With A. Pontzen & H. Peiris: 2012.02201
Corentin Cadiou | Journées du PNCG, Strasbourg
Fall 83 (\(z=0\))
Spiral galaxies \(\leftrightarrow\) high \(J_\star\)
3 variables: \(M_\star, J_\star\), morpho.
What causes what?
Some possible scenarios:
Harrison+17 (KMOS, \(z=1\))
Spiral galaxies \(\leftrightarrow\) high \(J_\star\): also at high-\(z\)
\(M_\star, J_\star,M_\mathrm{BH}\), morpho, bulge fraction, …
What causes what?
Rodriguez-Gomez+22 (TNG)
Correlation between environment & galaxy properties (cf previous session!)
Weak lensing signal
Classical model of gal form
1
2
3
\(M_\mathrm{DM}, j_\mathrm{DM}, \dots\)
4
\(M_\star, j_\star, \dots\)
Hierarchical clustering
\(N\)-body physics
Accretion of gas
star form, feedback, cooling, ...
Classical model of gal form
1
2
\(M_\mathrm{DM}, j_\mathrm{DM}, \dots\)
4
\(M_\star, j_\star, \dots\)
Hierarchical clustering
\(N\)-body physics
Accretion of gas
star form, feedback, cooling, ...
Part I
3
Classical model of gal form
1
2
\(M_\mathrm{DM}\),
\(j_\mathrm{DM}, \dots\)
4
\(M_\star\),
\(j_\star, \dots\)
Hierarchical clustering
\(N\)-body physics
Accretion of gas
star form, feedback, cooling, ...
Part I
Part II
3
\(j_\mathrm{DM}\)
\(z=0\)
\( z = 100\)
\(z=0\)
\( z = 100\)
\[\mathbf{L}_\mathrm{lin.} \propto \int\mathrm{d}^3q(\mathbf{q}-\bar{\mathbf{q}})\times \nabla\phi\]
Position w.r.t. center
Velocity
[White 84]
\(\mathbf{r}\)\(\times\)\(\mathbf{v}\)
\(z=0\)
\( z = 100\)
[Porciani+02]
Scatter of 1 dex!
\(z=0\)
\( z = 100\)
[Genetic modifications: Roth+16, see also Rey&Pontzen 18, Stopyra+20]
\[\mathbf{L}_\mathrm{lin.} \propto \int\mathrm{d}^3q(\mathbf{q}-\bar{\mathbf{q}})\times \nabla\phi\]
[On patch boundaries: see Lucie-Smith+18]
\(j_\star\)
Wechsler & Tinker 18
\({\color{red}M_\star} / M_\mathrm{h} \ll \Omega_b / \Omega_m \)
⇒ baryons & DM stem from different regions
Baryons more strongly bound
⇒ less prone to being ejected
[On ≠ patch: see Liao+17]
Simulations (9Mh @ DiRAC):
\( l_0 \times 0.66\)
\( l_0 \times 0.8\)
\( l_0 \times 1.2\)
\( l_0 \times 1.5\)
INPUT: Modified at \(z=200\)
OUTPUT:
Measured at \(z=200\)
\( l_0 \times 0.66\)
\( l_0 \times 0.8\)
\( l_0 \times 1.2\)
\( l_0 \times 1.5\)
\( l_0 \times 0.66\)
\( l_0 \times 0.8\)
\( l_0 \times 1.2\)
\( l_0 \times 1.5\)
PRELIMINARY
PRELIMINARY
More infos in Cadiou+21 (2012.02201)
Cadiou+22 (should appear this week!)
angular momentum of DM is predictable
boundary of halos in the ICs is a hard problem
⇒ limits practicality of predictions
stellar AM can be controlled!
⇒ imposed by mergers
⇒ controls B/T, \(v/\sigma\), morpho, …
⇒ weak lensing predictions easier than expected?
⚠️
\(j_\mathrm{DM}\)
⚠️
✅
\(j_\star\)
\( l_0 \times 1.2\)
\( l_0 \times 1.5\)
\( l_0 \times 0.66\)
\( l_0 \times 0.8\)
angular momentum is predictable
boundary of halos in the ICs is a hard problem
⇒ limits practicality of predictions (for now)
baryons appear to be simpler!
⇒ good news for weak lensing predictions
⇒ key to understand morphology
but why do some objects grow their AM faster/slower?
Verify that
\[\xi_\mathrm{lin}(r) \sim \left\langle {\color{green}\underbrace{\delta(x=d)}_\mathrm{in}} {\color{purple} \underbrace{\delta(x=d+r)}_\mathrm{out}}\right\rangle \]
is the same in spliced / ref simulation.
Verify that
\[\xi_\mathrm{lin}(r) \sim \left\langle {\color{green}\underbrace{\delta(x=d)}_\mathrm{in}} {\color{purple} \underbrace{\delta(x=d+r)}_\mathrm{out}}\right\rangle \]
is the same in spliced / ref simulation.
Verify that
\[\xi_\mathrm{lin}(r) \sim \left\langle {\color{green}\underbrace{\delta(x=d)}_\mathrm{in}} {\color{purple} \underbrace{\delta(x=d+r)}_\mathrm{out}}\right\rangle \]
is the same in spliced / ref simulation.
[L. Cortese; SDSS.]
[Dubois+16]
AGN no AGN
Origin of morphological diversity at fixed mass?
[L. Cortese; SDSS.]
[Dubois+16]
AGN no AGN
Origin of morphological diversity at fixed mass?
How to explain environmental effects?
[Danovich+15]
[Danovich+15]
I. Torque with cosmic web
[Danovich+15]
I. Torque with cosmic web
II. Transport at constant AM
[Danovich+15]
I. Torque with cosmic web
II. Transport at constant AM
III. Torque down in inner halo
[Danovich+15]
I. Torque with cosmic web
II. Transport at constant AM
III. Torque down in inner halo
IV. Mixing in inner disk & bulge
[Danovich+15]
IV. Mixing in inner disk & bulge
Fraction that ends up in disk vs. IGM?
Influence of galactic physics?
III. Torque down in inner halo
Origin of torque down (pressure or gravity)?
Loss of link with cosmic AM?
II. Transport at constant AM
Same evolution in cold/hot accretion modes?
I. Torque with cosmic web
Predict pre-accretion AM?
Alignment with environment?
[Danovich+15]
IV. Mixing in inner disk & bulge
Fraction that ends up in disk vs. IGM?
Influence of galactic physics?
III. Torque down in inner halo
Origin of torque down (pressure or gravity)?
Loss of link with cosmic AM?
See Cadiou+21c
II. Transport at constant AM
Same evolution in cold/hot accretion modes?
I. Torque with cosmic web
Predict pre-accretion AM?
Alignment with environment?
[Danovich+15]
IV. Mixing in inner disk & bulge
Fraction that ends up in disk vs. IGM?
Influence of galactic physics?
III. Torque down in inner halo
Origin of torque down (pressure or gravity)?
Loss of link with cosmic AM?
II. Transport at constant AM
Same evolution in cold/hot accretion modes?
I. Torque with cosmic web
Predict pre-accretion AM?
Alignment with environment?
+
\( R_{1/2} \)
\( l_0 \times 1.2\)
\( l_0 \times 1.5\)
\( l_0 \times 0.66\)
\( l_0 \times 0.8\)
\( l_0 \times 0.66\)
\( l_0 \times 0.8\)
\( l_0 \times 1.2\)
\( l_0 \times 1.5\)
\( l_0 \times 1.2\)
\( l_0 \times 1.5\)
\( l_0 \times 0.66\)
\( l_0 \times 0.8\)