4.7 Article

COSMIC REIONIZATION ON COMPUTERS. ULTRAVIOLET CONTINUUM SLOPES AND DUST OPACITIES IN HIGH REDSHIFT GALAXIES

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 820, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.3847/0004-637X/820/2/133

Keywords

cosmology: theory; intergalactic medium; large-scale structure of universe; methods: numerical

Funding

  1. Fermilab
  2. Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
  3. University of Chicago
  4. Fermi Research Alliance, LLC [DE-AC02-07CH11359]
  5. United States Department of Energy
  6. NSF [AST-1211190]
  7. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  8. Division Of Physics [1125897] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  9. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  10. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1211190] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We compare the properties of stellar populations of model galaxies from the Cosmic Reionization On Computers (CROC) project with the exiting ultraviolet (UV) and IR data. Since CROC simulations do not follow cosmic dust directly, we adopt two variants of the dust-follows-metals ansatz to populate model galaxies with dust. Using the dust radiative transfer code Hyperion, we compute synthetic stellar spectra, UV continuum slopes, and IR fluxes for simulated galaxies. We find that the simulation results generally match observational measurements, but, perhaps, not in full detail. The differences seem to indicate that our adopted dust-follows-metals ansatzes are not fully sufficient. While the discrepancies with the exiting data are marginal, the future James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) data will be of much higher precision, rendering highly significant any tentative difference between theory and observations. It is, therefore, likely, that in order to fully utilize the precision of JWST observations, fully dynamical modeling of dust formation, evolution, and destruction may be required.

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