270 likes | 384 Views
NVO Study of Super Star Clusters in Nearby Galaxies. Ben Chan, Chris Hanley, and Brad Whitmore. OUTLINE Science Background and Goals A Feasibility Study – M51 Automation. Are They Really Globular Clusters ?.
E N D
NVO Study of Super Star Clusters in Nearby Galaxies Ben Chan, Chris Hanley, and Brad Whitmore • OUTLINE • Science Background and Goals • A Feasibility Study – M51 • Automation
Are They Really Globular Clusters ? The young clusters we see in the Antennae (and other galaxies with massive young clusters) have the: • Colors (-0.2 < V-I < 0.6) • Luminosities (-15 < Mv < ?, power law LF with index ~ -2) • Sizes (Reff ~ 4 pc) • Distributions (similar to the field stars) • Spectra (~ 10 objects age dated at 3 - 20 Myr) • Vel. Dispersions (10 - 15 km/s) • Masses (104 - 106) • to be globular clusters with ages in the range 1 to ~ 500 Myr.
Mergers, Starbursts, Bars, Rings, and Spirals - (cont.) Roughly 20 gas-rich mergers have now been observed in detail by HST. All show young star clusters. In addition, we find young, massive, compact clusters in: starburst dwarf galaxies (e.g., Meurer et al., 1995), barred galaxies (Barth et al., 1995), spiral galaxies (Larsen & Richtler, 1999) Milky Way and LMC (e.g., Walborn 2000) These clusters have properties similar to those seen in the mergers, but always fewer in number, and generally fainter in luminosity. Science Question # 1 – Is “violent” star cluster formation different than “quiescent” star formation ?
Whitmore, 2000 If there are two different modes of star cluster formation we might expect a bimodal distribution in a plot of the magnitude of thebrightest cluster in a galaxy vs. the log of the number of clusters. Violent star formation ? Quiescent star formation ?
Whitmore, 2000 • The data appear to support a universalmodel rather than a bimodal model, with the correlation being due to statistics,not physics. • However, this dataset, and reductions, were very inhomogeous. • Our goal is to redo this diagram: • - with a uniform data set (e.g., SDSS, HST) • with uniform analysis (e.g., WESIX) • - for larger dataset (e.g., N~ 100) Best fit M51 Predicted if universal power-law, index = -2
Science Question # 2 – What fraction of clusters are hidden by dust ? Neff & Ulvestad (2000) found that their radio sources were “near but not coincident” with the young clusters in the Antennae”. It appears that this was due to a 1.2” positional offset. Once the offset was made we found that 85 % (11 of 13) of the strong radio sources have optical counterparts
Feasibility Study – M51 (using WESIX) DataScope - SDSS g-band image from WESIX - Source extraction and cross matching ALADIN – visualization Voplot – analysis Following Holtzman et al. (1992) observations of “proto-globular” clusters in NGC 1275,we observed the two extremes of the Toomre Sequence of merging galaxies using HST in Cycle 2 and Cycle 5.
Photometric Calibration Compared SDSS g-mag from sextractor to HST V-mag (Rupali Chandar) Scatter ~ 0.1mag
Analysis with VOplot Source classification with flux concentration index (aperture mag – isophot mag) VOTables exported back to Aladin for various source types
Diffuse sources Nucleus Clusters Saturatedstars Compact objects (stars)
Nucleus Saturatedstars
Fraction of missing clusters: Red crosses = 2 mass Blue squares = clusters Fraction hidden by dust (outside center) = < 45 % (15/33) = ~15 % (eyeballing) NOTE: - Something different near center ! Position offsets = TBD
Software Tools Development How can this work be done more efficiently?
I need images of my target local galaxies? • Single object or list driven application. • Astronomer can either give target names or known coords of target galaxies. • ObjectExtractor will provide a list of services from which images can be extracted. Initial implementation will contain a set list of known SIAP image services. A potential enhancement would be to allow for new service discovery. • FITS images will be saved to local disk. • Ties together multiple services. ObjectExtractor
We need catalogs of objects in our images? • CatalogMatch • We have the FITS images, we need to catalog the objects in the image and match to some external catalogs. • Path 1: WESIX: • Best for exploratory studies of small number of images of limited size. • Requires the writing of a Python WESIX interface client. • Path 2: Future PyRAF Implementation: • Catalog generation done in client app. • Smaller bandwidth usage with only query to OpenSkyQuery • More efficient generation of input image object catalogs. • Both paths hide ADQL queries from Astronomers.
Future Work Additional Tool Development
Fixing the WCS • fixWCS • Takes advantage of existing IRAF, PyRAF, and Python applications. • Requires the use of CatalogMatch application output. • Can have updated WCS based upon any of the external catalogs used in cross match. • This software will also give us our position offsets.
Conclusions • SDSS images can be used for this project (though will probably also try HST preview images) • M51 will fit nicely on the Mv(brightest) vs. log N diagram > further support for universal model. • NVO tools will be very useful for the project (e.g., datascope, WESIX, Aladin, VOPLOT). • Automating the program (e.g., SIAP services and OPENSKYQUERY) is feasible, but will take additional work (e.g., developing a python client for WESIX)