text:
\section{INTRODUCTION}

Until recently, it was widely believed that the numerous, diffuse H~I clouds
which give rise to the dense Ly$\alpha$-forest lines seen in high-redshift QSO
spectra are {\it intergalactic} clouds not directly associated with galaxies
(Sargent~et al.\ 1980).  However, since the launch of \hst\ and the subsequent
discovery of Ly$\alpha$ lines in the UV at redshifts $<$ 1 (Bahcall~et al.\
1991; Morris~et al.\ 1991), our understanding of their origin has become
somewhat confused.
The low-redshifts of these newly identified systems have made
it possible to directly search for galaxies which may be responsible for the
absorption, and deep CCD images of fields around observed QSOs, combined with
spectroscopic confirmation of candidate galaxies, initially suggested that
Ly$\alpha$ clouds are only weakly associated with galaxies on scales of
$\sim\:0.5-1$~Mpc (Morris~et al.~1993, hereafter M93; Stocke et
al. 1995). Later studies, however, found that most luminous galaxies at $0.1 <
z < 1$ are apparently surrounded by extended gaseous envelopes $\sim 160 \:
h^{-1}$~kpc in radius\footnote{$h\:=\:H_0/100$, where
$H_0$ is the Hubble constant,
and $q_0\:=\:0.5$ throughout this paper}
and that the fraction of Ly$\alpha$-forest lines which
occur in galaxies is high, between $\sim 40-70$~\% (Lanzetta~et al. 1995,
hereafter LBTW).  Confusingly, a study identical in method and objective, but
using different sightlines, failed to confirm this result (Le
Brun~et~al. 1996) and instead suggested that \lya\ lines may simply follow the
large scale structures which the brightest galaxies map out. More
recent observations have shown that at least some \lya\ absorbers reside
in galaxy voids (Shull~\etal\ 1996), although what that fraction is remains
unclear.

In a previous paper (Bowen, Blades, \& Pettini 1996; hereafter BBP) we
conducted a search for \lya\ absorption lines from {\it nearby} galaxies,
since it is easier to study the origin and characteristics of \lya\ clouds in
the local universe.
We concluded that nearby galaxies do
not possess \lya -absorbing halos beyond $\simeq\:300$~\h , and that {\it if}
absorption systems were directly associated with chosen galaxies, then
$\sim 40$\% of galaxies had absorbing halos of radii $50-300$~\h . However,
several facts led us to question whether galaxies we identified were
actually responsible for a \lya\ line when absorption was found,
and we proposed
that the most likely explanation was that absorbers follow the large-scale
structure of the galaxy distribution, a conclusion similar to that drawn by Le
Brun~\etal\ (1996) at higher redshift and supported by numerical simulations
of the high redshift universe (e.g.  Cen~\etal\ 1994; Petitjean, M\"{u}cket \&
Kates 1995; Zhang~\etal\ 1995; M\"{u}cket~\etal\ 1996).  An alternative
explanation is that \lya\ absorbers are associated with dwarf galaxies or low
surface-brightness galaxies; in that case the bright galaxies we had selected
which appeared to show absorption were not in fact directly responsible for
the absorption. A similar suggestion has been made by Shull~\etal\ (1996).

The observations reported in BBP were
designed to study the incidence of absorption in galactic
halos; we did not, however, quantify the fraction of the
\lya -forest associated with galaxies. To determine this quantity, complete
redshift information must be obtained in the field of a QSO
sightline to ensure that any galaxy which might be associated with any
particular absorption line could be detected --- at least to some limiting
magnitude.

We have therefore begun a spectroscopic survey of galaxies in fields of
selected QSOs observed with \hst\ in the far UV, to characterise
any association
of \lya\ absorption systems with present day galaxies and their large scale
structure. With the advent of multi-fibre spectrographs able to obtain
redshifts of relatively faint galaxies over large areas of sky, it is now
feasible to pursue such a study.  In this paper we present the first results
of our programme, identification of a magnitude limited sample of galaxies
toward the bright QSO 1821+643 ($z_{\rm{em}}\:=\:0.297$). This was one of the
first QSOs to be observed with \hst\ (Bahcall~\etal\ 1992), and was one of
the sightlines studied by Le~Brun~\etal\ (1996) in order to identify
intermediate-redshift \lya\ absorbers.
Q1821+643 is unique in being one of the few QSOs bright enough to be
observed with the Faint Object Spectrograph (FOS) aboard \hst\ {\it and} the
medium resolution gratings of the
Goddard High Resolution Spectrograph (GHRS). This means that over small
wavelength regions it is possible to search for weak \lya\ lines (equivalent
widths $<\:100$~m\AA ) which cannot be seen in FOS data.

This paper is structured as follows: In \S2.1 we present spectra of galaxies
obtained with the multi-fibre spectrographs WYFFOS/AF-2 attached to the
William Herschel Telescope (WHT) on La Palma, and HYDRA on the WIYN telescope
at the Kitt Peak National Observatory.
\S2.2 discusses our re-analysis of the avilable \hst\ data.  In
\S3 we present the results from our survey, and discuss the size of
individual galaxy halos (\S3.1) and the association of \lya\ lines with
galaxies in general (\S3.2). In \S3.3 we consider whether the associations
found are significant compared to a random distribution of galaxies and
absorbers.
Our conclusions are summarised in \S3.5.

\section{OBSERVATIONS}

\subsection{Galaxy redshifts}

\subsubsection{WYFFOS data}

Lists of galaxy candidates were produced from a scan of the POSS-II plate
PJ3948c which covers the field of Q1821+643 using the Automated Plate
Measuring (APM) Scanning Machine in Cambridge.  The majority of spectra were
obtained with the WYFFOS/AF-2 instrument on the WHT on August 20 and August
22nd 1995.  WYFFOS is a bench spectrograph situated at the Nasmyth platform of
the WHT, fed by 2.7 arcsec fibres positioned at the prime focus of the
telescope using the Autofib-2 fibre positioner, with a circular field of view
of 30 arcmins radius.  Data were obtained using the R600B grating centered at
5200~\AA\ and a thinned Tektronix 1024 CCD as the detector giving a wavelength
coverage of $\approx 3000$~\AA .

Fibre~configurations were produced using the {\tt configure} routine, with
priority given to the brightest objects in our sample. With a configuration
completed, objects already allocated with a fibre were removed from the list,
and the configuration routine run again, with the same magnitude priority
acting on the list to produce the next configuration.
Two exposures of 1200 sec were taken at each fibre configuration. Fibres
unallocated to galaxy candidates were used for obtaining sky spectra,
and wavelength calibration frames were taken for each fibre
configuration.
To maximise the efficiency of the available telescope time, we decided to
obtain spectra of all objects with APM magnitudes of $b_j\:\leq\:18.5$ in the
30 arcmin radius field of view.  Spectra were obtained of 69 objects using 3
fibre configurations.  These objects are listed in Table~\ref{gallist}, with
object designation given in column~1. The nomenclature of objects is
arbitrary, but the EXT designation indicates objects which were not selected
from the APM scans as galaxies, but were nevertheless added either because
their classification as galaxies were marginal or because of their proximity
to the QSO sightline. All these objects turned out to be stars.

Data were reduced using the {\tt wyffos} data reduction package (Lewis 1996)
running under IRAF. Redshifts of extracted spectra were measured by
cross-correlation with two radial velocity standards HD182572 ($v_r =
-100.5\pm 0.4$~\kms) and HD171391 ($v_r = +6.9\pm 0.2$~\kms) using the {\tt
rv} IRAF package. The resolution of our data, as measured from the calibration
arc lines, was 6.2~\AA , or 350~\kms\ at 5300~\AA ; cross-correlation of
galaxy spectra with template radial standards is known to give accuracies of
$\sim\:0.1\times$ FWHM, or $\sim\:35$~\kms\ for our data. Cross correlation of
the two radial velocity standards with each other easily found the correct
shift, confirming that the technique could certainly measure velocities to at
least 100~\kms .

Sky was subtracted from each spectrum using summed sky spectra obtained
during object exposures.  Column 6 of Table~\ref{gallist} indicates the
quality of the final spectrum: `a' indicates a certain redshift, measured
independently from both of the two exposures of a given fibre configuration;
`b' also indicates a certain redshift (more than one feature is identified in
a spectrum) but the redshift could only be measured accurately from one of the
exposures; `c' means a redshift could be measured but the data were of low
quality and the redshift may be uncertain (this applied to only two objects in
our sample); `d' indicates that no redshift could be measured.

Of 69 objects observed, 63 redshifts were obtained. Of these, 44 were
galaxies.  Redshifts for 68 objects are given in column~5 of
Table~\ref{gallist} (Obj56 in the original list of 69 objects measured was
removed --- see \S2.1.2), along with the RA \& DEC of the object (cols. 2 and
3), the $b_j$ magnitude derived from the APM scans (col.~4), the angular
separation of the object on the plane of the sky from the QSO, $\theta$, in
arcmins, (col.~7), and the corresponding separation in units of \h, $\rho$,
when the redshift is known. Values of $\rho\:=\:0$ are
given for objects identified as stars.

\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Galaxy Redshifts within 30$'$ of Q1821+643}
\label{gallist}
\begin{tabular}{lcccrccr}
\hline
& RA
& Dec
&
&
&
& $\theta$
& \push{$\rho $}   \\
\push{Des}
&\multicolumn{2}{c}{(J2000.0)}
& $b_j$
& \push{$z_{\rm{gal}}$ }
& Qual.
& ($'$)
& \push{($h^{-1}$~kpc)}   \\
\hline
\multicolumn{8}{c}{WYFFOS data}\\
\hline
Ext    & 18:25:12.31 & +64:30:04.8  & 16.77 &$-$0.00040 & a  & 23.10 & 0.0 \\
Obj81  & 18:23:58.30 & +64:26:51.3  & 14.45 &0.12311  & a  & 14.50 & 1269.9 \\
Obj19  & 18:25:26.87 & +64:36:39.1  & 18.14 &$\ldots$ & e  & 27.71 &$\ldots$ \\
Obj54  & 18:24:40.36 & +64:34:54.0  & 17.00 &0.10642  & a  & 22.67 & 1761.9 \\
Obj39  & 18:25:04.56 & +64:40:35.8  & 18.32 &0.09583  & a  & 28.39 & 2020.8 \\
Obj58  & 18:24:33.84 & +64:38:51.2  & 14.82 &$\ldots$ & e  & 24.85 &$\ldots$ \\
Obj113 & 18:23:15.55 & +64:33:05.6  & 17.78 &0.19188  & b  & 15.08 & 1854.1 \\
Obj93  & 18:23:38.88 & +64:41:46.7  & 12.71 &0.08826  & a  & 23.83 & 1581.3 \\
Obj153 & 18:22:20.92 & +64:26:50.9  & 17.17 &0.19231  & a  & 6.75  & 831.2 \\
Obj144 & 18:22:31.70 & +64:35:28.4  & 12.90 &0.05047  & a  & 15.33 & 618.9 \\
Obj142 & 18:22:36.11 & +64:45:44.9  & 16.41 &$\ldots$ & e  & 25.49 &$\ldots$ \\
Obj167 & 18:22:07.61 & +64:39:32.4  & 17.47 &0.05039  & a  & 18.97 & 764.8 \\
Obj186 & 18:21:49.21 & +64:37:48.4  & 10.08 &0.05019  & a  & 17.22 & 691.7 \\
Obj198 & 18:21:36.70 & +64:45:22.6  & 17.09 &0.10725  & a  & 24.87 & 1945.4 \\
Obj216 & 18:21:21.38 & +64:49:40.4  & 18.08 &$\ldots$ & e  & 29.32 &$\ldots$ \\
Obj219 & 18:21:18.20 & +64:43:35.5  & 18.19 &$-$0.00008 & a& 23.37 & 0.0 \\
Obj264 & 18:20:14.22 & +64:38:56.5  & 16.50 &$-$0.00018 & a& 21.42 & 0.0 \\
Obj238 & 18:20:56.96 & +64:27:55.0  & 17.52 &0.07198  & a  & 9.78  & 543.5 \\
Obj293 & 18:19:40.64 & +64:30:38.5  & 17.92 &0.17955  & a  & 17.83 & 2089.2 \\
Obj318 & 18:18:53.04 & +64:30:37.4  & 18.47 &$-$0.00009 & a& 22.25 & 0.0 \\
Obj290 & 18:19:44.59 & +64:23:07.4  & 15.66 &0.08941  & a  & 14.56 & 977.0 \\
Obj334 & 18:18:14.83 & +64:18:22.4  & 16.95 &0.05106  & a  & 24.19 & 987.1 \\
Obj272 & 18:20:02.47 & +64:18:53.0  & 18.32 &0.02788  & a  & 12.54 & 290.5 \\
Obj332 & 18:18:17.71 & +64:16:15.9  & 17.41 &0.18002  & a  & 24.18 & 2838.7 \\
Obj338 & 18:18:02.25 & +64:14:04.2  & 16.91 &0.12103  & a  & 26.30 & 2271.7 \\
Obj327 & 18:18:35.45 & +64:14:20.8  & 16.49 &0.09538  & a  & 22.75 & 1612.9 \\
Obj245 & 18:20:48.75 & +64:18:52.4  & 18.29 &$-$0.00029 & a& 7.61  & 0.0 \\
Obj307 & 18:19:24.44 & +64:07:53.1  & 17.85 &0.17993  & a  & 20.91 & 2453.9 \\
Obj221 & 18:21:19.80 & +63:59:45.2  & 16.86 &$-$0.00015 & a& 21.25 & 0.0 \\
Obj146 & 18:22:30.82 & +64:04:12.9  & 15.41 &0.07171  & a  & 16.79 & 929.9 \\
Obj137 & 18:22:41.28 & +64:10:27.1  & 17.07 &$\ldots$ & e  & 11.23 &$\ldots$ \\
Obj112 & 18:23:16.01 & +64:04:52.9  & 14.11 &0.02754  & a  & 17.91 & 410.0 \\
Obj92  & 18:23:41.16 & +64:01:08.3  & 16.70 &0.07249  & a  & 22.52 & 1259.2 \\
Obj213 & 18:21:25.88 & +63:51:36.0  & 17.22 &0.00028  & a  & 29.21 & 0.0 \\
Obj204 & 18:21:37.94 & +63:51:24.4  & 18.01 &0.00070  & b  & 29.27 & 0.0 \\
Obj178 & 18:21:57.41 & +63:52:44.1  & 17.00 &0.00004  & a  & 27.87 & 0.0 \\
Obj165 & 18:22:09.95 & +64:09:36.9  & 17.87 &0.08410  & a  & 11.08 & 705.3 \\
Obj151 & 18:22:25.74 & +63:53:51.5  & 18.46 &0.00005  & a  & 26.93 & 0.0 \\
Obj105 & 18:23:25.41 & +64:08:34.0   & 9.38 &0.05033  & a  & 15.39 & 619.8 \\
Obj53  & 18:24:40.55 & +64:02:45.1  & 17.09 &0.09681  & a  & 25.20 & 1809.2 \\
Obj67  & 18:24:21.54 & +64:06:26.2   & 7.30 &0.05106  & a  & 21.14 & 862.6 \\
Obj34  & 18:25:08.16 & +64:09:17.3  & 18.37 &0.13853  & a  & 23.63 & 2273.5 \\
Obj15  & 18:25:46.41 & +64:07:56.8  & 18.22 &0.07200  & b  & 27.94 & 1553.0 \\
Obj63  & 18:24:28.05 & +64:16:41.5  & 17.98 &0.08470  & c  & 16.81 & 1076.7 \\
Obj172 & 18:22:02.73 & +64:21:38.7  & 17.60 &0.12160  & a  & 1.20  & 104.0 \\
Obj217 & 18:21:22.44 & +64:28:28.7  & 18.08 &0.12245  & a  & 8.72  & 760.4 \\
Obj180 & 18:21:53.90 & +64:19:49.8  & 18.34 &$-$0.00012 & a& 0.85  & 0.0 \\
Obj345 & 18:17:33.14 & +64:19:29.9  & 17.38 &0.00000  & b  & 28.61 & 0.0 \\
Obj271 & 18:20:04.95 & +64:19:44.3  & 18.47 &$-$0.00014 & a& 12.18 & 0.0 \\
Obj242 & 18:20:53.45 & +64:19:37.1  & 18.10 &0.11155  & b  & 6.97  & 563.2 \\
Obj212 & 18:21:25.61 & +64:02:11.0  & 17.79 &0.19406  & a  & 18.74 & 2322.7 \\
Obj192 & 18:21:41.26 & +63:51:37.2  & 15.81 &0.02380  & b  & 29.04 & 578.4 \\
Obj132 & 18:22:47.01 & +63:59:28.6  & 15.49 &0.07201  & a  & 21.82 & 1213.0 \\
Obj140 & 18:22:36.32 & +64:12:42.1  & 17.96 &$-$0.00034 & a& 8.97  & 0.0 \\
Obj57  & 18:24:33.26 & +64:16:13.9  & 16.63 &0.05305  & a  & 17.48 & 738.6 \\
Obj72  & 18:24:12.74 & +64:24:40.1  & 18.02 &$-$0.00011 & a& 15.21 & 0.0 \\
Obj97  & 18:23:34.34 & +64:18:35.1  & 17.01 &0.05099  & a  & 10.72 & 436.9 \\
Ext    & 18:24:09.55 & +64:19:33.7  & 18.17 &$-$0.00035 & a& 14.37 & 0.0 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Cont.}
\begin{tabular}[t]{lcccrccr}
& RA
& Dec
&
&
&
& $\theta$       & \push{$\rho $}   \\
\push{Des}
&\multicolumn{2}{c}{(J2000.0)}
& $b_j$
& \push{$z_{\rm{gal}}$ }
& Qual.
& ($'$)
& \push{($h^{-1}$~kpc)}   \\
\hline
Obj10  & 18:26:01.05 & +64:23:16.4  & 16.17 &0.07623  & a  & 26.51 & 1549.3 \\
Obj73  & 18:24:12.45 & +64:35:12.7  & 18.24 &$-$0.00020 & a& 20.64 & 0.0 \\
Obj90  & 18:23:42.40 & +64:32:53.3  & 16.81 &0.05242  & a  & 16.72 & 698.8 \\
Obj87  & 18:23:44.90 & +64:42:45.9  & 18.06 &0.08849  & a  & 25.00 & 1662.7 \\
Obj148 & 18:22:29.27 & +64:41:05.4  & 16.76 &0.08807  & a  & 20.77 & 1375.7 \\
Obj347 & 18:17:26.18 & +64:19:43.7  & 18.24 &$\ldots$ & e  & 29.35 &$\ldots$ \\
Obj230 & 18:21:08.73 & +63:52:09.0  & 18.04 &0.15039  & a  & 28.94 & 2968.2 \\
Obj118 & 18:23:09.33 & +63:52:23.4  & 17.14 &0.00000  & a  & 29.29 & 0.0 \\
Obj138 & 18:22:40.55 & +64:09:43.7  & 18.42 &0.12050  & a  & 11.85 & 1019.9 \\
Obj130 & 18:22:50.78 & +64:09:40.8  & 18.40 &0.00000  & b  & 12.38 & 0.0 \\
\hline
\multicolumn{8}{c}{HYDRA data}\\
\hline
Ext    & 18:23:57.96 & +64:11:07.7  &  8.61 &$-$0.00014 & a& 16.18 & 0.0 \\
Obj131 & 18:22:50.92 & +64:09:19.8  & 12.71 &0.05086  & a  & 12.70 & 516.4 \\
Obj56  & 18:24:34.11 & +64:19:04.1  & 14.80 &0.05050  & a  & 17.07 & 689.5 \\
Obj58  & 18:24:33.84 & +64:38:51.2  & 14.83 &0.09605  & b  & 24.85 & 1772.2 \\
Obj181 & 18:21:52.77 & +64:38:59.5  & 15.32 &0.05050  & a  & 18.39 & 742.9 \\
Obj142 & 18:22:36.11 & +64:45:44.9  & 16.42 &0.04970  & a  & 25.49 & 1014.7 \\
Ext    & 18:25:12.31 & +64:30:04.8  & 16.77 &$-$0.00030 & a& 23.10 & 0.0 \\
Obj216 & 18:21:21.38 & +64:49:40.4  & 18.08 &0.05683  & c  & 29.32 & 1318.9 \\
Obj19  & 18:25:26.87 & +64:36:39.1  & 18.14 &0.09517  & a  & 27.71 & 1960.9 \\
Ext    & 18:24:09.55 & +64:19:33.7  & 18.18 &$-$0.00025 & a& 14.37 & 0.0 \\
Obj347 & 18:17:26.18 & +64:19:43.7  & 18.25 &0.08210  & b  & 29.35 & 1829.8 \\
Obj62  & 18:24:29.09 & +64:01:05.3  & 18.57 &0.08420  & a  & 25.58 & 1630.0 \\
Obj13  & 18:25:53.58 & +64:19:18.5  & 18.61 &0.11159  & b  & 25.63 & 2071.7 \\
Obj309 & 18:19:23.46 & +63:59:26.8  & 18.61 &0.00005  & a  & 26.98 & 0.0 \\
Obj331 & 18:18:17.57 & +64:34:37.2  & 18.65 &0.07836  & a  & 27.51 & 1647.0 \\
Obj20  & 18:25:20.57 & +64:16:35.7  & 18.67 &0.09697  & a  & 22.41 & 1611.2 \\
Obj313 & 18:19:07.28 & +64:36:50.3  & 18.67 &$\ldots$ & e  & 24.46 &$\ldots$ \\
Obj269 & 18:20:08.55 & +64:00:06.1  & 18.71 &0.00006  & a  & 23.67 & 0.0 \\
Obj241 & 18:20:57.82 & +63:56:00.8  & 18.71 &0.00040  & a  & 25.43 & 0.0 \\
Ext5   & 18:22:11.40 & +64:28:43.0  & 18.77 &$-$0.00013 & a& 8.26  & 0.0 \\
Obj234 & 18:21:00.73 & +64:37:54.3  & 18.77 &0.26650  & c  & 18.34 & 2813.8 \\
Obj314 & 18:19:10.44 & +64:07:27.4  & 18.77 &0.09458  & a  & 22.39 & 1576.1 \\
Obj297 & 18:19:34.62 & +64:42:21.0  & 18.77 &0.16410  & a  & 26.60 & 2915.55\\
Obj328 & 18:18:28.71 & +64:38:03.6  & 18.80 &0.16550  & a  & 28.43 & 3136.0 \\
Obj205 & 18:21:35.27 & +64:25:24.0  & 18.83 &0.18900  & a  & 5.35  & 650.7 \\
Obj38  & 18:25:04.35 & +64:25:23.1  & 18.85 &0.12005  & a  & 20.79 & 1784.0 \\
Obj275 & 18:19:56.14 & +64:40:20.0  & 18.85 &0.00008  & a  & 23.64 & 0.0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}

\subsubsection{HYDRA data}

Additional spectra of objects in the field of Q1821+643 were obtained with the
HYDRA instrument on the WIYN telescope at Kitt Peak.
HYDRA is similar in design to WYFFOS in that a fibre positioner
feeds optical fibres to a bench spectrograph.  The field of view (30 arcmin
radius) is also the same. Observations were made as part of the WIYN Queue
Observing Experiment on September 3rd 1996 using 316 lines~mm$^{-1}$ grating
centered at 5800~\AA\ and a thinned 2048x2048 CCD covering a wavelength
range of $\approx 4000$~\AA .

Three exposures of 2400 sec each were taken with one fibre configuration.
Fibres unallocated to galaxy candidates were again used for obtaining sky
spectra, and wavelength calibration frames were taken before and after the
configuration exposures.  Data were reduced using the {\tt dohydra} data
reduction package (Valdes 1992) running under IRAF. Redshifts of
spectra were measured by cross-correlation with the same two radial velocity
standards used for the WYFFOS data. The resolution as measured from the
comparison arc lines was 8.4~\AA , or 430~\kms\ at 5800~\AA .

Spectra were obtained of 80 objects. 58 of these had already been
observed with WYFFOS.  Several HYDRA spectra yielded redshifts which could
not be be measured in the WYFFOS data. These objects, as well as those not
covered by the WYFFOS configurations, are listed separately in
Table~\ref{gallist}. For objects with redshifts identified from both sets of
data, only one galaxy was found to have a discrepant redshift. This galaxy
(Obj56 in Table~\ref{gallist}) was one of the two spectra with a `c' quality
flag in the WYFFOS data, and we adopt the HYDRA measurement of its redshift in
Table~1.

\subsubsection{Completeness}

As noted above, our initial goal was to observe all galaxies within 30 arcmins
of the sightline of Q1821+643 down to a magnitude of $b_j\:=\:18.5$.
Combining the WYFFOS and HYDRA data, we measured 68 of 71 galaxy candidates, a
completeness of 96\%.  17 of 68 candidates, or 25\%, were found to be stars. A
large number of stellar spectra were expected, since we included objects
marginally identified as galaxies to ensure that compact galaxies were not
exlcuded in our sample.  The distribution of confirmed galaxies in Right
Ascension and Declination vs.\ redshift is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:wedges}.  We
believe the errors in the APM magnitudes may be within $\pm 0.5$ mags, but CCD
images taken over the entire field of view of the spectrographs are needed to
confirm this figure. Thus, the total galaxy sample considered here consists of
51 galaxies brighter than $b_j\:=\:18.5$ within 30 arcmin of Q1821+643 on the
plane of the sky.

\subsection{Identification of \lya\ systems}

There exist several independent observations of Q1821+643 made with \hst ,
covering different wavelength ranges and obtained at different resolutions.
The first data were obtained with the {\it FOS} by Bahcall~\etal\ (1992,
hereafter B92) using the G130H, G190H, and G270H gratings, and subsequently
reanalysed as part of the Absorption Line Key Project (Bahcall~\etal\ 1993,
hereafter KPI). Higher resolution data from the GHRS were obtained by Savage,
Sembach \& Lu (1995, hereafter SSL) with the G160M grating over two small
wavelength regions from $1232-1269$~\AA\ and $1521-1558$~\AA . Finally, GHRS
 G140L data are available from the \hst\ Archive, taken  30-March-1996 and
covering the wavelength range $\simeq\:1255-1530$~\AA .

Comparing the list of \lya\ absorption lines identified in FOS spectra by B92
and KPI shows several inconsistencies which arise from changes in their method
of line identification. Further, the high resolution GHRS spectra obtained by
SSL show that some of the initial identifications in the FOS spectra were
erroneous. To derive a list of \lya\ absorption systems to compare with
galaxies detected in our spectroscopic survey, we have extracted the FOS and
GHRS data from the \hst\ Archive and reanalysed the data with our own software.
Our identification of absorption lines follows similar procedures to those
described by Young~\etal\ (1979) and by B92. (These procedures differ from
those used subsequently by KPI who used the instrumental Line Spread Function
(LSF) of the spectrograph to weight the summation of pixels comprising a line
in the determination of its equivalent width.)

There are several differences in our analysis to those used by B92 and
KPI. First, we have corrected the FOS wavelength scales by applying a shift to
match the rest wavelengths of low ionization lines arising from Galactic
absorption in the spectra to the velocity of the bulk of H~I emission measured
at 21~cm. We take the heliocentric velocity of this gas to be at $\simeq\:
-40$~\kms\ (Lockman \& Savage 1995). Second, no accurate LSFs are available
for the FOS aperture used ($0\farcs25\times 2\farcs0$) so we have not used an
LSF to estimate the equivalent widths of lines. Instead, we have taken the
number of pixels over which an absorption feature is detected to be 11.  This,
for example, is the extent of the LSF for the $1.''0$ aperture (see BBP).
Third, error arrays supplied by the pipeline wavelength calibration of FOS
spectra do not include any contribution from the background or from other
sources such as scattered light, and are therefore inadequate for determining
the reality of a feature in a spectrum.  We have therefore constructed arrays
from measured rms deviations in regions of a spectrum clearly free of
absorption lines, and used these for our error arrays. The flux arrays used to
measure the noise are those prior to the data being resampled to a linear
wavelength scale because resampling introduces a smoothing of the flux.  For
GHRS data, the pipeline calibrated error arrays are true representations of
the noise in the data, and can be used for detection and measurement of
absorption lines.

Our final line lists consist of lines at wavelength $\lambda_{\rm{obs}}$, with
observed equivalent widths, $W$, which are $\geq 3\sigma(W)$, where
$\sigma(W)$ is the error in the equivalent width at $\lambda_{\rm{obs}}$.  For
lines which are in common with those found by B92 and KPI, the majority of our
measurements of $W$ are within $\pm 3\sigma(W)$ of their measurements. Hence
our measurements of $W$ give values close to those already published. Only if
a line sits on the peak of an emission line do equivalent widths differ by
more that $\pm 3\sigma(W)$, because errors inherent in continuum fitting
around the emission line mean that the true value of $\sigma (W)$ is greater
than that estimated from the noise. Of the 18 lines we detect in FOS or
published GHRS data, 15 have been identified by B92, SSL, and/or KPI. We
detect an additional \lya\ line in the GHRS data at 1252.1~\AA , which is
weak, but present at the 3$\sigma$ level in our analysis. Another two
lines are marginal detections in the FOS G130H data, but are confirmed in the
unpublished GHRS G140L spectrum.

\begin{figure*}
\vspace*{-2cm}
\centerline{
\psfig{figure=wedge1.ps,height=15cm,angle=0}}
\vspace{-2cm}
\centerline{
\psfig{figure=wedge2.ps,height=11cm,angle=270}}
\caption{Wedge diagrams showing the spatial distribution of galaxies observed
with WYFFOS and HYDRA as a function of redshift, plotted in RA (top) and DEC
(bottom). Redshifts of \lya\ lines towards Q1821+643 are plotted along the
central axis; diamonds indicate lines with $W_r\: \geq\: 0.2$~\AA ,
triangles $W_r \:<\:0.2$~\AA. Galaxies forming part of our magnitude limited
sample of $b_j\:\leq\:18.5$ are shown as filled circles, fainter galaxies are
open circles. The absolute
magnitudes of this limit at the redshifts marked along the right axis of each
cone are
shown on the left side, along with the comoving angular distance that 30
arcmin corresponds to at the same redshift.}
\label{fig:wedges}
\end{figure*}

The \lya\ lines we identify are listed in Table~\ref{linelist}.  Column 4
lists the absorption redshift, $z_{\rm{abs}}$, of the absorption line; column
5, $z_{\rm{GHRS}}$, indicates whether the redshift has been determined from
the high resolution G160M GHRS spectra of SSL, either by direct measurement of
the \lya\ line or higher order Lyman lines of the same absorption system.
Measurements of $z_{\rm{abs}}$ using these spectra are more accurate than
those derived from the FOS data.  Column 6 lists the absolute magnitude we
reach in our survey at $z_{\rm{abs}}$ given the limiting observed magnitude of
$b_j\:=18.5$.  Column 7 lists in which spectra the lines have been identified,
while in column 8 we record whether the authors mentioned above also
identified the line.

\begin{table*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{110mm}
\caption{\lya\ systems along the line of sight to Q1821+643}
\label{linelist}
\begin{tabular}{llclccrl}
$\lambda_{\rm{obs}}$
& $W$
& $\sigma (W)$
&
&
&
&
& \\
(\AA )
& (\AA )
& (\AA )
& $z_{\rm{abs}}$
& $z_{\rm{GHRS}}$
& $M_{\rm{lim}}$
& Instr.\footnote{Line detected in --- (1) GHRS G160M spectrum;
(2) FOS G130H spectrum;
(3) GHRS G140L spectrum}
& Who else?\footnote{Line also
found by: SSL---Savage, Sembach \& Lu 1995; B92---Bahcall~\etal\ 1992;
KPI---Bahcall~\etal\ 1993}\\
\hline
1245.33  & 0.32 & 0.02 & 0.0245 & y   & $-15.8$ & 1 	& SSL \\
1252.10  & 0.05 & 0.02 & 0.0300 & y   & $-16.3$ & 1	&     \\
1264.17  & 0.19 & 0.02 & 0.0399 & y   & $-16.9$ & 1,3 	& SSL \\
1265.59  & 0.04 & 0.01 & 0.0411 & y   & $-16.9$ & 1 	& SSL \\
1270.9   & 0.13 & 0.01 & 0.0454 & n   & $-17.2$ & 2,3 	&     \\
1285.0   & 0.06 & 0.01 & 0.0570 & n   & $-17.7$ & 2,3 	&     \\
1297.3   & 0.13 & 0.01 & 0.0672 & n   & $-18.1$ & 3 	& KPI \\
1351.0   & 0.10 & 0.01 & 0.1113 & n   & $-19.2$ & 3 	&     \\
1361.2   & 0.05 & 0.01 & 0.1197 & n   & $-19.3$ & 3     &	\\
1363.2   & 0.71 & 0.06 & 0.1214 & n   & $-19.4$ & 2,3 	& B92,KPI \\
1395.3   & 0.35:& 0.06 & 0.1478 & n   & $-19.8$ & 2,3   & B92,KPI \\
1406.8   & 0.06 & 0.01 & 0.1572 & n   & $-19.9$ & 3 	&     \\
1414.4   & 0.07 & 0.01 & 0.1635 & n   & $-20.0$ & 3 	&     \\
1422.5   & 0.62 & 0.06 & 0.1701 & n   & $-20.1$ & 2,3 	& B92,KPI\\
1435.1   & 0.23 & 0.06 & 0.1805 & n   & $-20.3$ & 2,3 	& KPI \\
1455.8   & 0.13 & 0.01 & 0.1975 & n   & $-20.5$ & 3 	&     \\
1474.8   & 0.54 & 0.07 & 0.2133 & y   & $-20.6$ & 2,3	& B92,KPI \\
1478.7   & 0.20 & 0.07 & 0.2166 & y   & $-20.7$ & 2,3	& KPI \\
1489.3   & 1.01 & 0.07 & 0.2249 & y   & $-20.8$ & 2,3 	& B92,KPI \\
1492.6   & 0.16:& 0.02 & 0.2278 & n   & $-20.8$ & 2,3  	& B92 \\
1513.7   & 0.06 & 0.02 & 0.2452 & n   & $-21.0$ & 3 	&             \\
1529.46  & 0.21 & 0.02 & 0.2581 & y   & $-21.1$ & 1,2,3 & SSL,B92     \\
1533.63  & 0.22 & 0.02 & 0.2616 & y   & $-21.1$ & 1,2	& SSL,B92,KPI \\
1539.74  & 0.24 & 0.02 & 0.2666 & y   & $-21.1$ & 1,2 	& SSL,B92,KPI \\
1576.6   & 0.56 & 0.03 & 0.2967 & y   & $-21.4$ & 2 	& B92,KPI     \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}

We identify lines at 1264.2 and 1270.9~\AA\ as \lya\ absorption at redshifts
of $z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.0399$ and $0.0454$. However, it is also possible that
these are actually an O~VI absorption doublet at $z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.2249$,
from an absorption system identified by its strong \lya\ and Ly$\beta$
absorption (Tripp~\etal\ 1997). We maintain that the lines are indeed
low-redshift \lya\ absorption for two reasons: a) the
$z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.2249$ Ly$\beta$ and O~VI$\lambda 1031$ lines do not match
up in velocity (although this could be because of additional lower column
density gas which shows up in H~I absorption but not O~VI); and b) there is no
absorption from C~IV, Si~IV or N~V (or indeed from any other metal species) at
$z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.2249$. Clearly, higher sensitivity observations are needed
to test the identification of these lines further.

In Figs.~\ref{fig:g130} and~\ref{fig:g140} we show portions of the FOS
G130H and GHRS G140L normalised spectra and \lya\ systems identified.
Comparisons between features found in both FOS G130H and GHRS G140L spectra
suggest that the values of $z_{\rm{abs}}$ in Table~\ref{linelist} are
consistent to within $|\Delta z| \:\approx\: 0.0002$.

\begin{figure*}
\centerline{\psfig
{figure=g130.ps,height=14cm,angle=270}}
\caption{Portions of the normalised spectra
of the FOS G130H spectrum of Q1821+643
originally presented by B92 \& KPI. All the \lya\ lines listed in Table 2 are
indicated. The shaded regions represent wavelength ranges spanned by the
high resolution GHRS G160M data obtained by SSL; tick marks which do not
appear to correspond to any obvious lines
here indicate the positions of weaker \lya\ absorption revealed by
GHRS G160M data.
Similarly, lines
marked between $\sim\:1270-1320$~\AA\ which appear marginal here
can be
seen in the GHRS G140L spectrum extracted from the \hst\ Archive (Fig.~3).}
\label{fig:g130}
\end{figure*}

\begin{figure*}
\vspace*{-5cm}
\centerline{\psfig
{figure=g140l.ps,height=15cm,angle=270}}
\caption{Portions of the normalised G140L spectrum
extracted from the \hst\ Archive, with the positions of \lya\ lines marked.
 Data are binned at the original dispersion
of 0.29~\AA~pix$^{-1}$.
See caption to Fig.~2 for significance of shaded
region. Redshifts of identified \lya\ lines are shown above the spectrum,
along with the positions of absorption lines from the Milky Way indicated by
$\bullet$; the expected wavelengths of \lya\ absorption from all the galaxies
listed in Table~1 which are within $\rho \:\leq\:1$~\mpc\ are shown by tick
marks below the spectrum.}
\label{fig:g140}
\end{figure*}

\subsection{NED galaxies}

Due to the pencil-beam nature of our survey, the number of galaxies sampled
below $z< 0.05$ begins to decline as the 1 degree angular size of the
sky samples smaller physical radii, and hence volume. We have therefore
supplemented our list of galaxies by searching the NASA Extragalactic
Database (NED) for all galaxies with known redshifts within 300 arcmins of
the QSO line of sight. Of 136 galaxies found, none were within 500~\h\ of
the QSO sightline.
A wider search for galaxy clusters over 30 degrees revealed only two clusters
close to the QSO sightline. ZwCl~1638.4+6038 at $z=0.01634$ is 10.3~\mpc\
away, while Abell~2295 at $z=0.05080$, is 13.0~\mpc\ from the line of
sight. The 13 galaxies we found at $z\:\simeq\:0.051\pm0.02$ in
Fig.~\ref{fig:wedges} are presumably
members of a larger structure of which Abell~2295 is part.

\section{Discussion}

Since the aim of our programme is to study the association of \lya\ lines with
low-redshift galaxies, we have detected very few galaxies beyond $z\:=\:0.2$
(see Fig.~\ref{fig:wedges}). The magnitude limit of our survey
($b_j\:\leq\:18.5$) means we
become insensitive to galaxies fainter than $L^*$ beyond
$z\:\approx\:0.1$. Deeper searches for galaxies close to the QSO line of
sight include those by Schneider~\etal\ (1992), who have
detected several galaxies within one arcmin.
Although most appear to be at similar redshifts to the QSO itself, one galaxy
(labelled G in their Table~1, 73~\h\ from the QSO sightline) is within
600~\kms\ of the $z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.2249$ and 0.2278 absorption
systems. Also, Le Brun~\etal\ (1996) have detected a galaxy (their \#8) at a
redshift of $0.1703$, 266~\h\ from the QSO line of sight, and close to
the redshift of the $z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.1701$ system listed in Table~2.
However, since these galaxies have been detected in surveys with
different magnitude limits, survey completion, and extent on the sky than
our own, we do not include them in our subsequent analysis.

\subsection{\lya -absorbing cross-section of individual galaxies}

We begin first by considering the limits we can set on the size of individual
galaxy halos from our data. Table~1 contains 49 galaxies within 2~\mpc\ of the
QSO line of sight.  For each galaxy at a separation $\rho $ from the QSO
sightline we have searched for \lya\ absorption in the QSO spectra within $\pm
600$~\kms\ of the galaxy's measured redshift. 18 of these galaxies could not
be searched for absorption, however, since any \lya\ absorption which did
arise at the redshift of the galaxy would be obscured by Milky Way absorption
lines or other lines from higher redshift systems. Also, six galaxies would
have \lya\ absorption lines blended with the wings of weak ($W<\:0.2$~\AA )
Galactic lines; in these cases it has only been possible to search for \lya\
absorption from the galaxy within $\pm(200-300)\mp600$~\kms\ of its velocity.
Table~\ref{neargals} lists the first 13 galaxies within 1~\mpc\ for which we
were able to search for absorption, and the detection of any \lya\
lines. $\Delta v$ given in column 7 is the velocity difference derived from
$z_{\rm{gal}}-z_{\rm{abs}}$.

\begin{table*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{100mm}
\caption{Galaxies with $\rho\:\leq\:1$~\mpc\ from the sightline of  Q1821+643}
\label{neargals}
\begin{tabular}{llcccrr}
    &                &                &$\rho$  & & $W_r$ & $\Delta v$ \\
Des & $z_{\rm{gal}}$ & $M_{\rm{gal}}$ & (\h )
& $z_{\rm{abs}}$
& (\AA )
& (\kms )\\ \hline
Obj172 & 0.12160 & $-20.3$ & 104.0 & 0.1214 & 0.63       & $54$ \\
Obj272 & 0.02788 & $-16.3$ & 290.5 & ...    & $<0.05$    & ... \\
Obj112 & 0.02754 & $-20.5$ & 410.1 & ...    & $<0.05$    & ... \\
Obj242 & 0.11155  & $-19.6$ & 563.2 & 0.1113 & $0.09$     & 67  \\
Obj192 & 0.02380  & $-18.5$ & 578.4 & 0.0245 & $0.31$     & $-205$ \\
Obj205 & 0.18900  & $-20.0$ & 650.7 & ...    & $<0.03$	 &... \\
Obj90  & 0.05242  & $-19.2$ & 698.8 & ...    & $<0.03$	 &... \\
Obj165 & 0.08410  & $-19.2$ & 705.3 & ...    & $<0.05$	 &... \\
Obj57  & 0.05305  & $-19.4$ & 738.6 & ...    & $<0.03$	 &... \\
Obj153 & 0.19231  & $-21.7$ & 831.2 & ...    & $<0.03$	 &... \\
Obj67  & 0.05106  & $-22: $ & 862.6 & ...    & $<0.10$	 &... \\
Obj290 & 0.08941  & $-21.5$ & 977.0 & ...    & $<0.03$	 &... \\
Obj334 & 0.05106  & $-19.0$ & 987.1 & ...    & $<0.10$	 &... \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}

Fig.~\ref{fig:percent} plots $\rho $ vs.\ $W_r$ for galaxies where \lya\ could
be searched for; circles represent detections of \lya\ absorption, limits are
given by arrows.  We find three galaxies within 500~\h\ of the QSO line of
sight, and detect \lya\ absorption from the galaxy closest to the line of
sight (Obj172) at $z_{\rm{gal}}=0.1216$, $\rho \:=\: 104$~\h .  The absorption
line is moderately strong, with a rest equivalent width of $W_r = 0.63$~\AA ,
and there is no associated C~IV absorption to $3\sigma$ equivalent width
limits of $0.12$~\AA .  The galaxy shows strong [O~II], [O~III], and H$\beta$
emission, as well as strong Balmer lines, indicating recent star formation.
However, the absorbing galaxies found by LBTW generally did not show emission
lines, and it is unlikely that any correlation exists between the star
formation implied by the spectral features in Obj172's spectrum and the
existence of an extended gaseous halo.

\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig
{figure=ew.ps,height=6cm,angle=270}}
\caption{Plot of the distribution of  $\rho $ {\it vs.}\ rest equivalent
width, $W_r$, for
galaxies in our survey. Open circles represent detections of \lya\ lines
within $\Delta v\:=\:\pm600$~\kms\ of a galaxy's velocity.
}
\label{fig:percent}
\end{figure}

The next closest galaxies are at impact parameters of 291 and 410~\h ; they
show no absorption to extremely low equivalent width limits of $0.05$~\AA\
(their redshifts were covered by SSL's high resolution GHRS data; these data
also show that no local Galactic lines prevent detection of \lya\ at the
galaxy redshifts).  One other galaxy is within $0.5$~\mpc, (Obj97 at
$z_{\rm{gal}}=0.05099$, $\rho \:=\:437$~\h ) but is not included in
Fig.~\ref{fig:percent} or Table~3 because the redshift at which \lya\ is
expected is obscured by a weak line at 1277.1~\AA\ which is probably
Galactic C~I. The line could in principle be \lya\ at
$z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.0505$, since there is no corresponding C~I$\lambda
1280$. However, C~I$\lambda 1277$ is detected in higher resolution GHRS data
at roughly the same strength as observed here, and a simple Voigt profile fit
to the C~I$\lambda 1277$ line suggests that C~I$\lambda 1280$ would be not be
detected in spectra of the sensitivity of the G140L data. This is unfortunate,
because the C~I$\lambda 1277$ line obscures any \lya\ absorption from the
group of galaxies found at $z\:\sim\:0.05$.

The detection of a single absorbing galaxy 104~\h\ from the QSO line of sight
is consistent with LBTW's conclusion that galaxies are surrounded by spherical
halos of 160~\h\ radius.  There is good evidence from LBTW and BBP that
individual galaxies are not surrounded by halos with radii greater than
$\sim\:200-300$~\h , and although our data do not well sample galaxy halos on
sizes $\rho\:=\:100-500$~\h , the data continue the trend of non-detections
beyond $\rho\:=\:500$~\h , confirming that the majority of galaxies do not
possess \lya\ absorbing halos beyond 500~\h . There are, however, a few cases
where \lya\ lines arise at the same redshifts as galaxies. This is similar to
what BBP found on scales of $100-500$~\h , where a few absorber-galaxy
associations were found despite the general trend of non-detections. In that
work, it was impossible to test whether those associations were statistically
significant or not. Here, however, we have a controlled sample of galaxies and
absorption systems which allows us to test whether the detection of
\lya\ at the same redshifts as galaxies is
coincidental, although with our data we are mainly
testing associations on scales of
$>\:200$~\h .

Another important point to emphasise is that the majority of \lya\ lines lines
listed in Table~2 are weak, $W_r\:<\:0.2$.  These lines are not detectable in
the FOS spectra of Q1821+643 [Bahcall~\etal\ (1996) in their analysis of FOS
Key Project data set a canonical value of 0.24~\AA\ as the limit to which FOS
spectra are sensitive over a large spectral range], and are only identified
clearly in the more sensitive GHRS data.  This makes it even more important to
test whether apparent galaxy-absorber associations arise purely from chance,
because the density of weak lines with redshift is very much higher than
strong ones, increasing the chances of `accidental' coincidence close to the
line of sight.  The statistical significance of all associations shown in
Fig.~4 are discussed in detail in \S3.3.

\subsection{Association of \lya -clouds with galaxies}

In Table~\ref{nearlines} we list the ten \lya\ lines for which we could have
detected a galaxy with luminosity brighter than $\approx\:L^*$, and any
galaxies found within $\pm 600$~\kms\ of the absorption line. The limit to
$\rho $ when no galaxy is found depends on the distance that 30 arcmins
corresponds to at the redshift of a \lya\ line; these lower limits are given
in column 6, and range from $\simeq\:0.75-1.6$~\mpc .  Column 7 gives the
proper separation, $s$~\mpc , between absorber and galaxy assuming that
$\Delta v$ represents cosmological (i.e. ``Hubble Flow'') distances.
$M_{\rm{lim}}$ is again listed in column 8 to highlight the limit to which we
are able to detect galaxies.

\begin{table*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{100mm}
\caption{Nearest galaxies to \lya\ lines within 600~\kms }
\label{nearlines}
\begin{tabular}{cclcrccc}
               &  $W_r$ &  &                & $\Delta v$ & $\rho $   & $s$ \\
$z_{\rm{abs}}$ &   (\AA )  & Des & $z_{\rm{gal}}$ & (\kms )    & (\h ) & (\mpc
) & $M_{\rm{lim}}$ \\
\hline
0.0245 & 0.31 & Obj192   & 0.0238      & $-205$   & 578.4  & 2.06 & $-15.8$ \\
0.0300 & 0.05 & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\it no galaxy} & $>745$ & ... & $-16.3$  \\
0.0399 & 0.18 & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\it no galaxy} & $>975$ & ... & $-16.9$  \\
0.0411 & 0.04 & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\it no galaxy} & $>1002$& ... & $-16.9$  \\
0.0454 & 0.12 & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\it no galaxy} & $>1099$& ... & $-17.2$  \\
0.0570 & 0.06 & Obj216   & 0.0568      & $-48$    & 1318.9 & 1.42 & $-17.7$ \\
0.0672 & 0.12 & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\it no galaxy} & $>1569$& ... & $-18.1$  \\
0.1113 & 0.09 & Obj242   & 0.1116      & 67       & 563.2  & 0.89 & $-19.2$ \\
0.1197 & 0.04 & Obj172   & 0.1216      & 508      & 104.0  & 4.28 & $-19.3$ \\
0.1214 & 0.63 & Obj172   & 0.1216      & 54       & 104.0  & 0.46 & $-19.4$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}

Of the ten \lya\ lines listed in Table~4 we are unable to detect any galaxies
at similar redshifts from five (50\%) of them.  This result is shown
graphically in a plot of $W_r$ vs.\ $\rho$ for nine of the absorption systems
in Fig.~\ref{fig:percent2} (for this figure, we have assumed that the weak
line at $z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.1197$, separated by 450~\kms\ from the
$z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.1214$ line, is
associated with the galaxy 104~\h\ from the QSO sightline).  The figure
suggests that at least half of the \lya\ lines are intergalactic in origin.  As
mentioned above, eight of the ten \lya\ lines are weaker than
$\simeq\:0.2$~\AA ; hence we are discussing a population of \lya\ lines much
weaker than those detectable in FOS spectra.  Six of these eight weak
absorbers have no bright galaxies at separations less than ($0.7-1.3)$~\mpc .
There are two strong lines ($W_r\:>\:0.3$~\AA) at $z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.0245$
and $0.1214$, and both have galaxies 578 and 104~\h\ from the QSO sightline
respectively. Again, the question is whether these associations are
coincidental, a question we attempt to answer in \S3.3.

\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig
{figure=ew2b.ps,height=6cm,angle=270}}
\caption{Plot of the distribution of rest equivalent
width, $W_r$, of the \lya\ lines towards Q1821+643,
{\it vs.}\ impact parameters, $\rho $,  of the nearest galaxies within
$\Delta v\:=\:\pm600$~\kms\ of the \lya\ system.
Open circles represent detections of a galaxy;
lower limits correspond to the size that 30 arcmin corresponds to at the
redshift of the absorption system.
}
\label{fig:percent2}
\end{figure}

Our survey detects one obvious group of galaxies at $z\approx\:0.05$ (see
Fig.~\ref{fig:wedges}).  As noted above, possible absorption by \lya\ at
this redshift is unfortunately obscured by a weak Galactic C~I absorption
line. It is clear though that strong \lya\ absorption, with
equivalent widths greater than the $W$(C~I$\lambda
1277$)$\:\simeq\:0.1$~\AA\ observed, is {\it not} associated with this group
of galaxies. A direct association between galaxy groups and \lya\ absorption
systems has been claimed by Lanzetta~\etal\ (1996) for a group of galaxies
toward Q1545+2101 at $z\:=\:0.26$; in their example, all five galaxies
constituting the group are within $\rho\:=\:500$~\h\ of the QSO sightline,
and the resulting \lya\ absorption is strong ($W\:=\:0.8$~\AA )
and broad. In our data, there are 12 galaxies in a redshift interval
$0.04950-0.05250$ (which corresponds to depth of 8~\mpc\ along the line of
sight) but all are at separations of $\rho\:=\:0.44-1.01$~\mpc . This
clearly shows that loose groups of galaxies --- where intracluster gas might
be expected to produce absorption --- need not produce \lya\
absorption. M93 found a similar example towards 3C~273.

In contrast, there are three absorption lines at
$z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.0399-0.0454$ (a depth of $\sim\:15$~\mpc ) which are
offset from this galaxy group, and unassociated with any galaxies brighter
than $M\:\simeq\:-17.0$.  There are $2-3$ published examples of a \lya\ line
lying in a void between galaxy structures at low-redshift (Shull~\etal\ 1996),
and, if the identification of the $z_{\rm{abs}}\:=0.0399$ and 0.0454 systems
towards Q1821+643 is correct (see \S2.2), then this would be another good
example of \lya\ lines avoiding galaxies.  Of course, at $z\:\simeq\:0.04$, 30
arcmins corresponds to only 1\mpc , which makes it possible that galaxies
forming part of a loose group at these redshifts might be missed.  If we
consider galaxies listed in the NED outside our 30 arcmin survey radius, we
find only eight nearby galaxies, at large distances of $3.0-10.0$~\mpc\ from
the QSO line of sight within a redshift range $z\:=\:0.038-0.042$. Although
the catalogue of galaxies from the NED is in no sense complete, (and drawing
any inferences from such a catalog may be highly misleading), this does
suggest that some \lya\ absorbers avoid galaxies on scales of at least
a few Mpc.

\subsection{Galaxy-absorber correlation functions: are absorbers associated
with galaxies?}

It is clear from the proceeding section that we need a statistical approach to
establishing whether apparent galaxy-absorber correlations are real.  In this
section, therefore, we calculate the galaxy-galaxy and galaxy-absorber
cross-correlation functions in our data set to test the significance of such
associations.

We have used the formalism given by Mann, Saunders \& Taylor (1996), which for
the galaxy-galaxy correlation function reduces to the estimator of
$\xi_{\rm{gg}}$ given by Hamilton (1993).  To calculate the galaxy-absorber
cross-correlation, $\xi_{\rm{gl}}$, in redshift space, where separations are
denoted as $s$, we have used their generalization

\begin{equation}
1+\xi_{\rm{gl}} (s) = \frac{D_g D_l(s)}{D_g R_l (s)} \frac{R_g R_l
(s)}{R_g D_l (s)}
\end{equation}

where $D_g D_l(s)$ is the weighted pair counts of galaxies and lines whose
separation places them in a bin centred on $s$, $R_g R_l$ is the corresponding
weighted count for a random catalogue of a) galaxies covering the same area of
sky and having the same selection function as the data, and b) lines randomly
distributed along the line of sight with a correction for an evolving number
density with redshift. $D_g R_l$, $R_g D_l$ and $R_g R_l$ are the weighted
counts of cross pairs between the data and the random catalogs.

For the weighting of the pair counts we adopt the now `standard' choice of
using either $w(r)\:=\:1$ --- no weighting ---
(where $r$ denotes the radial distance of a
galaxy/line from the observer) or, for galaxies,

\begin{equation}
w(r,s)\:=\:1/[1+4\pi \phi(r) J_3(s)]
\end{equation}

(Peebles 1973; Hamilton 1993; Mann, Saunders \& Taylor 1996; Tucker~\etal\
1997).  Here, $\phi(r)$ is the selection function, which we take simply to be
the
number density of galaxies in our survey, $n(r)/V(r)$, as calculated from our
data. In this weighting scheme, $J_3(s)$ is defined as

\begin{equation}
J_3(s)\:\equiv\:\int^s_0 x^2 \xi(x) dx
\end{equation}

and we have used the results from the Las Campanas Redshift Survey (LCRS;
Tucker~\etal\ 1996), $\xi(s) = (s_0/s)^\gamma$ with $s_0\:=\:6.3$ and $\gamma
= 1.52$ to evaluate $J_3(s)$. In fact, the correlation function we
calculate is relatively insensitive to using this weighting function.
 For absorption lines, $w(r)$ is always set
equal to unity. To ensure the correct number density of lines, random
catalogs were generated with the number of lines
$n(z)\:\propto\:(1+z)^\gamma$, where $\gamma\:=\:0.42$ (Bahcall~\etal\
1996). Although this is inevitably only
 an approximation, because we have included \lya\ lines with
equivalent widths less than the $0.24$~\AA\ used to evaluate $n(z)$, the
correction has little effect over the small redshift range discussed herein.
For all estimates of $\xi_{gg}$ and $\xi_{gl}$, we have used 10000 points for
the random catalogues, and a maximum redshift of $z\:=\:0.2$.
For $\xi_{gl}$, we have used a minimum redshift of 0.0060 for
lines and galaxies, since below this, we cannot distinguish \lya\ lines from
the Damped \lya\ line of our own Milky Way.

We first show in Fig.~\ref{fig:cross1} (top)
the galaxy auto-correlation function
for galaxies weighted in the way described in equation 2. Errors shown are
$1\sigma$ error bars calculated in the way prescribed by Mo~\etal\ (1992).
Also plotted is $1+\xi_{\rm{gg}}$ from the LCRS (dotted
line). The figure shows, unsurprisingly, that the galaxies are clustered in
much the same way as seen in more extensive galaxy surveys.

\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig
{figure=newcorr4.ps,height=8cm,angle=270}}
\caption{The galaxy auto-correlation function, $\xi_{\rm{gg}}$,
of galaxies in our sample
towards Q1821+643. For comparison, the
auto-correlation of galaxies found from
the Las Camapanas Redshift Survey (Tucker~\etal\ 1997)
is shown as a dotted line.}
\label{fig:cross1}
\end{figure}

In Fig.~\ref{fig:cross2} we plot the galaxy-absorber correlation function,
$\xi_{\rm{gl}}$.  For bins with no galaxies or \lya\ clouds detected, we have
set $\xi_{\rm{gl}}\:=\:1$ to indicate the size of bins used to calculate
$\xi_{\rm{gl}}$. In Fig.~\ref{fig:cross2}a the correlation is dominated by a
single point between $0.36-0.64$~\mpc ; this is Obj172 lying 104~\h\ from the
QSO sightline (Table~\ref{neargals}) at a redshift of 0.1216.  This
correlation calculation assumes a (comoving) Hubble flow; hence the difference
between $z_{\rm{gal}}$ and $z_{\rm{abs}}$ of $\simeq\:0.0002$ means that the
distance of galaxy and absorber becomes 518~\h , even though this value of
$\Delta z$ is within our measurement errors of $z_{\rm{gal}}$ and
$z_{\rm{abs}}$.  Nevertheless, the detection of a galaxy at these impact
parameters remains statistically significant; given a random distribution of
galaxies and absorbers, we would only have expected 0.02 pairs instead of the
one we found.  Hence this galaxy-absorber association is unlikely to have
arisen by chance.  Apart from this pair, Fig.~\ref{fig:cross2}a shows that the
majority of absorbers are uncorrelated with galaxies, that is, that
galaxies at similar redshifts to absorbers on scales of $0.5-2$~\mpc\ in
Fig.~\ref{fig:percent} probably arise by chance. We note a slight excess
between $s\:=\:2.0-3.6$~\mpc , but the point is within $2\sigma$ of
$\xi_{\rm{gl}}\:=\:0$ (7 pairs were expected, 10 were detected).  We note that
the lack of any galaxy-absorber pairs at separations of $s\:=\:0.15$ and
0.27~\mpc\ is not significant: compared with the randomly generated catalogue
of galaxies and absorbers, less than 1 galaxy-absorber association was
expected for each of these bins.

\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-5mm}
{\psfig
{figure=postparis.ps,height=10cm,angle=270}}
\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{The galaxy-absorber cross-correlation function, $\xi_{\rm{gl}}$,
towards
Q1821+643. $\xi_{\rm{gl}}$ is calculated (a) assuming that values of $\Delta v$
between absorbers and galaxies arise from the Hubble Flow, and
(b) assuming a retarded Hubble Flow such that $\Delta v$ is set to zero if
$\Delta v\:\leq\:200$~\kms .
For comparison, the galaxy-galaxy correlation
function found by Tucker~\etal\ (1997) for the LCRS is again
shown as a dotted line.}
\label{fig:cross2}
\end{figure}

The problems in taking the projected two-point correlation function and
estimating the proper three-dimensional spatial correlation function (Davis \&
Peebles 1983) for galaxies and absorbers are discussed in detail by M93.  It
is of more interest, however, to calculate $\xi_{\rm{gl}}$ using a ``retarded
Hubble Flow'' to take into account the possibility that a galaxy and an
absorber may be at the same (radial) distance from us, but have peculiar
velocities with respect to each due to the origin of the absorbing gas
(e.g. halo gas co-rotating with a galaxy disk). Hence in
Fig.~\ref{fig:cross2}b we calculate $\xi_{\rm{gl}}$ with $\Delta v$ set to zero
if the measured value is $|\Delta v|\:\leq\:200$~\kms , and $\Delta v$
corrected to $\Delta v - 200$~\kms\ if $|\Delta v|\:>\:200$~\kms . (The
resulting correlation is changed little by adopting values of $100-300$~\kms\
as the criterion for setting $\Delta v\:=\:0$.)  The figure shows that in
this case, absorbers
and galaxies tend to more consistently have values of
$\xi_{\rm{gl}}\:>\:0$. This suggests that absorbers and galaxies are weakly
associated if it is {\it assumed} that the velocity difference is not related
to any real physical separation, i.e. if the real separation between galaxy
and absorber is the measured value of $\rho$. However, it is important to
realise not only that all the points are within $2\sigma$ of
$\xi_{\rm{gl}}\:=\:0$, but that this correlation is sensitive to the exact
sample of \lya\ lines used; simply removing a line at random from the list to
test the robustness of the correlation can remove the apparent consistency of
having most of the points with
$\xi_{\rm{gl}}\:>\:0$. This lack of robustness is not surprising given
the small sample size of our data set.

We conclude that weak absorbers are uncorrelated, or at best, weakly
correlated, with galaxies, on scales of beyond a few hundred \h\ or more.
Given that there may be more of a significance for the retarded Hubble Flow
estimate of $\xi_{\rm{gl}}$, we can speculate on what this might mean. In what
scenarios could galaxies and absorbers be at the same radial distance from us?
One possibility is that absorbing gas is directly associated with the
identified galaxy. This seems unlikely for points in
Fig.~\ref{fig:percent} and~\ref{fig:percent2} with $\rho\:=\:0.5-2$~\mpc\
since there is good evidence that individual galaxy halos do not have
absorbing gas beyond $\rho\:=\:200-300$~\h\ (LBTW; BBP). A second possibility
is that the gas is a remnant of prior galaxy-galaxy interactions. Although
tidal debris is not a favoured explanation for the origin of the
$z\:\sim\:0.5$ Mg~II absorption lines (see, e.g. Steidel~\etal\ 1994), nearby
interacting galaxies have been shown to produce the characteristics of higher
redshift Mg~II systems (Bowen~\etal\ 1995), while tidal debris as an origin of
\lya\ absorbers has been discussed by Morris \& van den Bergh
(1994). This interpretation will remain hard to test, as observing the more
subtle signs of galaxy-galaxy interactions is difficult.

Finally, galaxies and absorbers could be at similar distances if they inhabit
the same dark matter (DM) structures which constitute the large scale
structure (LSS) of the Universe. Many CDM-based numerical simulations
(e.g. Cen~\etal\ 1994; Petitjean, M\"{u}cket \& Kates 1995; Zhang~\etal\ 1995;
M\"{u}cket~\etal\ 1996) now point to the possibility that low column density
H~I gas simply follows the same LSS as galaxies (at least at high redshift).
It seems likely that galaxies and absorbers which lie in DM sheets and
filaments will  have small (but non-zero) velocity differences, since the
velocity width of galaxy shells seen in local LSS is $200-300$~\kms\
(e.g. Santiago 1995). Hence the measured values of $\rho$ may well represent
real distances between galaxies and absorbers, at least for sheets aligned
perpendicular to our line of sight.

\subsection{Conclusions and Summary}

We have detected a single galaxy 104~\h\ from the line of sight of
Q1821+643; \lya\ absorption arises at the same redshift as
the galaxy to within measurement errors.  The association is statistically
significant compared to a randomly distributed ensemble of clouds and
galaxies, suggesting a direct link between absorber and galaxy.  The line is
strong ($W_r\:=\:0.63$~\AA ) and its detection is consistent with
those of similarly strong lines within 160~\h\ of bright galaxies found
by LBTW.  The next nearest galaxies are 291~\h\ and 410~\h\ away from the
sightline, and these show no absorption to very low equivalent width limits
($W_r\:<0.05$~\AA ) within 600~\kms .  Beyond 500~\h , several absorption
systems are found at similar redshifts to the galaxies, but these
coincidences are likely to be accidental.

Five of ten (50\%) \lya\ absorption systems out to a redshift of $0.12$
have no galaxies within 600~\kms\ and separations less than ($0.7-1.3$)~\mpc .
At these redshifts, our magnitude limited redshift survey would have been able
to detect at least $L^*$ luminosity galaxies. Excluding the one \lya\ system
apparently
associated with the galaxy described above, two \lya\ systems have
galaxies within 600~\kms\ and $\rho \:=\:0.4-0.7$~\mpc, but these associations
are again probably coincidental.  Eight of the ten lines have {\it weak}
equivalent widths ($W_r\:<\:0.2$~\AA), and we conclude that this population is
uncorrelated, or at best, weakly correlated, with galaxies. A similar result
was found by Stocke~\etal\ (1995) for lines with $W_r\:\leq\:0.1$~\AA\
detected in their own and previously published data sets.

The nature of the strong lines is less clear.  The detection of strong
lines within 200~\h\ of galaxies by LBTW, and the association of one of two
strong lines (out to a redshift of 0.12) with a galaxy at a separation of
104~\h\ in our own survey supports the idea that strong lines are
associated with galaxies while weak ones are intergalactic in origin.  This
is the `two-population' explanation proposed by Mo \& Morris (1994) and
Bahcall~\etal\ (1996).  The difficulty in unambiguously drawing this
conclusion from our analysis is that our data set contains too few strong
lines at low redshift to adequately characterise the nature of this
population.  Le Brun~\etal\ (1996)
have published the only other available survey
of the association of strong (FOS-detectable) lines with galaxies;  of
13 \lya\ systems listed with $W_r\:>\:0.24$~\AA, four have galaxies
coincident in velocity which are within 200~\h\ of a QSO sightline,
five are in the range
$\rho  \:=\:200-500$~\h , and the remaining four are at separations beyond
1.0~\mpc\ --- a roughly even spread in impact parameters.  Much of this
ambiguity may be down to the 43~\% completeness of their survey at
$m_r\:=\:18.5$, which ensures considerable difficulty in detecting
intermediate brightness galaxies at the redshifts of the \lya\ systems
studied, $z_{\rm{abs}}\:=\:0.09-0.77$. However, detection of even a
few bright galaxies so close to \lya\ systems may suggest that strong
lines are directly associated with galaxies. Clearly, to explore this
possibility further, more complete galaxy surveys are required at
the redshifts of strong lines. A second approach would be
to directly search for \lya\ absorption in halos of nearby, isolated
galaxies at impact parameters of $0-500$~\h .

Our results do not rule out the possibility that strong \lya\ lines are
directly associated with galaxies of {\it all } luminosities --- including
faint dwarf galaxies which have not been found in the surveys described
above --- on scales of a few hundred \h. This would explain why it has
been easy to find some absorbing galaxies (i.e. the bright ones) while
some strong lines appear to have no associated galaxies (those which
are too faint to be detected).
Only Rauch \etal\ (1996) have searched for low surface brightness galaxies
which might be responsible for \lya\ absorption lines toward 3C~273, and
none were detected, although two faint galaxies (CGCG014$-$054,
$M_B\:=\:-16.2$ and the H~I cloud H~I~1225+01, $M_B\:=\:-14.0$) are at
similar redshifts to the lowest redshifted \lya\ lines at 1012 and 1582~\kms\
and within $\rho \:=\:200$~\h .  BBP also found \lya\ absorption toward
Q1001+2910 at the same velocity as UGCA201 ($M_B\:=\:-16.2$, $\rho
\:=\:117$~\h ) with no other galaxies nearby.  Unfortunately, it is hard to
test whether these coincidences are accidental or not.

\bigskip

The amount of data needed to fully understand the origin
of the \lya -forest is still far from available. Obtaining high quality, high
resolution \hst\ spectra toward Q1821+643 demonstrates the importance of such
data, not only for exploring the weak population of \lya\ lines, but simply in
disentangling the \lya -forest from Galactic absorption lines when working at
low-redshift. The nature of the strong lines remains unclear, and as mentioned
above, a direct search for \lya\ lines within a few hundred \h\ of nearby,
isolated galaxies would provide much needed information as to whether strong
lines alone are directly associated with galaxies.

\section*{ACKNOWLEDGMENTS}

It is a pleasure to thank Andy Taylor, Licia Verde, and John
Peacock for highly illuminating discussions.  We are also very grateful to
Mike Irwin for providing candidate objects in the field of Q1821+643 from APM
scans. IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatories,
which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in
Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National Science
Foundation. The NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) is operated by the Jet
Propulsion Laboratory, Caltech, under contract with National Aeronautics and
Space Administration.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaArXiv


I'll be the first to admit that I get a little overexcited when it comes to new releases. But when I saw a picture of the Anastasia Beverly Hills Modern Renaissance Eyeshadow Palette teased on the brand's Instagram, I instantly knew I had to have it. I have quite the thing for warm-toned eyeshadows, and the fact that most of the shade names were inspired by pigments used by Renaissance painters excited me even more. I don't mention this much, but my original intention after graduating college was to use my chemistry degree to go into art conservation, so seeing these pigment names really made me happy.
The palette comes with fourteen shades, eleven of which are mattes and three satins/shimmers. Most of the shades are quite neutral, but there are a few pops of color in there, mainly a vibrant magenta pink shade called Love Letter. You can tell they really put a lot of thought into the color story - any of the shades would pair together to create a unique look. There are several perfect crease/transition shades as well as colors perfect for adding depth and smoking things up.
I've tried Anastasia eyeshadows before in the form of the Self-Made Palette (review), and they really are the best of the best in my opinion. These are the only eyeshadows I've ever used that will not crease or fade on me when used with a primer. I have a hard time reaching for any other brand because I know these will stay looking perfect all day long. The shadows are for the most part beautifully buttery and soft, though there are a few shades that aren't quite as creamy. Every shade has great color payoff, though. I can't wait to put together some summer looks using this palette, and there's not one color I can't see myself using. My favorite shades so far have been Vermeer, Buon Fresco, Antique Bronze, Red Ochre, and Warm Taupe. I've been slapping a bit of Vermeer on the lid with Buon Fresco in the crease for a quick everyday look, but I really can't wait to try an all-out smoky eye using Red Ochre and Realgar. I'll be sure to document it on Instagram or Snapchat (username: dadmunk) if I do.
The best thing about the palette, though, is that Anastasia Beverly Hills has made it a part of their permanent collection! It really is the essential warm eye palette. And word on the street is that they're going to release a cool version at some point if this one goes over well.
Have you tried the Modern Renaissance Palette? What eyeshadow palettes have you got your eyes on?


text:
Henrietta Park
Opened to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee of Queen Victoria of 1897, this parkland was donated by Captain Forester (formerly of the Third Kings Own Hussars) life tenant of the Bathwick Estate, with the stipulation that it should always remain a green space and never be built on.
It is a seven-acre park, situated within walking distance of the city centre, sitting between Henrietta Road and Great Pulteney Street.
Henrietta Park contains many fine trees, a pergola covered with roses, extensive shrubberies and beautiful flower beds, along with a Sensory Garden which is planted with many sweetly scented flowers and shrubs.
A small area of the park was laid out as a memorial garden to George V in 1937. You can still read the plaque by the gate: "The Garden of Remembrance dedicated in honour of King George the fifth by the city of Bath 1936".
This area was re-designed in the 1950s, and The Garden for the Blind is now a truly tranquil oasis, minutes away from the bustle of city life.
There is no charge for admission and Henrietta Park is open throughout the year, but the Memorial Garden of Remembrance is locked between dusk and dawn.
TripAdvisor Ranking
#78 of 388 things to do in Bath
8 Oct 2019: This small park is almost hidden away at the end of Henrietta Street. It's a short walk from the centre of Bath and is a magical place, very green and peaceful.
11 Aug 2019: Really good place to escape the hustle and bustle... Great to see a tree map provided of all the specimen trees and the remembrance garden was very peaceful.
27 Jul 2019: As you enter the park on your left you may wish to enjoy the peace and tranquillity of the King George V Garden of Remembrance, with its colourful borders, pool and water lilies. There is a very...
A historic seven-acre park with extensive shrubberies and beautiful flower beds, built in celebration of Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee.
Henrietta Street, Bath, BA2 6LR
TripAdvisor® Rating 93 Reviews
Explore Bath...
Henry's Restaurant
Icarus Jewellery
ESPA at Lucknam Park
Treatments at THE PIG-near Bath
Weekly Walks at Wells Cathedral
Bistrot Pierre
Thermae Bath Spa Shop
The Ivy Bath Brasserie
Firehouse Rotisserie

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
You are here: Home / Featured / Ol' Leroy McKrank and the Council of the Knights of the Royal Arch
Ol' Leroy McKrank and the Council of the Knights of the Royal Arch
July 26, 2009 by The Euphrates Leave a Comment
A couple of decades back, Ol' Leroy McKrank decided to join the York Rite. Now this was the only other body of Masonry that Ol' Leroy had ever joined, mainly because he refused to fork over the cash required to join any additional bodies. But at the time, each York Rite body's dues were only five bucks a piece, so Ol' Leroy thought it was a pretty good deal. Fifteen smackers for three organizations? Who could pass that up?
Leroy sat through all nine degrees, held over the course of a few months, with an expression of awe on his face. The Brethren of the York Rite took his expression to mean that he was thoroughly impressed with the degrees. However, Ol' Leroy was actually in a state of shock. Everywhere he looked he saw extravagant sets for the degrees, various aprons with different designs upon them, and the most dumbfounding thing that Leroy noticed was the impressive uniforms of the Knights Templar. Shiny swords? Custom made chapeaus? This was surely the most wasteful display that he had ever seen in Freemasonry. Besides, Ol' Leroy figured that you didn't need three bodies to tell the whole story of the York Rite.
So after Ol' Leroy McKrank had received the Order of the Temple, he went home and started to do some thinking. He was determined to create a less wasteful order for those that were interested in the York Rite, but he would also need a chance to implement it. He got the chance when the York Rite came to the Blue Lodge a few years later in dire straights. They needed help with the rent and Ol' Leroy jumped at the opportunity.
"Well I'll tell ya what your problem is," Leroy told the High Priest of the Royal Arch Chapter, "too much gol' dang waste! I got a plan that will save you all kinds of money and you won't have to ask the lodge for nothin'!"
That is when Ol' Leroy told them about the Council of the Knights of the Royal Arch. It was a single degree that enveloped all the teachings of the York Rite. It was like a book made into a movie. Sure, you get the general story line, but where is the content? Ol' Leroy McKrank explained the degree in detail to the members.
"You see, you get your candidate to start off over here and then he goes and gets his work inspected and then can't get paid, so he talks to the boss man and gets paid and to apologize for his not gettin' paid the boss man makes him the Master of the Lodge. Then its time to dedicate the temple and then we tear it down and throw the candidate into the rubble to find some stuff and he does find some purdy important things." Leroy proceeded to fly around the lodge room, giving a demonstration of the floor work for the degree. It looked as though he was running sprints from the west to the east and back to the west again. "Then we remind him of his last conversation with good ol' Hiram who shows him where he'll leave some important tools and when he goes to find what Hiram was tellin' him about…well…the guards stop him and just about put him to death. But luckily, some other fella' was nappin' on the job so we'll kill him instead and take it easy on the candidate this time." Leroy cackled about his little joke before continuing. "So then he has to go to Persia and talk to that fella' Darius and ask to build the temple. He gets into an argument about whether a beer, a purdy lady, or some ol' duffer is more powerful and says that truth is better than all of them. Then he goes to Malta for some reason to become a Knight and then he winds up here and we read him the book of Matthew and take a few shots. You don't need no swords or nothin', just a couple of aprons and a couple of guys that can tell a story."
Ol' Leroy had a smile of pure satisfaction with his creation on his face. The members of the York Rite stood with their mouths open in disbelief. It is unknown whether they were so confused and awestruck by what they had heard or whether they were in such a destitute situation that they had no other options, but they accepted Ol' Leroy's proposal.
Leroy slapped his knee and cackled, "Now this is a Masonic degree!"
To this day, Ol' Leroy McKrank's York Rite body operates the only Council of the Knights of the Royal Arch.
Like what you are reading at the Euphrates? Email the author at euphratesblog@gmail.com to join the Banks of the Euphrates mailing list.
York Rite Survey Results
In "The Euphrates"
Ain Soph to Malkuth – The First Degree of Scottish Rite Freemasonry
In "Masonic Traveler"
Filed Under: Featured, The Euphrates Tagged With: fiction, York Rite


There simply aren't enough superlatives to describe this experience. The results are beautiful and I felt comfortable leaving my home in care of the crew, knowing that they would do the work and protect my belongings. I was not disappointed. I highly recommend this company.


text:
More on the November 2021 election results
Here's the Chron story on the Tuesday election results. It is mostly a straight recording of the individual races, including those I covered yesterday and others that I didn't. Of the most interest to me is this:
Results were delayed until late Tuesday, in part because of a reported power outage at Harris County Elections' counting center. Early and absentee totals were not available until after 10 p.m.,
"The machines are sensitive to any interference, so to ensure the integrity of the computers we conducted a full logic and accuracy test, which takes about two hours," according to a Facebook post by the county's elections administration office. "Though we want to get the results out quickly, we prioritize processing everything accurately even if it takes some extra time."
The post said judges were dropping off equipment at the central counting location at that time.
People still were voting at 8 p.m., about an hour after polls closed, at one poll location, Harris County Elections Administrator Isabel Longoria tweeted.
"Standby, watch the Astros, and we'll catch you soon," Longoria said in the Tweet.
The Astros advice probably didn't help anyone's mood, but that's hindsight. The Facebook post in question, which contains video of Longoria explaining what is happening, is here – there are more vids further up the page as well. Campos was furious, called it a "botched" night and an "epic failure", and expects "outrage" from Commissioners Court. Stace was more measured, saying "these glitches give the County a chance to fix things so we can avoid them when everyone shows up next November". I lean more in that direction, but I get the frustration – I wore myself out hitting Refresh on Tuesday – and there are a lot of questions to be asked and answered. I will be interested to see how the Court reacts.
Longoria also had this to say, on Twitter:
8:12am and 100% of precincts reporting. Highlights include:
– 110K EDay Voters
– 43K EV (2K DTV)
– 46K Mail Ballots
~12% Turnout
– New Machines
– 1st Jail Voting in Texas
– First Countywide election under EA structure.
– Plenty of lessons to improve
– But proud of @HarrisVotes
— Isabel Longoria (@IsabelTX) 9:31 AM – 3 November 2021
The line about jail voting refers to this. Not sure where she's getting the 12% turnout figure from – going by the Election Day totals posted, there were 227,789 votes cast out of 2,482,914 registered voters, for 9.17% turnout. Still, that's a significant increase from 2017, which had 150,174 ballots cast out of 2,233,533 voters, for 6.72% turnout. That's a 52% increase in voters, or a 36% increase in turnout as a percentage of registered voters, in a year where there was nothing sexy on the ballot. What gives?
It could be an effect of a more energized Republican base, going to the polls to express their feelings about President Biden. I don't know that the Constitutional amendments were a great vehicle for that, but maybe the school board races were. Conservative challengers are in runoffs in three races, so maybe that had something to do with it. Here's a comparison of turnout from 2017 to 2021:
Year  Dist   Votes  Voters  Turnout
2017     I   9,784  78,479   12.47%
2021     I  10,108  87,671   11.53%
2017     V  12,431  85,309   14.57%
2017    VI   7,399  73,575   10.06%
2017   VII  12,219  89,177   13.70%
2017    IX   8,622  84,185   10.24%
2021    IX   8,935  90,067    9.32%
On the one hand, the two races that didn't prominently feature conservative candidates actually had less turnout (at least percentage-wise) than they did in 2017. On the other hand, outside of the District V race, the increase wasn't that much. In District VI, it was a jump of 21% in total voters, and 15% in turnout of RVs, and in District VII, it was 27% for voters and 14% for turnout of RVs. Not nothing, but much less than Harris County as a whole. Even District V, at a 38% increase in voters and 32% increase in turnout of RVs, was below the county level.
So who knows? Final turnout was definitely higher than I thought it would be, and in the end it was still the case that almost exactly half of the vote came in on Election Day. Again, more than I thought it would be but still a big step down from 2017, when 59% of the vote was on E-Day. Given the huge turnout in 2020, it may be the case that there are just now more habitual voters. If that's so, we'll see some of that effect in 2022 and especially 2023, when the open Mayoral race will also drive people to the polls. I don't think there are any big conclusions to draw here, but let's put a pin in this and see what we think a couple of years down the line.
2021 runoff results
Early voting starts today for the 2021 runoffs
It's 2021 Runoff Day
Posted in: Election 2021.
Tagged: Anne Sung · Bridget Wade · Caroline Walter · constitutional amendments · Election 2017 · Election 2020 · Election 2021 · Election 2022 · Election 2023 · Elizabeth Santos · Harris County · HCC · HISD · HISD Board of Trustees · Holly Maria Flynn Vilaseca · Isabel Longoria · Janette Lindner · Kendall Baker · Sue Deigaard · Texas · turnout
← A redistricting lawsuit twofer from MALC The fight for free speech continues at Collin College →
The CyFair ISD race also drove quite a bit of that increase. They had anti-CRT, anti mask candidates win all 3 positions. Also, that is where the voting location that had a line until after 8pm is located.
Mainstream says:
I don't think we ever had to wait until 8:12 a.m. the next day for all ballot boxes to be accounted for when Stan Stanart was in charge of Harris County elections.
Mainstream,
Good grief…you can stop clutching your pearls and creating artificial hysteria about a single ballot box that was not transferred the night before.
Have you had a chance to talk to accused anti-Semite Stan Stanart about whether this late ballot box was a part of a Jewish conspiracy by George Soros?
Some of those new folks in Cy-Fair are going to be surprised when they the limits of what school boards can do.
To suggest that former County Clerk Stan Stanart hates Jews is simply slanderous. He may be a hard right, social and religious movement conservative, but I am not aware of any evidence that he is anti-Semitic.
C.L. says:
Doesn't appear Frederick is only one who has referenced Stanart and Anti-Semite in the same sentence…
https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/harris-county-clerk-stan-stanart-george-soros-attack-anti-semitism/
policywonqueria says:
ANTI-THIS, ANTI-THAT, AND ABSOLUTELY NO ZERO TOLERANCE FOR NO TOLERANCE … ESPECIALLY NOT FOR ACCUSED ANTI-ANTERS. GOT THAT?
Seriously folks. A probing analysis of what went wrong and why with the local part of this low-key election, and how to do better next time, can be productive and constructive.
The incessant name-calling and denunciation of political enemies, on the other hand, gets tiresome.
What does it take to become an accused FILLTHEBLANK? An accusation. No more.
voter_worker says:
@policywonqueria: the situations criticized (a power failure resulting in a delay in reporting results, one precinct voting for over an hour after closing, a delayed ballot box) don't even rise to the status of bumps in the road in my opinion. The EA's post-election review will produce whatever procedural changes are needed to reduce the probability of recurrence. It's been a no-drama election which merits, if not congratulations to the EA, then certainly a feeling of relief that it went as smoothly as it did.


"Keyboard for piano and guitar" on folded leaf tipped in; includes guitar chord diagrams. Includes indexes.
Schirmer, 2009-03-03. 10. Paperback. Used:Good.
2012-04-08. New. Ships with Tracking Number! INTERNATIONAL WORLDWIDE Shipping available. Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!
2009-03-05. New. Ships with Tracking Number! INTERNATIONAL WORLDWIDE Shipping available. Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!
Cengage Learning. PAPERBACK. 0840029985 New Textbook, Ships with Emailed Tracking from USA . New.
2003-02-02. New. Ships with Tracking Number! INTERNATIONAL WORLDWIDE Shipping available. Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!
Schirmer. PAPERBACK. 0495572209 NEW TEXTBOOK, SHIPS WITH EMAILED TRACKING FROM USA . New.
Cengage Learning. PAPERBACK. 0840029993 New Textbook, Ships with Emailed Tracking from USA . New.
Cengage Learning. PAPERBACK. 0840029993 BRAND NEW W/FAST SHIPPING! This item is: A Creative Approach to Music Fundamentals (with CourseMate, 1 term (6 months) Printed Access Card), 11th Ed., by William Duckworth; FORMAT: Book With Online Product; ISBN: 9780840029997. Choose Expedited for fastest shipping! Our 98%+ rating proves our commitment! We cannot ship to PO Boxes/APO Addresses or outside the continental U.S. To avoid ordering the wrong item, please check your item's ISBN number! . New.
Cengage Learning. PAPERBACK. 049509093X New US Edition Textbook, Ships with Emailed Tracking from USA . New.
Wadsworth Publishing Co Inc, 1988-08-27. 3rd. Paperback. Used:Good.
Schirmer, 2012-01-10. 11. Paperback. Used:Good.
1997-12-31. New. Ships with Tracking Number! INTERNATIONAL WORLDWIDE Shipping available. Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!
Schirmer, 2012-01-25. 11. Paperback. Used:Good.
Cengage Learning. PAPERBACK. 0840029985 BRAND NEW W/FAST SHIPPING! This item is: A Creative Approach to Music Fundamentals (Book Only), 11th Ed., by William Duckworth; FORMAT: Bound Book; ISBN: 9780840029980. Choose Expedited for fastest shipping! Our 98%+ rating proves our commitment! We cannot ship to PO Boxes/APO Addresses or outside the continental U.S. To avoid ordering the wrong item, please check your item's ISBN number! . New.
Schirmer, 2006-01-10. 9. Paperback. Used:Good.
Wadsworth Pub. Co, 1981-01-01. Hardcover. Used:Good.
Wadsworth Pub Co, 1994-08-01. 5th. Paperback. Used:Good.
Cengage Learning. PAPERBACK. 0840029993 Brand New ,Original Book , Direct from Publisher , Express 5-8 business days , worldwide delivery. . New.
Cengage Learning. PAPERBACK. 0840029985 Expedited shipping NOT available. Brand New. Exceptional customer service. Standard shipping is ground. All deliveries in 4-14 business days. . New.
Cengage Learning. PAPERBACK. 0840029985 With keyboard; Teacher's Edition (same contents as the student edition plus extra material). Marked Not for Resale with disclaimer. New and in great condition with no missing or damaged pages. Need it urgently? Upgrade to Expedited. In stock and we ship daily on weekdays & Saturdays. No Access Code. . New.
2000-02-03. New. Ships with Tracking Number! INTERNATIONAL WORLDWIDE Shipping available. Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!
Schirmer. PAPERBACK. 0495572209 Item in very good condition! Textbooks may not include supplemental items i.e. CDs, access codes etc... . Very Good.
Wadsworth Pub. Co. Used - Good. Good condition. Binder Ready! Stamped on inside.
Wadsworth Publishing Co Inc, 1988-08-27. 3rd. Paperback. New. There is very little shelf wear. The spine remains free of creasing. The pages of this book are clean and unmarked. FAST SHIPPING & FREE TRACKING!
Cengage Learning. PAPERBACK. 0840029985 US Edition Textbook, May Have Highlights, Notes and/or Underlining, BOOK ONLY-NO ACCESS CODE, NO CD, Ships with Emailed Tracking from USA . Good.
Schirmer, 2009-01-13. 10. Paperback. Used:Good.
Cengage Learning. PAPERBACK. 0840029993 US Edition Textbook, May Have Highlights, Notes and/or Underlining, BOOK ONLY-NO ACCESS CODE, NO CD, Ships with Emailed Tracking from USA . Good.
Schirmer, 2003-07-24. 8. Paperback. Used:Good.
1984-11-08. Good. Ships with Tracking Number! INTERNATIONAL WORLDWIDE Shipping available. May not contain Access Codes or Supplements. May be ex-library. Shipping & Handling by region. Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!
1988-08-27. Good. Ships with Tracking Number! INTERNATIONAL WORLDWIDE Shipping available. May not contain Access Codes or Supplements. May be ex-library. Shipping & Handling by region. Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!
Schirmer Books, 2000-07-28. 7th. Paperback. Used:Good.
1997-12-31. Good. Ships with Tracking Number! INTERNATIONAL WORLDWIDE Shipping available. May not contain Access Codes or Supplements. May be ex-library. Shipping & Handling by region. Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!
2012-04-08. Good. Ships with Tracking Number! INTERNATIONAL WORLDWIDE Shipping available. May not contain Access Codes or Supplements. May be ex-library. Shipping & Handling by region. Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!
2009-03-05. Good. Ships with Tracking Number! INTERNATIONAL WORLDWIDE Shipping available. May not contain Access Codes or Supplements. May be ex-library. Shipping & Handling by region. Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!
Wadsworth Publishing Co Inc, 1991-09-27. 4th. Paperback. Used:Good.
Schirmer. PAPERBACK. 0534517684 New Condition. . New.
Cengage Learning. PAPERBACK. 049509093X US Edition Textbook, May Have Highlights, Notes and/or Underlining, BOOK ONLY-NO ACCESS CODE, NO CD, Ships with Emailed Tracking from USA . Good.
Wadsworth Pub Co, 1997-12-01. 6th. Paperback. Used:Good.
2000-02-03. Good. Ships with Tracking Number! INTERNATIONAL WORLDWIDE Shipping available. May not contain Access Codes or Supplements. May be ex-library. Shipping & Handling by region. Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!


The Oasis Boutique Beach Resort is a stunning & contemporary designed beach front resort in Tanjung Benoa-Nusa Dua area and only 20 minutes from International Airport.
It is a U shape building with the center of masterpiece 70 meters pool surrounded by landscaping & views of Nusa Penida island and Indian Ocean.
There are 118 guest rooms with several categories guest can choose; 86 Superior rooms is 32 m2 & 24 Deluxe rooms is 36 m2 either with shower only in Superior or with bath tub in Deluxe room, 5 Ocean Suite is 70 m2 with king size bed, large bathroom, 29' flat screen TV & separate shower. 2 Pool Suite is 150 m2 with king size bed, large private pool, private beach access, separate shower indoor & outdoor & DVD stereo. The rooms command views of swimming pool as well as the ocean for suite room.
All rooms have private balcony or terrace, flat screen TV, Mini Bar, Individually controlled AC, 40 TV channel, IDD phone with modem connection, in room safety box, bath room amenities, free daily 2 bottles of mineral water, slippers, bath robe (except Superior room), hair dryer and tea/coffee making facilities (except Superior room).
All day at the restaurant, uniquely designed & overlooking to the 70 meters long pool with cozy atmosphere, the Terrace restaurant serves the combination of spicy Balinese dishes & International cuisine throughout the day. The Terrace Bar is the place to sit & relax while enjoying the day. The bar menu offers a selection of wine & special cocktails. 24 Hours room service is available.
Indulge & discover your inner beauty at Tirta SPA. The SPA offers body massage from traditional Balinese massage, Shiatsu, Reflexology, body scrubs, face, hair & nails treatment. The Board room is ideal for small corporate meeting & other private functions and it exclusively provided with internet connection.
Getting around, we provide free shuttle hotel-Kuta-hotel (drop off at shopping area) 3 times a day and 3 times a week Ubud shuttle (chargeable) drop off at Ubud art market. Other activities within walking distance are local market shopping, water sport and other recreational activities are available as well as delicious local cuisine.
If you are looking for a trendy & contemporary design resort, something different The Oasis Boutique Beach Resort is th one. Our unique style is designed to inspire the imagination, making your stay a total experience for the senses and making your honeymoon an enduring memory in your heart.