1. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference The Formation and Evolution of SMGs: A (mostly) Panchromatic View Desika Narayanan Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics The Team: T.J. Cox Lars HernquistPatrik Jonsson Chris Hayward Josh Younger

2. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Discovery History Barger et al., Hughes et al.

3. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference The Incredible Fluxes of SMGs: Median Redshift z~2.4 (Chapman et al 2004) Selected at S 850 > 5 mJy, seen up to S 850 ~ 20 mJy z~2.4 ~mJy source (NED; Benford 1999)

4. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Where We’re at with SMGs: Median Redshift z~2.4 (peak of cosmic BH and SFR activity) Chapman et al 2004 - though see recent z>4 detections by J. Younger et al. L IR > 10 13 L  SFR ~ 1000-3000 M  /yr Huge Masses: –DM: 5x10 12 M  (Blain et al. 2004) –H 2 : Gas rich ~10 10 M  (Greve et al., Tacconi et al.) –Stellar: ~10 11 M  (Swinbank et al., Lonsdale et al.) Similar to z~2 QSOs

5. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Where We’re at with SMGs: Median Redshift z~2.4 (Chapman et al 2004) Selected at S 850 > 5 mJy, seen up to S 850 ~ 20 mJy Huge Masses: –DM: 5x10 12 M  (Blain et al. 2004) –H 2 : Gas rich ~10 10 M  (Greve et al., Tacconi et al.) –Stellar: ~10 11 M  (Swinbank et al., Lonsdale et al.) –SFR~ 2000 M  /yr SMGs are the most luminous, heavily star forming galaxies at the epoch of peak galaxy formation

6. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference The Theoretical Challenge (how do we catch up to the observers?): What is a physical model for SMGs (how do we form them)? How do they fit in an evolutionary scenario for hierarchical galaxy formation? (aka, how do we connect them to quasars?)

7. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Clues for the Modelers: Physical Parameters Merger? Disks? + massive galaxies (~few x 10 11 M  in stars) = 5-20 mJy SMGs? Lonsdale et al. 2008 Tacconi et al. 2008

8. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Clues for the Modelers: Huge CO Line Widths: (800 km/s : (maybe) ~ twice z~2 QSOs) (Greve et al. 2004, Carilli & Wang 2006) Off M BH -M * Relation? (Alexander et al. 2008)

9. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference The Theoretical Challenge (how do we catch up to the observers?): What is a physical model for SMGs (how do we form them)? How do they fit in an evolutionary scenario for hierarchical galaxy formation?

10. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference The Theoretical Challenge: Forming SMGs What is a physical model for SMGs (how do we form them)? SAMs: Flat IMF: dn/dln(m) ~ m (Baugh et al. 2004, Swinbank et al. 2008) Numerical Models: Merger models, diffuse ISM (Chakrabarti et al. 2006) S850--->  Time--->

11. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference GADGET (SPH) + SUNRISE (IR)+ Turtlebeach (Molecular Line) Physics Included in Hydrodynamics: -Full numerics: DM, Gas, Stars and BHs -Multi-phase McKee-Ostriker ISM -Star formation follows KS relations -BH growth and associated AGN feedback -Supernovae pressurization of ISM -Virial Properties of Galaxy disks scaled to z~3 -Mergers and Isolated disks simulated -Halo Masses: 1-5 x 10 12 M  Go to http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~dnarayan/Movies/ for the movies in the presentationhttp://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~dnarayan/

12. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Narayanan et al. 2008

13. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference GADGET (SPH) + SUNRISE (IR) + Turtlebeach (Molecular Line) GMC Diffuse ISM Physics Included in Monte Carlo IR RT: -IR transfer of stellar and AGN spectrum (starburst 99 for stars and Hopkins+ 07 for AGN) -dust radiative equilibrium -Kroupa IMF, MW Dust to Metals (0.4) -Stellar Clusters surrounded by placental GMCs (covering fraction is free parameter; f cover =0.3-1 measured in ULIRGs)

14. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference GADGET (SPH) + SUNRISE (IR) + Turtlebeach (Molecular Line) Narayanan et al. (2008) Physics Included in Monte Carlo CO RT -Mass spectrum of GMCs included as SISs -Molecular statistical equilibrium (collisions and radiation) -Pressure-driven H2 formation/destruction (Blitz & Rosolowsky 2006) -Milky Way Abundances for CO co

15. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference SMGs are Major Mergers at z~2 Narayanan, Hayward, Cox et al. in prep.Narayanan, Hayward, Cox, Younger et al. submitted Opacity dominated by birth clouds during starburst Opacity dominated by diffuse dust during inspiral

16. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference SMGs are Major Mergers at z~2 Narayanan, Hayward, Cox et al. in prep.Narayanan, Hayward, Cox, Younger et al. submitted. Opacity dominated by birth clouds during starburst Opacity dominated by diffuse dust during inspiral 1.Low luminosity (~5 mJy) SMGs are smaller scale (~100-200 M  /yr) starbursts. 2.The most luminous (~20 mJy) SMGs are “maximal” high mass starbursts during final coalesence. 3.Individual Spirals will have trouble reproducing anything except very low luminosity SMGs.

17. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Model SED at z=2: Matching Observations Pope et al. (2006)Kovacs et al. (2006) Narayanan, Hayward, Cox, Younger et al. submitted

18. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference The Theoretical Challenge: What is a physical model for SMGs (how do we form them)? How do they fit in an evolutionary scenario for hierarchical galaxy formation? Are SMGs and quasars related?

19. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference The life of an SMG: Sub-mm, CO and B-band evolution Narayanan, Hayward, Cox et al. in prep. √2 Coppin et al. 2008  virial = 225 km/s * 2.354 = 530 km/s FWHM Sub-mm Flux B-band Flux Narayanan, Cox, Hayward, Younger et al. in prep.  escape ~ 225 km/s * 2.354 * √2 = 750 km/s FWHM

20. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference The Connection between SMGs and QSOs Narayanan, Hayward, Cox et al. in prep. Sub-mm Flux B-band Flux Time Scale between peak SMG phase and peak QSO phase: ~50 Myr - though note tons of overlap

21. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference The M BH -M * Relation in SMGs and Quasars: Observed SMGs Alexander et al. Quasars Shileds et al.

22. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference The M BH -M * Relation in SMGs and Quasars: Modeled Time

23. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference The Trip Toward the Magorrian Relation: SMGs Observations (Alexander et al.) Models (DN, Hayward, Cox, Younger et al.)

24. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Are High-z QSOs on the M BH -M* relation ? Quasars at z~2 Shields et al. 2006 Quasars at z~6 Walter, Carilli et al. ~120 km/s 

25. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference CO FWHM-QSO Luminosity Relation Optically Luminous LOSs have small CO FWHMs because of molecular disk formation Narayanan, Li et al. (2008)

26. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Line widths of lower luminosity z~6 quasars Are observed to be broader (~600 km/s), consistent with large halo mases Carilli et al. (2007) Maiolino et al. (2007)

27. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Potential Contribution from the eVLA: Morphologies of SMGs (does our merger-driven scenario work in real life?) Sub-mm flux

28. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Contribution from the EVLA: True Line Width Distribution of QSOs Sub-mm flux

29. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference Conclusions Merger-driven model can reproduce S 850 5-20 mJy using only observationally motivated physical parameters Sub-mm duty cycles, SEDs, CO fluxes and line widths naturally reproduced in a merger-driven model SMGs evolve naturally into QSOs and then onto Magorrian Relation Quasars may be selected to have face-on molecular disks

30. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference QSOs may have preferentially face-on disks Narayanan, Hayward, Cox et al. in prep. Sub-mm Flux Coppin et al. 2008 Narayanan et al. 2008 QSOs SMGs

31. Desika Narayanan EVLA Conference GADGET (SPH) + SUNRISE (IR) + Turtlebeach (Molecular Line) GMC Diffuse ISM Physics Included in Monte Carlo IR RT: -IR transfer of stellar and AGN spectrum (starburst 99 for stars and Hopkins+ 07 for AGN) -dust radiative equilibrium -Kroupa iMF, MW Dust to Gas -Stellar Clusters surrounded by placental GMCs (covering fraction is free parameter) z = 2.5 SED input