120 likes | 272 Views
Galactic Astronomy 銀河物理学特論 I Lecture 3-3: Stellar mass function of galaxies Seminar: Perez-Gonzalez et al. 2008, ApJ, 675, 234 Lecture:. 2012/01/16. Observed magnitude and stellar mass, current stellar mass limit of deep surveys:. Marchesini et al. 2009, ApJ, 701, 1765,.
E N D
Galactic Astronomy銀河物理学特論 ILecture 3-3: Stellar mass function of galaxiesSeminar: Perez-Gonzalez et al. 2008, ApJ, 675, 234 Lecture: 2012/01/16
Observed magnitude and stellar mass, current stellar mass limit of deep surveys: Marchesini et al. 2009, ApJ, 701, 1765,
Evolution of Stellar Mass Function of Galaxies : Uncertainty due to stellar population synthesis model Kajisawa et al. 2009, ApJ, 702, 1393
Evolution of Stellar Mass Function of Galaxies : Kajisawa et al. 2009, ApJ, 702, 1393 Marchesini et al. 2009, ApJ, 701, 1765
Evolution of stellar mass density as a function of z: Kajisawa et al. 2009, ApJ, 702, 1393 Marchesini et al. 2009, ApJ, 701, 1765
Evolution of stellar mass density as a function of z and stellar mass Marchesini et al. 2009, ApJ, 701, 1765, Perez-Gonzalez et al. 2008, ApJ, 675, 234
Luminosity function compared with semi-analytic models Bower 2008
Luminosity function compared with semi-analytic models Based on simple Cold-Dark-Matter galaxy formation model, more massive galaxies expected than observed. Formation of massive galaxies needs to be stopped with feed-back from AGNs etc. Without AGN feedback With AGN feedback Without AGN feedback With AGN feedback Bower et al. 2006, MNRAS, 370, 645
Stellar mass function compared with semi-analytic models Three semi-analytic models with AGN feedback etc. Bower et al. 2011, arXiv:1112.2712
The relation between stellar mass and star formation rate: Daddi et al. 2007, ApJ, 670, 156
The relation between stellar mass and star formation rate: Comparison with semi-analytic models Z=0 observation (contour) vs. Three semi-analytic models with AGN feedback etc. Bower et al. 2011, arXiv:1112.2712
Evolution of stellar mass density as a function of z and stellar mass, compared with the estimated growth curve of SMBHs Perez-Gonzalez et al. 2008, ApJ, 675, 234 Marconi et al. 2004, MNRAS, 351, 169 Single Eddington ratio assumed, etc.