Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-fmk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-06T18:09:50.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Kinematics of z ∼ 4–6 Lyman break galaxies in ALPINE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 June 2020

Gareth C. Jones
Affiliation:
Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, 19 J. J. Thomson Ave., CambridgeCB3 0HE, UK email: [email protected] Kavli Institute for Cosmology, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, CambridgeCB3 0HA, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The past century has seen massive improvements in the study of galaxy kinematics. While early work focused on single nearby galaxies, current studies with modern IFUs and interferometers (e.g., SINFONI, ALMA) allow for extension of this field to high redshift. However, the sample of galaxy observations at z > 4 that feature the sensitivity and resolution required for resolved dynamical characterization has been small. The ALMA Large Program to INvestigate CII at Early times (ALPINE) targeted 118 star-forming galaxies at z = 4–6, representing a vast increase in the sample size of potentially dynamically-characterizable sources. Using a set of diagnostic plots, we are able to characterize roughly half the sample, revealing a vast kinematic diversity and high merger rate. For the nine targets that show rotational signatures, initial tilted ring fitting with 3DBarolo shows promise. With further observations (e.g., ALMA, NOEMA, MUSE), the true nature of each source will be revealed in unprecedented detail.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
© International Astronomical Union 2020

References

de Blok, W. J. G., Walter, F., Smith, J.-D. T., et al. 2016, AJ, 152, 5110.3847/0004-6256/152/2/51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Breuck, C., Williams, R. J., Swinbank, M., et al. 2014, A&A, 565, A59Google Scholar
Faisst, A., Bétthermin, M., Capak, P., et al. 2019, arXiv e-prints, p.arXiv:1901.01268Google Scholar
Förster Schreiber, N. M., Genzel, R., Bouché, N., et al. 2009, ApJ, 706, 136410.1088/0004-637X/706/2/1364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, G. C., Carilli, C. L., Shao, Y., et al. 2017, ApJ, 850, 18010.3847/1538-4357/aa8df2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pease, F. G. 1918, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 4, 2110.1073/pnas.4.1.21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smit, R., Bouwens, R. J., Carniani, S., et al. 2018, Nature, 553, 17810.1038/nature24631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wuyts, S., Förster Schreiber, N. M., Wisnioski, E., et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 149CrossRefGoogle Scholar