Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

The Light Echo of a High-Redshift Quasar mapped with Lyman-$\alpha$ Tomography

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Twelve background galaxies reveal the quasar's 'light echo', a three-dimensional ionization map that times its UV-bright phase at roughly 400,000 years.

desk verdict First spectroscopic multi-sightline transverse proximity effect is real, but the >5σ exclusion of f_obsc>99% is not supported by the reported limits and looks largely prior-driven. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.05417 v1 pith:NAQ7JMPG submitted 2025-09-05 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.CO

Anna-Christina Eilers , Minghao Yue , Jorryt Matthee , Joseph F. Hennawi , Frederick B. Davies , Robert A. Simcoe , Richard Teague , Rongmon Bordoloi
show 6 more authors
Gabriel Brammer Yi Kang Daichi Kashino Ruari Mackenzie Rohan P. Naidu Benjamin Navarrete
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.CO
keywords transverseproximityeffectLyman-alphatomographylightechoquasarlifetimessupermassiveblackholegrowthionizationconeshigh-redshiftquasarsreionization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper reports the first spectroscopic detection of the transverse proximity effect — the extra Lyman-alpha transmission from gas ionized by a quasar's radiation — along multiple galaxy sightlines toward the z≈6.3 quasar J0100+2802. Using deep near-infrared spectra of twelve background galaxies, the authors construct a three-dimensional map of the quasar's ionization cone and its 'light echo', the outward-propagating boundary set by the finite speed of light. Fitting a biconical illumination model, they constrain the quasar's current UV-luminous episode to a lifetime of about 400,000 years and place an upper limit of 91% on the fraction of the sky hidden by an obscuring medium. The short lifetime, if right, means the black hole cannot have grown via steady Eddington-limited accretion alone, and the low obscuration fraction rules out geometric hiding as the explanation. This matters because it narrows how the first billion-solar-mass black holes could have formed so early in cosmic history.

What carries the argument

The key object is the quasar's 'light echo': the parabolic boundary, set by the finite speed of light, that separates regions of the intergalactic medium ionized by the quasar's current UV-luminous episode from regions still neutral or ionized only by the cosmic UV background. The calculation combines a biconical AGN-geometry model (inclination, position angle, opening angle of an obscuring torus) with a photoionization-rate map, converting Γ_HI to effective Lyman-alpha optical depth via a power-law relation calibrated on hydrodynamic simulations. Each background galaxy sightline pierces the cone at a different projected distance, and the expected transmission profile is extracted along each

What would settle it

A background sightline within the best-fit cone but beyond the light-echo parabola that shows significant Lyman-alpha transmission, or a second transmitted-flux shell at larger distance indicating an earlier active episode, would falsify the single constant-luminosity echo model.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that the quasar's radiation has ionized a large, anisotropic region of the intergalactic medium that can be mapped as excess Lyman-alpha transmission in the spectra of background galaxies, and that the spatial extent of this region along the line of sight is limited by the quasar's recent turn-on time rather than by its geometry. The detection is made along multiple independent sightlines (twelve galaxies), and the pattern of transmission is fit by a biconical ionization model with a finite light-travel-time cutoff, yielding t_QSO = 10^5.6^{+0.1}_{-0.3} years and f_obsc < 91% (1σ), ruling out f_obsc > 99% at >5σ significance.

Load-bearing premise

The inference of a roughly 400,000-year quasar lifetime and a low obscured fraction depends on the quasar's ionizing luminosity being constant during the current episode and the ionization geometry being a static bicone; if the quasar flickered significantly or the bicone precessed, the light-echo boundary would not be a simple parabola and the fitted parameters would be biased.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The short UV-luminous lifetime supports models with radiatively inefficient accretion or heavily enshrouded early growth, rather than steady Eddington-limited accretion over a Hubble time.
  • The low obscured fraction argues against the idea that most early supermassive black holes are hidden by a torus and only briefly visible as quasars.
  • The light-echo map demonstrates a new technique to measure quasar ionizing geometries and radiative histories at z > 6.
  • The non-detection of transmission outside the fitted parabola indicates no significant previous UV-luminous episodes, disfavoring strong 'flickering' of the quasar light curve.
  • The inferred lifetime is consistent with independent duty-cycle estimates from quasar clustering, suggesting a coherent picture of episodic early black-hole growth.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the light-echo interpretation is correct, the same technique applied to other luminous z > 6 quasars could build a statistical sample of black-hole turn-on times, independently testing the duty-cycle picture inferred from clustering.
  • The tight bound on f_obsc suggests that searches for obscured high-redshift quasars should not expect a dominant population hidden by simple torus geometry; any heavy obscuration must be transient or in a cocoon phase that later clears.
  • A testable extension is to stack many quasar fields: even if individual detections are marginal, a population-level light-echo signature could be separated from sightline noise and would constrain the distribution of quasar lifetimes.
  • If future observations with more sightlines resolve structure inside the light-echo parabola, the constant-luminosity 'light-bulb' model could be replaced by a more realistic light curve, turning the echo into a tomographic record of accretion history.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents JWST/NIRSpec MSA spectroscopy of twelve [OIII]-selected galaxies behind the z_QSO = 6.33 quasar J0100+2802. After fitting and extrapolating power-law continua, the authors search for Lyα forest transmission at the quasar's systemic redshift, finding excess flux in individual sightlines and in the stacked spectrum. They interpret this as the first transverse proximity effect detected along multiple spectroscopic sightlines—the quasar's 'light echo.' A biconical ionization model with constant luminosity is fitted by MCMC, yielding constraints on cone inclination, position angle, obscured solid-angle fraction f_obsc < 91% (1σ) and < 94% (2σ), and a UV-luminous lifetime log10(t_QSO/yr) = 5.6^{+0.1}_{-0.3}. The paper argues this short lifetime is consistent with clustering-based duty-cycle measurements and that f_obsc > 99% is ruled out at >5σ, disfavoring geometric obscuration as an explanation for early SMBH growth.

Significance. If the detection and model hold, this is a genuinely new probe: it delivers the first multi-sightline, spectroscopic transverse proximity effect at z~6 and a three-dimensional map of a quasar's ionization cone. The t_QSO constraint (~4e5 yr) is physically important for early SMBH growth, and the external consistency with independent duty-cycle estimates is encouraging. The paper uses public JWST data and a transparent MCMC modeling framework. However, the quantitative conclusions currently outrun the presented evidence: the headline >5σ exclusion of f_obsc>99% is not derived, and the main systematic uncertainties (continuum normalization, UV background, light-curve shape) are not propagated. These issues are addressable and do not necessarily invalidate the central detection.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5 (also Abstract)] The statement 'We can securely rule out a solid angle obscured fraction of >99% at >5σ significance' is never derived, and it is difficult to reconcile with the §4 constraints f_obsc < 91% (1σ) and < 94% (2σ). For a bounded parameter with those upper limits, P(f_obsc > 0.99) is not obviously ~3e-7; the posterior width implied by the reported 1σ/2σ limits is at least several percent, and with only 12 sightlines a σ(f_obsc) ≈ 0.02 posterior is implausible without demonstration. Because this exclusion is load-bearing for the conclusion that geometric obscuration alone cannot explain the short quasar lifetime, please report the actual posterior probability or Bayes factor, separate the line-of-sight orientation prior from the data likelihood, and state the significance explicitly. If the calculation is not available, the >5σ claim should be removed or replaced by the upper limits actually sh
  2. [§4 and Table 1] The continuum-normalized Lyα transmission is obtained by fitting f_λ ∝ λ^β to 1300–1700 Å and extrapolating blueward. Table 1 quotes β uncertainties of ±0.2 to ±0.7 on individual galaxies, yet these uncertainties are not propagated into the transmitted-flux spectra or the MCMC likelihood. Since the light-echo signal sits close to the extrapolation region, correlated continuum errors can mimic or suppress transmission and directly affect t_QSO and f_obsc. Please include β (and the continuum normalization) as nuisance parameters in the likelihood, or provide a jackknife or synthetic-signal test showing that the reported posteriors are robust to these uncertainties.
  3. [§4–§5] The model adopts a single Γ_UVB ≈ 3e-13 s^-1, a fixed SED/bolometric correction, and a fixed τ_eff–Γ relation without propagating their uncertainties. The light-echo boundary is set by the balance between Γ_QSO and Γ_UVB, so errors in Γ_UVB or Ndot directly shift the inferred t_QSO and cone size. Similarly, the constant-luminosity 'light-bulb' assumption is a structural choice; variability or precession could bias t_QSO. The paper's caveat that the galaxy number prevents fitting more flexible models is not a quantitative assessment of that bias. I request a sensitivity analysis (e.g., vary Γ_UVB and Ndot over their plausible ranges; test a declining or episodic light curve) or explicit weakening of the quantitative t_QSO and f_obsc claims.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4] The text reports Nion,gal = 6.8×10^-58 s^-1 yet says this is more than five orders of magnitude below the quasar's 1.1×10^58 s^-1. The sign/exponent appears to be a typo; the value should be positive (e.g., 10^53–10^54 s^-1).
  2. [§4] The prior distributions shown in Fig. 7 are not described in detail. Please state explicitly the functional form of the prior after conditioning on our line of sight being inside the illuminated cone, and how it maps onto f_obsc and i.
  3. [§4] The equation for Γ_QSO would benefit from parentheses to make the denominator unambiguous, e.g., Γ_QSO = [−β/(3−β)] σ_912 Ndot / [4π(d_∥^2 + d_⊥^2)].
  4. [§2.2] Typo: 'Folded Port Infrated Echellette' should be 'Folded-port InfraRed Echellette' (FIRE).
  5. [General] The abstract and §5 refer to f_obsc < 91% and the >5σ exclusion of f_obsc>99% without consistently stating that the former is a 1σ limit; add confidence levels consistently in the abstract.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circularity: t_QSO and f_obsc are MCMC-fitted to the Lyα transmission data, with external calibrators and independent consistency checks.

full rationale

The central quantities (log10(t_QSO/yr), f_obsc, i, PA) are parameters of a forward biconical light-echo model fit directly to the observed Lyα transmission spectra via a Gaussian likelihood (Section 4). The model inputs—Γ_UVB from Bosman et al. (2022), the τ_eff calibration from Davies et al. (2020a), the bolometric/SED conversion from Lusso et al. (2015), and the ξ_ion/escape-fraction corrections—are externally established, not derived from the same galaxy spectra. The inferred t_QSO is compared with, but not defined by, previous estimates by the same authors (Eilers et al. 2017, 2020; Davies et al. 2020b) or the clustering-based duty cycle (Eilers et al. 2024); those citations are consistency checks and do not carry the derivation. The 'additional prior' that the line of sight lies inside the illuminated cone is a selection effect imposed by the fact that the quasar is observed unobscured; it is a prior, not a fitted quantity relabeled as a result. The only flagged weakness is that the abstract/Section 5 claim that f_obsc>99% is 'securely rule[d] out at >5σ' is not accompanied by the calculation connecting the MCMC posterior to that significance; this is a missing derivation/transparency issue, not a circular reduction, since no equation in the paper sets the claim equal to an input. Overall, the derivation is self-contained with respect to the data, so circularity is minimal.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central constraints rest on four fitted model parameters and on several literature values (gamma, delta, Gamma_UVB, SED) that are taken as fixed inputs; if those inputs are wrong, the inferred geometry and lifetime shift. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Inclination i = ~15 deg (weak constraint)
    MCMC fit to the Ly-alpha transmission profiles along the 12 galaxy sightlines.
  • Position angle PA = 240-340 deg (weak constraint)
    MCMC fit, orientation of the biconical model on the sky.
  • Obscured solid angle fraction f_obsc = <91% (1-sigma), <94% (2-sigma)
    Derived from the fitted opening angle of the obscuring medium; key constraint on geometry.
  • UV-luminous lifetime t_QSO = log10(t_QSO/yr)=5.6^{+0.1}_{-0.3}
    Primary model parameter, fit from the parabolic cutoff of the light echo.
  • Per-galaxy continuum slope beta = 12 values, around -2 to -3.5
    Fitted power-law slopes used to continuum-normalize each galaxy spectrum; uncertainties are not propagated into the transmission or likelihood.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Biconical ionization geometry with a toroidal obscurer, following the AGN unification model.
    The ionized region is modeled as a double cone; inspired by standard AGN unification, stated in Section 4.
  • domain assumption Constant ('light-bulb') quasar luminosity over the active lifetime.
    Used to compute the light-echo boundary; variability would alter the inferred shape and lifetime.
  • domain assumption Effective Ly-alpha optical depth relation tau_eff = gamma (Gamma_HI / 2.5e-13)^(-delta) with gamma~6, delta~0.55.
    Adopted from hydrodynamical simulations (Davies et al. 2020a); fixed during fitting.
  • domain assumption UV background photoionization rate Gamma_UVB ~ 3e-13 s^-1 at z~6.3.
    Extrapolated from Bosman et al. 2022; fixed during fitting, affects the transmission outside the cone.
  • domain assumption Quasar ionizing photon rate derived from M1450 using bolometric correction and SED.
    Converts observed absolute magnitude to ionizing emissivity using Runnoe et al. 2012 and Lusso et al. 2015.
  • domain assumption The ionizing contribution of galaxies in the quasar environment is negligible.
    Computed to be five orders of magnitude below the quasar's photon rate; stated in Section 4.
  • domain assumption Masking within +-1000 km/s of each galaxy's Ly-alpha emission removes CGM contamination.
    Adopted to isolate IGM transmission at the quasar redshift; for z_gal close to z_QSO the quasar signal may fall inside the mask.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Light Echo of a High-Redshift Quasar mapped with Lyman-$\alpha$ Tomography." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NAQ7JMPG

@misc{pith2026250905417,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Light Echo of a High-Redshift Quasar mapped with Lyman-$\alpha$ Tomography},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NAQ7JMPG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.05417}
}
abstract

Ultra-violet (UV) radiation from accreting black holes ionizes the intergalactic gas around early quasars, carving out highly ionized bubbles in their surroundings. Any changes in a quasar's luminosity are therefore predicted to produce outward-propagating ionization gradients, affecting the Lyman-$\alpha$ (Ly$\alpha$) absorption opacity near the quasar's systemic redshift. This "proximity effect" is well-documented in rest-UV quasar spectra but only provides a one-dimensional probe along our line-of-sight. Here we present deep spectroscopic observations with the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) of galaxies in the background of a super-luminous quasar at $z_{\rm QSO}\approx6.3$, which reveal the quasar's "light echo" with Ly$\alpha$ tomography in the transverse direction. This transverse proximity effect is detected for the first time towards multiple galaxy sightlines, allowing us to map the extent and geometry of the quasar's ionization cone. We obtain constraints on the orientation and inclination of the cone, as well as an upper limit on the obscured solid angle fraction of $f_{\rm obsc}<91\%$. Additionally, we find a timescale of the quasar's UV radiation of $t_{\rm QSO}=10^{5.6^{+0.1}_{-0.3}}$ years, which is significantly shorter than would be required to build up the central supermassive black hole (SMBH) with conventional growth models, but is consistent with independent measurements of the quasars' duty cycle. Our inferred obscured fraction disfavors a scenario where short quasar lifetimes can be explained exclusively by geometric obscuration, and instead supports the idea that radiatively inefficient accretion or growth in initially heavily enshrouded cocoons plays a pivotal role in early SMBH growth. Our results pave the way for novel studies of quasars' ionizing geometries and radiative histories at early cosmic times.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.05417 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sample of [O III]-emitting galaxies in the quasar field J0100+2802. A total of 213 [O III]-emitters (grey points) were previously discovered via NIRCam WFSS observations (D. Kashino et al. 2023) in this quasar field. For 35 of them (blue stars) we obtained deep NIRSpec/MSA spectroscopic observations, and 12 of those (red stars) were used in this analysis. Left and right panels show the observed magnitude in NIRCam’s… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Observations. The middle panel shows a color image of the quasar field with the central quasar circled in red, constructed via NIRCam images in the filters F115W, F200W and F356W, showing the spatial locations of the twelve analyzed background galaxies, circled in white. The top and bottom panels show the 2D and 1D spectra of two galaxies, which show a clear detection of the transverse proximity effect at the system… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Galaxy spectra. 2D (top) and 1D (bottom) spectra of ten out of the twelve analyzed galaxies in the quasar field (the remaining two galaxy spectra are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Stacked Galaxy Spectra. The top panel shows the two-dimensional unweighted mean stack of all twelve galaxy spectra colored by the flux. The bottom panel shows the unweighted stack over the same wavelength range of the continuum normalized one-dimensional galaxy spectra…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Flux transmission along individual galaxy sightlines. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Biconical model for quasar’s ionization cone. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Posterior distributions of the model pa [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Map of the quasar’s ionized bubble. The central quasar is indicated by the yellow star, and all galaxy sightlines shown as blue dashed lines. The underlying colormap indicates the level of the expected Lyα flux transmission, while the overplotted black contours illustr…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Subaru meets JWST: A Direct Measurement of Ly$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$ Escape Fraction at $\boldsymbol{z\simeq6.2}$ with Dual Narrow-Band Imaging

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    Completeness-weighted stacking of 56 HAEs at z≃6.2 gives median f_esc^Lyα = 0.106^{+0.066}_{-0.044} with no strong Hα-luminosity dependence and UV-linked galaxy-to-galaxy trends.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Adelberger, K. L. 2004, ApJ, 612, 706, doi: 10.1086/422804

    work page doi:10.1086/422804 2004

  2. [2]

    1993, ARA&A, 31, 473, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.002353 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T

    Antonucci, R. 1993, ARA&A, 31, 473, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.002353 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M....

    work page arXiv 1993

  3. [3]

    C., & Volonteri, M

    Begelman, M. C., & Volonteri, M. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 1102, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2446

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2446 2017

  4. [4]

    C., Volonteri, M., & Rees, M

    Begelman, M. C., Volonteri, M., & Rees, M. J. 2006, MNRAS, 370, 289, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10467.x

    arXiv 2006

  5. [5]

    D., & Begelman, M

    Blandford, R. D., & Begelman, M. C. 1999, MNRAS, 303, L1, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02358.x

    work page arXiv 1999

  6. [6]

    Bosman, S. E. I., Kakiichi, K., Meyer, R. A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 896, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab85cd

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab85cd 2020

  7. [7]

    Bosman, S. E. I., Davies, F. B., Becker, G. D., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 55, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1046

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1046 2022

  8. [8]

    2023, msaexp: NIRSpec analyis tools, 0.6.17 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8319596

    Brammer, G. 2023, msaexp: NIRSpec analyis tools, 0.6.17 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8319596

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.8319596 2023

Show all 62 references
  1. [9]

    L., Wang, R., Fan, X., et al

    Carilli, C. L., Wang, R., Fan, X., et al. 2010, ApJ, 714, 834, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/714/1/834

    2010 doi

  2. [10]

    B., Hennawi, J

    Davies, F. B., Hennawi, J. F., & Eilers, A.-C. 2019, ApJL, 884, L19, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab42e3

    2019 doi

  3. [11]

    B., Hennawi, J

    Davies, F. B., Hennawi, J. F., & Eilers, A.-C. 2020a, MNRAS, 493, 1330, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3303

    doi

  4. [12]

    B., Wang, F., Eilers, A.-C., & Hennawi, J

    Davies, F. B., Wang, F., Eilers, A.-C., & Hennawi, J. F. 2020b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2007.15657. https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.15657 de Graaff, A., Brammer, G., Weibel, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.05948, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.05948

    2007 arXiv

  5. [13]

    B., & Hennawi, J

    Eilers, A.-C., Davies, F. B., & Hennawi, J. F. 2018, ApJ, 864, 53, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad4fd

    2018 doi

  6. [14]

    B., Hennawi, J

    Eilers, A.-C., Davies, F. B., Hennawi, J. F., et al. 2017, ApJ, 840, 24, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6c60

    2017 doi

  7. [15]

    F., Decarli, R., et al

    Eilers, A.-C., Hennawi, J. F., Decarli, R., et al. 2020, ApJ, 900, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba52e

    2020 doi

  8. [16]

    A., Yue, M., et al

    Eilers, A.-C., Simcoe, R. A., Yue, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 950, 68, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd776

    2023 doi

  9. [17]

    2024, ApJ, 974, 275, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad778b

    Eilers, A.-C., Mackenzie, R., Pizzati, E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 275, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad778b

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    P., Fan, X., et al

    Endsley, R., Stark, D. P., Fan, X., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 4248, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac737

    2022 doi

  11. [19]

    A., Becker, R

    Fan, X., Strauss, M. A., Becker, R. H., et al. 2006, The Astronomical Journal, 132, 117, doi: 10.1086/504836 13

    2006 doi

  12. [20]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    2013 doi

  13. [21]

    B., Watson, D., et al

    Fujimoto, S., Brammer, G. B., Watson, D., et al. 2022, Nature, 604, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04454-1

    2022 doi

  14. [22]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  15. [23]

    E., Brammer, G

    Heintz, K. E., Brammer, G. B., Watson, D., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A60, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450243

    2025 doi

  16. [24]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing In Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  17. [25]

    Inayoshi, K., Haiman, Z., & Ostriker, J. P. 2016, MNRAS, 459, 3738, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw836

    2016 doi

  18. [26]

    2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1911.05791

    Inayoshi, K., Visbal, E., & Haiman, Z. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1911.05791. https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.05791

    2019 arXiv

  19. [27]

    A., Wagner, S., & Reimers, D

    Jakobsen, P., Jansen, R. A., Wagner, S., & Reimers, D. 2003, A&A, 397, 891, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021579

    2003 doi

  20. [28]

    2001, SciPy: Open source scientific tools for Python, http://www.scipy.org/

    Jones, E., Oliphant, T., Peterson, P., et al. 2001, SciPy: Open source scientific tools for Python, http://www.scipy.org/

    2001

  21. [29]

    2022, MNRAS, 516, 582, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2026

    Kakiichi, K., Schmidt, T., & Hennawi, J. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 582, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2026

    2022 doi

  22. [30]

    J., Matthee, J., et al

    Kashino, D., Lilly, S. J., Matthee, J., et al. 2023, ApJ, 950, 66, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc588

    2023 doi

  23. [31]

    F., Stark, C., et al

    Lee, K.-G., Hennawi, J. F., Stark, C., et al. 2014, ApJL, 795, L12, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/795/1/L12

    2014 doi

  24. [32]

    F., et al

    Lusso, E., Worseck, G., Hennawi, J. F., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 449, 4204, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv516

    2015 doi

  25. [33]

    2024, A&A, 685, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347884

    Mascia, S., Pentericci, L., Calabr` o, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347884

    2024 doi

  26. [34]

    A., et al

    Matthee, J., Mackenzie, R., Simcoe, R. A., et al. 2023a, ApJ, 950, 67, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc846

    doi

  27. [35]

    2017, MNRAS, 465, 3637, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2973

    Matthee, J., Sobral, D., Best, P., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 3637, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2973

    2017 doi

  28. [36]

    P., Brammer, G., et al

    Matthee, J., Naidu, R. P., Brammer, G., et al. 2023b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.05448, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.05448

    doi arXiv

  29. [37]

    A., Eilers, A.-C., Davies, F

    Morey, K. A., Eilers, A.-C., Davies, F. B., Hennawi, J. F., & Simcoe, R. A. 2021, ApJ, 921, 88, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1c70

    2021 doi

  30. [38]

    P., Matthee, J., Katz, H., et al

    Naidu, R. P., Matthee, J., Katz, H., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.16596, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.16596

    2025 doi arXiv

  31. [39]

    1995, ApJ, 452, 710, doi: 10.1086/176343

    Narayan, R., & Yi, I. 1995, ApJ, 452, 710, doi: 10.1086/176343

    1995 doi

  32. [40]

    W., Hu, W., et al

    Papovich, C., Cole, J. W., Hu, W., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.08870, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.08870

    2025 doi

  33. [41]

    F., Schaye, J., et al

    Pizzati, E., Hennawi, J. F., Schaye, J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.12140, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.12140

    2024 doi arXiv

  34. [42]

    2008, ApJ, 675, 960, doi: 10.1086/524343

    Polletta, M., Weedman, D., H¨ onig, S., et al. 2008, ApJ, 675, 960, doi: 10.1086/524343

    2008 doi

  35. [43]

    A., Andrews, S

    Rosenfeld, K. A., Andrews, S. M., Hughes, A. M., Wilner, D. J., & Qi, C. 2013, ApJ, 774, 16, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/774/1/16

    2013 doi

  36. [44]

    C., Brotherton, M

    Runnoe, J. C., Brotherton, M. S., & Shang, Z. 2012, MNRAS, 422, 478, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20620.x

    2012

  37. [45]

    C., & Haehnelt, M

    Satyavolu, S., Kulkarni, G., Keating, L. C., & Haehnelt, M. G. 2023a, MNRAS, 521, 3108, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad729

    doi

  38. [46]

    2023b, MNRAS, 522, 4918, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1326

    Satyavolu, S., Eilers, A.-C., Kulkarni, G., et al. 2023b, MNRAS, 522, 4918, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1326

    doi

  39. [47]

    2023, ApJ, 943, 67, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca7ca

    Schindler, J.-T., Ba˜ nados, E., Connor, T., et al. 2023, ApJ, 943, 67, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca7ca

    2023 doi

  40. [48]

    M., Hennawi, J

    Schmidt, T. M., Hennawi, J. F., Lee, K.-G., et al. 2019, ApJ, 882, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2fcb

    2019 doi

  41. [49]

    M., Hennawi, J

    Schmidt, T. M., Hennawi, J. F., Worseck, G., et al. 2018, ApJ, 861, 122, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac8e4

    2018 doi

  42. [50]

    I., & Sunyaev, R

    Shakura, N. I., & Sunyaev, R. A. 1973, A&A, 500, 33

    1973

  43. [51]

    A., Burgasser, A

    Simcoe, R. A., Burgasser, A. J., Bernstein, R. A., et al. 2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7014, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy II, ed. I. S. McLean & M. M. Casali, 70140U, doi: 10.1117/12.790414

    2008 doi

  44. [52]

    2024, MNRAS, 535, 2998, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2537

    Simmonds, C., Tacchella, S., Hainline, K., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 535, 2998, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2537

    2024 doi

  45. [53]

    1982, MNRAS, 200, 115, doi: 10.1093/mnras/200.1.115

    Soltan, A. 1982, MNRAS, 200, 115, doi: 10.1093/mnras/200.1.115

    1982 doi

  46. [54]

    2009, ApJ, 696, 1798, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/696/2/1798

    Tanaka, T., & Haiman, Z. 2009, ApJ, 696, 1798, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/696/2/1798

    2009 doi

  47. [55]

    M., & Padovani, P

    Urry, C. M., & Padovani, P. 1995, PASP, 107, 803, doi: 10.1086/133630

    1995 doi

  48. [56]

    2011, A&A, 536, A105, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117752

    Vernet, J., Dekker, H., D’Odorico, S., et al. 2011, A&A, 536, A105, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117752

    2011 doi

  49. [57]

    2019, ApJ, 884, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2be5

    Wang, F., Yang, J., Fan, X., et al. 2019, ApJ, 884, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2be5

    2019 doi

  50. [58]

    2015, Nature, 518, 512, doi: 10.1038/nature14241

    Wu, X.-B., Wang, F., Fan, X., et al. 2015, Nature, 518, 512, doi: 10.1038/nature14241

    2015 doi

  51. [59]

    2020, ApJ, 904, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbc1b

    Yang, J., Wang, F., Fan, X., et al. 2020, ApJ, 904, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbc1b

    2020 doi

  52. [60]

    2002, MNRAS, 335, 965, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05532.x

    Yu, Q., & Tremaine, S. 2002, MNRAS, 335, 965, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05532.x

    2002

  53. [61]

    A., et al

    Yue, M., Eilers, A.-C., Simcoe, R. A., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2309.04614, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2309.04614 14

    2023 doi arXiv

  54. [62]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.05381, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.05381

    Yue, M., Eilers, A.-C., Matthee, J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.05381, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.05381

    2025 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.