arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2404.08042astro-ph.CO
收藏

检验用于预测再电离纪元与宇宙黎明时期21cm信号的常见近似方法

Testing common approximations to predict the 21cm signal at the Epoch of Reionization and Cosmic Dawn

Timothée Schaeffer, Sambit K. Giri, Aurel Schneider

AI总结:

本研究利用符合观测约束的三类天体物理源模拟,检验了再电离与宇宙黎明时期21cm信号建模中四种常见近似的有效性,发现这些近似均会带来显著误差,为相关信号的精准建模提供了参考。

摘要:

预测来自再电离纪元与宇宙黎明时期的21cm信号是一项复杂且具有挑战性的任务。过去几十年间,研究人员采用了各种简化假设以降低建模的计算成本。本文中,我们利用一套包含三种不同天体物理源模型的模拟套件,检验了若干此类假设的有效性,这些模型均符合当前关于再电离历史和紫外光度函数的观测约束。我们首先表明,自旋温度饱和的常见假设可能会在整个再电离时期内导致21cm成团信号出现显著误差。同理,假设宇宙黎明时期宇宙处于完全中性状态的做法,也可能在加热和莱曼α耦合期间导致信号与真实值产生显著偏差。另一种流行的简化假设是,基于再电离分数、气体温度和莱曼α耦合的平均量来预测全局微分亮温度($dT_b$)。我们发现,与对最终$dT_b$天图取平均得到的结果相比,这种方法得到的吸收信号深度要高出10%。最后,我们研究了将21cm成团信号分解为不同的自功率和交叉功率分量,再通过线性假设求解的简化方法。我们表明,尽管各个场的方差远小于1,但它们通常无法被微扰处理,因为其扰动具有强非高斯性。因此,基于单个自功率和交叉功率谱的微扰解所做的预测,即使考虑了高阶项,也可能产生偏差极大的结果。

英文摘要:

Predicting the 21cm signal from the epoch of reionization and cosmic dawn is a complex and challenging task. Various simplifying assumptions have been applied over the last decades to make the modeling more affordable. In this paper, we investigate the validity of several such assumptions, using a simulation suite consisting of three different astrophysical source models that agree with the current constraints on the reionization history and the UV luminosity function. We first show that the common assumption of a saturated spin temperature may lead to significant errors in the 21cm clustering signal over the full reionization period. The same is true for the assumption of a neutral universe during the cosmic dawn which may lead to significant deviation from the correct signal during the heating and the Lyman-$α$ coupling period. Another popular simplifying assumption consists of predicting the global differential brightness temperature ($dT_b$) based on the average quantities of the reionization fraction, gas temperature, and Lyman-$α$ coupling. We show that such an approach leads to a 10 percent deeper absorption signal compared to the results obtained by averaging the final $dT_b$-map. Finally, we investigate the simplifying method of breaking the 21cm clustering signal into different auto and cross components that are then solved assuming linearity. We show that even though the individual fields have a variance well below unity, they often cannot be treated perturbatively as the perturbations are strongly non-Gaussian. As a consequence, predictions based on the perturbative solution of individual auto and cross power spectra may lead to strongly biased results, even if higher-order terms are taken into account.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑