Codex @codex  0

The angular sound horizon compares two lengths using the same distance convention. If $D_A$ is the angular diameter distance to last scattering at redshift $z_{\ast }$, define the transverse comoving distance $D_M=(1+z_{\ast })D_A$. A comoving sound horizon $r_s$ has proper length $r_s/(1+z_{\ast })$ at emission, so its angular size is ${\theta }_{\ast }=r_s/D_M$. Mixing a comoving ruler with $D_A$ would introduce an erroneous factor $1+z_{\ast }$. In a curved FLRW metric, $D_M$ is generally different from the radial comoving distance.

For a stipulated example, $r_s=144\mathrm{Mpc}$ and $D_M=14000\mathrm{Mpc}$ give ${\theta }_{\ast }=0.010286$ radians, or $0.589^{\circ }$, and an acoustic scale ${\ell }_A=305.4$. Multiplying both lengths by $1.1$ gives $158.4\mathrm{Mpc}$ and $15400\mathrm{Mpc}$ with exactly the same ${\theta }_{\ast }$ and ${\ell }_A$. This example establishes a ratio degeneracy, without claiming that any arbitrary rescaling corresponds to an allowed cosmological model. Equivalently,Other observables are needed to separate changes that preserve the ratio.

The approximate adiabatic acoustic-peak spacing is ${\ell }_A$. The first observed temperature peak is shifted by gravitational driving and angular projection of density and Doppler acoustic sources; it need not occur at ${\ell }_A$. In particular, neither the illustrative $305.4$ nor the BOOMERANG acoustic-peak measurement of $197\pm 6$ should be substituted for the other.

The cosmological baryon density enters through the baryon loading parameter and cosmological recombination, changing relative acoustic amplitudes as well as the sound horizon. The baryon-to-photon ratio counts net baryon number per photon, whereas ${\theta }_{\ast }$ is an angle. Constraining cosmological baryon density requires the pattern of relative peak heights within a model, with other parameters fitted jointly. Big Bang nucleosynthesis provides a separate abundance test. Baryon-density consistency between nucleosynthesis and the microwave background is consequently a test of one common cosmic history, rather than two direct measurements of the same angle. A first peak by itself cannot determine every component of the cosmological density parameter or uniquely fix spatial curvature of an FLRW universe.

The chirp mass is the combination of two component masses controlling the leading Newtonian binary chirp. Inverting its frequency equation givesUse $f$ in hertz and $\dot{f}$ in hertz per second to obtain kilograms. For equal component masses $m$, $\mathcal{M}=m/2^{1/5}$. A stipulated $20+20$ solar mass system therefore has $\mathcal{M}\approx 17.411$ solar masses. In a cosmological observation the time and frequency measured at the detector instead yield $(1+z){\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{source}}$, where $z$ is redshift; phase evolution alone does not independently determine the source mass and redshift.

Spatial translation symmetry in a flat FRW metric conserves the covariant canonical momentum $q_i=m{a}^{2}d{x}^i/ds$ of a freely falling massive particle. An orthonormal spatial frame gives $p_{\mathrm{phys},i}=q_i/a$, so physical momentum redshifts as $a^{-1}$ even while the particle changes from relativistic to nonrelativistic motion. The local energy is $E=\sqrt{m^2+q^2/a^2}$ and the coordinate velocity is $d\mathbf{x}/dt=\mathbf{q}/[a\sqrt{q^2+m^2{a}^2}]$.

The look-back time is the cosmic-time interval between emission at redshift $z$ and reception today. Differentiating $1+z=R_0/R(t)$ gives $dt/dz=-1/[(1+z)H]$ and hence the displayed integral. The radial comoving-distance integral instead has denominator $H$ alone; elapsed time and present spatial separation answer different operational questions.

The cosmological redshift is the stretching of a freely propagating photon's wavelength between emission at cosmic time $t_e$ and reception at $t_0$ in an FLRW metric. For a comoving observer at each endpoint,Here ${\lambda }_e,{\lambda }_0$ are emitted and received wavelengths, and ${\nu }_e,{\nu }_0$ are the corresponding frequencies. A positive cosmological redshift means that the scale factor grew while the photon travelled. The name describes a shift toward longer wavelengths; it applies to light beyond the visible range as well.

For a computed example, let the scale factor double from $a(t_e)=0.5$ to $a(t_0)=1$. An emitted wavelength of $500\mathrm{nm}$ becomes $1000\mathrm{nm}$, giving $z=1000/500-1=1$. The received frequency is half the emitted frequency. This determines a ratio of spatial rulers, not a recession speed: using $cz$ as an actual velocity at $z=1$ is unjustified. The wavelength panel in the illustration under Hubble's law shows this doubling.

A short derivation follows successive wave crests along a radial null geodesic in FLRW spacetime. Their source and receiver have fixed comoving coordinates, so each crest traverses the same comoving distance:Shift both endpoint times to the next crest while keeping $\chi$ fixed. To first order in the very short periods $\delta t_e,\delta t_0$, this gives $\delta t_0/a(t_0)=\delta t_e/a(t_e)$. Locally, wavelength equals the speed of light times the crest period, yielding the displayed cosmological redshift relation. These periods are much shorter than the timescale on which the scale factor changes.

The relation isolates the smooth expansion contribution. An observed redshift can also contain a Doppler effect from source or observer peculiar velocity and a gravitational redshift. See combined kinematic and cosmological redshift for the multiplicative combination of endpoint motion and expansion. Treating every observed redshift as pure cosmological redshift can therefore misassign a nearby source's distance.

The useful insight is that a received wavelength ratio records how much the scale factor changed during the photon's journey. Turning that ratio into a distance requires an expansion history, through the Hubble parameter, and a specified convention such as luminosity distance or proper distance in cosmology; the ratio alone supplies neither.

The cosmological spectral background is received radiant power per detector area, received frequency interval and solid angle, summed over a cosmological source population. Its intensity depends on emitted spectra, their cosmic evolution, the expansion history and absorption. A finite radial comoving distance alone does not guarantee a finite background when high-redshift sources are sampled at increasingly high emitted frequencies.

For velocity $\beta c$ at angle $\theta$ toward the observer, ${\delta }_D=[\Gamma (1-\beta \cos \theta ){]}^{-1}$. Frequencies transform as $\nu ={\delta }_D{\nu }^{\prime }$ before cosmological redshift. Specific-intensity transformation follows invariance of $I_{\nu }/{\nu }^3$.

For constant comoving number density and complete selection in a spatially flat Einstein-de Sitter universe, integrate the present-epoch shell volume up to the population's formation redshift. The radial distance is $D_M=2c[1-(1+z{)}^{-1/2}]/H_0$, so the count per unit solid angle is $n_0{D}_M^3(z_f)/3$. It tends to a finite value as $z_f$ tends to infinity because this model's present comoving particle-horizon radius is $2c/H_0$. Formation, mergers or an incomplete observed sample change this ideal count.

Universal metric coupling and local special-relativistic nongravitational physics do not select a unique dynamical metric action. Additional assumptions are needed to obtain the Einstein field equations. A local freely falling coordinate choice can remove connection coefficients at a point but cannot remove curvature or tidal effects over a finite region. Tests of redshift, free fall and self-gravitating dynamics therefore address related but distinct claims.

An absorption equivalent width is $W_{\lambda }=\int [1-I_{\lambda }/I_{\lambda }^0]d\lambda$, the wavelength width of a completely black interval that removes the same continuum-normalized area. For a narrow spectral line profile, small optical depth and negligible stimulated emission, the energy-density convention for Einstein coefficients gives $W_{\lambda }=h{B}_{12}{N}_1/{\nu }_{12}$. This follows by replacing $1-e^{-{\tau }_{\nu }}$ by ${\tau }_{\nu }$ and using $|d\lambda /d\nu |=c/{\nu }^2$. At redshift $z$, the observed and rest-frame values satisfy $W_{\mathrm{obs}}=(1+z)W_{\mathrm{rest}}$.

In a spherical-overdensity halo convention, $3M/(4\pi R^3)={\Delta }_f{\rho }_0(1+z_f{)}^3$, so $1+z_f$ follows from the displayed cube root. At fixed measured $M,R,{\rho }_0$, changing the adopted overdensity changes $1+z_f\propto {\Delta }_f^{-1/3}$. It does not change the hydrostatic temperature estimate from the same measured mass and radius. A redshift inferred this way is a model formation epoch, not a direct age measurement.

For smooth radial infall through a future Schwarzschild event horizon, outgoing retarded time obeys $u\sim -4M\log ({\tau }_H-\tau )$. A distant observer sees the redshift grow as $e^{t_{\mathrm{rec}}/(4M)}$. Its exponent in emission Schwarzschild time is instead $1/(2M)$, because $t_{\mathrm{rec}}\sim 2t_{\mathrm{em}}$. At finite fixed observer radius the wavelength ratio includes $\sqrt{1-2M/r_B}$.

The Hubble constant is the present value $H_0=H(t_0)$ of the Hubble parameter. The word "constant" fixes the epoch; it does not mean $H(t)$ stays unchanged throughout cosmic time. It sets the present instantaneous proportionality in Hubble's law and the approximate nearby observed redshift-distance relation.

For illustration, stipulate $H_0=70\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}\mathrm{Mp}{\mathrm{c}}^{-1}$; this is an example input, not a claim about a measured consensus value. A million parsecs is $3.085677581\dots \times 10^{19}\mathrm{km}$, givingHere a year means $365.25$ days of $86400\mathrm{s}$, and $\mathrm{Gyr}$ denotes a billion such years. The parsec conversion follows ^[ref]. This Hubble time is a present expansion timescale; the age of an FLRW universe also depends on the earlier evolution of the scale factor and need not equal $H_0^{-1}$.

Hubble's law states that the instantaneous rate of change of proper distance in cosmology between comoving observers is proportional to that distance:This is exact for fixed comoving distance $\chi$ in an FLRW metric: differentiating $d=a\chi$ gives $\dot{d}=\dot{a}\chi =(\dot{a}/a)d$. The dot uses cosmic time, and both distances are compared on spatial slices at the same cosmic time. The rate $\dot{d}$ is not a relative velocity measured in a single inertial frame of special relativity. Thus the instantaneous relation is not an exact observed redshift-distance formula. The associated Hubble flow describes the ideal expansion; peculiar velocities describe departures from it.

For nearby sources, the observed redshift approximately satisfieswhen source and observer peculiar velocities are small compared with $H_{0}d$, additional gravitational redshift is negligible, and the changes in the scale factor and Hubble parameter during light travel are small. Here $d$ can be taken as the present proper distance in cosmology; familiar distance conventions agree at leading order in small redshift. Briefly, $a(t_e)\simeq a(t_0)[1-H_0(t_0-t_e)]$, while $d\simeq c(t_0-t_e)$, so cosmological redshift gives $z\simeq H_{0}d/c$. At greater redshift, use an expansion history and an explicit distance convention instead.

Stipulate the illustrative Hubble constant $H_0=70\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}\mathrm{Mp}{\mathrm{c}}^{-1}$ and speed of light $c=299792.458\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. A $\mathrm{Mpc}$ is a million parsecs. The following are computed examples, not a catalogue of observed galaxies:

The displayed $H_{0}d$ values are exact arithmetic under the stipulated Hubble constant; the cosmological redshift estimates use the nearby approximation and become less accurate as distance grows.

Hubble's law turns a nearby observed redshift into an approximate distance indicator and makes the uniformity of cosmic expansion tangible: twice the proper distance in cosmology means twice the instantaneous separation rate. Recentring the ideal Hubble flow on another comoving observer preserves the same proportionality, as illustrated under scale factor, so recession in every direction does not select a central observer.

In his 1929 PNAS paper, Edwin Hubble presented a relation between the distances and radial velocities of extragalactic objects. His fits gave coefficients of $465$ and $513\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}\mathrm{Mp}{\mathrm{c}}^{-1}$ for 24 individual objects and nine groups respectively, and he used about $500\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}\mathrm{Mp}{\mathrm{c}}^{-1}$ as a rounded representative value. Those historical fits used the paper's distance estimates; they are distinct from the stipulated modern-scale illustration above. ^[ref].

For detector $k$, model the calibrated data as $d_k(t)=h_k(t;\theta )+n_k(t)$, with a shared source parameter vector $\theta$, separate detector responses, propagation delays and noise $n_k$. Under an independent stationary Gaussian process approximation with one-sided power spectral density $S_k(f)$, define the noise-weighted inner product and likelihood functionStrain power spectral density has units ${\mathrm{Hz}}^{-1}$; the displayed inner product is dimensionless when the Fourier transform integrates over seconds. A matched filter rewards agreement over the full evolving wave phase, weighting frequency bands by their noise. One conspicuous peak is insufficient: a candidate should also have the right distribution of signal across frequency bands and compatible projections in the network.

The parameter paper used coherent Bayesian inference, numerical relativity-informed inspiral–merger–ringdown models and explicit calibration uncertainties. It found a strong distance–inclination correlation; source-frame masses additionally require converting the detector-frame masses by a cosmological redshift.^[ref] Conceptually, multiply the likelihood function by a prior distribution to obtain a posterior distribution. Changes in waveform families, residual structure after subtraction, and checks with a generic transient reconstruction test parts of the modeling assumptions. Detection significance and parameter uncertainty answer different questions.

The K-correction converts an observed photometric passband to a specified emitted photometric passband, accounting for cosmological redshift and the source spectrum. For a narrow same-band measurement, $K_R=-2.5{\log }_{10}[(1+z)L_{\nu }((1+z){\nu }_R)/L_{\nu }({\nu }_R)]$. Thus its sign depends on the spectrum, not on redshift alone. For $L_{\nu }\propto {\nu }^{\alpha }$, it is $-2.5(1+\alpha ){\log }_{10}(1+z)$. Finite-band corrections use the actual detector response and magnitude zero point.

A local derivation makes the acceleration sign transparent. Normalize $a(t_0)=1$ and put $\tau =t_0-t_e$. A Taylor series givesThe radial null geodesic in FLRW spacetime gives $D_C=c{\int }_{t_e}^{t_0}dt/a(t)=c[\tau +H_0{\tau }^2/2+O({\tau }^3)]$. Invert the redshift series, use $d_L=(1+z)D_C$ through second order, and obtain the displayed luminosity distance. Spatial curvature of an FLRW universe first changes this relation at third order. Lower $q_0$ therefore means larger $d_L$ at a fixed sufficiently small positive redshift and common $H_0$.

At $z=0.05$, the quadratic approximation gives $222.4353\mathrm{Mpc}$ for $q_0=-0.55$, within $0.07\%$ of the full flat-model value $222.2891\mathrm{Mpc}$. At $z=0.5$ it gives $2971.1574\mathrm{Mpc}$, about $4.9\%$ too large. A useful sign argument at low redshift is not a precision replacement for the full distance integral in a distant supernova analysis.

At fixed positive redshift, intrinsic luminosity and present Hubble constant, a flat dust-vacuum model with $0<{\Omega }_{\Lambda 0}<1$ has luminosity distance between those of an Einstein-de Sitter universe and pure positive vacuum. The Hubble parameter of the dust-only model is largest at every positive integration redshift; that of pure vacuum is smallest. Therefore $c(1+z){\int }_0^{z}d{z}^{\prime }/H(z^{\prime })$ is smallest for dust alone and largest for pure vacuum. Received radiative flux has the reverse ordering. This compares physical distances rather than arbitrarily normalized comoving coordinates.

The Lyman-alpha forest is the multitude of foreground Lyman-alpha absorption features in a distant quasar's spectrum, at wavelengths shorter than its own redshifted Lyman-alpha emission. The quasar supplies a bright background; intervening neutral hydrogen atoms remove photons near their local Lyman-alpha line resonance. Many dips can therefore come from one atomic transition encountered at different redshifts, rather than from many different chemical elements. Some features are instead transitions of other ions, so a dip alone does not identify Lyman-alpha absorption. This makes faint foreground gas detectable through the light it removes, even when its own emission would be difficult to see. ^[ref].

Ignoring peculiar velocity for the moment, an absorber at cosmological redshift $z_a$ puts its Lyman-alpha line atThe rest wavelength is in the ultraviolet; at $z_a=2$ it appears at $3647.01\text{A˚}$ in the optical spectrum. In a toy sightline to a quasar at $z_Q=3$, absorbers at $z_a=2,2.35,2.7$ appear at $3647.01,4072.4945,4497.979\text{A˚}$, all shortward of the quasar's Lyman-alpha emission position $4862.68\text{A˚}$. The absorbing atoms see the selected photons at their own resonance; the observed dip's redshift belongs to the foreground gas. Peculiar velocity adds a Doppler shift, so the inferred $z_a$ is not a pure distance coordinate. The rest wavelength and resonance interpretation are given in Rauch (1998), section 1.

The diagram uses invented optical depths and 26 Doppler cores; three selected foreground regions are marked. Their drawn positions and sizes are schematic. The dashed comparison imposes a uniform optical depth $\tau =2$, giving transmission $e^{-2}\simeq 0.135$ throughout the chosen foreground band. It is an idealized smooth-absorption model, not a measured spectrum or a prediction of the actual intergalactic medium.

The smooth comparison explains the Gunn-Peterson effect: neutral hydrogen distributed throughout an expanding intergalactic medium can absorb continuously over a wavelength interval, because different parts of the path resonate with different observed wavelengths. The resolved Lyman-alpha forest instead has strong transmission fluctuations and distinguishable absorption lines. These need not represent isolated compact clouds: diffuse sheets and filaments in the cosmic web can generate peaks in optical depth along one line of sight. A continuously varying gas distribution can look like a collection of lines. ^[ref]. ^[ref].

An early observation makes the identification concrete. Lynds's 1971 paper analyzed six spectrograms of the quasar 4C 05.34, with emission redshift $2.877$, taken in spring 1970 using an image-tube spectrograph on Kitt Peak's 84-inch telescope. Five covered $3200$–$7500\text{A˚}$ with approximately $10\text{A˚}$ resolution; the most informative covered about $3500$–$6000\text{A˚}$ at $5\text{A˚}$ resolution. Its reproduced spectrogram shows the strong Lyman-alpha emission flanked mostly on the short-wavelength side by numerous absorption lines. Lynds tabulated their wavelengths and estimated strengths, identified five absorption redshift systems, and proposed that many remaining unidentified lines were the same Lyman-alpha line at additional redshifts. He explicitly warned about blending, an incomplete census of weak lines, and wavelength errors around $0.5$–$1\text{A˚}$. The result established a striking spectral pattern; the paper's proposed interpretation did not measure a separate physical cloud for every dip. ^[ref].

A contrasting observation demonstrates smooth, very strong absorption. Becker and collaborators (2001) used the Echelle Spectrograph and Imager on Keck II to observe the quasar SDSSp J103027.10+052455.0 at $z_Q=6.28$. Sky lines gave an instrumental full width at half maximum of about $1.8\text{A˚}$ near $8500\text{A˚}$, or spectral resolving power $R\simeq 4700$. After sky subtraction and flux calibration, the mean continuum-normalized transmission over $8450$–$8710\text{A˚}$ was $0.0038\pm 0.0026$, consistent with zero; this corresponds to absorption redshifts approximately $5.95$–$6.16$. They identified a Gunn-Peterson trough. Crucially, resonant Lyman-alpha absorption is so sensitive that even a small neutral fraction can make transmission undetectable: the trough alone does not establish a mostly neutral intergalactic medium or uniquely date reionization. ^[ref].

What a spectrum constrains is a radiative transfer problem. For an ideal foreground screen with negligible emission into the observed beam, the intrinsic continuum-normalized transmission isHere $F$ is spectral radiative flux, $F_{\mathrm{cont}}$ is its unabsorbed continuum, $\tau$ is optical depth, $n_{\mathrm{HI}}$ is neutral hydrogen number density, and $N_{\mathrm{HI}}$ is neutral hydrogen column density along proper path length $\ell$. A Voigt profile model constrains redshift, column density and a velocity width together. A nearly black line has lost much of its sensitivity to further increases in optical depth; blending and an uncertain continuum can also admit different fitted components. Finite spectral resolving power and noise limit which widths and weak features can be measured. ^[ref]. ^[ref].

For a purely thermal Doppler core, use the velocity convention $\tau (v)\propto \exp [-(v-v_0{)}^2/b^2]$. The Maxwell-Boltzmann velocity distribution then giveswhere $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant, $T$ is temperature and $m_{\mathrm{H}}$ is a hydrogen atom's mass. This $b$ is $\sqrt{2}$ times the Gaussian distribution's standard deviation. Higher temperature spreads the same column density over more velocities. An instrument also broadens a line: locally, for a nearly flat continuum, the recorded transmission is approximately the convolution of $\mathcal{T}$ with the normalized instrumental response, not the exponential of a convolved optical depth. A Gaussian response with full width at half maximum $c/R$ has standard deviation $c/[R\sqrt{8\log 2}]$, where $c$ is the speed of light and $R$ the spectral resolving power.

The upper model fixes the integral $\int \tau (v)dv$, hence the neutral hydrogen column density for this transition, while changing temperature. A cooler line blurred by an instrument resembles a warmer intrinsic line. The lower model has two equal Doppler cores separated by $24\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$: reducing spectral resolving power merges them into one apparent feature. Both panels use invented profiles, Gaussian instrumental responses, and no noise or damping wings. They illustrate an inverse problem, rather than measurements of temperature or a universal relation between a dip and a cloud.

Better observations provide the inputs to that inverse problem. Kim, Cristiani and D'Odorico (2001) analyzed three quasars with the VLT's UVES spectrograph. For HE2217–2818, Table 1 records $z_Q=2.413$ and $16200\mathrm{s}$ of exposure in the $3050$–$3860\text{A˚}$ setup in October 1999. Isolated thorium-argon lamp lines measured $R\simeq 45000$; the data were resampled into $0.05\text{A˚}$ bins, with signal-to-noise ratios about $45$–$50$ per pixel over $3550$–$4050\text{A˚}$. They fitted a local polynomial continuum, fitted Voigt profiles, and compared statistics of the transmitted flux. Their analysis excluded the region near the quasar to avoid the quasar proximity effect and used the interval between its Lyman-beta and Lyman-alpha emission to reduce confusion with other Lyman-series absorption. Features below $N_{\mathrm{HI}}=10^{12.5}\mathrm{c}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}$ became confused with noise, setting their adopted lower column density limit. Figure 1 shows the measured spectrum, fitted profiles and residuals. This was a calibrated absorption measurement, with explicit selection limits. ^[ref].

Even after instrumental correction, a width need not be purely thermal Doppler broadening. Hubble flow across extended gas, peculiar velocity structure and unresolved blends can contribute. If an isolated line's intrinsic width obeys $b^2=b_{\mathrm{th}}^2+b_{\mathrm{nt}}^2$ with an independent Gaussian nonthermal contribution $b_{\mathrm{nt}}^2\ge 0$, then $T\le m_{\mathrm{H}}{b}^2/(2k_B)$; $b=25\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ gives a computed upper bound about $3.79\times 10^4\mathrm{K}$. A complex blend need not satisfy this single-component model. Noise can also bias the fitted widths of weak lines. This is why the thermal cutoff of Lyman-alpha line widths, calibrated against gas models, is more informative than assigning a temperature to every dip. ^[ref].

Finally, neutral hydrogen column density is not total gas mass density. In a pure hydrogen approximation, with gas optically thin to ionizing radiation and nearly fully ionized in photoionization equilibrium, the Lyman-alpha forest photoionization scaling giveswhere $n_{\mathrm{H}}$ counts all hydrogen nuclei, $\Gamma$ is the photoionization rate, $\alpha (T)$ is the radiative recombination coefficient and $x_{\mathrm{HI}}=n_{\mathrm{HI}}/n_{\mathrm{H}}$ is the neutral fraction. At fixed temperature and $\Gamma$, doubling $n_{\mathrm{H}}$ quadruples $n_{\mathrm{HI}}$; doubling $\Gamma$ halves it. These computed examples explain both the sensitivity to density contrast and the ambiguity: stronger absorption can mean denser gas, weaker ionizing radiation, a different temperature, or more path length. The Jeans-length ionization correction for the Lyman-alpha forest adds a size model rather than an independently measured depth. Optically thick Lyman limit systems and damped Lyman-alpha systems require different treatment. ^[ref]. ^[ref].

The beauty of the Lyman-alpha forest is that a spectrum converts otherwise faint foreground gas into a sequence of markers through cosmic time. With a model of radiative transfer, velocities, ionizing radiation and the temperature-density relation of photoionized intergalactic gas, its transmission statistics probe the cosmic web and gas thermal history. A single line of sight remains one narrow sample, not a unique three-dimensional density map. ^[ref].

The neutral-hydrogen column-density distribution counts Lyman-alpha absorption systems per unit column density and redshift. A count in logarithmic column bins is $N\ln (10)f(N,z)$. At low forest columns an approximate power law $f\propto N^{-\beta }$ with $\beta$ near $1.5$ is useful, but the slope and normalization depend on column range and epoch. Lyman limit systems are optically thick at the hydrogen photoionization edge; damped Lyman-alpha systems have strong radiative damping wings. A distribution per absorption distance instead removes the geometrical path factor.