On the significance of the excess number of strong MgII absorbers observed towards Gamma-ray bursts

TL;DR

The paper investigates the excess of strong MgII absorbers observed towards GRBs compared to QSOs, analyzing statistical significance and potential biases like dust obscuration and gravitational lensing, to explain this discrepancy.

Contribution

It formalizes the statistical significance of the MgII problem and evaluates the roles of dust obscuration and gravitational lensing biases in explaining the excess.

Findings

The MgII problem exists at a 4σ level for high-resolution GRB spectra.

Gravitational lensing bias likely contributes only modestly to the MgII excess.

Dust obscuration could account for the discrepancy if underestimated, potentially resolving the problem.

Abstract

The number of strong (equivalent width > 1A) MgII absorbers observed towards Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) has been found to be statistically larger than the number of strong absorbers towards quasi-stellar objects (QSOs). We formalize this "MgII problem" and present a detailed explanation of the statistical tools required to assess the significance of the discrepancy. We find the problem exists at the 4{\sigma} level for GRBs with high-resolution spectra. It has been suggested that the discrepancy can be resolved by the combination of a dust obscuration bias towards QSOs, and a strong gravitational lensing bias towards GRBs. We investigate one of the two most probable lensed GRBs that we presented in our previous work (GRB020405; Rapoport et al.) and find it not to be strongly gravitationally lensed, constraining the percentage of lensed GRBs to be < 35% (2{\sigma}). Dust obscuration of QSOs has been estimated to be a significant effect with dusty MgII systems removing ~20% of absorbed objects from flux-limited QSO samples. We find that if ~30% of the strong MgII systems towards QSOs are missing from the observed samples, then GRBs and QSOs would have comparable numbers of absorbers per unit redshift. Thus, gravitational lensing bias is likely to make only a modest contribution to solving the MgII problem. However, if the dust obscuration bias has been slightly underestimated, the MgII problem would no longer persist.