probing the ism at z > 3 with rest-frame uv emission from laes in...
TRANSCRIPT
Probing the ISM at z > 3 with rest-frame UV emission from LAEs in MUSE-Wide
Kasper B. SchmidtLeibniz-Institut für Astrophysik Potsdam (AIP)
&The MUSE Collaboration:
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
• Demographics:- Clustering in (R.A., Dec., z), number counts (LF),
• But also physics of the systems:- Stellar mass- Star formation rate- Electron density- Temperature- Gas phase metallicity- Kinematics and velocities- etc.
• Main probes are rest-frame optical photometry and spectroscopy
• But at z > 3 observed optical corresponds to rest-frame UV
Main Goal: Understanding Galaxies
2
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
Probing ISM/Galaxy prop. with UV lines
3
• Have to rely on rest-frame UV for early Universe studies: Lyα, CIII, CIV
• Lyα gives redshift, SFR(?) and relates to Hydrogen column density• CIII], CIV, HeII, [OIII]4363, etc probe:
- ionizing radiation (logU), gas-phase metallicity (Z), electron density (ne)Rigby+15
Supersolar
Subsolar
(Until JWST is launched)
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
Probing ISM/Galaxy prop. with UV lines
3
• Have to rely on rest-frame UV for early Universe studies: Lyα, CIII, CIV
• Lyα gives redshift, SFR(?) and relates to Hydrogen column density• CIII], CIV, HeII, [OIII]4363, etc probe:
- ionizing radiation (logU), gas-phase metallicity (Z), electron density (ne)Rigby+15
Supersolar
Subsolar
(Until JWST is launched)
Gutkin+16
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
Probing ISM/Galaxy prop. with UV lines
3
• Have to rely on rest-frame UV for early Universe studies: Lyα, CIII, CIV
• Lyα gives redshift, SFR(?) and relates to Hydrogen column density• CIII], CIV, HeII, [OIII]4363, etc probe:
- ionizing radiation (logU), gas-phase metallicity (Z), electron density (ne)Rigby+15
Supersolar
Subsolar
(Until JWST is launched)
Gutkin+16 Maseda+17
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
• MUSE GTO program; PI: Lutz Wisotzki• 100 ⨉ 1arcmin2 MUSE pointing mosaic on CDF-S and COSMOS • 1 hour exposures reaching 6σ point-source EL depth ≲10-17erg/s/cm2
• Main Science Goals:
4
Bright Lyα Emitters
Complete census of z > 3 LAEs(exploiting multi-λ HST data)
Physical properties of LAEs
Studying extreme EW objects
LAE Luminosity Functions
Describe Lyα halos and Blobs
Spectra of Everything!
Immense legacy value for the broader community
Discovery potential
Low & Intermediate z Galaxies:
Spatially Resolved Spectroscopy + HST
Low mass galaxies (≳ 107M )
Studying Faint AGN
�
R. Saust’s poster
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
Emission Line Sources in MW
5
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0redshift
0
10
20
30
40
50Ly↵
674 LAEs from first 60 MUSE-Wide pointings
Lyα
[OII]
Balmer break absorption Hβ + [OIII]
Hα + SII
6.53
0.04
z
The first 60 fields
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
Emission Line Sources in MW
5
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0redshift
0
10
20
30
40
50Ly↵
674 LAEs from first 60 MUSE-Wide pointings
Lyα
[OII]
Balmer break absorption Hβ + [OIII]
Hα + SII
6.53
0.04
z
The first 60 fields
However,As of last week, this has been added the
sources from 40 more fields…
Details are onT. Urrutia’s Poster
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
• Despite MUSE sensitivity at 1hr detection is still challenging- Initial comparison in overlap with deep fields confirm this
• Optimal extraction of spectra to improve S/N with:- Multi-component GALFIT model of HST counterpart- Representation of models in full 3D MUSE cube- Simultaneous extraction of all sources in FoV- Full 3D per-pixel representation of each source- Collapsed 1D spectra with optimal S/N
UV lines in MUSE-Wide LAEs
6
https://github.com/kasperschmidt/TDOSE
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
• Searching for CIII and CIV doublets in MUSE-Wide LAEs- MUSE covers CIII] at 2.9 < z < 3.9 & CIV at 2.9 < z < 5.0 for LAEs
UV lines in MUSE-Wide LAEs
7
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CII
I]�
1909
A)/
[A]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4
�2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
EW
(CII
I]�
1909
A)/
[A]
1:1 relation1:3 relation1:10 relationBayliss et al. (2014)
Erb et al. (2010)Hoag et al. in press.Huang et al. (2016)Rigby et al. (2014)
Rigby et al. (2015), IUERigby et al. (2015), MagERigby et al. (2015), STISSchmidt et al. (2017)
Shapley et al. (2003)Stark et al. (2014)Stark et al. (2015b)
Stark et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4.0
�3.5
�3.0
�2.5
�2.0
�1.5
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
1:1 relation1:3 relation1:10 relation
Hoag et al. in press.Huang et al. (2016)Mainali et al. (2017)
Schmidt et al. (2017)Shapley et al. (2003)
Smit et al. (2017)Stark et al. (2015a)
Vanzella et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CII
I]�
1909
A)/
[A]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4
�2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
EW
(CII
I]�
1909
A)/
[A]
1:1 relation1:3 relation1:10 relationBayliss et al. (2014)
Erb et al. (2010)Hoag et al. in press.Huang et al. (2016)Rigby et al. (2014)
Rigby et al. (2015), IUERigby et al. (2015), MagERigby et al. (2015), STISSchmidt et al. (2017)
Shapley et al. (2003)Stark et al. (2014)Stark et al. (2015b)
Stark et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4.0
�3.5
�3.0
�2.5
�2.0
�1.5
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
1:1 relation1:3 relation1:10 relation
Hoag et al. in press.Huang et al. (2016)Mainali et al. (2017)
Schmidt et al. (2017)Shapley et al. (2003)
Smit et al. (2017)Stark et al. (2015a)
Vanzella et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4.0
�3.5
�3.0
�2.5
�2.0
�1.5
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
1:1 relation1:3 relation1:10 relation
Hoag et al. in press.Huang et al. (2016)Mainali et al. (2017)
Schmidt et al. (2017)Shapley et al. (2003)
Smit et al. (2017)Stark et al. (2015a)
Vanzella et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
• Searching for CIII and CIV doublets in MUSE-Wide LAEs- MUSE covers CIII] at 2.9 < z < 3.9 & CIV at 2.9 < z < 5.0 for LAEs
UV lines in MUSE-Wide LAEs
7
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CII
I]�
1909
A)/
[A]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4
�2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
EW
(CII
I]�
1909
A)/
[A]
1:1 relation1:3 relation1:10 relationBayliss et al. (2014)
Erb et al. (2010)Hoag et al. in press.Huang et al. (2016)Rigby et al. (2014)
Rigby et al. (2015), IUERigby et al. (2015), MagERigby et al. (2015), STISSchmidt et al. (2017)
Shapley et al. (2003)Stark et al. (2014)Stark et al. (2015b)
Stark et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4.0
�3.5
�3.0
�2.5
�2.0
�1.5
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
1:1 relation1:3 relation1:10 relation
Hoag et al. in press.Huang et al. (2016)Mainali et al. (2017)
Schmidt et al. (2017)Shapley et al. (2003)
Smit et al. (2017)Stark et al. (2015a)
Vanzella et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CII
I]�
1909
A)/
[A]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4
�2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
EW
(CII
I]�
1909
A)/
[A]
1:1 relation1:3 relation1:10 relationBayliss et al. (2014)
Erb et al. (2010)Hoag et al. in press.Huang et al. (2016)Rigby et al. (2014)
Rigby et al. (2015), IUERigby et al. (2015), MagERigby et al. (2015), STISSchmidt et al. (2017)
Shapley et al. (2003)Stark et al. (2014)Stark et al. (2015b)
Stark et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4.0
�3.5
�3.0
�2.5
�2.0
�1.5
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
1:1 relation1:3 relation1:10 relation
Hoag et al. in press.Huang et al. (2016)Mainali et al. (2017)
Schmidt et al. (2017)Shapley et al. (2003)
Smit et al. (2017)Stark et al. (2015a)
Vanzella et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4.0
�3.5
�3.0
�2.5
�2.0
�1.5
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
1:1 relation1:3 relation1:10 relation
Hoag et al. in press.Huang et al. (2016)Mainali et al. (2017)
Schmidt et al. (2017)Shapley et al. (2003)
Smit et al. (2017)Stark et al. (2015a)
Vanzella et al. (2016)Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CII
I]�
1909
A)/
[A]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4
�2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
EW
(CII
I]�
1909
A)/
[A]
1:1 relation1:3 relation
1:10 relationBayliss et al. (2014)
Rigby et al. (2015), MagEShapley et al. (2003)
Stark et al. (2014)Vanzella et al. (2016)
Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
0 50 100 150 200
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
�20 �10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
EW( Ly↵ ) / [A]
�4.0
�3.5
�3.0
�2.5
�2.0
�1.5
EW
(CIV
�15
48A
)/[A
]
1:1 relation1:3 relation
1:10 relationShapley et al. (2003)
Smit et al. (2017) Vanzella et al. (2016) Vanzella et al. (2017)
0.0
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
5.6
6.4
7.2
8.0
reds
hift
See also Maseda+17 & in prep. work in MUSE deep fields
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
UV lines in MUSE-Wide LAEs
8
• Searching for CIII and CIV doublets in MUSE-Wide LAEs- MUSE covers CIII] at 2.9 < z < 3.9 & CIV at 2.9 < z < 5.0 for LAEs
• Initial guess on zsys from Verhamme et al. (submitted)• First step: Obtain EW estimates from potential line detections
- Forced flux estimate on optimally extracted spectra
• Template matching around zsys for UV lines/doublets independently- First tests recover lines well in mock spectra - Extend to larger template grid, and apply to MUSE-Wide LAEs
1895 1900 1905 1910 1915 1920Wavelength [A]
�2
0
2
Flu
x
Template at z(CCmax) = 3.5 Spectrum Max(CC Value)
1895 1900 1905 1910 1915 1920Wavelength [A]
0
25
50
Lin
ear
CC
1895 1900 1905 1910 1915 1920Wavelength [A]
�0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
Lin
ear
CC
Nor
mal
ized
Mock spectrum CIII-doublet template CCmax location
K. B. Schmidt, [email protected] Sakura CLAW, Tokyo, March 26 2018
Acknowledgements
9
P.I. R. Bacon* P.I. L. Wisotzki*
C. DienerC. HerenzJ. Kerutt*R. Saust*
K. Schmidt*T. Urrutia*
*At Sakura CLAW