Astron. Astrophys. 347, 1-20 (1999)
3. Galaxy formation
In this paper we wish to study the reionization history of the
universe. Since a large part of the ionizing radiation will be emitted
by stars, we first need to devise a model for galaxy and star
formation. We shall use a simplified version of the model described in
detail in VS II and which was there compared with many observations.
One can define galaxies by the requirement that two constraints be
satisfied by the underlying dark matter halo: 1) a virialization
condition (where
is given by the spherical model and
is constant for a critical universe) and 2) a cooling
constraint which states that the
gas must have been able to cool within a few Hubble times at
formation. However, at high redshifts
the cooling constraint becomes
irrelevant since any object which satisfies 1) also satisfies 2).
Hence since we are mainly interested in large redshifts
we shall simply define galaxies by
the virialization condition . We also
require that the virial temperature T of the halo be larger
than the "cooling temperature" at
redshift z. The latter corresponds to the smallest virialized
objects which can cool efficiently at redshift z, defined by
the constraint:
![[EQUATION]](img44.gif)
where is a proportionality factor
(one must have since cooling is more
efficient within the halo where the density is larger than on its
boundary and cooling accelerates as baryons collapse). Here
is the age of the universe at
redshift z while is the
cooling time of a halo with density contrast
, mass M, taking into account
both cooling (recombination, molecular cooling) and heating (by the
background UV flux) processes. Since the physical properties of
virialized halos with temperature T and density contrast
are different from the IGM, we let
the chemical reactions (involving HI, HII, H-,
H2, H , HeI, HeII, HeIII
and e-) evolve for a Hubble time
within this environment (defined by
T and ) before we evaluate the
cooling time . The main effect is
that at large redshifts such clouds may produce enough molecular
hydrogen to make molecular cooling efficient while with the use of the
IGM abundances one would underestimate this contribution; see for
instance Tegmark et al. (1997) for a detailed discussion. This will
also appear clearly below in Fig. 4 where we compare the main
contributions to cooling for both the IGM and these cooling halos. The
virial temperature also defines the
mass and the radius
of the smallest objects which can
cool and eventually form stars at redshift z. From the
lower-bound and the virialization
constraint , we obtain the mass
function of galaxies at redshift z using (2).
Next, we must attach a specific stellar content to these galactic
halos. We shall again use the star formation model described in VS II.
This involves 4 components: (1) short-lived stars which are recycled,
(2) long-lived stars which are not recycled, (3) a central gaseous
component which is deplenished by star formation and ejection by
supernovae winds, and replenished by infall from (4) a diffuse gaseous
component. The star-formation rate
is proportional to the mass of central gas with a time-scale set by
the dynamical time. The mass of gas ejected by supernovae is
proportional to the star-formation rate and decreases for deep
potential wells as , in a fashion
similar to that adopted by Kauffmann et al. (1993). It was seen in VS
II that for such a model a good approximation for the star-formation
rate is:
![[EQUATION]](img59.gif)
where is the total mass of gas,
is the dynamical time and
K describes the ejection of gas by
supernovae and stellar winds:
![[EQUATION]](img63.gif)
Here is the fraction of the
energy delivered by supernovae
transmitted to the gas ( erg) while
is the number of supernovae per
solar mass of stars formed. Note that for halos defined by a constant
density threshold we have
. Although (6) was obtained for small
galaxies with (which is the range we
are mainly interested in) it also provides a reasonable approximation
for large galaxies . In the case
we obtain in our model for a galaxy
similar to the Milky Way (i.e. with a circular velocity
km s-1):
years and
year (see VS II). This star formation
rate is consistent with observations (McKee 1989). Then the mass of
gas at time t within the galaxy is given by:
![[EQUATION]](img76.gif)
where is the initial mass of
baryons which we take to be proportional to the dark matter mass
M:
![[EQUATION]](img78.gif)
From this model, the star-formation rate per Mpc3 is:
![[EQUATION]](img79.gif)
where is a parameter of order
unity which enters the definition of the dynamical time
. The significance of each term in
this expression is clear and the temperature dependence simply states
that the average star formation efficiency of small galaxies is small
as the gas is easily expelled by supernovae. Note that in the original
model described in VS II for bright galaxies at low redshifts, the
star formation rate declines since most of the gas has already been
consumed. This does not appear in (10) because we defined all galaxies
by while at low z for large
T the cooling constraint implies that
(i.e. R is constant) which
decreases the galactic dynamical time and increases the ratio
which enters (8).
To derive the radiation emitted by galaxies, we do not need their
global star formation rate but their stellar content. However, as
shown in VS II, the mass in the form of short-lived stars (i.e. with a
life-time small compared to
) of mass m to
is given by:
![[EQUATION]](img85.gif)
where is the fraction of mass
which goes into such stars for each unit mass of stars which are
formed. This depends on the initial stellar mass function (IMF)
. Since the stellar radiation output
at high energy ( eV) is dominated by
the most massive stars, the relation (11) will be sufficient for our
purposes. Next, if we assume that stars radiate as blackbodies with an
effective temperature and we use the
mean scalings and
we obtain the energy output of such
galaxies:
![[EQUATION]](img92.gif)
with
![[EQUATION]](img93.gif)
From the radiation emitted by individual galaxies we now wish to
estimate the energy received by a random point in the IGM. We shall
write the source term due to stellar
radiation for the background UV flux
, see (30), as the following average:
![[EQUATION]](img96.gif)
where is the mass function of
galaxies, obtained from (2) as described previously, while
is a mean opacity which takes into
account the fact that the radiation emitted by galaxies can be
absorbed by the IGM and Lyman-
clouds. We shall come back to this term later. Thus, we get in this
way a simple model for the stellar radiative output from our more
detailed description of galaxy formation. The reader is referred to VS
II for a more precise account of the details and predictions of our
galaxy formation model. Note that our prescription is consistent with
such observations as the Tully-Fisher relation and the B-band
luminosity function.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999
Online publication: June 18, 1999
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |