Corentin Cadiou

Framing the Big Picture of Galaxy Star Formation Quenching with JWST & Euclid 2024

Postdoc @ Lund University
Soon “Chargé de recherche” CNRS @ IAP, Paris

Mini-quenching of high-\(z\) \(\gtrsim 10^7\,\mathrm{M}_\odot\) halos & ISM

Side-B: peeking into emission lines

Insights from the MEGATRON* simulation — with H. Katz & M. Rey

*MEGATRON: TransforMing Galaxy Formation by REsolvinG the Non-Equilibrium Chemistry And TheRmOdyNamics of the ISM and CGM

Detailed modelling of the ISM and emission lines to constrain (the interplay between) feedback and star formation

Spectra contain a huge amount of information

SFR

SFH

Katz+23

Spectrum of a \(z=8.5\) galaxy

Katz+23

*geometry, equilibrium, ISM properties near stars, element abundances

3. Mock spectra &
images

2. Post-processing*

1. Simulation

From intrinsic…

… to observed

\(\text{O\small{II}}\)

\(\text{O\small{I}}\)

\(\text{N\small{I}}\)

\(\text{Mg\small{II}}\)

\(\text{Ne\small{II}}\)

\(\text{CO}\)

\(\rho\)

\(v_r\)

\(\text{O\small{III}}\)

Megatron model [i]

Based on RAMSES-RT (Rosdahl+13)
Out-of-equilibrium chemistry (Katz 23)
Primordial species: \(\text{H~{\small I}-{\small II}}\), \(\text{He~{\small I}-{\small III}}\), \(e^{-}\)
Metal ions: \(\text{C~{\small I}-{\small VI}}\), \(\text{N~{\small I}-{\small VII}}\), \(\text{O~{\small I}-{\small VIII}}\), \(\text{Ne~{\small I}-{\small X}}\), \(\text{Mg~{\small I}-{\small X}}\), \(\text{Si~{\small I}-{\small XI}}\), \(\text{S~{\small I}-{\small XI}}\) & \(\text{Fe~{\small I}-{\small XI}} \)
Molecules: \(\text{H}_2\) & \(\text{CO}\)
Dust model (Rémy-Ruyer+14)
Assuming dust-to-gass ratio
Heating & Cooling out of equilibrium
photoheating, photoelectric heating, excitation/dissociation heating, primordial, dust recombination, dust-gas collisions, metal lines
- \(\text{C~{\small I}}\), \(\text{C~{\small II}}\), \(\text{N~{\small II}}\), \(\text{O~{\small I}}\), \(\text{O~{\small III}}\), \(\text{Ne~{\small II}}\), \(\text{Si~{\small I}}\), \(\text{Si~{\small II}}\), \(\text{S~{\small I}}\), \(\text{Fe~{\small I}}\), \(\text{Fe~{\small II}}\) @ \(T<10^4\,\mathrm{K}\)
- CLOUDY tables @ \(T>10^4\,\mathrm{K}\)

Megatron model [ii]

Turbulence-based star formation (Padoan & Nordlund 11, Agertz+21)
\(\dot{\rho_\star} = \varepsilon_\star\rho/t_\mathrm{ff}\)
- if \(Z<10^{-6}Z_\odot\) ⇒ Pop. III
- if \(Z\geq10^{-6}Z_\odot\) ⇒ Pop. I & II, Kroupa
\(M_\star = 500\,\mathrm{M}_\odot\)
\(M_{\star,\rm III} \sim 100\,\mathrm{M}_\odot\)
Feedback (Agertz+21; Rey+23)
core-collapse SN, type Ia, winds + HN (Nomoto+06).
Yields (Limongi & Chieffi 18)
AGB winds (Ritter+18)

Simulated objects

MW analogue @ \(z=0\)
Genetically engineered to form earlier
ICs generated with genetIC
2 main runs
- constant physical \(\Delta x_\mathrm{min} \approx 20-40\,\mathrm{pc}\)
- constant comoving \(\Delta x_\mathrm{min}(z=2) = 20\,\mathrm{pc}\)
  \(\Delta x_\mathrm{min}(z=5)=10\,\mathrm{pc}\)
  \(\Delta x_\mathrm{min}(z=14)=4\,\mathrm{pc}\)

fiducial:
few JWST targets

early-forming:
many targets

\(z>8\)

Side quest:

if you have an unusual formation history to test, we can simulate it!

(side quest): causal origin of (morphological) quenching

\(M_\star = 10^{11}\,\mathrm{M_\odot}\) @ \(z=2\) galaxy
different ang. mom history (ask me for details!)

Low tides

High tides

\(\mathcal{B}\searrow\)

\(R_\mathrm{eff} \nearrow \)

\(v/\sigma\nearrow\)

See Cadiou+21a, and Cadiou+21b; Storck, CC+24

\(2\times\) too massive at high \(z\)

⇒ we need more regulation

Vintergatan: Agertz+21

Mass evolution: Megatron vs. Vintergatan

Mine

My current boss'

1. Single-halo setup: massive dwarf

\(M_\mathrm{DM} \approx 10^{8}\,\mathrm{M_\odot}\)
to \(z=6\)

Merger

1. Single-halo setup: massive dwarf

\(M_\mathrm{DM} \approx 10^{9}\,\mathrm{M_\odot}\) at \(z=6\)

Strong feedback

⇒ removes cold gas

⇒ \(\sim100\,\mathrm{Myr}\) mini-quenching

Increasing feedback strength

\(T<500\,\mathrm{K}\)

\(2\times 10^{51}\,\mathrm{erg/SN}\)

\(4\times 10^{51}\,\mathrm{erg/SN}\)

\(5\times 10^{51}\,\mathrm{erg/SN}\)

1. Single-halo setup: varying \(E_\mathrm{SN}\)

With hypernovae

With Ly\(\alpha\) rad. pressure

1. Single-halo setup: varying feedback channels

⇒ Stronger feedback heats up/expells cold gas \(T<500\,\mathrm{K}\)

1. Single-halo setup: signature of FB?

High \(T_\mathrm{e^-}\)

Lower \(T_\mathrm{e^-}\)

⇒ Exciting opportunities to relate
ISM to feedback with NIRSPEC!

1. Single-halo setup: signature of FB?

⇒ Exciting opportunities to relate
ISM to feedback with NIRSPEC!

Varying feedback

Varying star formation recipe

See Nicolas' talk yesterday

2. Quenching of more massive halos?

Focus : halos \(M_\mathrm{DM} = 10^8-10^{10}\,\mathrm{M_\odot}\)
at \(z=10\)

⇒ Mini-quenching

\(M_\star \lesssim 10^8\,\mathrm{M_\odot}\) for \(\sim 50-100\,\mathrm{Myr}\)

iff feedback is strong enough

Increasing mass

Mini-quenching? Napping?

3. Even more massive?

Focus : halos \(M_\mathrm{DM} = 10^{10}-10^{11}\,\mathrm{M_\odot}\) at \(z=6\)

⇒ No SNe quenching in this mass range?

SNe quenching - SPICE simulation (Bhagwat+24)

\(M_\mathrm{DM}=3\times 10^{11}\,\mathrm{M}_\odot\) at \(z=5\)

\(M_\star= 10^{8.5}\,\mathrm{M}_\odot\) at \(z=5\)

Plenty others in bursty/HN channels

3. Massive end : peeking into other sims

AGN quenching - FLARES simulation (Lovell+20)

AGN quenching - THESAN simulation (Kannan+22) (no ISM)

Conclusions

Low-mass quenching within our uncertainties
Strong SNe (Hypernovæ, top-heavy IMF, Ly\(\alpha\)) ⇒ mini-quenching
Maybe high-mass quenching w/out AGN is possible
Different feedback (quenching?) channels ⇒ different line ratios
ISM thermodynamics matter, direct obs.

Open questions

Observational constraints on FB processes to understand quenching?
“Easy” to generate mocks → how to make the simulations most useful? How to pin down quenching?
Can we learn anything from combined IFU data?

Conclusions

Low-mass quenching within our uncertainties
Strong SNe (Hypernovæ, top-heavy IMF, Ly\(\alpha\)) ⇒ mini-quenching
Maybe high-mass quenching w/out AGN is possible
Different feedback (quenching?) channels ⇒ different line ratios
ISM thermodynamics matter, direct obs.

Open questions

Observational constraints on FB processes to understand quenching?
“Easy” to generate mocks → how to make the simulations most useful? How to pin down quenching?
Can we learn anything from combined IFU data?

Katz 22

Today's talk, in a nutshell

(My) route to high-\(z\) kinematics

Effect of cosmo. env. (Musso+19, Kraljic+20,21, Cadiou+21, Storck+24)
Cosmology-galaxy connection (Cadiou+21)
Cosmological accretion (Cadiou+19, Kocjan+24)
But what are we actually observing? This talk

Low grav. tides

Large grav. tides

cosmological environment \(\sim 50-100\,\mathrm{Mpc}\)
resolve Strömgren spheres \(\sim 10\,\mathrm{pc}\)
radiative-transfer
proper multi-phase ISM \(T \lesssim 10^4\,\mathrm{K}\)
Track ion abundances out-of-equilibrium

Wishlist for proper modelling of emission lines + kinematics

Background: Vintage Gordon (follow-up of Vintergatan) simulation
(PI: Cadiou)

\(t_\mathrm{chem} \propto 1/n^2\)

\(t_\mathrm{dyn} \propto 1/\sqrt{n}\)

\(t_\mathrm{burst} \sim 10-100\,\mathrm{Myr}\)

How we typically model emission lines

Lots of assumptions

(equilibrium, geometry, element abundances, …)

See Aniket's talk (I guess?)

\(\rho, T, Z,v\)
sometimes \(n_\mathrm{H}, n_{\mathrm{HI}}, n_\mathrm{HeI}, n_\mathrm{HeII},n_\mathrm{HeIII},\)

Processes that control ion and molecular properties:

Collisional, photo, cosmic-ray ionization
Radiative, dielectronic, dust recombination
Charge exchange

RAMSES-RTZ + PRISM: Non-equilibrium chemistry coupled to on-the-fly radiative transfer

Processes that control gas temperature:

Cosmic-ray, photo, photo-electric, H2, dust heating
Primordial, \(\mathrm{H}_2\), CO, metal, dust* recombination, dust-gas collisional cooling
Adiabatic (expansion), shocks (e.g. SN, turbulence), gravitational, etc.

Image: Cadiou/Katz/Rey+in prep

Early forming MW mass galaxy
\(1.6\times 10^{4}\mathrm{M}_\odot\) DM, \(500\, \mathrm{M}_\odot\) Pop. II stars, individual Pop III stars, \(1\, \mathrm{pc}\) resolution at first star formation
IMF sampled chemical enrichment from individual stars for all relevant elements
SN (CC, Ia, HN, PISN), Winds → follows Vintergatan (validated for MW galaxies at z = 0)
82 species chemistry coupled to 8 bin RT
PRISM ISM model
Enhanced resolution in the CGM
Calibration sims with IMF variations and physical model variations

Introducing MEGATRON

Halo-mass—stellar-mass relation

VG: Vintergatan (Agertz+21)
⇒ Well-regulated by \(z=0\)

High-resolution early \(<1\mathrm{pc}\)

Constant resolution \(\sim 20\,\mathrm{pc}\)

Most massive galaxy, edge-on

Most massive galaxy, face-on

Difference \([\mathrm{C{\small{II}}}]\)-weighted vs. \(n_\mathrm{H}\)-weighted

Early results

Stacked profiles

36 galaxies @ \(z=10\)

\(8.3\leq\log(M_\star/\mathrm{M}_\odot)\leq 10.0\)

⚠️ PRELIMINARY ⚠️

Only gas within \(\pm0.5\,\mathrm{kpc}\) height

All gas

Random discussion points:

“All simulations are wrong, but some are useful”
George “Simulation” Box

How should the complex kinematics be modelled at high-\(z\)?
Non-axisymmetric structures → tilted rings not valid? What about inflows/outflows/extra-planar motions?
Do we really need out-of-equilibrium thermochemistry?
If we do in simulation, probably also required in observation
Likely \(z\) dependent (stay tuned!)
How can we help observers and vice versa?
Fairly easy to generate density/velocity maps, but what's needed?