1 / 18

GEPI, Obs. Paris: F. Hammer, H. Flores, & C. Balkowski LAM : P. Amram MPE, Garching : M. Lehnert Stockholm Obs.

Galaxy kinematics at z ~ 1. Mathieu PUECH Post-Doc GEPI – Obs. Paris. GEPI, Obs. Paris: F. Hammer, H. Flores, & C. Balkowski LAM : P. Amram MPE, Garching : M. Lehnert Stockholm Obs. : G. Östlin, T. Marquart. FLAMES/GIRAFFE on the UT2. 3 modes. MEDUSE, 132 mono-fibers, 1”.2

anastasia
Download Presentation

GEPI, Obs. Paris: F. Hammer, H. Flores, & C. Balkowski LAM : P. Amram MPE, Garching : M. Lehnert Stockholm Obs.

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. Galaxy kinematics at z ~ 1 Mathieu PUECH Post-Doc GEPI – Obs. Paris GEPI, Obs. Paris: F. Hammer, H. Flores, & C. Balkowski LAM : P. Amram MPE, Garching : M. Lehnert Stockholm Obs. : G. Östlin, T. Marquart

  2. FLAMES/GIRAFFE on the UT2 3 modes MEDUSE, 132 mono-fibers, 1”.2 IFU, 15 x3’’x2’’arrays (20 sq. lenses, 0’’.52) ARGUS, 11”x7” array (300sq. lenses) 15 IFUs deployable over a 20 arcmin FoV with R~10000

  3. Preliminary program : 6 nights on distant galaxies 35 galaxies with0.4 < z < 0.75 and W0([OII])> 15Å: Tint~8- 13hrs 32galaxies with enough S/N (at least 4 pixels with S/N([OII]) > 5) CFRS03.0488, z=0.46, (3’’x2’’) 4 3 2 Only pixels with S/N > 3 R> 13000 at rest: the [OII] doublet can be resolved 1 All but 6 galaxies show a well resolved [OII] doublet. 5x5 linear interpolation

  4. pixel= random_motionsVlarge_scale_motions GIRAFFE pixel @ z=0.6 Also sigma maps… Provided by: the absence of cross-talk between individual spectra. from Blais-Ouellete, Amram et al, 2002 (Fabry-Perot/Halpha)

  5. Also sigma maps… pixel= random_motionsVlarge_scale_motions At low spatial resolution, dispersion maps of rotating disks do show a peak in their dynamical center Dispersion or  map Velocity map

  6. And we find rotating disks at z ~ 0.6 HST/F814W Velocity field sigma map Maps from Puech et al (2006a) & Flores et al (2006) Rotation is seen in the VF and the sigma map is peaked in the dynamical center Rotating disks : 31 % of the sample

  7. but also « perturbed » rotations HST/F814W Velocity field sigma map Maps from Puech et al (2006a) & Flores et al (2006) Rotation is seen in the VF but the sigma map is perturbed Perturbed rotations: 20% of the sample

  8. and much complex kinematics HST/F814W Velocity field sigma map Maps from Puech et al (2006a) & Flores et al (2006) Complex kinematics: 40% of the sample

  9. FP velocity field ESO 400-G43 (Ostlin et al, 2001) Simulated Giraffe IFU observation (degraded spatial resolution, z=0.6) Comparison to local (Fabry-Perot) - FP observations of 20GHASP galaxies (Amram et al, 2002)  simulations of 60 data-cubes at different z  rotating disks are recovered - FP observations of complex velocity fields: Perturbed/complex VFs are real!!

  10. A simple test of the classification s observée s modélisée We assume all galaxies to be rotating disks, i.e. their large scale motions to be rotational We can simply compared the derived  maps to the observed ones: Amplitude ratio versus  peak distances CFRS03.9003 CFRS22.0504 CFRS22.0293 HDFS4070

  11. Galaxy kinematics at z ~0.6: some numbers A (small) complete sample of 35 galaxies: IAB 22.5 ; W0(OII) > 15A and 0.4  z  0.75 ==> representative of emission line galaxies at z= 0.6 (MB < -19.5) - Simple classification using VF+sigma+ HST morphology: rotating disks: 31%; perturbed/complex: 60%; undetermined: 9% - Accounting for all IAB< 22.5 (i.e. including quiescent E/S0/…):  we do find that 26-40% of them are not relaxed systems ! GIRAFFE/multiple IFUs: unique tool to study the kinematics of distant galaxies

  12. Tully-Fischer relation at z ~ 0.6 (K band) Conselice et al (2005) KECK/LRIS (long slit) Conselice et al (2005) VLT/GIRAFFE-IFUs Flores et al (2006)

  13. ■ Conselice et al (2005) ▲ Complex Kinematics Perturbed Rotations Rotating Disks ● KECK/LRIS (long slit) Conselice et al (2005) VLT/GIRAFFE-IFUs Flores et al (2006)

  14. Scatter is related to interlopers (non relaxed kinematics) Conselice et al (2005) KECK/LRIS (long slit) Conselice et al (2005) VLT/GIRAFFE-IFUs Flores et al (2006)

  15. Tully-Fischer not evolving ? Local TF (Verjeinhen 2001) TF at z=0.6 (Flores et al, 2006) We need statistics !!!

  16. Specific Angular Momentum jdisk=2RdVmax • Robustness of the dynamical classification • Evidence for a non linear growth of jdisk • Evidence for through merging ? Puech et al. 2006, in revision

  17. Comparison with simulations * perturbed rotations = minor mergers ? * complex kinematics = major mergers ?  to be compared with hydrodynamical codes (Simulations by T.J. Cox) Puech ‘s PhD thesis Puech et al., in preparation

  18. Conclusion 1- Since z=0.4, galaxy dynamics is too complex to be sampled by slits  is this a definitive claim ? 2- Requires multi-IFUs to sample > 50 rotating disks (among > 150 distant galaxies); goal is to verify the absence of TF evolution ~ analysis of 40 new CDFS galaxies in progress ; ~ 50 more will be observed this semester 3- High rate of merging (major/minor) or could this be recovered by other scenarios (smooth gas accretion) ?

More Related