Challenges and Techniques for Simulating Line Emission

Olsen, Karen P.; Pallottini, Andrea; Wofford, Aida; Chatzikos, Marios; Revalski, Mitchell; Guzmán, Francisco; Popping, Gergö; Vázquez-Semadeni, Enrique; Magdis, G.; Richardson, Mark L. A.; Hirschmann, Michaela; Gray, William J.

doi:10.48550/arxiv.1808.08251

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Codes such as SKIRT or POWDERDAY are used to perform dust RT (Camps & Baes 2015;Narayanan et al 2015), and tools such as RADMC-3D, DESPOTIC, LIME, CLOUDY, or MAPPINGS are used to compute line RT in the ISM (Allen et al 2008;Krumholz 2014;Ferland et al 2017). For a detailed summary and comparison of these codes, we refer interested readers to Olsen et al (2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictions of the L _{[C ii]}–SFR and [Cii] Luminosity Function at the Epoch of Reionization

Leung

Olsen

Somerville

et al. 2020

ApJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present the first predictions for the L [C ii]–SFR relation and [Cii] luminosity function (LF) in the epoch of reionization (EOR) based on cosmological hydrodynamics simulations using the simba suite plus radiative transfer calculations via sígame. The sample consists of 11,137 galaxies covering halo mass log M halo ∈ [9, 12.4] M ⊙, star formation rate SFR ∈ [0.01, 330] M ⊙ yr−1, and metallicity 〈Z gas〉SFR ∈ [0.1, 1.9] Z ⊙. The simulated L [C ii]–SFR relation is consistent with the range observed, but with a spread of ≃0.3 dex at the high end of SFR (>100 M ⊙ yr−1) and ≃0.6 dex at the lower end, and there is tension between our predictions and the values of L [C ii] above 108.5 L ⊙ observed in some galaxies reported in the literature. The scatter in the L [C ii]–SFR relation is mostly driven by galaxy properties, such that at a given SFR galaxies with higher molecular mass and metallicity have higher L [C ii]. The [Cii] LF predicted by simba is consistent with the upper limits placed by the only existing untargeted flux-limited [Cii] survey at the EOR and those predicted by semianalytic models. We compare our results with existing models and discuss the differences responsible for the discrepant slopes in the L [C ii]–SFR relation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictions of the L _{[C ii]}–SFR and [Cii] Luminosity Function at the Epoch of Reionization

Leung

Olsen

Somerville

et al. 2020

ApJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Challenges and Techniques for Simulating Line Emission

Cited by 1 publication

References 0 publications

Predictions of the L _{[C ii]}–SFR and [Cii] Luminosity Function at the Epoch of Reionization

Predictions of the L _{[C ii]}–SFR and [Cii] Luminosity Function at the Epoch of Reionization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Challenges and Techniques for Simulating Line Emission

Cited by 1 publication

References 0 publications

Predictions of the L [C ii]–SFR and [Cii] Luminosity Function at the Epoch of Reionization

Predictions of the L [C ii]–SFR and [Cii] Luminosity Function at the Epoch of Reionization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Predictions of the L _{[C ii]}–SFR and [Cii] Luminosity Function at the Epoch of Reionization

Predictions of the L _{[C ii]}–SFR and [Cii] Luminosity Function at the Epoch of Reionization