S 1 Galaxy formation in the cosmic web Credit: Guzzo & VIPERS - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

S

Mergers and Gas accretion onto galaxies: the imprint of the cosmic web

Collaborators: Chris Power(ICRAR), Pascal Elahi (ICRAR) Christophe Pichon (IAP), Julien Devriendt (Oxford), Yohan Dubois( IAP),Sandrine Codis (CITA), Clotilde Laigle (IAP) 08/07/2016

1

Charlotte Welker

Galaxy formation in the cosmic web

Credit: Guzzo & VIPERS team (2013)

☛ Galactic properties correlated to anisotropically distributed density: Implications? ☛ Angular momentum hidden variable?

The Hubble sequence

Spirals Barred spirals Ellipticals Lenticulars (+Irregulars)

3

Credit: NASA, ESA, M. Kornmesser

Hubble (1936)

Rotation supported Dispersion supported

j

4

Simulations in this talk:

☛ Cosmological Hydrodynamical runs with Gadget and Ramses. ☛ Hydrodynamical zooms on haloes with Gadget, Ramses, Arepo. ☛ Large scale cosmological “full physics” run with Ramses: Horizon-AGN 100 Mpc.h-1 cubic box UV reheating, cooling, star formation, metal release feedback from SNI, SNII, AGN: quasar and jets 1 kpc maximal resolution

Tracing spin swings in the Cosmic web

5

Horizon-AGN: Skeleton

(Sousbie 2009 +DisPerse, Sousbie 2011)

Gas, 10 Mpc projected map Ø Detecting the ridge lines of the density field Ø Fully connected network Ø Topolological extractor, naturally multiscale Ø DisPerse: can be applied on real data (particles or grids) Ø No smoothing: persistence level, “S/N ratio threshold”

L

Filament segment

L

θ

µ = cos(θ)

Pick your favourite cosmic web extractor….

S

Cosmic Flows in the vicinity of filaments.

6

[1] Kinematics of the cosmic web: a a brief recap

Credit: Laigle et al 2015.

Kinematics of the cosmic web

7

Void Filament DM Particle tracers

Credit: Laigle et al 2015.

8

Void Wall Filament particle tracers

Kinematics of the cosmic web

DisPerse extracted LSS features

Voids towards walls

9

Kinematics of the cosmic web

Walls towards filaments

10

Kinematics of the cosmic web

Filaments towards nodes

11

Kinematics of the cosmic web

High vorticity regions

12

Kinematics of the cosmic web

High vorticity regions

13

Galaxies in the vicinity of filaments

Kinematics of the cosmic web

14

Vorticity-filament alignment

Vorticity Sz maps (filament cross-sections) PDF of the vorticity-filament angle

ω=rot(v) flament direction walls

Credit: Laigle et al 2015.

Laigle et al 2015

15

The gaseous cosmic web

Gas (AMR) Dark matter particles Z=3.8 Mh=2 10^12 Msun Rvir=79 kpc ☛ DM particles shell-cross but gas shocks and radiatively cools: gas filaments significantly thinner than DM counterpart!

Credit: Pichon et al 2011.

16

Structure of gas inflows

☛ DM particles shell-cross but gas shocks and radiatively cools: gas filaments significantly thinner than DM counterpart!

Large scales: Ø 10^14 -10^15 Msun clusters: connectivity remains around 3-5

Tilted ring

2.1)

y (Mpc/h) z (Mpc/h) 4 8

• 8
• 4

4 8

• 4

x (Mpc/h) 4 8

• 8
• 4

y (Mpc/h) 4 8

• 4

GAS Nifty comparison, in prep

17

Structure of gas inflows

Ø filamentary structure survives shocks at ~1-2 Rvir Ø Tested with RAMSES, GADGET, AREPO (Nifty comparison)

Tilted ring

2.1)

Skeleton (filaments) Highest robustness Nifty comparison, in prep

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

18

Structure of gas inflows

Ø filamentary structure survives shocks at ~1-2 Rvir Ø Tested with RAMSES, GADGET, AREPO (Nifty comparison)

Tilted ring

2.1)

x ( /R200) y ( /R200) 0.5 1

• 0.5
• 1

0.5 1

• 0.5
• 1

1 Mpc.h-1

Skeleton (filaments) Anti-skeleton (depletion contours) Nifty comparison, in prep

19

Structure of gas inflows

☛ DM particles shell-cross but gas shocks and radiatively cools: gas filaments significantly thinner than DM counterpart!

Credit: Danovich 2015.

Cold flows at z>1

• torques from misaligned halo/galaxy
• Net angular momentum transfer from neighbouring

“pushing” voids (cause braided vorticity tubes). Helix like structure (Pichon 2011, Danovich 2015)

Z=1.33 0.35 Rvir Cold gas streamlines Inner halo 30 kpc Z=2.33 Tilted ring

S

20

[2a] Impact on the spin of haloes and galaxies

1) Simulated haloes 2) Simulated galaxies 3) Real galaxies

21

Swings for dark haloes in simulations…

Aragon-Calvo 2007, Hahn 2007, Paz 2008, Codis 2012 Low mass halo Massive halo

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 g−r =0.34 cos θ 1+ξ z=1.83 g−r =0.21 cos θ 1+ξ z=1.83 g−r =0.09 cos θ 1+ξ z=1.83 g−r =−0.04 cos θ 1+ξ z=1.83 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 log Z/Zo =−1.14 cos θ 1+ξ z=1.83 log Z/Zo =−0.87 cos θ 1+ξ z=1.83 log Z/Zo =−0.66 cos θ 1+ξ z=1.83 log M /Mo =10.75 z=1.83 log M /Mo =10.25 z=1.83 log M /Mo =9.75 z=1.83 log M /Mo =9.25 z=1.83 log M /Mo =8.75 z=1.83 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 cos θ 1+ξ cos θ 1+ξ cos θ 1+ξ

Low-mass, young, centrifugally supported, metal-poor, bluer galaxies : aligned Massive, high velocity dispersion, red, metal-rich old galaxies: perpendicular

Spin orientation distribution for galaxies

It holds true for synthetic galaxies (multiple tracers)

Log(Mtrans/Msun)= 10.25-10.75

22

☛ We recover the alignement/ perpendicular signal. Consistent with dark haloes Dubois, Pichon, Welker et al 2015

SDSS DR8

… and real galaxies likewise!

Tempel & Libeskind 2013

23

☛ recent observations in SDSS

L

θ µ= cos(θ)

z<0.5

! Spiral galaxies: aligned with filaments Elliptical galaxies: perpendicular to filaments

S

24

[2b] Mechanisms of spin acquisition

1) Eulerian view: smooth accretion vs

mergers

2) Lagrangian theory

SMOOTH ACCRETION

Spin swing dynamics

Smooth accretion

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04 1.06 p=n+2 1+ξ p=n+3 1+ξ p=n+4 1+ξ p=n+1 μ

L

θ µ= cos(θ) PDF of µ over 4 timesteps δt δt = 250 Myr Spin-filament angle ξ : excess probability ☛ Gas inflows (re)-align galaxies with their filament

25

time

Lgal

v

Lgal 1 Lgal2

Mergers drive galactic spin flips.

Spin swing dynamics

Mergers MERGERS

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1+ξ μ 1+ξ Δm=0, 9.4 < Γ < 9.6 δm>0, nm =1 δm>0, nm =2 δm>0, nm >2 Δm=0, 9.6 < Γ < 9.7

L

θ µ= cos(θ) PDF of µ for different merging histories

nm : number of mergers

Red to pink:

merged between z=5.2 and z=1.8

Blue to yellow:

never merged, Γ =log(M/Msun)

☛ Mergers flip the spin perpendicular to the filament

26

Stronger signal than for galactic properties!

27

A lagrangian theory exits!

Tidal Torque Theory:

☛ In the vicinity of a filament: anisotropic environment !

See Codis et al 2015. See Codis et al 2015.

28

Insights from lagrangian theory

☛ Proto-filament in the initial density field:

Ø Line connecting two maxima (proto-nodes) through a saddle point 2D gaussian random field maximum saddle point minimum

See Codis et al 2015.

29

Insights from lagrangian theory

2D density map 2D spin map In the plane of the saddle point orthogonal to filament:

We recover the quadrants !

T I

See Codis et al 2015.

30

☛ Same GRF analysis around a filament-type saddle point constraint in 3D: ☛ Compute expectations for δ and s Density map

See Codis et al 2015.

Sketch of the spin distribution

Insights from lagrangian theory

S

31

[2c] Impact on the mopholgy

• f galaxies

Statistical study in Horizon-AGN

Morphological variety in Horizon-AGN

blue red

10.0 11.0 11.7

Colour (g-r) mass

irregular disk elliptical

32

Rest-frame colour images of synthetic galaxies

Galactic Morphologies

33

Iij = Σlml(δij.(xl

k.xl k) − xl i.xl j)

λ1 > λ2 > λ3

Inertia tensor: Moments and ellipsoid axis:

c < b < a Spheroids: c/a > 0.7 b/a >0.8

Disks : c/a < 0.45

b/a< 0.55

?

c a b c b a

SMOOTH ACCRETION

Gas inflows flatten spheroids

• ver time along the filament

direction 1.5 Gyr Dark to light: 1.5 Gyr

Galactic morphologies: Smooth accretion

Cumulative probability of axis ratios ξ over a time step (250 Myr)

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

ξ1=c/a P(ξi >Ξ)

disks spheroids

• Axis ratio: c/a

9.5<log(M/Msun)<10.5

34

Time Cumulative probability

SMOOTH ACCRETION

Gas inflows flatten spheroids

• ver time along the filament

direction Dark to light: 1.5 Gyr

Galactic morphologies: Smooth accretion

Cumulative probability of axis ratios ξ over a time step (250 Myr)

Up to the transition mass!

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

ξ1=c/a P(ξ >Ξ)

• log(M/Msun)>10.5

35

Axis ratio: c/a

Cumulative probability

MERGERS

Galactic morphologies: Mergers

Mergers turn disks into spheroids Even minor mergers can create spheroid remnants Cumulative probability of axis ratios ξ for mergers with different mass ratios

• ver a time step (250 Myr)
• 0.2

0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

δm = 0 9% < δm < 20% 5% < δm < 9% δ m > 20% ξ1 = c/a P(>Ξ)

36

[2b]

δm Cumulative probability

Axis ratio: c/a

37 0.95

fgas

j-M scaling relations : variations with gas fraction

38

z = 3 z = 1.6 z = 0.8

V/σ 2

j-M-morphology scaling relations

ü Main filament inflow contribution ü V/σ Z=2.1 Z=1.6 Z=0.8

39

Summary I

☛ Spin swings recovered for galaxies. ☛ Smooth accretion builds up the spin parallel to filaments and reform disks. ☛ Minor and major mergers destroy disks and flip the spin orthogonal to the filament. Δm Μi Mf=Mi+Δm Implications for satellites in the Local Universe and detectability?

S Impact on the morphology of clusters at z<1

40

[3]

Is satellite distribution imprinted by the collimated nature of the filamentary infall ? (recall cold gas flows at z>1)

41

L

θ1 (or spin-position) µ1 = cos(θ1) Minor axis-position

Tracing galactic alignments

See also: Yang 2006, Ibata 2014, Libeskind 2015

[3]

L

ν = cos(α) Position-filament

α

See also: Tempel 2015, Libeskind 2015

Filamentary and coplanar trends: expected correlation

42

blue central red central fjlament satellites

low mass high mass Galactic plane Orthogonal to filament Galactic plane Parallel to filament

All satellites within 5 Rvir

☛ Satellites aligned with filament ⇒ mass segregation for the coplanar trend.

[3]

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

1=cos(θ1)

1+ξ

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

ν=cos(α) 1+ξ μ

log(Mg/Msun) < 10 10< log(Mg/Msun) < 10.5 log(Mg/Msun) > 10.5 0.3<z<0.8 minor axis flament

Filamentary and coplanar trends: Mass segregation

43

Consistent with Observations: Sales 2004, Brainerd 2005, Yang 2006

[3]

c θ1 α

20 40 60 80 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

αx

20 40 60 80 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

θx

1+ξ // // 2D major axis projected flament

g-r >0.55 0.4<g-r<0.55 g-r<0.4

log(Mg/Msun)>10 0.3<z<0.8

<θx>= 38,8 ° <θx>= 41° <θx>= 42.9 °

Projected Alignment Trends

44

[3]

c θ1 α

Consistent with Observations: Sales 2004, Brainerd 2005, Yang 2006

20 40 60 80 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

αx

20 40 60 80 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

θx

1+ξ // // 2D major axis projected flament

g-r >0.55 0.4<g-r<0.55 g-r<0.4

log(Mg/Msun)>10 0.3<z<0.8

<θx>= 38,8 ° <θx>= 41° <θx>= 42.9 °

Projected Alignment Trends

45

[3]

c θ1 α SDSS

Consistent with Observations: Sales 2004, Brainerd 2005, Yang 2006

Filamentary and coplanar trends: Transition

fjlament satellite galactic plane 2 Rvir Rvir

0.5 Rvir

46

☛ Transition between: the filamentary trend (outskirt of the halo) and the coplanar trend ( vicinity of the central).

In observations: Zaritsky 1997

[3]

47

Central spin orientation selection

37 degree angle cuts

blue central red central fjlament satellites

[3]

0.3<z<0.8 log(Mg/Msun)>10

Rgs < 0.25*Rvir 0.25*Rvir< Rgs < 0.5*Rvir 0.5*Rvir< Rgs < 1.0*Rvir 1.0*Rvir< Rgs < 2.0*Rvir 2.0*Rvir < Rgs < 5*Rvir minor axis flament

//

μ

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

ν=cos(α) 1+ξ

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

1=cos(θ1)

1+ξ

37° cone 37° cone

Evolution with distance to host

48

[3]

c θ1 α

mass

log(Mg/Msun)>10.5

10<log(Mg/Msun)<10.5 log(Mg/Msun)<10

−1.0 −0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

cos(φ)=(Lsat*Lg)/|Lsat*Lg| 1+ξ

• rb
• rb

spin-orbital

0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

Kinematic signature

49

☛ Satellites align their orbital momentum with the spin of massive centrals

☛ Consistent trends w.r.t distance to host

central satellite

See also: Ibata 2014

[3]

Cos(φ) Lg Lsat

• rb

φ

mass

log(Mg/Msun)>10.5

10<log(Mg/Msun)<10.5 log(Mg/Msun)<10

−1.0 −0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

cos(φ)=(Lsat*Lg)/|Lsat*Lg| 1+ξ

• rb
• rb

spin-orbital

0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

Kinematic signature

50

☛ Satellites align their orbital momentum with the spin of massive centrals

✔ Corotation!

Lg Lsat

• rb

central satellite

See also: Ibata 2014

[3]

Cos(φ)

φ

1+2ξ

Summary

51

[3]

☛ Satellites align their orbital momentum with the spin

• f massive centrals

☛ Transition between the filamentary trend and the coplanar trend ☛ Satellites aligned with filament ⇒ mass segregation for the coplanar trend.

−2 −1 1 2 −2 −1 1 2 x (Mpc) y (Mpc)

satellites following distribution: uniform triaxial flamentary coplanar halo density isocontour flament galactic plane

Summary

52

[3]

Conclusion

ü Tight connection between the LSS geometry and galactic properties: Ø Gas inflow explains angular momentum spin-up and consecutive (re)-building of disks at z>1. Ø Mergers account for spin swings observed for massive galaxies in the cosmic web. Ø Satellites infall generates the separation dependent angular distribution of satellites around their central host.

53