Conference summary
Catherine CesarskyESO
Moriond, March 2005
When UV meets infrared
• (and everything from gamma rays to radio)
• Do we see the same sources in UV and IR?
GALEX 24 micron MIPS
IRAC GOODS
Summary
1. By selection, UV galaxies and IR galaxies have very different characteristic IR/UV ratios (the means differ by a factor of 10). 2. The morphological and stellar mass distributions of the two populations have good overlaps (> 70%). IR galaxies tend to be more massive and earlier types, with an excess of interacting galaxies, and UV galaxies to be less massive and later types.3. UV galaxies are less clustered than IR galaxies.
4. Galaxies with the highest SFR (>100 M /yr, Ltot > 1012 L ),
are missed in the UV samples.5. A population of low metallicity (< 1/10 solar), low mass (<10^9 M ) dwarf UV galaxies (prototype I Zw 18) are `IR quiet’, with the IR/UV ratio ~ 0.3 or less. They occupy only a few percent of a UV selected sample.
๏
๏ ๏
Moriond 2005VC
UV/mid-IR comparison of two LIRGsUV/mid-IR comparison of two LIRGs
Charmandaris, Le Floc’h, Mirabel, ApJ, 2004, 600, L15
At z~2: UV --> R-/I- band & ISO/CAM 7μm -> Spitzer/MIPS24.
The poor spatial at z~2 will result in blending of the emission from the unresolved interacting components. An increased scatter will thus be introduced in the observed optical to mid-IR colors of these galaxies, leading to a
systematic underestimation of their dust content.
7μm/UV ~ 800:10:35 7μm/UV ~ 330:160:190
Images: HST/STIS UV - Contours: ISOCAM 7μm
• Do we need UV to understand star formation?
• YES, at least in some cases (low obscuration)
Rest UV Traces Star Formation
Over Large Range of Specific Star Formation & SFR/Area
What gives???
gas ranges 20:1
gas 1.4 ranges 70:1
Milky Way
Luminous UV Galaxies
Low SurfaceBrightnessGalaxies
Early Type Gals
( )* *
** / age
M Mb
M tM= =
& &
&
Shortcut to SFH
• b-parameter vs. NUV-r color
– Obtain b from color alone– Works when no spectra are
available– Valuable for high z– Spread in x-direction due to
internal extinction
( )* *
** / age
M Mb
M tM= =
& &
&
NUV-r b
Rest UV Traces Star Formation
Over Large Range of Specific Star Formation
H and UV radial profiles Thilker, Meuer, et al
• Radial profile differences seen in other galaxies
• Not all galaxies show H deficit
UV
Ha
•Star clusters as indicators/ demonstrators of star formation
• Do we need IR to understand star formation?
• YES, especially for the brightest galaxies
• Can the different star formation indicators be reconciled?
• Sometimes…
Ha/UV in SDSSTreyer, Johnson, et al.
• Ha/UV shows systematic trend
Higher LUV, Blue NUV-r
L(Ha)/L(UV)~Kennicutt
Low LUV, Red NUV-r
L(Ha)/L(UV) > Kennicutt
OII line & UV luminosities underestimate SFR values by factors 5 to 100 for starbursts & LIRGs !
SFRs as estimated by UV, [OII] & IR(Hammer et al, Venice 2003, proceedings, astro-
ph/0401246)
SFRSFRNUVNUV vs. SFR vs. SFR
dustdust
Quite good agreement on average but...Quite good agreement on average but...lo
g S
FRdust (
Msu
n y
r-1)
log SFRNUV (Msun yr-1)
● At low values of At low values of AANUVNUV, the dust , the dust
emission emission underestimates the underestimates the total SFR because of total SFR because of the non negligible the non negligible NUV emission.NUV emission.● At high values of At high values of AANUVNUV, the NUV , the NUV
emission emission underestimates the underestimates the total SFR. total SFR. Problem with AProblem with ANUVNUV??
Two different trends are observed:Two different trends are observed:
log SFRNUV (Msun yr-1)
log S
FRN
UV/S
FRdust
Estimating extinctions and SFRs at z ~1
(Flores et al, 2004, A&A 415, 885)FORS2/ISAAC: 16 ISO galaxies, 0.4< z <1
- extinction corrected H SFRs are close to mid-IR estimates (Elbaz et al, 2002) for SFR < 150 MO/yr (i.e. below ULIRGs)
more robust SFR estimates
-luminous IR galaxies (not ULIRGs) dominates the cosmic star formation density at z~1 (confirmed by Spitzer, Le Floch et al, 2004)
less than 20% of the star formation density is coming from extremely dust enshrouded regions
•Deep IR surveys: do we understand what we see?
•Probably, but…
EBL: optical vs IR
CIRB~ 1.5 OPT IGL
In local universe, about 30% bolometric light in IR; LIRGs, ULIRGs produce 2% of bolometric luminosity
However,distant universe is IR.
Due to LIRGs? How distant?
LW3z=0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Typical galaxyspectra
K-corrections
LW3 15
LW2 6.7
CIRB peak: 140 m
Individual galaxies peak: 60 to 100 m
Peak shifted to 140 m
if z=0.4 to 1.3 (<z>~0.85)
15 m 8 m
z=0.85 z=0
140 m 80 m
ISOCAM deep surveys in LW3 (12-18 m):
Ideal to detect redshifted PAH for z~0.85 (or in general at z<1.5)
Number Counts• Roughly in agreement with
ISOCAM results • Some confused ISOCAM
sources are resolved by Spitzer• The HDF-N pilot study is not an
unbiased survey• Marleau et al. (2004) find 24
m number counts peak at fainter flux than 15 m counts
• difference b/w 15 and 24 m counts is not the result of confusion of ISOCAM sources or systematic differences between the observatories
From the MIR ? From the MIR ?
Local universe : correlation MIR – LIR Local universe : correlation MIR – LIR (Elbaz et al, 2002)
correlation radio-MIR correlation radio-MIR (Codon 1992, Yun et al, 2001)
or radio is a tracer of LIRor radio is a tracer of LIR
MIR + local templates or correlations => FIR=> LIR => SFRMIR + local templates or correlations => FIR=> LIR => SFR Chary & Elbaz 2001 Kennicutt 1998Chary & Elbaz 2001 Kennicutt 1998
Dale & Helou, 2002 Dale & Helou, 2002 Lagache et et al, 2004Lagache et et al, 2004
…… ……....
M82(disque)
(Laurent et al. 2000)
15 m vs IRIR vs IRAS 12 mIR vs ISOCAM 15 m
24m Spitzer-MIPS
15m ISOCAM
SED of a LIRG at z=0.69 (LIR~10SED of a LIRG at z=0.69 (LIR~1011.111.1 L L,SFR~22 M,SFR~22 Myr-1)yr-1)
The PAH bump exists at z=0.7The PAH bump exists at z=0.7
*
50 % stars born z<1.5 (70 % universe age)36 % @ z<1 (57 %)67 % @ z<2 (76 %)
Proportion of present-day stars born in LIRGs > 50 %==> Common phase experienced by all/most galaxies...
LIRGs and cosmic star formation
General 24m differential counts (this work, Chary et al. 2004, Papovich et al. 2004)
Model predictions Model predictions SS2424/S/S1515 as a function of z, Sas a function of z, S2424Model predictions Model predictions SS2424/S/S1515 as a function of z, Sas a function of z, S2424
S > 2-3 mJyS > 2-3 mJy dominated by dominated by objects with Sobjects with S2424/S/S15152-2.52-2.5
S S 0.3 mJy 0.3 mJy dominated by dominated by objects with Sobjects with S2424/S/S15 15 1.51.5
S < 0.2-0.3 mJyS < 0.2-0.3 mJy dominated dominated by objects with Sby objects with S2424/S/S15 15 > 2-3 > 2-3 -> NEW POPULATION !-> NEW POPULATION !
S > 2-3 mJyS > 2-3 mJy dominated by dominated by objects with Sobjects with S2424/S/S15152-2.52-2.5
S S 0.3 mJy 0.3 mJy dominated by dominated by objects with Sobjects with S2424/S/S15 15 1.51.5
S < 0.2-0.3 mJyS < 0.2-0.3 mJy dominated dominated by objects with Sby objects with S2424/S/S15 15 > 2-3 > 2-3 -> NEW POPULATION !-> NEW POPULATION !
R-band mag versus Flux@24μm
Rencontres de Moriond, March 6-12th 2005
80% completeness limit at 24μm
VERY hard to be complete in the redshift identification at any 24μm flux, using VVDS/GOODS/COMBO-17
IR luminosities in the CDFS
2635 sourceswith redshifts
* Modest IR emitters at 0<z<0.5
* ULIRGs : quite rare at 0<z<1
* LIRGS: significant contribution at z>0.5
* More « normal » starbursts are not negligible neither
80% completeness limit
Rencontres de Moriond, March 6-12th 2005
Star formation history at z<1
LIRGs/ULIRGs dominate beyond z~0.7
Chary & Elbaz 2001
Blain et al. 2002
Lagache et al. 2004
. . . . . .
_ _ _ _ _
ULIRGs
total
L >10 L .11
IR
L <10 L .11
IR
Rencontres de Moriond, March 6-12th 2005
Compilation by Hopkins 2004
Star formation history at z<1
LIRGs/ULIRGs dominate beyond z~0.7
AGN contribution ??* ISO/XMM : <20% (Fadda et al. 2002)* X-ray +IR bkg synthetic models : <5% (e.g., Silva et al. 2004)
First Spitzer results : <15% of sources flagged as AGNs by VVDS& COMBO-17 (see also SWIRE, Franceschini et al. 2005)
Rencontres de Moriond, March 6-12th 2005
* 55~65 % of 24μm sources at z<1 for flux>80μJy
Summary
* At 0<z<1, L* evolves at least by (1+z) ( exclude a pure density evolution)
3.5
* IR luminous galaxies start to dominate the SFRH at z>0.6
* LIRGs+ULIRGs = 70% of SFR at z=1
* Need a better understanding of IR SEDs : IRS GTO, MIPS SED mode...
Cornell University - Ithaca, December 1st 2004
• Is galaxy formation (the building up of galaxies) regular or episodic?
• Mostly episodic, even if we don’t know for sure why.
LIRGs: potentially double their masses in ~0.8 Gyr
SFR: [OII]3727Open symbols
From BE00:
Brinchman & Ellis 2000
SFR: IR & HRed dots: LIRGs (20-200 MO/yr)
Full squares: starbursts (<20M/yr)
How to account for the high LIRG fraction (15% of intermediate mass galaxies) ?
A specific population ?
LIRGs are continuously forming stars during 3.3 Gyrs (z=1 z=0.4)
they would multiply their masses by 2 x (3.3/0.8)=8.2 !!
BUT no trace of recent formation of massive galaxies, dominated by E/S0, with 3 1011<Mstar<31012MO
• Do we understand ultra luminous star forming galaxies?
• Yes, although debate on role of AGN not completely closed
Moriond 2005VC
The first 18
low-resolution
IRS spectra
of ULIRGs
Diversity!
is the name of the game…
• Highly luminous (ULIRG) systemsHighly luminous (ULIRG) systems• SFR ~ 1000 MSFR ~ 1000 M yr yr-1 -1
• Massive systemsMassive systems• Evidence for outflowing windsEvidence for outflowing winds
Progenitors of massive
elliptical galaxies?
Results of submm surveys
• Do we understand Luminous star forming galaxies?
• Errrrr, well…
Stellar properties of distant LIRGs
• b parameter: SFR/<SFR> = 5 +/-3
• Burst duration ~ 108 years
• Burst stellar mass fraction ~ 5-10 %
• M/Lz ~ 0.3 (SDSS 1.6)
• Stellar masses: <M*> ~ 5 x1010 M
Large UVLGs = LIRGs ?
• UV Luminosity Density from UVLG x30 from z=0 to z=1• 25% of FUV luminosity density at z=1 from UVLG• SFR from LIRGs x20 from z=0 to z=1• > 70% of dust-enshrouded SFR density at z=1 from LIRGs
Goldader et al. (2002)
Burgarella et al.(2005)
Conclusions The most UV luminous galaxies in the combined
GALEX/SDSS sample comprise two populations: Large UVLGs – rare, massive disk systems Compact UVLGs – small systems undergoing intense star
formation Compact UVLGs appear similar in many respects to
Lyman break galaxies UV Luminosity, star formation rate (selected) Size UV extinction Stellar mass, velocity dispersion Metallicity
Compact UVLGs may be useful analogs for LBGs
UV Luminous Galaxies (UVLGs)Dramatic Evolution to z=3 (DS, Ilbert, Arnouts
et al)
(1+z)2.5
Luminosity density ofUV luminous (LBG-analog)galaxies shows dramaticevolution: (1+z)5
LFUV,bol > 1010 Lsol
SFR > 10 Msol/yr
Steeper than QSOLD evolution (Boyle+Madau et al)
UVLGs producea significant fraction of LD at z = 1
Total
GALEX AIS + IRAS Bivariate SF Luminosity
Function
1000 GALEX+IRAS galaxies
LBG
LBG
Do AGNs play a role in galaxy
evolution?
Yes.
Chandra allows to separate the X-ray emission from the nucleus and the star-forming ring
Jet-Induced Star Formation in Centaurus A
S. G. Neff et al.
• New GALEX data:– Deep (~27 mag rms)– Wide field (1.2o)
• FUV emission (1500A) detected:
– along jet(s) for >25 kpc (shocks)
– where jet hits cold clouds (young stars)
– where inner jet is disrupted (???)
– possibly around radio lobes (young stars?)
FUV (1500A)NUV (2300A)
5 kpc ~
Minkowski’s Object
(cf. van Breugel)
FUV + HI Neff, Schiminovich et al.
Results for 65 Sey2: for central (median) 174 pc (65 Sey 2); 121 pc (14-rest)
Heterogeneous star formation histories.
● 10 SSP BC03 ages, Z=1 and 2.5 solar, plus a power law FC.
Some, dominated by old stars (t>2.5Ga), to 80% of the optical light;
Some show strong component of intermediate age stars (100Ma<t<1.4Ga);
Young clusters are ubiquitous (t<25Ma), in some cases to more than 50% of the light at 4020A and in several to 20%.
Strong FC component also present. This could be a genuine monster or a dusty young burst.
At least 3 of the 4 components present with significant strength (more than 10%) in any one galaxy.
A simple Ell galaxy + a power law (used many times before) does not apply to the bulk of Sey 2s.
Benson (2003)
Problem can be solved with extreme super-winds >5x1049 erg per solar mass required
Massive X-ray outflow in PDS 456
Reeves et al. (2003)
XMM EPIC pn/MOS
Conclusions Overwhelming evidence for CDM hierarchical structure formation
Problems with semi-analytical galaxy formation models - mechanism required to terminate SF in massive gals - plus other problems…
AGN feedback is a likely solution - may be related to the origin of the M/ relation - could also explain high-mass cut-off & cluster heating problem
• Are galaxies sensitive to their large scale environment?
• Discussed yesterday.
Other problem:
•How to reconcile integrated and small scale properties?
V. Lebouteiller – Moriond 2005
Blue Compact DwarfsBlue Compact Dwarfs
Refs : Lebouteiller et al. (2003), Lecavelier et al. (2003), Aloisi et al. (2003), Thuan et al.(2005), Thuan et al. (2002), Lee et al. (2003)
NGC1705 NGC253 IZw18 IZw36 Markarian59 SBS0335-052
[N/H] [O/H]
[Si/H] [P/H]
[Ar/H] [Fe/H]
HII region (opt. +IR em. lines)HI region (UV abs. lines)
6/18
Distant star formation: what came first?
Consensus (purely theoretical):
1000 Mo stars