1 / 20

Multivariate Properties of Galaxies at Low Redshift

Multivariate Properties of Galaxies at Low Redshift. Galaxy Properties from Imaging. Luminosity functions Star formation rate Stellar mass Morphology Color-magnitude relation Environment Photometric redshift 2-D Clustering. 2 6-color SDSS scans of 2.5 ° x2.5 °.

joyce
Télécharger la présentation

Multivariate Properties of Galaxies at Low Redshift

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. Multivariate Properties of Galaxies at Low Redshift

  2. Galaxy Properties from Imaging • Luminosity functions • Star formation rate • Stellar mass • Morphology • Color-magnitude relation • Environment • Photometric redshift • 2-D Clustering 2 6-color SDSS scans of 2.5°x2.5°.

  3. Galaxy Properties from Spectroscopy • Detailed star formation history • Dynamical mass • Metallicity • Dust content • 3-D clustering • AGN activity

  4. Galaxy Surveys: Optical & NIR DEEP2 AEGIS • • • • • COMBO17 MUSYC ELAIS-S1 Steidel • MS1054 From Mara Salvato’s web page

  5. Where is the stellar mass? • Galaxies at ~1010.5-1011.5M contain most of stellar mass. • SFR and Dn show bimodality. • Some, not much, environmental dependence Kauffmann et al. 2004

  6. Ball et al 2005 Bivariate LF’s: Morphology • Sersic index n: • n=4: elliptical • n=1: spiral • Ellipticals dominate bright end; later types at faint end. • Faint end slope varies with n; Bright end truncation invariant. • SB trends similar; high SB’s have higher n.

  7. Ball et al 2005 Bivariate LF’s: Color • u-r measures (roughly) ratio of current to past star formation. • Red galaxies dominate at bright end. • Blue galaxies have steeper faint-end slope. • r-z distribution shows less trend, because fewer blue galaxies.

  8. Cortese et al. 2005 LF’s in Field vs. Clusters • Field R-band LF (SDSS) well-fit by Schechter function, with a~-1.26. • Clusters show an excess population of small galaxies. • GALEX data shows faint-end upturn is from passive dwarfs. Trentham et al 2005

  9. Stellar Mass Fcn in Field vs. Clusters • Near-IR (J, K) allow more direct tracer of M*. • Clusters show steeper faint end, field is shallow. • Non-emission line field galaxies show very shallow slope. Balogh et al 2001

  10. Morphology-Density Relation • Ellipticals prefer denser environments. • Discovered in the 80’s, regarded as a fundamental aspect of environment. • Why does it occur? • Ram-pressure stripping? • Merging? • Harassment? • Starvation? Goto et al. 2004

  11. It’s star formation history, stupid! • At fixed luminosity and color, there is no strong relationship between density and either Sersic index or surface brightness. • It’s not morphology-density, it’s color-density, or perhaps star formation history-density relation. Blanton et al. 2005

  12. Color, magnitude, morphology • Ellipticals (high-n) tend to be red and high-SB. • CMD shows bimodality: “red sequence” & “blue cloud”. • Color-SB relation shows similar bimodality.

  13. Red sequence evolution • Red sequence in place at z~1 (10 Gyr ago). • Gets slowly redder with time; zf~2+. • Dominated by early-types (not dusty spirals).

  14. Lee et al. 2006 Mass-Metallicity Relation • SDSS emission line galaxies, central regions. • M*-Z shows a strong trend up to M*~1010.5M, then flattens to higher M*. • Scatter is small: 0.2 dex at low-M, 0.07 dex at high-M. • Origin yet unclear, but outflows likely needed. Tremonti et al. 2004

  15. Lv4 Lv3 McGaugh 2004 Tully-Fisher and M*/L Bell & de Jong 2001 • Stellar/baryonic mass vs. dynamical mass. • ~x7 M*/L variation in B, ~x2 in K (for spirals). Tightest with B-R color. • With M*/L(color), TF has M*v4.5. • With HI data, baryonic TF Mbv3.5±0.2. • Extending to lower masses suggests Mbv4: variation with Mb? • Recall Mhalov3, so at face value small halos have less baryons: Mb/Mhv0.5.

  16. AGNs: Where do they live? Kauffmann et al 2003 • In M*>1010M. • Morphologically similar to early-types. • OTOH, recent SF similar to late-types (esp. in strong AGN).

  17. Kauffmann et al 2004 AGNs and galaxy evolution • AGNs roughly occupy “green valley”. • Black hole growth occuring in M*~1010.5-1011 M galaxies. • Same M* as transition in colors, SFRs, etc. • Cause or effect?

  18. Norberg et al 2001 Clustering: 2PCF • x=(r/r0)-g, g~1.8 and r0~5 Mpc/h. • Departs significantly from pure power law. • Red galaxies have steeper x slope. • Mild luminosity dependence, strongest at luminous end. Zehavi et al. 2003, 2004

  19. Yang et al 2004 Halo Occupation Distribution Zehavi et al 2003 • HOD = P(Ng,Mh). • Made up of “1-halo” and “2-halo” terms. • From this, get bias: b≡(xgg/xmm)1/2. • <N(M)> has character-istic shape; can derive by matching x(r).

  20. Conditional Luminosity Function • F(L|M)dL: Luminosity fcn in bins of halo mass. • Tune F(L|M) to reproduce LF, x(L), and T-F. • Depends on cosmology, or anything that affects halo abundance. Yang et al 2003

More Related