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

U

Z

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

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