1 / 39

Feedback in Starburst Galaxies

Feedback in Starburst Galaxies. Todd Thompson Princeton University. with Eliot Quataert, Norm Murray, & Eli Waxman. Outline. Goal: A model for the global structure of starbursts. Why starbursts? The physical conditions. Radiation pressure feedback. Magnetic fields, cosmic rays, & -rays.

trory
Download Presentation

Feedback in Starburst Galaxies

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Feedback in Starburst Galaxies Todd Thompson Princeton University with Eliot Quataert, Norm Murray, & Eli Waxman

  2. Outline • Goal: A model for the global structure of starbursts. • Why starbursts? The physical conditions. • Radiation pressure feedback. • Magnetic fields, cosmic rays, & -rays.

  3. Systematics of Star Formation • Schmidt Law: • ``Star-forming” galaxies: • Extended, few-kpc scales. • ~ billion year timescales. • ``Starburst” galaxies: • Compact, 100’s pc scales. • 1-100 million year timescales. • Pressure: P ~  G g2 Starbursts Star-forming galaxies Kennicutt (1998)

  4. Regulation & Feedback in Galaxies • Low star formation efficiency: Suggests feedback and/or regulation over a broad range of conditions. • Q~1 observed in disks. (Martin & Kennicutt 2001) • Stellar processes (?): Stellar winds, radiation, supernovae, HII regions, etc. • Non-stellar processes (?): MRI. (Sellwood & Balbus 99;Piontek & Ostriker 04) Starbursts Star-forming galaxies Kennicutt (1998)

  5. Why Starbursts?

  6. M82 IRAS 19297-0406 M51 NOAO NGC 253 Arp 220

  7. Backgrounds & Starbursts Dole et al. (2006)

  8. Why Starbursts? • Starbursts & U/LIRGs • lie on the same scaling relations with normal galaxies. • constitute a large fraction of the IR background, the star-formation rate density at high z (also, -ray & MeV/TeV  backgrounds). • may be a key phase in the growth of super-massive black holes & spheroids. • are connected physically to super-star clusters, starburst cores. • have turbulent velocities v > 10 km/s. • What do we want to know? • Constituents: radiation, gas/dust, magnetic fields, and cosmic rays. • The origin and systematics of the scaling relations of galaxies.

  9. The Physical Conditions Arp 220 (d ~ 80 Mpc): • Two counter-rotating cores, ~100pc. • Circumbinary disk R~300pc. • gas ~ 5 g cm-2 • n ~ 103-104 cm-3 • Mgas ~ 109 -1010 M • v ~ 100 km s-1 • LFIR ~ 21012 L • LX ~ 3109 L • tdyn ~ 106 n4-1/2 yr 300 pc Solomon, Sakamoto Beswick 2006; Mundell et al; Lonsdale et al

  10. Pressures • Accounting:

  11. What processes regulate Star Formation in ULIRGs? • The standard lore:Energy injection by supernovae, stellar winds, HII regions (e.g., McKee & Ostriker ‘77). However, in a dense ISM, radiative losses are large: E  n-1/4. • Another Option: Radiation Pressure: • Starburst photons absorbed & scattered by dust: UV ~ 100’s cm2/g. • Dust is collisionally coupled to gas:  ~ 0.01 pc a0.1 n3-1. • Starbursts: optically thick to re-radiated IR : IR ~ gasIR > 1. • Radiative diffusion: efficient coupling to cold, dusty component, most of the mass. Scoville (2003) Thompson, Quataert, & Murray (2005)

  12. Radiation Pressure Supported Starbursts • Radiative flux: • Radiative diffusion: • Radiation pressure: • Obtain Eddington-limited starbursts:

  13. Some Predictions • The “Schmidt”-law for optically-thick starbursts: Higher  implies more pressure support, which implies a lower star formation rate & efficiency. Kennicutt (1998)

  14. The Rosseland Mean Opacity • Sublimation: Tsub ~ 1000 K. • Dust dominates T < 1000 K. • At T < 200 K — in the Rayleigh limit — = 0T2. • Overall normalization is dependent on metallicity and the dust-to-gas ratio. Semenov et al. (2003)

  15. Some Predictions • The “Schmidt”-law: • When = 0T2: no dependence on anything, but 0.

  16. A Characteristic Flux? ULIRGs are compact. Intrinsic size? Appeal to radio size, hoping that the radio reliably traces the star formation. Data from Condon et al. (1991)

  17. Evidence for a Characteristic Flux? Davies et al. (2006)

  18. Why Radiation Always Wins • Schmidt law: • Flux: • Radiation pressure: • Hydrostatic pressure: • Critical surface density:

  19. Magnetic Fields & Cosmic Rays

  20. The FIR-Radio Correlation How do CR electrons cool? Radio synchrotron from CR e-’s accelerated by SNe. FIR traces star formation, massive stars, SNe. “Calorimeter” theory: synchrotron cooling timescale shorter than the escape time: tsynch < < tescape (Völk‘89; generally unaccepted) galaxy = CR beam dump Starbursts Star-Forming Galaxies Yun et al. (2001)

  21. Magnetic Fields & Cosmic Rays • In the Milky Way, B~5-10G and • In starburst galaxies, how do we estimate B? • “Minimum energy” (UB~UCR; Burbidge 1956): (~5-10G in MW). Depends on the ratio [p/e] and on the injected CR spectral index. • Magnetic energy density in equipartition with total hydrostatic pressure: (~5-10G in MW)

  22. Magnetic Fields Conclusion: Magnetic fields in star-forming galaxies are both minimum energy & equipartition. and

  23. Magnetic Fields Conclusion: Either the minimum energy estimate is wrong, or magnetic fields are dynamically weak in starburst galaxies. Thompson et al. (2006)

  24. BminMust Underestimate the True Field UBmin/Uph measures the importance of synchrotron relative to IC cooling. If Bmin is correct, IC dominates for starbursts. This contradicts the linearity of the FIR-radio correlation. UBmin /Uph

  25. Magnetic Fields & FIR-Radio Correlation • In the limit of very strong cooling (the “calorimeter” limit): • The observed Schmidt Law says that • Therefore, in the limit of strong cooling:

  26. Magnetic Fields Conclusion: If a fraction ~1% of 1051 ergs per SN goes to CR electrons, and they cool rapidly, the observed trend is reproduced. Implies that B is in fact larger than Bmin. Thompson et al. (2006)

  27. Magnetic Fields in Starbursts • Observations thus imply rapid electron cooling. • Strong evidence for the calorimeter theory for the FIR-radio correlation: tcool< < tescape. • So, how big is B? • Well, B is big enough that the synchrotron cooling timescale is << tesc. But, what is tesc? Very uncertain: Diffusion in MW tesc ~107.5 yrs. Maybe advection (winds!) in starbursts tesc ~105.5 yrs (?).

  28. Magnetic Fields in Starbursts • Argument/Problem: • The strongest objection to the calorimeter theory for FIR-radio correlation: if synchrotron dominates cooling and tcool< < tesc, the radio spectral indices of starbursts at GHz should be steep “cooled” : F ~ - , with  ~ 1-1.2. • This is not observed. Spectral indices at GHz are ~constant & not steep: F ~ - , with  ~ 0.7. • Solution: • IfCRs interact with matter at mean density & B~Beq, then Ionization losses dominate for low-energy CRs, not high. This effect changes the expected slope of the radio spectrum at a characteristic frequency ~GHz.

  29. Magnetic Fields in Starbursts • Ionization losses flatten the radio spectra • Ionization is important only if CRs interact with ISM of ~mean density. • Prediction: spectral break ubiquitous at GHz ’s for all galaxies obeying FIR-radio. • Because this only works if B~Beq, this is the best argument for B >> Bmin in starbursts. Steeper p=2.5 p=2.0 Flatter

  30. Summary • Observations indicate • feedback is important, SF is inefficient, starbursts are dusty, disks have Q~1. • Radiation pressure • can dominate feedback in the optically thick regions of starbursts. • yields qualitative change to Schmidt Law. • couples to the cold dusty component, most of the mass. • predict starburst structure: T, Teff, F, , , v, SFR/area, efficiency • are in good agreement with observations (local & high-z ULIRGs). • Magnetic Fields in Starbursts • are larger than Bmin and probably ~ Beq. • are large enough that the “calorimeter” theory for FIR-radio is preferred. • are consistent with starburst radio spectral indices only if CRs interact with ISM of mean density so that ionization/bremsstrahlung losses are important. • -Ray Observations of Starbursts • will constrain the ISM density seen by CR protons. • will constrain the energetics of CR acceleration. - Lastly, (CRp/CRe) ~ 10. Thompson et al. (2005), (2006ab)

  31. The Present & The Future • Radiation pressure feedback: • Embedded sources, porosity, transport, multi-phase ISM. • The gravitational instability in radiation pressure dominated backgrounds. • Starburst winds, scaling relations: Faber-Jackson, M-. • Other mechanisms for feedback: • HII regions, stellar winds, supernovae, gravity. • The starburst-AGN fueling connection. • The FIR-radio correlation: • Test prediction of spectral breaks at GHz. • Electron calorimetry in normal star-forming galaxies (?). • Starbursts: what is the role of the secondary electron/positrons? • Backgrounds: neutrino (MeV to >TeV), -ray, FIR, & radio. • What is the energy density of cosmic rays in starburst galaxies?

  32. The End

  33. Constraining the Average Density “Seen” by Cosmic Rays

  34. -Rays from Starbursts • Assume SNe accelerate both CR protons & electrons. • The GeV protons collide with ambient gas: • Proton-proton collisions produce • If pp<< esc, then the starburst is a “proton calorimeter,” and all of the proton energy goes into ’s (1/3), e+,-’s (1/6), and ’s (1/2). • What is esc? As for CR electrons, very uncertain. Thompson et al. (2006)

  35. -Rays from Starbursts • Massive star formation  IR emission  Supernovae: where  is the fraction of 1051 ergs per supernova to CRp’s. This is a FIR--Ray correlation analogous to FIR-radio. • How do we constrain ? Assume the e+,-’s from p-p cool via only synchrotron in the starburst: • Observed FIR-radio correlation: Thompson et al. (2006)

  36. -Rays from Starbursts NGC 253 Arp 220

  37. -Rays from Starbursts • If GLAST sees a larger flux from NGC 253: • Then  > 0.05  more energy per SN to CR protons. • Because from secondary electrons/positrons, another process (not synchrotron) must dominate CR electron cooling. • If GLAST sees a smaller flux from NGC 253: • Either the CRs interact ISM below mean density, rapid escape, • or,  < 0.05  less energy per SN to CR protons. • These options can in principle be distinguished by modeling the IC and relativistic bremsstrahlung emission at -ray energies since the latter also depends on density.

  38. The Diffuse -Ray Background • Massive star formation  IR emission  Supernovae. + star formation rate history of the universe. + the fraction of all star formation at high-z that occurs in “proton calorimeters” (high density). • For an individual galaxy: • For the history of star formation: Thompson et al. (2006)

  39. The -Ray Background

More Related