MUSE & ALMA Françoise Combes Observatoire de Paris Toulouse, 19 March 2009

2 Capacities of ALMA  50 x 12m, bases from 200m to 14km, 3mm to 0.3mm (factor ~6 in surface with respect to IRAM-PdB)  4 frequency bands at the beginning GHz, GHz, GHz, GHz Large bandwidth of 8GHz/polar Spatial resolution, up to 10mas, Spectral resolution up to R=10 8 Dynamical range from 128x128 to 8192x8192 pixels Small field of view: from 1arcmin (3mm) to 6 arsec (0.3mm) Possibility of mosaics Early Science? Debated In : Full Operation

3 Main privilege of the mm/submm domain Negative K-correction: example of Arp 220

4 K-correction for the CO lines Simple Model of a starburst ~ ULIRG Very high molecular masses Mo High temperatures of dust: 30-50K up to 100K (or 200K) Very small sizes: below 1kpc (300pc disks) In these conditions, the average column density is around cm -2 and the dust becomes optically thick at λ < 150μ Two components, both with low filling factor 1-the dense and hot component: star forming cores 10 6 cm -3, 90K 2-each embedded in a cloud 10 4 cm -3, 30K Individual velocity dispersion of 10km/s Embedded in the rotational gradient of the galaxy, 300km/s

5 LVG Model results With the two-component models, At 30 and 90K T dust 6 - T bg 6 = cste  No negative K-correction

6 Detecting galaxies at high redshift with ALMA // MUSE  For high z galaxies, go to low frequencies z=6 CO(7-6) at 3mm  At 3mm (115GHz), field of 1 arcmin x 1 arcmin Most frequently 300x 300 = pixels/spectra Bandwidth 2x 8GHz ~ 16%, or ~50 000km/s Possibility to have several lines from the Rotational ladder of CO, or other =6, the spacing between CO lines is of 16 GHz. With 2 tunings, one obtains a « redshift-machine »

7 Complementarity Optical / Submm Many submm sources (0.85mm, 1.2mm) have no optical counterparts Multi-wavelength studies are fundamental MUSE/VLT + JWST+ELT-40m +ALMA Abell 1835 (Ivison et al 2000)

8 Zoo of star-forming galaxies at high z SDF MAHOROBA -11 z=6 sample by Dow-Hygelund07 LBG, z> 5 ERO, DRG, BzK, SMG ･･･････ z<5 Different selection criteria, LAE by the Lya line,  no continuum in general LBG, through continuum,  weak lines Should have some overlap, although LAE less massive?

9 Star formation rate in LBGs SFE ~140 Mo/Lo LCO & gas mass 7 times higher than cB58 z= o'clock arc Allam et al 2007

10 SMGs: Submillimeter Galaxies Star formation efficiency L IR /L’ CO vs z 6 SMGs not detected in CO Greve et al Myr SB phase SFR ~700 Mo/yr More efficient than ULIRGs Mergers without bulges? Total masses ~0.6 M *

11 Ly-alpha Blobs LABs at z~3 detected in submm Large SFR 10 3 Mo/yr, Might be different sources, SB or AGN cD in clusters? Cooling Flows? Superwinds? Radio sources? Geach et al 2005, 2007 SB Av=3 AGN X-ray

12 Z=3 ULIRGs easy to detect with ALMA nH 2 = 10 6 cm -3 nH 2 = 10 5 cm -3 nH 2 = 10 4 cm -3 nH 2 = 10 3 cm -3 M(H 2 ) = Mo, N(H 2 ) = cm -2, CO/H 2 ~10 -4 T=60K SKA ALMA Size = 1kpc Influence of density

13 Predictions for LBG at z~3: ALMA 24h, 0.1" Greve & Sommer-Larsen 2008 rms=10  Jy/beam (2-3  ) CO(4-3)  Jykm/s

14 Low efficiency of star formation In BzK galaxies, much more CO emission detected than expected Massive galaxies, CO sizes 10kpc? L(FIR) ~10 12 Lo Normal SFR, M(H2) ~ Mo  ~2 Gyr  Much larger population of gas rich galaxies at high z Daddi et al 2008

15 SMG versus UV/optical galaxies Bouché et al 2007 SMG are very concentrated But UV galaxies not (High extinction)

16 Star formation rate (Schmidt law) Bouché et al 2007 More efficient at high  gas? But X smaller by factor 2-4

17 Do SMG actually trace massive haloes? In the GOODS-N field, cluster of RG and SMG at z=1.99 The strongest known association of SMG (Chapman et al 2008) Overdensity of 10. But only 2 in UV-selected galaxies  Only a mild overdensity, experiencing brief and strong starburst field Highly active merger periods in modest mass structures  Merger bias Herschel and ALMA could probe a large range of environments

18 Prediction of SFR-density reversal From Elbaz et al 2007SFR correl with Mass and more massive galaxies in clusters ? But at z=1, SFR/M * increases with  gal SFR/M *  gal Only 30% of the SF is due to mergers

19 Evolution of Clusters, z=0.4-1 The LIRGs of the cluster CL , detected by Spitzer at 24  are detected in CO  x Mo ( SFR ~60Mo/yr) (or x 6 if normal CO/H2 conversion) Geach et al 2009

20 Mergers w or w/o black holes Narayanan et al 06 With BHwithoutWith BHwithout Gyr Kkm/s z=2 30"= 235kpc CO(1-0)

21 APM z=3.9 lensed QSO Influence of AGN feedback on CO emission? This object is one of the brightest in the sky, and has been observed with mm and cm telescopes (amplification factor ~50) CO(1-0) to CO(11-10) detected Recent 0.3" resolution CO(1-0) mapping with VLA (Riechers ) Previously believed to be extended, CO emission is in 2 peaks, Co-spatial with optical/NIR, may be less amplified than thought (4?) CO is in a circumnuclear disk of 550 pc radius, inclined by 25° Mgas ~ Mo MBH = Mo, bulge 10x less massive than the MBH-  relation  No hint of the influence of the AGN feedback…

22 APM , Riechers et al 08 VLA __ GBT --- Keck NIRC HST Chandra

23 Excitation in high-z starbursts Weiss et al 2007

24 z> 7 sources: ALMA CO discovery space Walter & Carilli 2007

25 Cloverleaf CII/LFIR ~0.06%, 10 times less than locally CII detected in J1148 QSO at IRAM Other lines CII 158m, CI, NII… CI/H 2 ~10 -5

26 Molecular surveys TODAY ALMA prediction TOMOROW

27 Mapping large-scale structures & the environment of SMGs COSMOS: overdensities z= With APEX,  COSMOS 2deg 2 to rms=2mJy: sources with S/N>4  20x20 armin2 at the confusion level, mJy: sources Deeper with CCAT 200/350mu (25m) ALMA rms=50  Jy N (>0.2mJy) = /deg 2, 870mu FoV 19" 1h 1 armin2: 20sources 1yr = 1sqdeg Certainly several smaller regions

28 Molecular Absorptions Variations of cst ~ times more sources with ALMA? Combes & Wiklind 1998 Up to now, only 5 systems: PKS1413, B (self-abs) B0218, PKS1830, PMN J0134 (OH): gravit lenses + local: CenA, 3C293 (0.045), 4C (0.06)

29 Cooling flows Salome et al 2006, 2008 Perseus A, nearby

30 Conclusions ALMA deep field in continuum: N(S), SFR (z) and SFH the CO lines will be intensively observed at high z with ALMA  efficiency of star formation (z), and the kinematics, Mdyn Now: 4 objects CO-detected at z~4-6: Mdyn ~ Mgas Mdyn ~ MBH [vs. ~700 today] Mdyn ~ MBH [vs. ~700 today] Evolution with redshift or change toward high-mass end? Evolution with redshift or change toward high-mass end? black holes in QSOs may form before bulk of stellar body black holes in QSOs may form before bulk of stellar body (Riechers, Carilli, et al 2009)  If CO not excited, either CII, or go to GBT, EVLA to detect the low-J CO lines Dark matter as a function of redshift: study of individual galaxies with MUSE+JWST + ELT + ALMA and statistical studies, with Tully-Fisher relation