4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

The first galaxies: structure and stellar populations

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2000.0626

关键词

early Universe; evolution; morphology; stellar content; galaxies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Hubble deep fields (HDFs) continue to be a valuable resource for studying the distant Universe, particularly at z > 2 where their comoving volume becomes large enough to encompass several hundred L* galaxies or their progenitors. Here, I present recent results from a near-infrared (NIR) imaging survey of the HDF-north with the Near Infrared Camera and Multi-Object Spectrograph (NICMOS), which provides structural and photometric information in the optical rest frame (lambda lambda(0)4000-5500 Angstrom) for hundreds of 'ordinary' galaxies at 2 < z < 3, and which offers the means to search for still-more-distant objects at z much greater than 5. Lyman-break galaxies (LBGs) at 2 < z < 3 are compact and often irregular in the NICMOS images; ordinary Hubble sequence spirals and ellipticals seem to be largely absent at these redshifts, and apparently reached maturity at 1 < z < 2. The LBGs have ultraviolet (UV)-optical spectral energy distributions like those of local starburst galaxies. Population synthesis models suggest typical ages of a few x 10(8) years and moderate UV extinction (ca. 1.2 mag at 1700 Angstrom), but the constraints are fairly weak and there may be considerable variety. Considering an NIR selected galaxy sample, there is little evidence for a significant number of galaxies at z similar to 3 that have been missed by UV-based Lyman-break selection. Using the well-characterized z similar to 3 galaxy population as a point of reference, I consider LEG candidates at 4.5 < z < 9, as well as one remarkable object that might (or might not) be an LEG at z > 12. The space density of UV-bright galaxies in the HDF appears to thin out toward larger redshifts, although surface-brightness selection effects may play an important role.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据