4.7 Article

Predicting FIR lines from simulated galaxies

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 496, Issue 4, Pages 5160-5175

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/staa1842

Keywords

ISM: kinematics and dynamics; ISM: lines and bands; galaxies: evolution; galaxies: formation; galaxies: high-redshift; galaxies: ISM

Funding

  1. European Research Council [740120]
  2. Carl Friedrich von SiemensForschungspreis der Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung Research Award
  3. PCI Redes Internacionales project [REDI170093]
  4. CONICYT [PIA ACT172033]
  5. BASAL Centro de Astrofisica y Tecnologias Afines (CATA) [PFB-06/2007]
  6. European Research Council (ERC) [740120] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Far-infrared (FIR) emission lines are a powerful tool to investigate the properties of the interstellar medium, especially in high-redshift galaxies, where ALMA observations have provided unprecedented information. Interpreting such data with state-of-the-art cosmological simulations post-processed with CLOUDY, has provided insights on the internal structure and gas dynamics of these systems. However, no detailed investigation of the consistency and uncertainties of this kind of analysis has been performed to date. Here, we compare different approaches to estimate FIR line emission from state-of-the-art cosmological simulations, either with CLOUDY or with on-the-fly non-equilibrium chemistry. We find that [C II](158 mu) predictions are robust to the model variations we explored. [O I] emission lines, that typically trace colder and denser gas relative to [C II](158 mu), are instead model dependent, as these lines are strongly affected by the thermodynamic state of the gas and non-equilibrium photoionization effects. For the same reasons, [O I] lines represent an excellent tool to constrain emission models, hence future observations targeting these lines will be crucial.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available