a detection
634: threshold of $2 \, \rm \mu Jy$ centered on a cluster with $\sigma =
635: 1200 \,\,{\rm km \, s^{-1}}$ are expected to have a few detections even
636: if the cloud radius is as small as $r_{\DLA}=2 \,\, {\rm kpc}$. This
637: corresponds to a mass range $2 \times 10^7\,\, {\rm M}_{\odot} \le M_{\rm HI}
638: \le 10^9 \,\,{\rm M}_{\odot}$.
639:
640:
641: The discussion until now has been restricted to $320 \,\, \rm MHz$.
642: The main differences which arise at other
643: frequencies are:
644: (a) the flux from HI clouds changes (Eq.~(\ref{eq:a2})), (b) the total number
645: of clouds is different owing to changes in $\Omega_{\rm HI}$
646: (Eq.~(\ref{eq:a4})) and $\Delta z$ and, (c) the magnification of
647: sources changes owing to change in the source redshift (\S 3).
648:
649:
650: At $z\simeq 1.3$ $(610 \,\, {\rm MHz})$ observations indicate $\alpha
651: \simeq 2.5$ and $N_{\rm HI}[\rm max] \sim 10^{21} \, \rm cm^{-2}$
652: (Lanzetta {\it et al.} 1995). Also, $\Omega_{\rm HI}$ falls
653: considerably from its value at $z \simeq 3.4$
654: However, owing to obscuration of quasar light by the dust present
655: in HI clouds (Fall \& Pei 1995) these values may not be
656: representative of the population of HI clouds and it is
657: possible that the observed $\Omega_{\rm HI}$ is
658: underestimated by a factor of 3 (Fall \& Pei 1995) at this
659: redshift . Given the uncertainty in the HI content we have used
660: several values of spectral indices and $\Omega_{\rm HI}$.
661: Figure~(\ref{fig:othchan}) shows the results for
662: just one set of cluster parameters.
663:
664: The value of $\Omega_{\rm HI}$ at $z \simeq 5.10$
665: ($233 \, \rm MHz$) is not known. For the purposes of this paper we use the
666: value given by Storrie-Lombardi {\it et al.} (1996) which is valid
667: for $z \le 4.7$. For $\nu=233 \,\, {\rm MHz}$ the number of detectable
668: clouds in a cluster field is shown in Figure~(\ref{fig:othchan}).
669:
670:
671: \section{Discussion and Conclusions}
672: In this paper we have investigated the possibility of detecting the
673: redshifted $21\,\,{\rm cm}$ emission from HI clouds at high
674: redshift. Such observations are not possible with existing radio
675: telescopes unless we observe the cloud through a cluster gravitational
676: lens which magnifies the HI flux. However, this method has the
677: disadvantage that it will work only for clouds which lie very close to
678: the caustics of cluster lenses.
679:
680: Given the lack of a clear picture about the nature of these
681: objects we have used two simple models, namely the UD and
682: the ED models (\S 2). The results are
683: similar for both the models (Figures~\ref{fig:ud3} and~\ref{fig:ed3}).
684: Both the models have free parameters which effectively allow us the
685: freedom of distributing the
686: total HI available in the HI clouds at high redshift
687: into either a large number
688: of clouds with a small amount of HI each or a small number of clouds with
689: large amounts of HI each.
690: In the former scenario the probability of a cloud being
691: located very close to the caustic of a gravitational lens and
692: experiencing a large magnification is higher but
693: this is offset by the fact that the unlensed flux of the HI clouds will be
694: very small and a magnification of $\simeq 50$
695: may not be sufficient to render the lensed flux above the threshold
696: value for detection. The parameter range where the probability of a
697: detection is maximum changes with the threshold flux and this may lead
698: to the possibility of using such observations to constrain the
699: distribution of the HI masses of the clouds. This possibility has not been
700: studied here in any detail.
701:
702:
703:
704:
705: We find that for observations at $320 \,\, {\rm MHz}$ with a detection
706: threshold of $50 \,\,\mu {\rm Jy}$ centered on a cluster with $\sigma=1200
707: \,\, {\rm km \, s^{-1}}$, the chance of detecting a HI cloud is
708: greater than $10 \%$ provided the minimum HI
709: content of these clouds is in the mass
710: range $5 \times 10^8\,\,{\rm M}_{\odot} \le
711: \M \le 2.5 \times 10^{10} \,\,{\rm M}_{\odot}$.
712: The chances of detecting an HI cloud increases for a cluster with a
713: higher velocity dispersion, and a single deep image in the field of a
714: cluster such as Abell 1689 (Tyson \etal 1990; Pierre \etal 1991; Smail
715: \etal 1991), which has $\sigma =1989 \,\, {\rm km \, s^{-1}}$ and
716: $z_l= 0.196$, might either reveal a cloud or put meaningful bounds on
717: the mass range and mass spectral index $\alpha$ of the HI clouds.
718:
719:
720:
721: At $320 \,\, {\rm MHz}$ the GMRT will reach a sensitivity of $50
722: \,\,\mu {\rm Jy}$ with $100\,\,{\rm hrs}$ of integration at a frequency
723: resolution of $\Delta \nu = 1.25 \times 10^5 \,\, \rm Hz$
724: corresponding to a velocity width $\Delta V
725: \simeq 115 \,\, \rm km \, s^{-1}$.
726: An alternative strategy would be to observe several clusters to a
727: threshold flux of $100 \,\, \rm \mu Jy$. The latter strategy may be
728: superior for a part of the parameter range shown in
729: Figures~\ref{fig:ud3}, \ref{fig:ed3} and~\ref{fig:othchan}, i.e. the
730: number of expected detections will be higher for the same total
731: observation time.
732:
733: Future radio telescope Square Kilometer Array (SKA) will reach
734: sensitivity $\simeq 2 \,\, \rm \mu Jy$ at $\nu \simeq 320 \,\, \rm MHz$ for
735: $\Delta V \simeq 200 \,\, \rm km \, s^{-1}$ in an integration time
736: of $\simeq 8 \,\, \rm hrs$ \footnote{for details see {\tt
737: http://www.nfra.nl/skai/science}}. In this case
738: observations centered on clusters with $\sigma=1200 \,\,{\rm km \, s^{-1}}$
739: are expected to detect a few HI clouds even if
740: the clouds have low HI masses in the range $2 \times 10^7\,\, {\rm M}_{\odot}
741: \le M_{\rm HI} \le 10^9 \,\,{\rm M}_{\odot}$.
742:
743: Our results indicate that the probability of detecting a
744: gravitationally lensed HI cloud at $233$ and $610 \,\, {\rm MHz}$ is
745: generally lower than the probability at $320 \,\, {\rm MHz}$. However,
746: it should be borne in mind that there are larger uncertainties in our
747: predictions at $233$ and $610 \,\, {\rm MHz}$ as compared to the
748: predictions for $320 \,\, {\rm MHz}$.
749:
750: %In conclusion,
751: We conclude by noting that
752: the strategy of carrying out deep radio observations
753: centered on known cluster lenses will make it possible to detect
754: the redshifted 21 cm emission from lensed HI clouds with either the
755: GMRT or the SKA, depending on the HI content of these clouds. Such
756: observations will shed new light on these objects whose HI content has
757: been observed only in absorption to date.
758:
759: \acknowledgments
760: The authors would like to thank Jasjeet Bagla, Jayaram Chengalur,
761: Divya Oberoi, and Somak Raychaudhury for useful discussions and
762: an anonymous referee for helpful comments.
763: T.D.S thanks CSIR for providing financial support.
764:
765: \section*{Appendix A}
766: Here we present a derivation of Eq.~(\ref{eq:a1}) which gives
767: the specific intensity of the redshifted HI emission from a cloud
768: which has HI column density $N_{\rm HI}$, velocity dispersion
769: $\Delta V$ and is at a redshift $z$.
770:
771: The HI contained in a part of the cloud which subtends a solid angle
772: $\Delta \Omega$ at the observer is $N_{\rm HI} r^2_A(z)
773: \Delta\Omega$, where $r^2_A(z)$ is the angular diameter
774: distance to the HI cloud. In the rest frame of the cloud the total
775: luminosity of the HI emission is
776: \begin{equation}
777: \Delta L= A_{21} h_P \nu_e f N_{\rm HI} r^2_A(z) \Delta\Omega\,\,,
778: \label{eq:app1}
779: \end{equation}
780: and it will be distributed
781: over the frequency interval $\Delta \nu_e=\Delta V \nu_e/c$.
782: Here $\nu_e=1420 \,\,{\rm MHz}$ is the rest frame frequency of the HI
783: emission, $h_P$ is the Planck constant, $f$ is the fraction of HI atoms in
784: the excited state and $A_{21}=2.85 \times 10^{-15}\,\, s^{-1}$ is the
785: Einstein coefficient for the spontaneous emission.
786:
787: At the observer the radiation will be redshifted to a frequency
788: $\nu=\nu_e/(1+z)$ and it will be distributed over the frequency
789: interval $\Delta \nu= \Delta \nu_e/(1+z)$ The flux $\Delta F$
790: is given by
791: \begin{equation}
792: \Delta F= \frac{\Delta L}{4 \pi r_L^2(z)}\,\,,
793: \label{eq:app2}
794: \end{equation}
795: where $r_L(z)$ is the luminosity distance to the HI cloud.
796: We use this to calculate the specific intensity
797: \be
798: I_{\nu}=\frac{\Delta F}{\Delta\nu \Delta\Omega} \,\,.
799: \ee
800: Using Eqs.~(\ref{eq:app1}) and~(\ref{eq:app2}) and the relation
801: (see e.g. Peebles 1993)
802: \be
803: \frac{r_A(z)}{r_L(z)}=(1+z)^{-2} \,\, ,
804: \ee
805: we obtain
806: \be
807: I_{\nu}= \frac{N_{\rm HI} \, f \, A_{21} \, h_P c}{4 \pi \, (1+z)^3 \,
808: \Delta V }\,\,.
809: \label{eq:app3}
810: \ee
811:
812: In a situation where the spin temperature $T_{s}$ is high ($T_{s} \gg
813: h_P \nu_e/k_B)$ we have $ f=3/4$, where $k_B$ denotes the Boltzmann
814: constant. Equation (\ref{eq:app3}) can
815: be evaluated to give
816: \be
817: I_{\nu}= 40 \,\, \mu {\rm Jy \, arcsec^{-2}} (1+z)^{-3}
818: \left( \frac{N_{\rm HI}}{10^{22} \,{\rm cm^{-2}}} \right) \,
819: \left( \frac{200 \,\, {\rm km \, s^{-1}}}{\Delta V} \right) \,.
820: \ee
821:
822:
823:
824: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
825: \bibitem{1p4} Briggs, F. H., Wolfe, A. M., Liszt, H.S., Davis,
826: M. M., \& Turner, K. L. 1989, ApJ, 314, 650
827: \bibitem{1p3} Briggs, F. H. 1988, {\it QSO absorption lines:
828: Probing the universe}, p. 275--290, Cambridge University Press
829: \bibitem{1ppp} Djorgovski, S. G., Pahre, M. A., Bechtold, \& J., Elston,
830: R. 1996, Nature, 382, 234
831: \bibitem{1pp} Fall \& Pei 1995, {\it QSO Absorption Lines},
832: ed. G. Meylan, Springer-Verlag
833: \bibitem{1p2} Fynbo, J. U., Burud, I., \& Moller, P. 2000, A \& A,
834: 358, 48
835: \bibitem{1p} Fynbo, J. U., Moller, P, \& S. J. Warren 1999, MNRAS,
836: 305, 849
837: \bibitem{1} Haehnelt, M., Steinmetz, M., \& Rauch, M. 1998,
838: ApJ, 495, 647
839: \bibitem{1a} Kassiola, A. \& Kovner, I. 1993, ApJ, 417,
840: 450
841: \bibitem{1aa} Kulkarni, V. P. {\it et al.} 2000, ApJ, 536, 36
842: \bibitem{1b} Lane, W. M., Briggs, F. H. \& Smette, A. 2000, ApJ, 532, 146
843: \bibitem{2} Lanzetta, K. M., Wolfe, A. M., \& Turnshek, D. A. 1995,
844: ApJ, 430, 435
845: \bibitem{2aa} Le Brun, V, Bergeron, J. \& Boiss\'e, 1997, A \& A,
846: 321, 733
847: \bibitem{2a} Mazure, A. {\it et al. \/} 1996, A \& A, 310, 31
848: \bibitem{2b} Moller, P. \& Warren, S. J. \& Fynbo, J. U. 1998, A \&
849: A, 330, 19
850: \bibitem{2c} Moller, P. \& Warren, S. J. 1993, A \& A, 270, 43
851: \bibitem{3} Peebles, P. J. E. 1993, {\it Principles of Physical
852: Cosmology}, Princeton university Press
853: \bibitem{3a} Pierre, M., Soucail, G., Mellier, Y. \& Sanahuja, B.,
854: 1991, \apj, 366, 405
855: \bibitem{4} Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S., Vellering, W. T., \&
856: Flannery, B.P. 1992, {\it Numerical Recipes in Fortran},
857: Cambridge university Press
858: \bibitem{5} Prochaska, J. X. \& Wolfe, A. M. 1998, ApJ, 507, 113
859: \bibitem{7} Schneider, P., Ehlers, J., Falco, E. E., 1992, {\em
860: Gravitational Lenses}, Springer-Verlag
861: \bibitem{7.a} Smail, I., Ellis, R. S., Fitchett, M. J.,
862: Norgaard-Nielsen, H. U., Hansen, L., Jorgensen, H. E., 1991, \mnras,
863: 252, 19
864: \bibitem{8} Smette, A., 1995, {\it QSO Absorption Lines },
865: ed. G. Meylan, Springer-Verlag
866: \bibitem{8a} Storrie--Lombardi, L.J., McMahon, R.G., Irwin, M.J. 1996, MNRAS,
867: 283, L79
868: \bibitem{9}Swarup, G., Ananthakrishan, S., Kapahi, V. K., Rao, A. P.,
869: Subrahmanya, C. R., \& Kulkarni, V. K. 1991, Curr. Sci., 60, 95
870: \bibitem{9a} Tyson, J. A., Valdes,F. and Wenk, R.A., 1990, ApJ. Lett.,
871: 349, 1.
872: \bibitem{9b} Warren, S. J. \& Moller, P. 1996, A \& A, 311, 25
873: \bibitem{10} Wolfe, A. 1995, {\it QSO Absorption Lines },
874: ed. G. Meylan, Springer-Verlag
875: \end{thebibliography}
876:
877: \newpage
878:
879: \begin{figure}
880: %\figurenum{1}
881: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=\textwidth]{fig1.ps}
882: \caption {
883: This shows the number of HI clouds with flux greater than $F_{\nu}$
884: in a $1' \times 1'$ patch of the sky for a bandwidth of $16\,\, {\rm MHz}$
885: centred at $320 \,\, {\rm MHz}$, and a mass spectral index $\alpha
886: = 0.5$. {\it Left Panel} is the UD model
887: for three values of $r_{\rm DLA}$ (in kpc). {\it Right Panel} is the ED model
888: for three values of $N_{\rm HI}(0)$.}
889: \label{fig:ud1}
890: \end{figure}
891:
892: \begin{figure}
893: %\figurenum{2}
894: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=\textwidth]{fig2.ps}
895: \caption {The area in which the averaged amplification $\bar{\mu}$ exceeds a
896: given value $\mu$ is shown for several cluster parameters and clouds
897: radii in the the UD model. In each panel, the clouds radius $
898: r_{\rm DLA} = \{10, 20,30, 40 \} \,\, \rm kpc$ corresponds to curves of
899: decreasing maximum amplification. }
900: \label{fig:ud2}
901: \end{figure}
902:
903: \begin{figure}
904: %\figurenum{3}
905: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=\textwidth]{fig3.ps}
906: \caption {The area in which the averaged amplification $\bar{\mu}$ exceeds a
907: given value $\mu$ is shown for several cluster parameters and radius
908: parameter $R_d$ in the the ED model. In each panel,
909: the radius
910: parameter $R_d = \{2, 8, 14 \} \,\, \rm kpc$, corresponding to curves
911: of decreasing maximum amplification. }
912: \label{fig:ed2}
913: \end{figure}
914:
915: \begin{figure}
916: %\figurenum{4}
917: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=0.9\textwidth]{fig4.ps}
918: \caption{This shows the number of lensed HI clouds expected to be
919: detected in the field of a cluster as a function of the
920: cloud radius in the UD model with $\alpha=0.5$, for the 4 cluster
921: models shown in
922: Figure~\ref{fig:ud2}. The three curves in each panel correspond to
923: detection thresholds $ F_{\nu}[{\rm min}]= \{ 50 , 100, 150 \} \,\, \rm
924: \mu Jy$, with the number of expected detections decreasing for higher
925: flux thresholds.}
926: \label{fig:ud3}
927: \end{figure}
928:
929: \begin{figure}
930: %\figurenum{5}
931: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=0.9\textwidth]{fig5.ps}
932: \caption {This shows the number of lensed HI clouds expected to be
933: detected in the field of a cluster as a function of
934: the central column density $N_{\rm HI}(0)$ in the ED model with
935: $\alpha = 0.5$. for the
936: 4 cluster models shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ed2}. The three curves in
937: each panel correspond to detection thresholds $F_{\nu}[{\rm min}]=
938: \{ 50 , 100, 150 \} \,\, \rm \mu Jy$ with the number of expected
939: detections decreasing for higher flux thresholds. }
940: \label{fig:ed3}
941: \end{figure}
942:
943: \begin{figure}
944: %\figurenum{6}
945: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=0.9\textwidth]{fig6.ps}
946: \caption{This shows the number of lensed HI clouds expected to be
947: detected in the field of a cluster as a function
948: of the cloud radius, $r_{\rm DLA}$, in the UD model with $\alpha=0.5$
949: for observations with
950: $ F_{\nu}[{\rm min}] = 2 \,\, \rm \mu Jy$ and a bandwidth of $16 \,\,{\rm
951: MHz}$ centred at $320 \,\, {\rm MHz}$. The cluster parameters are shown in
952: the figure. }
953: \label{fig:ska}
954: \end{figure}
955:
956: \begin{figure}
957: %\figurenum{7}
958: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=0.9\textwidth]{fig7.ps}
959: \caption{This shows the number of lensed HI clouds expected to be
960: detected in the field of a cluster with $\sigma = 1800 \,\, \rm km \,
961: s^{-1}$, $\epsilon = 0.1$, $z_l = 0.2$ and $R_c = 45 \,\, \rm kpc$ in
962: the UD model. {\it Left Panel} is at $610 \,\, {\rm MHz}$. The solid
963: curve is for $N_{\rm HI}[max] = 10^{21} \,\, {\rm cm}^{-2}$,
964: $\alpha = 2.3$ and $\Omega_{\rm HI}$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:a4}).
965: The dashed (dot-dashed) curve uses $\alpha = 2.3$ ($\alpha = 0.5$)
966: with $\Omega_{\rm HI}$ twice the prediction of eq. (\ref{eq:a4}) and
967: $N_{\rm HI}[max] = 10^{22} \,\, {\rm cm}^{-2}$
968: {\it Right Panel} is at $233 \,\,{\rm MHz}$ with
969: $\alpha = 0.5$ (solid line) and $\alpha = 1.5$ (dashed line) }
970: \label{fig:othchan}
971: \end{figure}
972:
973: \end{document}
974:
975:
976:
977:
978:
979:
980:
981: