Chatroom
 

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > Space and Astronomy > Astronomy
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

   

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 25-January-2002, 09:13 PM
frenchy frenchy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: now CA, originally QC
Posts: 26
Default

This is the second installement of 'a talk that I just attended' (the first was the new theory about black holes thread). ((it helps keep me awake at talks if I have to summarize them afterwards))

This one was by Robert Becker (UC Davis/IGPP) in which he talked of an observable evidence for the identification of the time of the reionization of the Universe. At first it was ionized then became neutral some 300 000 years after the BB and is now mostly ionized again (I'm talking of intergalactic matter here).

The idea is:
- look at quasars, the more distant the better
- in spectra of quasars one can see the so-called Lyman alpha forest which is absorption of the quasars light by intervening clouds of hydrogen at redshifts smaller than the quasar (naturally). The higher the redshift the denser the clouds become.
- If one sees a quasar past the reionization limit than there would be no Lyman alpha forest because all the light from the quasar would be blocked and there would be simply no flux at redshifts smaller than the quasars position but larger than the limit of reionization.

So they observed a quasar at 6.3 and they claim to see a large range of redshift (approximately between 6 and 6.3 where there is no light flux from the quasar. (They use data from Sloan Digital Sky Survey and Keck)

The implications being that reionization occured around redshift 6 which puts it around 900 million years after the big bang.

According to surveys there are not enough quasars observed (the density of quasar is too small) for them to be the cause of the reionization. Therefore it would be caused by starlight.

caveats: based on only one quasar and uncertainties are still large.

<insert standard disclaimers>
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 25-January-2002, 09:22 PM
Hale_Bopp Hale_Bopp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 614
Default

Yep...that is called the Gunn-Peterson trough first predicted back in 1965 and seen at a red shift of z = 6.28.

You can find the paper on the topic at http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0108097

This paper has pictures of the spectrum so you can see the GP Trough. You can also find a picture of it on SkyServer, the SDSS EPO web site at http://skyserver.pha.jhu.edu/en/sdss...iscoveries.asp

Almost as interesting is the process that led to the discovery of these high red shift quasars. You can read about that at http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0108063

Rob
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 06:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0
©  2006 Bad Astronomy and Universe Today