1 / 48

Galaxies in clusters and their progenitors

Galaxies in clusters and their progenitors. Pieter van Dokkum (Yale). General properties of cluster galaxies. Morphology-density relation In core approx. 80% are E and S0 galaxies. (Dressler 1980). General properties of cluster galaxies. Cluster galaxies follow tight scaling relations:

shana
Download Presentation

Galaxies in clusters and their progenitors

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. Galaxies in clusters and their progenitors Pieter van Dokkum (Yale)

  2. General properties of cluster galaxies • Morphology-density relation • In core approx. 80% are E and S0 galaxies (Dressler 1980)

  3. General properties of cluster galaxies • Cluster galaxies follow tight scaling relations: • Color-magnitude relation • Fundamental Plane (Djorgovski & Davis 1987, Dressler et al 1987) • relation (Faber 1973) (e.g., Bower, Lucey, Ellis 1992) Terlevich, Caldwell, Bower 2001

  4. Motivation for studying cluster galaxies • Early-type galaxies are massive and old: Constrain galaxy formation theories or ?

  5. Motivation for studying cluster galaxies • Descendants Ly-break galaxies? • Ly-break galaxies already clustered (Giavalisco et al 1998) • In hierarchical models end up in groups and clusters Ly-break descendants Baugh et al. 1998

  6. Observational programs • Study the evolution of galaxies in the densest environments • Determine when/how galaxies and LSS formed • Test predictions from CDM models • Such programs require the resolution of HST and collecting area of large ground-based telescopes Meza et al. 2003

  7. Observational programs • Several 100 clusters known at 0.2<z<1.0 (best selected by SZ-effect, lensing, or X-rays) Stanford et al. 2001

  8. Observational programs • Several 100 clusters known at 0.2<z<1.5 (best selected by SZ-effect, lensing, or X-rays) (Lensing NOT effective method beyond z~0.7)

  9. Observational programs • Several 100 clusters known at 0.2<z<1.0 (best selected by SZ-effect, lensing, or X-rays) • Many (50+) observed with HST (eg ACS GTO team) Abell 2218 (z=0.18; Ellis et al 04) RX0848 (z=1.27; van D & Stanford 03)

  10. Observational programs • Several 100 clusters known at 0.2<z<1.0 (best selected by SZ-effect, lensing, or X-rays) • Many (50+) observed with HST (eg ACS GTO team) • … but only handful outside the inner Mpc CL1358+62 MS2053-04 MS1054-03 (z=0.33) (z=0.58) (z=0.83)

  11. What have we learned ? • Early-type galaxies appear to evolve slowly and gradually -> stars formed at high redshift Fundamental Plane: van Dokkum/Franx/Kelson/Illingworth/ Stanford/vdMarel 96-04 Studies of colors, line strengths, etc: Ellis et al. 1997, Bernardi et al 98, Stanford et al 95/98, vD et al 98,00, Treu et al 99,02, Poggianti et al 03, Blakeslee et al 03, Kodama et al 04 z=10 z=3 z=1.5

  12. What have we learned ? RDCS1252 (z=1.24; Blakeslee et al 03; Lidman et al 03)

  13. What have we learned ? • At the same time, morphological mix evolves Andreon et al. 1997 Fabricant et al 98 Dressler et al. 1997 van D et al 00,01 Lubin et al. 1998 Smith et al 04

  14. What have we learned ? • At the same time, morphological mix evolves • This may affect age estimates of early-type galaxies (“progenitor bias”; vDF01) • Current idea: evolution driven by infall from the field Kodama et al 01 (z=0.41; Subaru)

  15. Field spirals and groups fall in

  16. Kenney - Interaction hot gas: “ram pressure stripping” spiral -> S0 galaxy (Gunn & Gott 1972) - Encounters: “galaxy harassment” spiral -> early-type (Moore et al 98) MORPHS

  17. - Mergers may take place in infalling groups groups -> ellipticals (van Dokkum et al 1999)

  18. 30 arcmin Cluster evolution at 0.5<z<1.5 • Need to sample to the virial radius: R~10’ • Very inefficient with HST (even with ACS/WF3) CL0024 at z=0.39 Treu et al. 2003

  19. Surveying clusters at 0.5<z<1.5 • Need to sample to the virial radius: R~10’ • Very inefficient with HST (even with ACS/WF3) • Requirements: • Field of 20-30 arcmin • Near-IR capability to study clusters beyond z=1 • Good match to SNAPlike mission (expect 10-20 clusters in 15 sq degrees of deep survey areas!)

  20. Progenitors at z>2 • Overdensities of young objects found out to z~5 Venemans et al 02; also: Francis et al 97, Steidel et al 00, …

  21. Progenitors at z>2 • Overdensities of young objects found out to z~4 • However, rest-UV selection may give biased view Optical: Palomar digital sky survey UV: GALEX

  22. Typical Lyman-break galaxy and typical nearby spiral • L* Sb/c galaxy at z=3: K  23, R  28 • Would not be selected by any current method!

  23. Selecting “mature” galaxies at z>2 • Use redshifted Balmer- or 4000Å-break • Adopted criterion: J – K > 2.3 (restframe U – V > 0)

  24. 10 arcmin FIRES Deep (Ivo Labbe) FIRES Wide (Natascha Forster Schreiber) MUSYC Deep (Ryan Quadri)

  25. Red galaxies at z>2 • Substantial surface density: ~ 0.6/arcmin to K=21 (from FIRES/MUSYC) ~ 2/arcmin to K=22 (from FIRES) ~ 3/arcmin to K=23 (from FIRES) 2 2 2 2

  26. Red galaxies at z>2 • Substantial surface density: ~ 0.6/arcmin to K=21 (from FIRES/MUSYC) ~ 2/arcmin to K=22 (from FIRES) ~ 3/arcmin to K=23 (from FIRES) • SEDs very different from Lyman breaks 2 2 2

  27. Förster Schreiber et al., ApJ, submitted

  28. Red galaxies at z>2 • Substantial surface density: ~ 0.8/arcmin to K=21 (from both fields) ~ 2/arcmin to K=22 (from HDF-S) ~ 3/arcmin to K=23 (from HDF-S) • SEDs very different from Lyman breaks • Rest-frame optical spectroscopy + SED fits: massive, dusty, star-forming galaxies 2 2 2 vD et al, ApJ, in press; Foerster Schreiber et al, ApJ, subm.

  29. Red galaxy at z=2.43 Keck/NIRSPEC, 1½ hrs vD et al, ApJ, in press (astro-ph/0404471)

  30. Best constrained parameter: stellar (and dyn) mass vD et al, ApJ, in press (astro-ph/0404471)

  31. Correlations with linewidth • Combining z=3 LBGs and z=2.6 DRGs: linewidth correlates with color and stellar mass astro-ph/0404471

  32. Evolution of massive galaxies astro-ph/0404471

  33. Evolution of massive galaxies Early-type ? ERO DRG ? Spiral LBG

  34. Evolution of massive galaxies Early-type ERO DRG Spiral LBG

  35. Mapping matter at z=2-3 • Galaxies highly clustered -> need large fields • Map stellar mass using near-IR selected galaxies • Map halo mass using Tully-Fisher type correlations and clustering

  36. HDF-South 10’x10’ RJK composite K<21.5, J-K>2.3 MUSYC project (Ryan Quadri)

  37. 30’x30’ field (1/60 of SNAP deep survey!)

  38. Mapping matter at z=2-3 • Galaxies highly clustered -> need large fields • Map stellar mass using near-IR selected galaxies • Map halo mass using Tully-Fisher type correlations and clustering • Morphologies • Fully formed galaxies or mergers? • Sizes: bulges or ellipticals? • Star formation in disks or clumps? • Density? Central point sources?

  39. Red galaxy in Ultra Deep Field: ACS B,V,I,z + NICMOS J,H

  40. B V I z J H In near-IR, JDEM could be >1000 x more efficient than HST!

  41. Mapping matter at z=2-3 • Galaxies highly clustered -> need large fields • Map stellar mass using near-IR selected galaxies • Map halo mass using Tully-Fisher type correlations and clustering • Morphologies • Sizes / densities • Star formation in disks or clumps? • How far to the red ? • Current selection: J–K -> z=2-4 • In practice: break almost always between J and H

  42. Quadri et al., in prep

  43. Mapping matter at z=2-3 • Galaxies highly clustered -> need large fields • Map stellar mass using near-IR selected galaxies • Map halo mass using Tully-Fisher type correlations and clustering • Morphologies • Sizes / densities • Star formation in disks or clumps? • How far to the red ? • Current selection: J–K -> z=2-4 • In practice: break almost always between J and H • Cutoff at 1.7 micron OK for z=2-3 (need filter!)

  44. There are exceptions: • Overlap with ground-based K or IRAC needed to select red z>3 galaxies, and to fit the SEDs K = 20.1 phot z = 3.7

  45. Mapping matter at z=2-3 • Galaxies highly clustered -> need large fields • Map stellar mass using near-IR selected galaxies • Map halo mass using Tully-Fisher type correlations and clustering • Morphologies • Sizes / densities • Star formation in disks or clumps? • How far to the red ? • Current selection: J–K -> z=2-4 • In practice: break almost always between J and H • Cutoff at 1.7 micron OK for z=2-3 (need filter!)

  46. Blue: data for K-bright LBGs (Shapley et al; astro-ph/0405187)

  47. Comparison to other star forming galaxies

More Related