Dynamical properties of forming galaxies at redshift z 5
Download
1 / 34

Dynamical Properties of Forming Galaxies at Redshift z > 5 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 117 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Dynamical Properties of Forming Galaxies at Redshift z > 5. Yoshi Taniguchi Research Center for Space & Cosmic Evolution Ehime University. ZOO of Star-Forming Galaxies at High Redshift. LAE LBG ERO DRG BzK SMG ・・・・・・・. z > 5. z < 5. LAEs vs. LBGs. LAE surveys

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Dynamical Properties of Forming Galaxies at Redshift z > 5 ' - morag


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Dynamical properties of forming galaxies at redshift z 5

Dynamical Properties of Forming Galaxiesat Redshift z > 5

Yoshi Taniguchi

Research Center for

Space & Cosmic Evolution

Ehime University


Zoo of star forming galaxies at high redshift
ZOO of Star-Forming Galaxiesat High Redshift

LAE

LBG

ERO

DRG

BzK

SMG

・・・・・・・

z > 5

z < 5


Laes vs lbgs
LAEs vs. LBGs

LAE surveys

 may miss weak Lya emitters,

but faint cont. doesn’t matter

LBG surveys

 may miss faint continuum sources,

but w/ or w/o Lya doesn’t matter


Laes vs lbgs1
LAEs vs. LBGs

LAEs tend to be

younger (larger EW of Lya)

less massive (fainter UV)

………….

than LBGs

But,

not always !


Laes vs lbgs2
LAEs vs. LBGs

LAEs & LBGs are overlapped

in many physical properties by definition

But, ……

Difference between LAEs & LBGs

as a function of redshift & environ

give us hints to understand

SF history in early universe


Lae to lbg ratio @ z 3 7
LAE to LBG Ratio @ z ~ 3 – 7

z=6 sample

by Dow-Hygelund07

SDF

SDF

MAHOROBA-11

(Yamada+05, PASJ, 57, 881; Sumiya+08, in prep.)


Hst acs imaging of laes @ z 5 7 z 4 9 in the cosmos field morphology of laes

HST/ACS Imaging ofLAEs @ z=5.7 & z=4.9in the COSMOS Field Morphology of LAEs


Dynamical properties of forming galaxies at redshift z 5

HST Treasury Program

(Cycle 12 & 13)

Scoville et al.

ACS I814

Cosmic Evolution Survey

- COSMOS -

Subaru Intensive Program

(S03B , S04B, S05B,…)

Taniguchi et al.

Other optical bands


Cosmos 20
COSMOS-20

12 IB

2 NB

NB816

NB711


119 laes @ z 5 7 in cosmos murayama et al 07 apjs 172 523 85 laes are imaged w acs f814w
119 LAEs @ z=5.7 in COSMOS(Murayama et al. 07, ApJS, 172, 523) 85 LAEs are imaged w/ACS-F814W

●Not imaged w/ACS

(34 LAEs)

● Detected w/ACS

(47 LAEs)

× Not detected w/ACS

(38 LAEs)

● Masked out areas


Half light radius r hl
Half-Light Radius (RHL)

(1”=6 kpc @ z = 5.7)

0.15”


47 laes detected w acs
47 LAEs detected w/ACS

Compact (RHL <0.15 arcsec)

24 LAEs

< RHL > = 0.11±0.02 arcsec

Extended (RHL > 0.15 arcsec)

23 LAEs

21: single

2: double

< RHL > = 0.21±0.06 arcsec

ALL

< RHL > = 0.16±0.10 arcsec


Compact
Compact

(5”x5” for each panel)



Extended double
Extended - Double

D=0.94”

D=0.36”



What do we see in f814w acs i814 vs s cam nb816
What do we see in F814W?ACS I814 vs. S-cam NB816

● extended

● extended-double

● extended-sp. confirmed

○ compact

○ compact-sp. confirmed

No correlation between I814 & NB816

 We don’t see Lya emission in I814


What do we see in f814w
What do we see in F814W?

NB816

LAEspectrum


What do we see in f814w1
What do we see in F814W?

● extended

● extended-double

● extended-sp. confirmed

○ compact

Good correlation between (I814z’) & z’

 We see UV continuum (>121.6nm) in I814


Three topics
Three Topics

1. Size-Magnitude Relation

2. Dynamical Structures

Disk-like or Spheroid-like ?

3. Multiple-component LAEs


Size magnitude relation @ z 6 r hl vs z 850 mag
Size-Magnitude Relation @ z~6- RHL vs. z850 mag -

● + * : LAEs

■ + ▲ + ●: LBGs

LAEs are more compact

LAEs are younger

than LBGs ?

(Dow-Hygelund+ 07, ApJ, 660, 47)


R hl vs z850 mag for high z laes and lbgs
RHL vs. z850 mag for High-z LAEs and LBGs

z~6

Bouwens06 i-dropout (UDF, UDF-P, GOODS-N&S)

Bunker03 1 LAE @ z =5.7

Bunker04 UDF i-dropout

Stanway04a 3 LAEs

Stanway04b 2 LAEs in GOODS-N

Dow-Hygelund07 22 z ~6 (UDF&UDF-P)

z~5

Rhoads05 1 LAE @ z =5.42

Overzier06 23 V dropouts in RG (z =5.2) field

z~4

Overzier08 63 g dropouts in RG (z =4.1) field

13 spectroscopic confirmed LAEs


R hl vs z 850 relation for high z lbgs and laes
RHL vs z850 Relation for High-z LBGs and LAEs

Little difference in sizes between LAEs & LBGs

Little redshift evolution from z=6 to 4 ?

LAE (Red) LBG (Black)


Hst acs imaging of laes @ z 4 9 in the cosmos field

HST/ACS Imaging ofLAEs @ z=4.9 in the COSMOS Field


79 laes @ z 4 9 in cosmos shioya et al 08 apj submitted 61 laes are imaged w acs f814w
79 LAEs @ z=4.9 in COSMOS(Shioya et al. 08, ApJ, submitted) 61 LAEs are imaged w/ACS-F814W

●Not imaged w/ACS

(18 LAEs)

● Detected w/ACS

(55 LAEs)

× Not detected w/ACS

(6 LAEs)

● Masked out areas


R hl vs z 850 relation for high z lbgs and laes1
RHL vs z850 Relation for High-z LBGs and LAEs

?

LAE (Red) LBG (Black)


R hl vs z 850 relation for high z laes and lbgs
RHL vs z850 Relation for High-z LAEs and LBGs

Little difference in size

between LAEs & LBGs @ each z

Size evolution from z=6 to 4 is weak

although LAEs @ z=6 are slightly

smaller than those @ z =4 – 5


Dynamical structures of the laes @ z 5 7 in comsos
Dynamical Structures of the LAEs@ z=5.7 in COMSOS

Disk-like or Spheroidal-like ?

 Azimuthally-averaged profile

w/ PSF deconvolution

(Hathi et al. 08, arXiv:0710.0007)


Azimuthally averaged composite psf deconvolved analysis
Azimuthally Averaged Composite (PSF-deconvolved analysis)

COMPACT

22 LAEs

RHL=0.08”

~480 pc

Sersic n=0.8

RHL=0.21”

~1.3 kpc

Sersic n=1.4

1”

EXTENDED

21 LAEs

< 1kpc for z~5 LAEs

(Pirzkal+06)


Dynamical structures of laes @ z 5 7 in the cosmos field
Dynamical Structures of LAEs @ z=5.7 in the COSMOS Field

Disk-like or Irregular morphology

for both compact & extended LAEs

Note that

40% of bright LBGs @ z=2.5 – 5

show disk-like morphology,

but 30% show spheroid-like structures

(Ravindranath+06)

Need systematic analysis of dynamical structures of

LBGs & LAEs as a function of z


Multiple component laes in the cosmos field
Multiple-component LAEsin the COSMOS Field

Fraction of multiples

2/47 = 4 % @ z = 5.7

8/55 = 15 % @ z = 4.9


Zoo of star forming galaxies at high redshift1
ZOO of Star-Forming Galaxiesat High Redshift

LBG

LAE

ERO

DRG

BzK

SMG

・・・・・・・

z > 5

z < 5


Summary
Summary

There must be overlaps in observational properties between LAEs and LBGs by definition.

However, systematic studies of both populations as a function of z are absolutely necessary to understand the whole history of star formation in early universe.


ad
  • Login