The spectra of real galaxies depend strongly on wavelength and also evolve with time. How might these facts alter the conclusion obtained in Sec. 2; namely, that the brightness of the night sky is overwhelmingly determined by the age of the Universe, with expansion playing only a minor role?
The significance of this question is best appreciated in the microwave portion of the electromagnetic spectrum (at wavelengths from about 1 mm to 10 cm) where we know from decades of radio astronomy that the "night sky" is brighter than its optical counterpart (Fig. 1). The majority of this microwave background radiation is thought to come, not from the redshifted light of distant galaxies, but from the fading glow of the big bang itself -- the "ashes and smoke" of creation in Lemaître's words. Since its nature and suspected origin are different from those of the EBL, this part of the spectrum has its own name, the cosmic microwave background (CMB). Here expansion is of paramount importance, since the source radiation in this case was emitted at more or less a single instant in cosmological history (so that the "lifetime of the sources" is negligible). Another way to see this is to take expansion out of the picture, as we did in Sec. 2.4: the CMB intensity we would observe in this "equivalent static model" would be that of the primordial fireball and would roast us alive.
While Olbers' paradox involves the EBL, not the CMB, this example is still instructive because it prompts us to consider whether similar (though less pronounced) effects could have been operative in the EBL as well. If, for instance, galaxies emitted most of their light in a relatively brief burst of star formation at very early times, this would be a galactic approximation to the picture just described, and could conceivably boost the importance of expansion relative to lifetime, at least in some wavebands. To check on this, we need a way to calculate EBL intensity as a function of wavelength. This is motivated by other considerations as well. Olbers' paradox has historically been concerned primarily with the optical waveband (from approximately 4000Å to 8000Å), and this is still what most people mean when they refer to the "brightness of the night sky." And from a practical standpoint, we would like to compare our theoretical predictions with observational data, and these are necessarily taken using detectors which are optimized for finite portions of the electromagnetic spectrum.
We therefore adapt the bolometric formalism of
Sec. 2. Instead of
total luminosity L, consider the energy emitted by a source per
unit time between wavelengths
and
+
d
. Let us write
this in the form
dL
F(
, t)
d
where
F(
, t)
is the spectral energy distribution (SED),
with dimensions of energy per unit time per unit wavelength.
Luminosity is recovered by integrating the SED over all wavelengths:
![]() |
(57) |
We then return to (11), the bolometric intensity of the
spherical shell of galaxies depicted in
Fig. 2.
Replacing L(t) with
dL in this equation gives the
intensity of light emitted between
and
+
d
:
![]() |
(58) |
This light reaches us at the redshifted wavelength
0 =
/
(t).
Redshift also stretches the wavelength interval by the same factor,
d
0
= d
/
(t). So the
intensity of light observed by us between
0 and
0 +
d
0 is
![]() |
(59) |
The intensity of the shell per unit wavelength, as observed at
wavelength 0,
is then given simply by
![]() |
(60) |
where the factor 4 converts
from an all-sky intensity to one
measured per steradian. (This is merely a convention, but has become
standard.) Integrating over all the spherical shells corresponding to
times t0 and t0 -
tf (as before) we obtain the spectral analog of
our earlier bolometric result, Eq. (12):
![]() |
(61) |
This is the integrated light from many galaxies, which has been emitted
at various wavelengths and redshifted by various amounts, but which is all
in the waveband centered on
0 when it
arrives at us. We refer to this
as the spectral intensity of the EBL at
0.
Eq. (61), or ones like it, have been considered from the
theoretical side principally by McVittie and Wyatt
[12],
Whitrow and Yallop
[13,
14] and Wesson
[10,
15].
Eq. (61) can be converted from an integral over t to one over z by means of Eq. (14) as before. This gives
![]() |
(62) |
Eq. (62) is the spectral analog of (15). It may be
checked using (57) that bolometric intensity is just the integral
of spectral intensity over all observed wavelengths,
Q = 0
I(
0)
d
0.
Eqs. (61) and (62)
provide us with the means to constrain any kind of radiation source by
means of its contributions to the background light, once its number density
n(z) and energy spectrum
F(
, z)
are known. In subsequent sections we will apply them to various species
of dark (or not so dark) energy and matter.
In this section, we return to the question of lifetime and the EBL.
The static analog of Eq. (61) (i.e. the equivalent spectral EBL
intensity in a universe without expansion, but with the properties of the
galaxies unchanged) is obtained exactly as in the bolometric case by setting
(t) = 1
(Sec. 2.4):
![]() |
(63) |
Just as before, we may convert this to an integral over z if we choose. The latter parameter no longer represents physical redshift (since this has been eliminated by hypothesis), but is now merely an algebraic way of expressing the age of the galaxies. This is convenient because it puts (63) into a form which may be directly compared with its counterpart (62) in the expanding Universe:
![]() |
(64) |
If the same values are adopted for H0 and
zf, and the same functional forms are used for
n(z),
F(, z)
and
(z), then
Eqs. (62) and (64) allow us to compare model
universes which are alike in every way, except that one is expanding
while the other stands still.
Some simplification of these expressions is obtained as before in
situations where the comoving source number density can be taken as
constant, n(z) = n0. However, it is not
possible to go farther and pull
all the dimensional content out of these integrals, as was done in the
bolometric case, until a specific form is postulated for the SED
F(, z).
3.2. Comoving luminosity density
The simplest possible source spectrum is one in which all the energy is
emitted at a single peak wavelength
p at each
redshift z, thus
![]() |
(65) |
SEDs of this form are well-suited to sources of electromagnetic radiation
such as elementary particle decays, which are characterized by specific
decay energies and may occur in the dark-matter halos surrounding galaxies.
The -function SED is not
a realistic approximation for the spectra
of galaxies themselves, but we will apply it here in this context to lay
the foundation for later sections.
The function Fp(z) is obtained in terms of the total source luminosity L(z) by normalizing over all wavelengths
![]() |
(66) |
so that Fp(z) = L(z) /
p. In the
case of galaxies, a logical choice for the characteristic wavelength
p would be
the peak wavelength of a blackbody of "typical" stellar
temperature. Taking the Sun as typical (T =
T
=
5770K), this would be
p = (2.90
mm K)/T = 5020Å from Wiens' law. Distant galaxies
are seen chiefly during periods of intense starburst activity when many
stars are much hotter than the Sun, suggesting a shift toward shorter
wavelengths. On the other hand, most of the short-wavelength light
produced in large starbursting galaxies (as much as 99% in the most
massive cases) is absorbed within these galaxies by dust and re-radiated
in the infrared and microwave regions
(
10, 000Å).
It is also important to keep in mind that while distant starburst galaxies
may be hotter and more luminous than local spirals and ellipticals, the
latter contribute most to EBL intensity by virtue of their numbers at
low redshift. The best that one can do with a single characteristic
wavelength is to locate it somewhere within the B-band (3600 - 5500Å).
For the purposes of this exercise we associate
p with the
nominal center of this band,
p =
4400Å, corresponding to a blackbody temperature of 6590 K.
Substituting the SED (65) into the spectral intensity integral (62) leads to
![]() |
(67) |
where we have introduced a new shorthand for the comoving luminosity density of galaxies:
![]() |
(68) |
At redshift z = 0 this takes the value
0, as given
by (20). Numerous studies have shown that the product of
n(z) and L(z) is approximately conserved
with redshift, even when
the two quantities themselves appear to be evolving markedly.
So it would be reasonable to take
(z) =
0 = const.
However, recent analyses have been able to benefit from
observational work at deeper redshifts, and a consensus is emerging
that
(z) does rise
slowly but steadily with z, peaking in the range
2
z
3, and falling
away sharply thereafter
[16].
This is consistent with a picture in which the first
generation of massive galaxy formation occurred near z ~ 3, being
followed at lower redshifts by galaxies whose evolution proceeded
more passively.
Fig. 9 shows the value of
0 from (20)
at z = 0
[2]
together with the extrapolation of
(z)
to five higher redshifts from an analysis of photometric galaxy redshifts
in the Hubble Deep Field (HDF)
[17].
We define a relative comoving luminosity density
(z) by
![]() |
(69) |
and fit this to the data with a cubic
[log(z) =
z +
z2 +
z3]. The best
least-squares fit is plotted as a solid line in
Fig. 9 along
with upper and lower limits (dashed lines). We refer to these cases in
what follows as the "moderate," "strong" and "weak" galaxy evolution
scenarios respectively.
3.3. The delta-function spectrum
Inserting (69) into (67) puts the latter into the form
![]() |
(70) |
The dimensional content of this integral has been concentrated into
a prefactor
I, defined by
![]() |
(71) |
This constant shares two important properties of its bolometric counterpart
Q* (Sec. 2.2).
First, it is independent of the
uncertainty h0 in Hubble's constant. Second, it is
low by
everyday standards. It is, for example, far below the intensity of the
zodiacal light, which is caused by the scattering of sunlight by dust in
the plane of the solar system. This is important, since the value of
I sets the scale of
the integral (70) itself. Indeed, existing observational
bounds on
I
(
0) at
0
4400Å are of the
same order as
I
. Toller, for example, set an upper limit of
I
(4400Å) < 4.5 × 10-9erg
s-1 cm-2 Å-1 ster-1
using data from the Pioneer 10 photopolarimeter
[18].
Dividing
I of (71) by the photon energy
E0 = hc /
0 (where
hc = 1.986 × 10-8 erg Å) puts
the EBL intensity integral (70) into new units, sometimes
referred to as continuum units (CUs):
![]() |
(72) |
where 1 CU 1 photon
s-1 cm-2 Å-1 ster-1.
While both kinds of units (CUs and
erg s-1 cm-2 Å-1
ster-1) are in common use for reporting
spectral intensity at near-optical wavelengths, CUs appear most frequently.
They are also preferable from a theoretical point of view, because they most
faithfully reflect the energy content of a spectrum
[19].
A third type of intensity unit, the S10 (loosely, the
equivalent of
one tenth-magnitude star per square degree) is also occasionally
encountered but will be avoided in this review as it is wavelength-dependent
and involves other subtleties which differ between workers.
If we let the redshift of formation
zf
then Eq. (70) reduces to
![]() |
(73) |
The comoving luminosity density
(
0 /
p - 1)
which appears here
is fixed by the fit (69) to the HDF data in
Fig. 9. The Hubble parameter is given by (33) as
(
0 /
p -1) =
[
m,0(
0 /
p)3
+
, 0
- (
m,0 +
, 0
-1)(
0 /
p)2]1/2 for a universe
containing dust-like matter and vacuum energy with density parameters
m,0 and
, 0
respectively.
Turning off the luminosity density evolution (so that
= 1 = const.),
one obtains three trivial special cases:
![]() |
(74) |
These are taken at
0
p, where
(
m,0,
,
0) = (1, 0),(0, 1)
and (0, 0) respectively for the three models cited
(Table 1).
The first of these is the "7/2-law" which often appears
in the particle-physics literature as an approximation to the spectrum
of EBL contributions from decaying particles. But the second (de Sitter)
probably provides a better approximation, given current thinking
regarding the values of
m,0 and
, 0.
To evaluate the spectral EBL intensity (70) and other quantities
in a general situation, it will be helpful to define a suite of
cosmological test models which span the widest range possible
in the parameter space defined by
m,0 and
,
0. We list four such models
in Table 2 and summarize the main rationale for
each here
(see Sec. 4 for more detailed discussion).
The Einstein-de Sitter (EdS) model has long been favoured on grounds of
simplicity, and still sometimes referred to as the
"standard cold dark matter" or SCDM model.
It has come under increasing pressure, however, as evidence mounts for
levels of
m,0
0.5, and most
recently from observations of Type Ia supernovae (SNIa) which indicate that
, 0
>
m,0.
The Open Cold Dark Matter (OCDM) model is more consistent with data
on
m,0 and
holds appeal for those who have been reluctant to
accept the possibility of a nonzero vacuum energy.
It faces the considerable challenge, however, of explaining data on
the spectrum of CMB fluctuations, which imply that
m,0 +
, 0
1.
The
+Cold
Dark Matter
(
CDM) model has
rapidly become the new standard in cosmology because it agrees best with
both the SNIa and CMB observations. However, this model suffers from a
"coincidence problem," in that
m(t)
and
(t) evolve so
differently with time that the probability of finding ourselves at a
moment in cosmic history when they are even of the same order of magnitude
appears unrealistically small. This is addressed to some extent in the
last model, where we push
m,0 and
, 0
to their lowest and highest limits, respectively. In the case of
m,0 these
limits are set by big-bang nucleosynthesis, which requires a density of
at least
m,0
0.03 in baryons
(hence the
+Baryonic Dark Matter or
BDM model).
Upper limits on
, 0
come from various arguments, such as the observed
frequency of gravitational lenses and the requirement that the Universe
began in a big-bang singularity. Within the context of isotropic and
homogeneous cosmology, these four models cover the full range of what
would be considered plausible by most workers.
EdS/SCDM | OCDM | ![]() |
![]() |
||
![]() |
1 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.03 | |
![]() ![]() |
0 | 0 | 0.7 | 1 | |
Fig. 10 shows the solution of the full integral
(70)
for all four test models, superimposed on a plot of available experimental
data at near-optical wavelengths (i.e. a close-up of
Fig. 1).
The short-wavelength cutoff in these plots is an artefact of the
-function SED, but the
behaviour of
I
(
0) at wavelengths above
p = 4400
Å is quite revealing, even in a model
as simple as this one. In the EdS case (a), the rapid fall-off in intensity
with
0
indicates that nearby (low-redshift) galaxies dominate.
There is a secondary hump at
0
10, 000 Å, which
is an "echo"
of the peak in galaxy formation, redshifted into the near infrared.
This hump becomes progressively larger relative to the optical peak at
4400 Å as the ratio of
, 0
to
m,0
grows. Eventually
one has the situation in the de Sitter-like model (d), where the
galaxy-formation peak entirely dominates the observed EBL signal, despite
the fact that it comes from distant galaxies at z
3. This is
because a large
,
0-term (especially one which is large relative to
m,0)
inflates comoving volume at high redshifts. Since the comoving
number density of galaxies is fixed by the fit to observational
data on
(z)
(Fig. 9), the number of galaxies at these
redshifts must go up, pushing up the infrared part of the spectrum.
Although the
-function
spectrum is an unrealistic one,
we will see that this trend persists in more sophisticated models,
providing a clear link between observations of the EBL and the
cosmological parameters
m,0 and
,0.
![]() |
Figure 10. The spectral EBL intensity of
galaxies whose radiation is modelled
by |
Fig. 10 is plotted over a broad range of wavelengths from the near ultraviolet (NUV; 2000-4000Å) to the near infrared (NIR; 8000-40,000Å). The upper limits in this plot (solid symbols and heavy lines) come from analyses of OAO-2 satellite data (LW76 [20]), ground-based telescopes (SS78 [21], D79 [22], BK86 [23]), Pioneer 10 (T83 [18]), sounding rockets (J84 [24], T88 [25]), the shuttle-borne Hopkins UVX (M90 [26]) and -- in the near infrared -- the DIRBE instrument aboard the COBE satellite (H98 [27]). The past few years have also seen the first widely-accepted detections of the EBL (Fig. 10, open symbols). In the NIR these have come from continued analysis of DIRBE data in the K-band (22,000Å) and L-band (35,000Å; WR00 [28]), as well as the J-band (12,500Å; C01 [29]). Reported detections in the optical using a combination of Hubble Space Telescope (HST) and Las Campanas telescope observations (B02 [30]) are preliminary [31] but potentially very important.
Fig. 10 shows that EBL intensities based on the
simple
-function spectrum are
in rough agreement with these data.
Predicted intensities come in at or just below the optical limits in the
low-
, 0
cases (a) and (b), and remain consistent with the infrared
limits even in the
high-
, 0
cases (c) and (d). Vacuum-dominated models with even higher ratios of
, 0
to
m,0
would, however, run afoul of DIRBE limits in the J-band.
The Gaussian distribution provides a useful generalization of the
-function for modelling
sources whose spectra, while essentially
monochromatic, are broadened by some physical process. For example,
photons emitted by the decay of elementary particles inside dark-matter
halos would have their energies Doppler-broadened by circular velocities
vc
220 km s-1, giving rise to a spread of order
(
) = (2vc
/ c)
0.0015
in the SED.
In the context of galaxies, this extra degree of freedom provides a
simple way to model the width of the bright part of the spectrum.
If we take this to cover the B-band (3600-5500Å) then
~
1000Å. The Gaussian SED reads
![]() |
(75) |
where p is
the wavelength at which the galaxy emits most of its light.
We take
p =
4400Å as before, and note that integration over
0
confirms that L(z) =
0
F(
, z)
d
as required. Once
again we can make the simplifying assumption that L(z) =
L0 = const., or we can use the empirical fit
(z)
n(z)
L(z) /
0 to the
HDF data in Fig. 9. Taking the
latter course and substituting (75) into (62), we obtain
![]() |
(76) |
The dimensional content of this integral has been pulled into a
prefactor Ig =
Ig(0), defined by
![]() |
(77) |
Here we have divided (76) by the photon energy
E0 = hc /
0 to put
the result into CUs, as before.
Results are shown in Fig. 11, where we have
taken p =
4400Å,
=
1000Å and zf = 6. Aside from the fact that the
short-wavelength cutoff has disappeared, the situation is qualitatively
similar to that obtained using a
-function approximation.
(This similarity becomes formally exact as
approaches zero.)
One sees, as before, that the expected EBL signal is brightest at
optical wavelengths in an EdS Universe (a),
but that the infrared hump due to the redshifted peak of galaxy formation
begins to dominate for
higher-
, 0
models (b) and (c), becoming
overwhelming in the de Sitter-like model (d). Overall, the best
agreement between calculated and observed EBL levels occurs in
the
CDM model
(c). The matter-dominated EdS (a) and OCDM (b) models
contain too little light (requiring one to postulate an
additional source of optical or near-optical background radiation
besides that from galaxies), while the
BDM model (d) comes
uncomfortably close to containing too much light.
This is an interesting situation, and one which motivates us to
reconsider the problem with more realistic models for the galaxy SED.
The simplest nontrivial approach to a galaxy spectrum is to model it as a blackbody, and this was done by previous workers such as McVittie and Wyatt [12], Whitrow and Yallop [13, 14] and Wesson [15]. Let us suppose that the galaxy SED is a product of the Planck function and some wavelength-independent parameter C(z):
![]() |
(78) |
Here SB
2
5
k4 / 15c2 h3 =
5.67 × 10-5 erg cm-2 s-1
K-1 is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
The function F is normally regarded as an increasing function of
redshift
(at least out to the redshift of galaxy formation). This can in principle
be accommodated by allowing C(z) or T(z) to
increase with z in
(78). The former choice would correspond to a situation in which
galaxy luminosity decreases with time while its spectrum remains unchanged,
as might happen if stars were simply to die. The second choice corresponds
to a situation in which galaxy luminosity decreases with time as its
spectrum becomes redder, as may happen when its stellar population ages.
The latter scenario is more realistic, and will be adopted here. The
luminosity L(z) is found by integrating
F(
, z)
over all wavelengths:
![]() |
(79) |
so that the unknown function C(z) must satisfy
C(z) = L(z) / [T(z)] 4.
If we require that Stefan's law (L
T4) hold at each z, then
![]() |
(80) |
where T0 is the present "galaxy temperature" (i.e. the blackbody temperature corresponding to a peak wavelength in the B-band). Thus the evolution of galaxy luminosity in this model is just that which is required by Stefan's law for blackbodies whose temperatures evolve as T(z). This is reasonable, since galaxies are made up of stellar populations which cool and redden with time as hot massive stars die out.
Let us supplement this with the assumption of constant comoving number
density, n(z) = n0 = const. This is
sometimes referred to as the pure
luminosity evolution or PLE scenario, and while there is some controversy
on this point, PLE has been found by many workers to be roughly consistent
with observed numbers of galaxies at faint magnitudes, especially if there
is a significant vacuum energy density
, 0
> 0. Proceeding on this
assumption, the comoving galaxy luminosity density can be written
![]() |
(81) |
This expression can then be inverted for blackbody temperature
T(z)
as a function of redshift, since the form of
(z)
is fixed by Fig. 9:
![]() |
(82) |
We can check this by choosing T0 = 6600K (i.e. a
present peak wavelength of 4400Å) and reading off values of
(z) =
(z) /
0 at
the peaks of the curves marked "weak," "moderate" and "strong"
evolution in Fig. 9. Putting these numbers into
(82) yields blackbody temperatures (and corresponding peak wavelengths)
of 10,000K (2900Å), 11,900K (2440Å) and 13,100K (2210Å)
respectively at the
galaxy-formation peak. These numbers are consistent with the idea that
galaxies would have been dominated by hot UV-emitting stars at this
early time.
Inserting the expressions (80) for C(z) and (82) for T(z) into the SED (78), and substituting the latter into the EBL integral (62), we obtain
![]() |
(83) |
The dimensional prefactor
Ib = Ib(T0,
0) reads in
this case
![]() |
(84) |
This integral is evaluated and plotted in
Fig. 12, where we have
set zf = 6 following recent observational hints of an
epoch of "first light" at this redshift
[32].
Overall EBL intensity
is insensitive to this choice, provided that zf
3.
Between zf = 3 and zf = 6,
I
(
0) rises by less than 1% below
0 =
10,000Å and less than ~ 5% at
0 =
20,000Å (where most of the signal originates at high
redshifts). There is no further increase beyond zf
> 6 at the three-figure level of precision.
Fig. 12 shows some qualitative differences from
our earlier results
obtained using -function
and Gaussian SEDs. Most noticeably, the
prominent "double-hump" structure is no longer apparent. The key
evolutionary parameter is now blackbody temperature T(z)
and this goes as
[
(z)],1/4
so that individual features in the
comoving luminosity density profile are suppressed. (A similar effect
can be achieved with the Gaussian SED by choosing larger values of
.)
As before, however, the long-wavelength part of the spectrum climbs steadily
up the right-hand side of the figure as one moves from the
, 0 = 0
models (a) and (b) to the
,
0-dominated models (c) and (d), whose
light comes increasingly from more distant, redshifted galaxies.
Absolute EBL intensities in each of these four models are consistent with
what we have seen already. This is not surprising, because changing the
shape of the SED merely shifts light from one part of the spectrum to
another. It cannot alter the total amount of light in the EBL,
which is set by the comoving luminosity density
(z) of
sources
once the background cosmology (and hence the source lifetime) has been
chosen. As before, the best match between calculated EBL intensities
and the observational detections is found for the
,
0-dominated
models (c) and (d). The fact that the EBL is now spread across a broader
spectrum has pulled down its peak intensity slightly, so that the
BDM model (d) no
longer threatens to violate observational limits and in fact
fits them rather nicely. The zero-
, 0
models (a) and (b) again
appear to require some additional source of background radiation (beyond
that produced by galaxies) if they are to contain enough light to make up
the levels of EBL intensity that have been reported.
3.6. Normal and starburst galaxies
The previous sections have shown that simple models of galaxy spectra,
combined with data on the evolution of comoving luminosity density in
the Universe, can produce levels of spectral EBL intensity in rough
agreement with observational limits and reported detections, and even
discriminate to a degree between different cosmological models.
However, the results obtained up to this point are somewhat unsatisfactory
in that they are sensitive to theoretical input parameters, such as
p and
T0, which are hard to connect with the properties of
the actual galaxy population.
A more comprehensive approach would use observational data in conjunction
with theoretical models of galaxy evolution to build up an ensemble of
evolving galaxy SEDs
F(, z)
and comoving number densities n(z)
which would depend not only on redshift but on galaxy type as well.
Increasingly sophisticated work has been carried out along these lines over
the years by Partridge and Peebles
[33],
Tinsley
[34],
Bruzual
[35],
Code and Welch
[36],
Yoshii and Takahara
[37]
and others. The last-named authors, for instance, divided
galaxies into five morphological types (E/SO, Sab, Sbc, Scd and Sdm),
with a different evolving SED for each type, and found that their
collective EBL intensity at NIR wavelengths was about an order
of magnitude below the levels suggested by observation.
Models of this kind, however, are complicated while at the same time
containing uncertainties. This makes their use somewhat incompatible with
our purpose here, which is primarily to obtain a first-order estimate
of EBL intensity so that the importance of expansion can be
properly ascertained. Also, observations have begun to show that the above
morphological classifications are of limited value at redshifts
z 1,
where spirals and ellipticals are still in the process of forming
[38].
As we have already seen, this is precisely
where much of the EBL may originate, especially if luminosity density
evolution is strong, or if there is a significant
,
0-term.
What is needed, then, is a simple model which does not distinguish too
finely between the spectra of galaxy types as they have traditionally
been classified, but which can capture the essence of broad trends in
luminosity density evolution over the full range of redshifts
0 z
zf. For
this purpose we will group together
the traditional classes (spiral, elliptical, etc.) under the single
heading of quiescent or normal galaxies. At higher redshifts
(z
1),
we will allow a second class of objects to play a role:
the active or starburst galaxies. Whereas normal galaxies
tend to be comprised of older, redder stellar populations,
starburst galaxies are dominated by newly-forming stars whose energy
output peaks in the ultraviolet (although much of this is absorbed by
dust grains and subsequently reradiated in the infrared). One signature
of the starburst type is thus a decrease in
F(
) as a
function of
over NUV
and optical wavelengths, while normal types show an increase
[39].
Starburst galaxies also tend to be brighter,
reaching bolometric luminosities as high as 1012 -
1013
L
,
versus 1010 - 1011
L
for
normal types.
There are two ways to obtain SEDs for these objects:
by reconstruction from observational data, or as output from
theoretical models of galaxy evolution. The former approach has had some
success, but becomes increasingly difficult at short wavelengths, so that
results have typically been restricted to
1000Å
[39].
This represents a serious limitation if we want to
integrate out to redshifts zf ~ 6 (say), since it
means that our results are only strictly reliable down to
0 =
(1 +
zf) ~ 7000Å.
In order to integrate out to zf ~ 6 and still go down
as far as the NUV
(
0 ~
2000Å), we require SEDs which are good to
~ 300Å in the
galaxy rest-frame. For this purpose we will
make use of theoretical galaxy-evolution models, which have advanced
to the point where they cover the entire spectrum from the far ultraviolet
to radio wavelengths. This broad range of wavelengths involves diverse
physical processes such as star formation, chemical evolution, and
(of special importance here) dust absorption of ultraviolet light
and re-emission in the infrared. Typical normal and starburst
galaxy SEDs based on such models are now available down to ~ 100Å
[40].
These functions, displayed in Fig. 13,
will constitute our normal and starburst galaxy SEDs,
Fn(
)
and
Fs(
).
![]() |
Figure 13. Typical galaxy SEDs for (a)
normal and (b) starburst type galaxies with and without extinction by dust.
These figures are adapted from Figs. 9 and 10 of Devriendt
[40].
For definiteness we have normalized (over 100 - 3 × 10
4Å) such that Ln = 1 × 1010
h0-2
L |
Fig. 13 shows the expected increase in
Fn()
with
at NUV wavelengths (~ 2000Å) for normal galaxies, as well as the
corresponding decrease for starbursts. What is most striking about both
templates, however, is their overall multi-peaked structure. These objects
are far from pure blackbodies, and the primary reason for this is
dust.
This effectively removes light from the shortest-wavelength peaks
(which are due mostly to star formation), and transfers it to the
longer-wavelength ones. The dashed lines in
Fig. 13 show what
the SEDs would look like if this dust reprocessing were ignored.
The main difference between normal and starburst types lies in the
relative importance of this process. Normal galaxies emit as little
as 30% of their bolometric intensity in the infrared, while the
equivalent fraction for the largest starburst galaxies can reach 99%.
Such variations can be incorporated by modifying input parameters
such as star formation timescale and gas density, leading to spectra which
are broadly similar in shape to those in Fig. 13
but differ in
normalization and "tilt" toward longer wavelengths. The results have
been successfully matched to a wide range of real galaxy spectra
[40].
3.7. Comparison with observation
We proceed to calculate the spectral EBL intensity using
Fn() and
Fs(
),
with the characteristic luminosities of these two types
found as usual by normalization,
Fn(
)
d
=
Ln and
Fs(
)
d
=
Ls.
Let us assume that the comoving luminosity density of the Universe
at any redshift z is a combination of normal and starburst components
![]() |
(85) |
where comoving number densities are
![]() |
(86) |
In other words, we will account for evolution in
(z) solely
in terms of a changing starburst fraction f (z),
and a single comoving number density n(z) as before.
Ln and Ls are awkward to work with
for dimensional reasons,
and we will find it more convenient to specify the SED instead by
two dimensionless parameters, the local starburst fraction
f0 and luminosity ratio
0:
![]() |
(87) |
Observations indicate that
f0
0.05 in the local population
[39],
and the SEDs shown in Fig. 13 have been fitted to
a range of normal and starburst galaxies with
40
0
890
[40].
We will allow these two parameters to vary in the ranges
0.01
f0
0.1 and
10
0
1000.
This, in combination with our "strong" and "weak" limits on
luminosity-density evolution, gives us the flexibility to obtain
upper and lower bounds on EBL intensity.
The functions n(z) and f (z) can now be
fixed by equating
(z)
as defined by (85) to the comoving luminosity-density curves
inferred from HDF data (Fig. 9),
and requiring that
f
1 at peak
luminosity (i.e. assuming that the galaxy
population is entirely starburst-dominated at the redshift
zp of peak
luminosity). These conditions are not difficult to set up. One finds
that modest number-density evolution is required in general,
if f (z) is not to over- or under-shoot unity at
zp. We follow
[42]
and parametrize this with the function
n(z) = n0(1 +
z)
for
z
zp. Here
is often termed
the merger parameter since a value of
> 0 would
imply that the comoving number density of galaxies decreases with time.
Pulling these requirements together, one obtains a model with
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
(88) |
Here (z)
[1 /
0 + (1 - 1 /
0)
f0]
(z) and
=
ln[
(zp)]
/ ln(1 + zp).
The evolution of f (z), nn(z) and
ns(z) is plotted in
Fig. 14 for five models: a best-fit Model 0,
corresponding to the moderate evolution curve in
Fig. 9
with f0 = 0.05 and
0 = 20, and four
other models chosen to produce
the widest possible spread in EBL intensities across the optical band.
Models 1 and 2 are the most starburst-dominated,
with initial starburst fraction and luminosity ratio at their upper
limits (f0 = 0.1 and
0 = 1000). Models
3 and 4 are the
least starburst-dominated, with the same quantities at their
lower limits (f0 = 0.01 and
0 =
10). Luminosity density evolution
is set to "weak" in the odd-numbered Models 1 and 3, and "strong"
in the even-numbered Models 2 and 4. (In principle one could identify
four other "extreme" combinations, such as maximum f0 with
minimum
0, but
these will be intermediate to Models 1-4.) We find merger parameters
between +0.4,
0.5 in the
strong-evolution Models 2 and 4, and -0.5, - 0.4 in the weak-evolution
Models 1 and 3, while
= 0 for Model
0. These are well within the normal range
[43].
![]() |
Figure 14. Evolution of (a) starburst
fraction f (z) and (b) comoving
normal and starburst galaxy number densities
nn(z) and ns(z),
where total comoving luminosity density
|
The information contained in Fig. 14 can be
summarized in words as follows: starburst galaxies formed near
zf ~ 4 and increased in
comoving number density until
zp ~ 2.5 (the redshift of peak comoving
luminosity density in Fig. 9). They then gave
way to a steadily growing population of fainter normal galaxies which
began to dominate between
1 z
2 (depending on
the model) and now make
up 90-99% of the total galaxy population at z = 0. This scenario is
in good agreement with others that have been constructed to explain the
observed faint blue excess in galaxy number counts
[41].
We are now in a position to compute the total spectral EBL intensity by
substituting the SEDs (Fn, Fs) and
comoving number densities (86) into Eq. (62).
Results can be written in the form
I(
0) =
In
(
0) +
Is
(
0) where:
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
(89) |
Here In and
Is
represent contributions from normal and
starburst galaxies respectively and
(z)
n(z) / n0 is the
relative comoving number density. The dimensional content
of both integrals has been pulled into a prefactor
![]() |
(90) |
This is independent of h0, as before, because the
factor of h0 in
0 cancels out
the one in H0. The quantity
0 appears
here when we normalize the galaxy SEDs
Fn(
)
and
Fs(
)
to the observed comoving luminosity density of the Universe. To see this,
note that Eq. (85) reads
0 =
n0 Ln[1 +
(
0 - 1)
f0] at z = 0. Since
0
n0
L0, it follows that
Ln = L0 / [1 +
(
0 - 1)
f0] and Ls = L0
0 / [1 +
(
0 - 1)
f0].
Thus a factor of L0 can be divided out of the
functions Fn and Fs
and put directly into Eq. (89) as required.
The spectral intensity (89) is plotted in Fig. 15,
where we have set zf = 6 as usual. (Results are
insensitive to this choice,
increasing by less than 5% as one moves from zf = 3 to
zf = 6, with no further increase for
zf 6 at
three-figure precision.)
These plots show that the most starburst-dominated models (1 and 2)
produce the bluest EBL spectra, as might be expected. For these two models,
EBL contributions from normal galaxies remain well below those from
starbursts at all wavelengths, so that the bump in the observed spectrum
at
0 ~
4000Å is essentially an echo of the peak at ~ 1100Å in the
starburst SED (Fig. 13), redshifted by a factor
(1 + zp) from the epoch
zp
2.5 of maximum comoving luminosity density.
By contrast, in the least starburst-dominated models (3 and 4),
EBL contributions from normal galaxies catch up to and exceed those from
starbursts at
0
10,
000Å, giving rise to the bump seen at
0 ~ 20,
000Å in these models. Absolute EBL intensities are
highest in the strong-evolution models (2 and 4) and lowest in the
weak-evolution models (1 and 3). We emphasize that the total
amount of light in the EBL is determined by the choice of luminosity
density profile (for a given cosmological model). The choice of SED
merely shifts this light from one part of the spectrum to another.
Within the context of the simple two-component model described above,
and the constraints imposed on luminosity density by the
HDF data (Sec. 3.2), the curves in
Fig. 15 represent
upper and lower limits on the spectral intensity of the EBL
at near-optical wavelengths.
![]() |
Figure 15. The spectral EBL intensity of a
combined population of normal and starburst galaxies, with SEDs as shown in
Fig. 13. The evolving
number densities are such as to reproduce the total comoving luminosity
density seen in the HDF (Fig. 9).
Results are shown for the (a) EdS, (b) OCDM, (c)
|
These curves are spread over a broader range of wavelengths than those
obtained earlier using single-component Gaussian and blackbody spectra.
This leads to a drop in overall intensity, as we can appreciate by noting
that there now appears to be a significant gap between theory and
observation in all but the most vacuum-dominated cosmology,
BDM (d). This is
so even
for the models with the strongest luminosity density evolution (models 2 and
4). In the case of the EdS cosmology (a), this gap is nearly an order of
magnitude, as reported by Yoshii and Takahara
[37].
Similar conclusions have been reached more recently from an analysis of
Subaru Deep Field data by Totani
[44],
who suggest that the shortfall could be made up by a very diffuse,
previously
undetected component of background radiation not associated with galaxies.
Other workers have argued that existing galaxy populations are
enough to explain the data if different assumptions are made about
their SEDs
[45],
or if allowance is made for faint low surface
brightness galaxies below the detection limit of existing surveys
[46].
3.8. Spectral resolution of Olbers' paradox
Having obtained quantitative estimates of the spectral EBL intensity
which are in reasonable agreement with observation,
we return to the question posed in
Sec. 2.4: why precisely is
the sky dark at night? By "dark" we now mean specifically dark at
near-optical wavelengths. We can provide a quantitative answer
to this question by using a spectral version of our previous bolometric
argument. That is, we compute the EBL intensity
I,stat in model
universes which are equivalent to expanding ones in every way
except expansion, and then take the ratio
I
/
I
,stat.
If this is of order unity, then expansion plays a minor role and the
darkness of the optical sky (like the bolometric one) must be
attributed mainly to the fact that the Universe is too young to
have filled up with light. If
I
/ I
,stat << 1, on the other hand,
then we would have a situation qualitatively different from the
bolometric one, and expansion would play a crucial role in the resolution
to Olbers' paradox.
The spectral EBL intensity for the equivalent static model is obtained by
putting the functions
(z), f
(z),
Fn(
),
Fs(
)
and
(z) into
(64) rather than (62). This results in
I
,stat(
0) =
In
,stat(
0) +
Is
,stat(
0) where
normal and starburst contributions are given by
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
(91) |
Despite a superficial resemblance to their counterparts (89)
in the expanding Universe, these are vastly different expressions. Most
importantly, the SEDs
Fn(0) and
Fs(
0) no longer depend on z
and have been pulled out of the integrals. The quantity
I
,stat(
0)
is effectively a weighted mean of the SEDs
Fn(
0) and
Fs(
0). The weighting factors (i.e. the integrals
over z) are related to the age of the galaxies,
0zf dz /
(1 + z)
(z),
but modified by factors of nn(z) and
ns(z) under the integral.
This latter modification is important because it prevents the integrals
from increasing without limit as zf becomes
arbitrarily large,
a problem that would otherwise introduce considerable uncertainty into
any attempt to put bounds on the ratio
I
,stat /
I
[15].
A numerical check confirms that
I
,stat is nearly as insensitive to
the value of zf as
I
, increasing by up to 8% as one
moves from zf = 3 to zf = 6, but
with no further increase for
zf
6 at
the three-figure level.
The ratio of
I / I
,stat is plotted over the waveband
2000-25,000Å in
Fig. 16, where we have set zf
= 6. (Results are insensitive to
this choice, as we have mentioned above, and it may be noted that they are
also independent of uncertainty in constants such as
0 since these
are common to both
I
and
I
,stat.) Several features in this figure
deserve notice. First, the average value of
I
/
I
,stat across
the spectrum is about 0.6, consistent with bolometric expectations
(Sec. 2). Second, the diagonal, bottom-left
to top-right orientation arises largely because
I
(
0) drops off at
short wavelengths, while
I
,stat(
0) does so at long ones. The reason why
I
(
0) drops off at short wavelengths is that
ultraviolet light reaches us only from the nearest galaxies; anything
from more distant ones is redshifted into the optical. The reason why
I
,stat(
0) drops off at long wavelengths is because it
is a weighted mixture of the galaxy SEDs, and drops off at exactly the
same place that they do:
0 ~ 3
× 104Å. In fact, the weighting is heavily
tilted toward the dominant starburst component, so that the two sharp
bends apparent in Fig. 16 are essentially
(inverted) reflections of features in
Fs(
0); namely, the small bump at
0 ~
4000Å and the shoulder at
0 ~ 11,
000Å (Fig. 13).
Finally, the numbers: Fig. 16 shows that the
ratio of
I / I
,stat
is remarkably consistent across the B-band (4000-5000Å) in all four
cosmological models, varying from a high of 0.46 ± 0.10 in the EdS
model to a low of 0.39 ± 0.08 in the
BDM model. These
numbers should be compared with the bolometric result of
Q / Qstat
0.6 ± 0.1 from
Sec. 2. They tell us that expansion
does play a greater
role in determining B-band EBL intensity than it does across the spectrum
as a whole -- but not by much. If its effects were removed, the night
sky at optical wavelengths would be anywhere from two times brighter (in
the EdS model) to three times brighter (in the
BDM model). These
results depend modestly on the makeup of the evolving galaxy population,
and Fig. 16 shows that
I
/ I
,stat in every case is highest for the
weak-evolution model 1, and lowest for the strong-evolution model 4.
This is as we would expect, based on our discussion at the beginning
of this section: models with the strongest evolution effectively
"concentrate" their light production over the shortest possible
interval in time, so that the importance of the lifetime factor drops
relative to that of expansion. Our numerical results, however,
prove that this effect cannot qualitatively alter the resolution of
Olbers' paradox. Whether expansion reduces the background intensity
by a factor of two or three, its order of magnitude is still
set by the lifetime of the Universe.
There is one factor which we have not considered in this section, and that
is the extinction of photons by intergalactic dust and neutral hydrogen,
both of which are strongly absorbing at ultraviolet wavelengths.
The effect of this would primarily be to remove ultraviolet light
from high-redshift galaxies and transfer it into the infrared --
light that would otherwise be redshifted into the optical and contribute
to the EBL. The latter's intensity
I(
0) would therefore drop,
and one could expect reductions over the B-band in particular. The
importance
of this effect is difficult to assess because we have limited data on the
character and distribution of dust beyond our own galaxy. We will find
indications in Sec. 7, however, that the
reduction could be significant at the shortest wavelengths considered here
(
0
2000Å) for the
most extreme dust models.
This would further widen the gap between observed and predicted
EBL intensities noted at the end of Sec. 3.6.
Absorption plays far less of a role in the equivalent static models,
where there is no redshift. (Ultraviolet light is still absorbed, but
the effect does not carry over into the optical). Therefore, the ratio
I /
I
,stat would be expected to drop in nearly direct
proportion to the
drop in I
. In this sense Olbers had part of the solution after
all -- not (as he thought) because intervening matter "blocks" the light
from distant sources, but because it transfers it out of the optical.
The importance of this effect, which would be somewhere below that of
expansion, is a separate issue from the one we have concerned ourselves
with in this section. We have shown that expansion reduces EBL intensity
by a factor of between two and three, depending on background cosmology
and the evolutionary properties of the galaxy population.
Thus the optical sky, like the bolometric one, is dark at night
primarily because it has not had enough time to fill up with light
from distant galaxies.