The ISM Beyond 3D: Promises & Problems

An intro talk I gave at the ISM Beyond 3D workshop in Orsay, France in july 2017

Transcript

1. The ISM Beyond 3D: Promises & Problems Joshua E. G. Peek Space Telescope Science Institute July 3, 2017 ISM3D+ Look up here if you get lost! Kirill Tchernyshyov Johns Hopkins Eddie Schlafly LBNL @jegpeek @jegpeek AMA GALFA-HI DR2!
2. Dust & Tomography Emission Maps Beyond 2D The 3rd Dimension Beyond the 3rd Dimension Promises
3. Astronomy has always been a science of catalogs Ptolemy 155
4. 1% 4% 23% 72% Dark Energy Dark Matter Plasma & Gas Stars etc. Text Unfortunately, most of the Universe is diffuse
5. Text 60s 70s 80s 90s 00s 2% 20% 10% Star & Formation / Star Galaxy & Formation / Galaxy h/t SAO/NASA ADS Everything forms from diffuse material, a topic of interest
6. We study the diffuse universe through absence in catalogs ESO 99; Lan, Ménard, & Zhu 15 99% 100% 99% 100% 99% 100% Balmer β DIBs in LMZ15 Stellar and Sky Residuals 5150Å 4350Å 5150Å 5950Å Normalized flux Mgb [OI] 5577 NaD Synthetic DIB spectrum 5950 Å 6700 Å [OI] 6300 [OH] Balmer α
7. Dust & Tomography Emission Maps Beyond 2D The 3rd Dimension Beyond the 3rd Dimension Promises
8. Dust & Tomography Emission Maps Beyond 2D The 3rd Dimension Beyond the 3rd Dimension Promises
9. Interstellar metals are in dust, tracing gas and evolution Periodic Elements of Dust 4 Solar Fe Mg Si N Ne C O (99%) + many other trace elements (S,P,Ca,Cl,Ti) Solar Metals slide courtesy L. Corrales
10. 1000 10000 wavelength[Å] 6 5 4 2 1 0 3 A O / AV Dust grains extinguish light more towards the blue
11. u g r i z u g r i z W1 W1 F F N N 1000 10000 wavelength[Å] 6 5 4 2 1 0 3 A O / AV MW dust grains can mostly be parameterized by Rv Reddening is often reduced to a single parameter family, Rv
12. Text 2D→3D Classic tomography (medical) uses slices of data
13. Text 2D→3D Classic tomography uses slices of data (CT, PET, MRI)
14. Text 0D→3D ć+ 2008–2012 Stellar tomography finds density from points
15. Text 1D→3D Vergely+ 2011 Na I Gas tomography uses absence along the line of sight
16. Text 1D→3D Vergely+ 2011 E(B-V) Gas tomography uses absence along the line of sight …so what?
17. “…so what?” “There are a number of specific aims one could adopt for 3d extinction mapping…” Sale 2015 “…The most obvious is to infer the extinction to stars that feature in the ‘input catalogue’. “ “One might also be interested in the estimating the extinction to some arbitrary point or points in space.” Pays the Bills …since extinction affects the light from stars distributed throughout the Galaxy it offers a direct route to studying the elusive 3d structure of the ISM. Is the Money
18. Dust & Tomography Emission Maps Beyond 2D The 3rd Dimension Beyond the 3rd Dimension Promises
19. Dust 90 180 270 90 180 270 0.33 30. MJy/sr Log scale FIG. 8.ÈFull-sky dust map for the NGP (top) and SGP (bottom) Our best high latitude dust maps come from FIR emission Schlegel, Finkbeiner, & Davis 98 Dust 90 180 270 90 180 270 . 0 3 3 3 . 0 MJy/sr Log scale F IG. 8.ÈFull-sky dust map for the NGP ( top) and SGP ( bottom )
20. Dust map errors distort LSS results via sample biasing Huterer, Cunha, and Fang 12 0.1 0.3 1 3 Faint-end slope of luminosity func, s(z) 10-2 10-1 100 101 102 103 bias / error For Peek-Graves 2010 correction to dust map ‘non-Gaussianity’ ‘dw/dt’ target precision For known errors to dust map Redshift of galaxies used for cosmology ~0 0.7 1.9 3.7
21. Standard Candle: near far Standard Crayon: clear obscured “Standard Crayon” methods measure reddening directly Standard Ruler: near far
22. JEGP & Graves 10 Quiescent galaxies can be selected spectroscopically.
23. JEGP & Graves 10 Residual colors are very, very small and unimodal σ δ g-r
24. δE (B − V ) [magnitudes] error[σ] l=0 l=270 l=180 l=90 Cryaons provide corrections to the SFD98 reddening map. JEGP & Graves 10
25. But is FIR actually better than HI? Schlegel, Finkbeiner, & Davis 98
26. The “Yahata Effect” is a fundamental floor for FIR Yahata+ 2007
27. SFD LAB PG10 PG10-SFD PG10-LAB SFD-LAB >0.1 >0.1 >1021 0 0 0 >0.015 >0.015 >0.015 <-0.015 <-0.015 <-0.015 E (B − V ) E (B − V ) E (B − V ) E (B − V ) E (B − V ) NHI cm−2 HI methods and FIR methods give ~similar precision JEGP 13 Extinction HI FIR Extinction HI FIR
28. HI + FIR method is significantly better as errors cancel JEGP 13 Extinction HI FIR cHI cF IR Fraction HI Fraction FIR
29. Making the best HI maps velocity information matters Lenz, Hensley & Doré 2015
30. -90 < HI < 90 , HI < 4 x 1020: HI does a great job Lenz, Hensley & Doré 2015
31. Does 3D, thermal, shape information matter?
32. 8 9 10 11 12 13 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Huge Galactic HI surveys are on the horizon Log[ # resolution elements] LAB GASS GALFA-HI EBHIS APERTIF/ASKAP SKA surveys? surpasses Planck resolution
33. Dust & Tomography Emission Maps Beyond 2D The 3rd Dimension Beyond the 3rd Dimension Promises
34. Text PS1 APOGEE GAIA “AS4” LSST grizy R~23,000 R ~100 R~23,000 ugrizy 8 x 108 stars 1.5 x 105 stars 2 x 108 stars 5 x 106 stars 140 x 108 stars ~no parallax ~no parallax precise parallax ~no parallax some parallax now now April 2018? 2020s 2020s We are in the era of amazing tomography machines 䢀Available in MAST today!
35. This is big business and growing! Sale 2015
36. Significant methodological advances are happening too S. Rezaei Kh. + 2016, Sale 2015 Gaussian Processes Poisson Point Processes
37. Text PS1 dust tomography fits E(B-V), distance, and stellar type Green+ 2014 PS1 Absolute Magnitude
38. Text By combining many PDFs, get an E(B-V) by distance Green+ 2014 ~ 1000 stars / 6’ pixel 100 pc 10 kpc 1 kpc …so what? PS1
39. Text 3D dust maps provide clean distances to molecular clouds Schlafly+ 2014 PS1
40. Dust & Tomography Emission Maps Beyond 2D The 3rd Dimension Beyond the 3rd Dimension Promises
41. Text Majewski+ 2015 APOGEE: R~23,000 of 150,000 red giants, ~in the plane High Resolution Spectroscopy → Very precise stellar parameters → Very precise unreddened colors → Very precisely measured reddening APOGEE
42. Text R(V) variation can be measured in detail with APOGEE Schlafly+JEGP,Tchernyshyov+ 2015 Principal Component 1 Principal Component 2 APOGEE
43. Text R(V) has strange large scale structure related to Planck Beta… Schlafly+JEGP,Tchernyshyov+ 2015 Sagittarius arm Orion-Cygnus / Local Arm I⌫ / ⌫ B⌫ (T)
44. R(V) variation is driven by location, not density! zut! Schlafly, JEGP, Finkbeiner, & Green 2017 ; Reid 2014
45. R(V) variation is driven by location, not density! zut! Schlafly, JEGP, Finkbeiner, & Green 2017 ; Reid 2014
46. Text 60s 70s 80s 90s 00s 2% 20% 10% Star & Formation / Star Galaxy & Formation / Galaxy h/t SAO/NASA ADS But what about formation??
47. t + · ( v) = 0 The continuity equation is how we get at formation
48. Text We add the PPV data in HI+CO, which probes similar gas PS1 PPD HI PPV CO PPV Green+ 2014; McClure-Griffiths+ 2005; Peek+ 2011; Kalberla+ 2005; Dame+ 2001; Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017 PS1
49. radial velocity distance radio ISM surveys alone radial velocity distance stellar reddening alone radial velocity distance KT: Static Cloud radial velocity KT: Converging Cloud distance radial velocity KT: Diverging Cloud distance The D/V diagram is the killer app for formation PS1
50. Text But how do we associate tomography data with gas? 220 200 180 160 140 Galactic longitude -40 -20 0 20 40 Velocity [km/s LSR] 0.1 1 10 Distance [kpc] CO [Dame et al] Extinction [Schlafly/Green] PS1
51. Text We start with the dust map Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017 PS1
52. Text We start with the dust map PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
53. Text We start with the dust map PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
54. Text But how do we construct the D/V diagram? PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
55. Text The Galactic rotation curve provides a strong prior PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
56. Text The Galactic rotation curve provides a strong prior PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
57. Text Other rotation curves generate changes in radial velocity PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
58. Text We allow each distance deviate in radial velocity to fit PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
59. Text We apply Markov “springs”, to add image-plane information PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
60. Text We apply Markov “springs”, to add image-plane information Longitude Latitude PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
61. Text So we go from this… PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
62. Text To our markov spring all-disk fit PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
63. Text Masers provide sparse, model-free distances and velocities Reid+ 2014 X (kpc) Y (kpc)
64. KT does an excellent job recovering Masers and PPV Observed Flat PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
65. KT does an excellent job recovering Masers and PPV Observed Clemens (1985) Clemens (1985) PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
66. KT does an excellent job recovering Masers and PPV Observed KT w/o springs KT w/o springs PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
67. KT does an excellent job recovering Masers and PPV Observed KT w/ springs KT w/ springs PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
68. KT does an excellent job recovering Masers and PPV PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
69. Text 60s 70s 80s 90s 00s 2% 20% 10% Star & Formation / Star Galaxy & Formation / Galaxy h/t SAO/NASA ADS But Josh! what about formation??
70. Are shocks key to forming H2 clouds in the Milky Way? Roberts 1969; Shu 2016 ⇢1v1 = ⇢2v2
71. Shocks do seem to exist in spirals like M81 and M51… Visser 1980 M 81
72. Shocks are also invoked to explain arm feathering Kim & Ostriker 2002 Σ/Σ₀ W [km/s] 26 13 0 0 0 0.5 -0.5 2 4 6 X/L x
73. Text We do not see spiral shocks in the MW… yet Roberts 1972, Tchernyshyov & Peek in prep Two Armed Spiral Shock (seen in M81, M51) Linear Density Wave PS1 ũ = 110 Data from TP17
74. Shock models predict unseen sharp velocity changes PS1 Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
75. PS1 Shock models predict unseen sharp velocity changes Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
76. Text Gas emission + dust reddening KT has some flaws… Map tested only at HMSFRs 0.1 1.0 10.0 Aquila-Ophiuchus CO + HI = NH (1021 H/cm2) 0.1 1.0 10.0 AV gas at Av=2 is not CO + HI “Dark Gas” PS1 … to be continued
77. Standard Crayons are a powerful tool for the precision study of dust, crucial for cosmology R(V) is not simply a proxy for gas density; 3D structure influences R(V), for unknown reasons The Perseus arm does not seem to be a spiral shock, although we need better data… Modern tomography uses big data and new models To answer questions of formation we need to measure where gas is and how it moves: D/V diagrams
78. Problems Hypothesis Generation Hypothesis Testing
79. Problems Hypothesis Generation Hypothesis Testing
80. Text The ISM Beyond 3D… has more than three dimensions Schlafly+JEGP,Tchernyshyov+ 2015 I
81. Text Tomographic data can have very complex biases GC 20 15 10 5 -10 -5 0 5 10 350 0 galactic latitude galactic longitude 355 3.1–5.0 kpc 2.0–3.1 kpc 1.3–2.0 kpc ~500pc
82. Both problems gets worse beyond 3D Tchernyshyov & Peek 2017
83. Problems Hypothesis Generation Hypothesis Testing
84. How I was taught to science Observation Pure Theory Interpretation Prediction ✅ ❌ "I know where the information is”
85. How the hip kids science now Observation Pure Theory Data Simulation Prediction More Hip Less Hip
86. The ISM is very, very hard to simulate
87. It’s even hard to interpret: where is the information? 24o 26o 28o 15h00m 14h32m 14h04m 13h36m 24o 26o 28o Right Ascension n o i t a n i l c e D 24o 26o 28o 15h00m 14h32m 14h04m 13h36m 24o 26o 28o Right Ascension n o i t a n i l c e D Clark, JEGP, Putman 14 Declination 24o 26o 28o 15h00m 14h32m 14h04m 13h36m 24o 26o 28o Right Ascension n o i t a n i l c e D
88. The ISM especially hard to interpret in 3D… and beyond Green, Schlafly, & Finkbeiner 2015 …since extinction affects the light from stars distributed throughout the Galaxy it offers a direct route to studying the elusive 3d structure of the ISM. Sale+2015
89. What are our tools? What are we looking for? What are our metrics? What are our models?