DYNAMICAL EFFECTS OF STELLAR FEEDBACK IN LOW MASS GALAXIES AT Z~2 In - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
JESSIE HIRTENSTEIN DYNAMICAL EFFECTS OF STELLAR FEEDBACK IN LOW MASS GALAXIES AT Z~2 In collaboration with: Tucker Jones, Xin Wang, Andrew Wetzel , Kareem El-Badry , Austin Hoag, Tommaso Treu, Maru a Brada , Takahiro Morishita GLA S S :
In collaboration with: Tucker Jones, Xin Wang, Andrew Wetzel, Kareem El-Badry, Austin Hoag, Tommaso Treu, Maruša Bradač, Takahiro Morishita
Del Popolo et al. (2016)
▸ Dark matter only simulations predict cusp-y central density profiles ▸ Observations reveal constant density cores
CUSP CORE
Observations Dark matter only simulations
Del Popolo et al. (2016)
▸ Dark matter only simulations predict cusp-y central density profiles ▸ Observations reveal constant density cores
CUSP CORE
Observations Dark matter only simulations
CUSP
Simulations including baryonic feedback
CORE CUSP
(α~-1) → cusp (α~0) → core
Tollet, Macciò, Dutton et. al. (2016)
▸ Most dynamically effective with 7 ≲ log (M*/M⦿) ≲ 9, at z ~ 2
https://www2.keck.hawaii.edu
▸ IR spectrograph with AO + Integral
Field Unit (IFU)
▸ Kinematic survey of lensed galaxies ▸ Pre-selected for M*, z, SFR, EL fluxes ▸ 21 galaxies to-date ▸ 8 < log (M*/M⦿) < 9.8 ▸ 1.25 < z < 2.29
Hirtenstein et al. 2019
Hirtenstein et al. 2019
0.5’’
0.5’’
Collapse data cube into effective slit Flux Integrated Spectrum
El-Badry et al. (2017)
= 1 snapshot
log (M*/M⦿) ~ 8.5 z ~ 0
▸ Relationship is a result of feedback cycle, which may drive core formation
Hirtenstein et al. 2019
Single snapshot from FIRE galaxy
Hirtenstein et al. 2019
Single snapshot from FIRE galaxy Best fit line and 1σ scatter over entire sample
σpred=σ (M*, sSFR)
Hirtenstein et al. 2019
Single snapshot from FIRE galaxy Best fit line and 1σ scatter over entire sample
σpred=σ (M*, sSFR)
OLAS targets
Hirtenstein et al. 2019
same trends as in FIRE
100 Myr timescales
end of sSFR
Hirtenstein et al. 2019
Image plane Source plane
Hirtenstein et al. in prep
Wuyts et al. 2016
▸ Does this relationship hold for
lower mass galaxies?
▸ Need dynamical mass of galaxies ▸ Mdyn = M* + Mgas + MDM ▸ Examining the DM distribution in
high redshift dwarfs:
▸ Cusp → higher fDM → lower f* ▸ Core → lower fDM → higher f*
KMOS3d: z~2, massive galaxies
Wuyts et al. 2016
▸ Does this relationship hold for
lower mass galaxies?
▸ Need dynamical mass of galaxies ▸ Mdyn = M* + Mgas + MDM ▸ Examining the DM distribution in
high redshift dwarfs:
▸ Cusp → higher fDM → lower f* ▸ Core → lower fDM → higher f*
KMOS3d: z~2, massive galaxies
Wuyts et al. 2016
▸ Does this relationship hold for
lower mass galaxies?
▸ Need dynamical mass of galaxies ▸ Mdyn = M* + Mgas + MDM ▸ Examining the DM distribution in
high redshift dwarfs:
▸ Cusp → higher fDM → lower f* ▸ Core → lower fDM → higher f*
KMOS3d: z~2, massive galaxies
Wuyts et al. 2016
▸ Does this relationship hold for
lower mass galaxies?
▸ Need dynamical mass of galaxies ▸ Mdyn = M* + Mgas + MDM ▸ Examining the DM distribution in
high redshift dwarfs:
▸ Cusp → higher fDM → lower f* ▸ Core → lower fDM → higher f*
KMOS3d: z~2, massive galaxies
Wuyts et al. 2016
OSIRIS data
▸ Does this relationship hold for
lower mass galaxies?
▸ Need dynamical mass of galaxies ▸ Mdyn = M* + Mgas + MDM ▸ Examining the DM distribution in
high redshift dwarfs:
▸ Cusp → higher fDM → lower f* ▸ Core → lower fDM → higher f*
KMOS3d: z~2, massive galaxies