A clumpy multiphase CGM in massive haloes at z~3 Gabriele - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
a clumpy multiphase cgm in massive haloes at z 3
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

A clumpy multiphase CGM in massive haloes at z~3 Gabriele - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nov 19, 2023 385 likes •702 views

A clumpy multiphase CGM in massive haloes at z~3 Gabriele Pezzulli (ETH Zurich) Sebastiano Cantalupo Rafgaella Anna Marino Elena Borisova Ann-Christine Vossberg Sofja Gallego Saeed Sarpas What matuer(s) around galaxies? Durham 20

slide-1
SLIDE 1

A clumpy multiphase CGM in massive haloes at z~3

What matuer(s) around galaxies? Durham – 20 June 2017

Gabriele Pezzulli (ETH Zurich) Sebastiano Cantalupo Rafgaella Anna Marino Elena Borisova Ann-Christine Vossberg Sofja Gallego Saeed Sarpas

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Borisova et al. (2016)

MUSE QSO Giant Lyα nebulae

Massive galaxy haloes at z~3 QSO illuminates the CGM “Cold” photoionized gas bright in recombination (Lya)

(Trainor & Steidel 2012)

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Borisova et al. (2016)

MUSE QSO Giant Lyα nebulae

Massive galaxy haloes at z~3 QSO illuminates the CGM “Cold” photoionized gas bright in recombination (Lya) What is the density distribution

  • f the cold gas?

(on large and small scales) What is its physical origin ? Is the CGM multiphase? What is the total CGM mass ?

(Trainor & Steidel 2012)

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Density profjle (large scale)

Borisova et al. (2016)

OBSERVED Surface brightness

Importance of small scale structure!

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Density profjle (large scale)

Borisova et al. (2016)

OBSERVED Surface brightness

Importance of small scale structure!

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Density profjle (large scale)

Borisova et al. (2016)

OBSERVED Surface brightness

Importance of small scale structure!

CLUMPING FACTOR

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Density profjle (large scale)

Borisova et al. (2016)

OBSERVED Surface brightness INTRINSIC Density profjle (volume average)

Importance of small scale structure!

CLUMPING FACTOR

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Density profjle (large scale)

Borisova et al. (2016)

OBSERVED Surface brightness INTRINSIC Density profjle (volume average)

Importance of small scale structure!

CLUMPING FACTOR

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Clumpiness and mass

(Trainor & Steidel 2012)

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Clumpiness and mass

  • Cfr. w. SLUG nebula

(Cantalupo + 2014)

(Trainor & Steidel 2012)

slide-11
SLIDE 11

What is the origin

  • f the clumpiness?

Several physical scenarios, e.g.

slide-12
SLIDE 12

What is the origin

  • f the clumpiness?

Several physical scenarios, e.g.

  • Supersonic turbulence

M = Mach number

Federrath & Klessen (2013)

e.g. Federrath & Klessen (2013)

slide-13
SLIDE 13

What is the origin

  • f the clumpiness?

Several physical scenarios, e.g.

  • Supersonic turbulence

M = Mach number

Federrath & Klessen (2013)

  • Spatial confjnement

Kritsuk & Norman (2002)

e.g. Federrath & Klessen (2013)

fV = volume fjlling factor

slide-14
SLIDE 14

What is the origin

  • f the clumpiness?

Several physical scenarios, e.g.

  • Supersonic turbulence

M = Mach number

Federrath & Klessen (2013)

  • Spatial confjnement

Kritsuk & Norman (2002)

e.g. Federrath & Klessen (2013)

e.g. thermal instability (or Kelvin-Helmholtz, see Ann-Christine’s fmash talk) fV = volume fjlling factor e.g.

  • gravitationally bound?
  • pressure confjnement by hot gas
slide-15
SLIDE 15

What is the origin

  • f the clumpiness?

Several physical scenarios, e.g.

  • Supersonic turbulence

M = Mach number

Federrath & Klessen (2013)

  • Spatial confjnement

Kritsuk & Norman (2002)

e.g. Federrath & Klessen (2013)

e.g. thermal instability (or Kelvin-Helmholtz, see Ann-Christine’s fmash talk) fV = volume fjlling factor e.g.

  • gravitationally bound?
  • pressure confjnement by hot gas
slide-16
SLIDE 16

Properties of the cold gas

Density of the cold phase (clumps, fjlaments, sheets../) Average density profjle Confjnement “ansatz”

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Properties of the cold gas

Density of the cold phase (clumps, fjlaments, sheets../) Average density profjle Confjnement “ansatz” Typical size of the cold “clumps” or structures Area covering factor

  • Cfr. Arrigoni-Battaia et al. (2013)

+ absorption (Prochaska et al. 2013)

Size of nebula ≈ 100 kpc Size of “clump”

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Properties of the cold gas

“ISM”

  • like

“thermal instability”

  • like
slide-19
SLIDE 19

Properties of the hot gas

Pressure equilibrium: Filling factor:

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Properties of the hot gas

Pressure equilibrium: Filling factor:

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Properties of the hot gas

Pressure equilibrium: Filling factor:

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Total CGM baryon fraction

Range of plausible (consistent) clumping factor

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Total CGM baryon fraction

Range of plausible (consistent) clumping factor Minimum baryons in the CGM Constraints to:

  • star formation
  • ejective feedback

fCGM = 50 %

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Minimum baryons in the CGM Constraints to:

  • star formation
  • ejective feedback

fCGM = 30 - 40 %

Typical “expected” value, due to ejective feedback at high z e.g. Liang et al. (2016) Mitchell, priv. comm. (EAGLE)

Total CGM baryon fraction

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Minimum baryons in the CGM Constraints to:

  • star formation
  • ejective feedback

fCGM = 30 - 40 %

Typical “expected” value, due to ejective feedback at high z e.g. Liang et al. (2016) Mitchell, priv. comm. (EAGLE) Assuming (Trainor & Steidel 2012)

(Trainor & Steidel 2012)

Total CGM baryon fraction Dependence on halo mass

slide-26
SLIDE 26

fCGM = 30 - 40 %

Typical “expected” value, due to ejective feedback at high z e.g. Liang et al. (2016) Mitchell, priv. comm. (EAGLE)

Dependence on halo mass

Minimum baryons in the CGM Constraints to:

  • star formation
  • ejective feedback

Mhalo x 3

Total CGM baryon fraction

(Trainor & Steidel 2012)

Assuming (Trainor & Steidel 2012)

slide-27
SLIDE 27

fCGM = 30 - 40 %

Typical “expected” value, due to ejective feedback at high z e.g. Liang et al. (2016) Mitchell, priv. comm. (EAGLE)

Dependence on “cold” gas temperature

Minimum baryons in the CGM Constraints to:

  • star formation
  • ejective feedback

Total CGM baryon fraction

T = 10^4 K

slide-28
SLIDE 28

fCGM = 30 - 40 %

Typical “expected” value, due to ejective feedback at high z e.g. Liang et al. (2016) Mitchell, priv. comm. (EAGLE)

Dependence on “cold” gas temperature

Minimum baryons in the CGM Constraints to:

  • star formation
  • ejective feedback

T = 2 x 10^4 K

Total CGM baryon fraction

T = 10^4 K

slide-29
SLIDE 29

fCGM > 1 fCGM < 1 fCGM < 0.4

Low CGM fraction (f< 0.4) “marginally consistent” with MUSE QSO nebulae Require:

  • “high” halo mass (cfr. clustering & galaxy cross-correlations)
  • low T < 2 x 10^4 K (cfr. radiation hardness & metallicity)

Total CGM baryon fraction

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Summary

MUSE Giant Lyα nebulae: CGM of haloes at z ~3

  • Consistent with cold gas “entrained” within a hot halo

KH/thermal instability? High-res (10 pc in the CGM) required!

  • CGM baryon fraction ≥ ~ 50%

→ Constraints to halo properties & ejective feedback

Tiank you!

  • Lyα luminosity and SB profjle imply

and