LJMU Research Online
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LJMU Research Online Keller, BW, Kruijssen, JMD, Pfeffer, J, Reina-Campos, M, Bastian, N, Trujillo- Gomez, S, Hughes, ME and Crain, RA Where did the globular clusters of the Milky Way form? Insights from the E- MOSAICS simulations http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/13201/ Article Citation (please note it is advisable to refer to the publisher’s version if you intend to cite from this work) Keller, BW, Kruijssen, JMD, Pfeffer, J, Reina-Campos, M, Bastian, N, Trujillo- Gomez, S, Hughes, ME and Crain, RA (2020) Where did the globular clusters of the Milky Way form? Insights from the E-MOSAICS simulations. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 495 (4). pp. 4248-4267. ISSN LJMU has developed LJMU Research Online for users to access the research output of the University more effectively. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LJMU Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of the record. Please see the repository URL above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. For more information please contact [email protected] http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/ MNRAS 495, 4248–4267 (2020) doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1439 Advance Access publication 2020 May 23 Where did the globular clusters of the Milky Way form? Insights from the E-MOSAICS simulations Benjamin W. Keller ,1‹ J. M. Diederik Kruijssen ,1 Joel Pfeffer ,2 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-abstract/495/4/4248/5843285 by Liverpool John Moores University user on 29 June 2020 Marta Reina-Campos ,1 Nate Bastian,2 Sebastian Trujillo-Gomez ,1 Meghan E. Hughes 2 and Robert A. Crain 2 1Astronomisches Rechen-Institut, Zentrum fur¨ Astronomie der Universitat¨ Heidelberg, Monchhofstraße¨ 12-14, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany 2Astrophysics Research Institute, Liverpool John Moores University, 146 Brownlow Hill, Liverpool L3 5RF, UK Accepted 2020 May 15. Received 2020 April 2; in original form 2019 December 30 ABSTRACT Globular clusters (GCs) are typically old, with most having formed at z 2. This makes understanding their birth environments difficult, as they are typically too distant to observe with sufficient angular resolution to resolve GC birth sites. Using 25 cosmological zoom- in simulations of Milky Way-like galaxies from the E-MOSAICS project, with physically motivated models for star formation, feedback, and the formation, evolution, and disruption of GCs, we identify the birth environments of present-day GCs. We find roughly half of GCs in these galaxies formed in situ (52.0 ± 1.0 per cent) between z ≈ 2–4, in turbulent, high-pressure discs fed by gas that was accreted without ever being strongly heated through a virial shock or feedback. A minority of GCs form during mergers (12.6 ± 0.6 per cent in major mergers, and 7.2 ± 0.5 per cent in minor mergers), but we find that mergers are important for preserving the GCs seen today by ejecting them from their natal, high density interstellar medium (ISM), where proto-GCs are rapidly destroyed due to tidal shocks from ISM substructure. This chaotic history of hierarchical galaxy assembly acts to mix the spatial and kinematic distribution of GCs formed through different channels, making it difficult to use observable GC properties to distinguish GCs formed in mergers from ones formed by smooth accretion, and similarly GCs formed in situ from those formed ex situ. These results suggest a simple picture of GC formation, in which GCs are a natural outcome of normal star formation in the typical, gas-rich galaxies that are the progenitors of present-day galaxies. Key words: galaxies: evolution – galaxies: formation – galaxies: haloes – galaxies: star clus- ters: general – galaxies: star formation. 2014). Age determinations have yet to reach the level of precision, 1 INTRODUCTION however, where observations alone can tell us the precise time line A ubiquitous feature of galaxies in the nearby Universe are their of GC formation in the Milky Way (MW) or elsewhere. The GC populations of globular clusters (GCs). These old (τ ∼ 10 Gyr), populations we see in galaxies across many decades of halo and 4 6 massive (M ∼ 10 –10 M) stellar clusters (e.g. Brodie & Strader stellar mass show remarkable differences compared to the ‘normal’ 2006; Kruijssen 2014; Forbes et al. 2018) are found distributed field stellar populations of those same galaxies. GCs are typically 9 throughout the haloes of nearly all galaxies with M∗ 10 M older (Mar´ın-Franch et al. 2009; VandenBerg et al. 2013), more (Harris, Blakeslee & Harris 2017b). The ages of these objects tell metal poor (Puzia et al. 2005;Sarajedinietal.2007), and broadly us that many of them formed near cosmic noon, at z ∼ 2 (e.g. Dotter distributed through the halo compared to field stars (Zinn 1985). et al. 2010; Forbes & Bridges 2010; Dotter, Sarajedini & Anderson Both the number (Blakeslee, Tonry & Metzger 1997) and total mass 2011; VandenBerg et al. 2013; Choksi, Gnedin & Li 2018; El-Badry (Spitler & Forbes 2009;Harrisetal.2017b) of GCs appears to be a et al. 2019; Reina-Campos et al. 2019;Kruijssenetal.2019a), when constant ratio of halo mass, unlike the total stellar mass, which both the cosmic star formation rate was at its peak (Madau & Dickinson abundance matching (Behroozi, Wechsler & Conroy 2013;Moster, Naab & White 2013) and weak lensing studies (Hudson et al. 2015) have confirmed to be a non-linear function of halo mass. In different E-mail: [email protected] galaxies, unimodal (e..g Harris et al. 2017a), bimodal (e.g. Peng C 2020 The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Astronomical Society Globular cluster formation environments 4249 et al. 2006), and even trimodal distributions (e.g. Blom, Spitler & GCs, and they have also not been subject to Gyrs of evolution. Their Forbes 2012; Usher et al. 2012) of GC metallicities have been locations within their host galaxies are also quite different to that observed. Understanding when, where, and how these objects form of GCs. While YMCs are seen forming in the dense ISM of the can help us understand star formation in some of the most extreme present-day galaxy disc, a significant fraction of the GC population cosmic environments. As the epoch of GC formation may coincide orbits the galaxy at large radii, in a spherical distribution through with cosmic noon (Reina-Campos et al. 2019), understanding GC the stellar halo. In order to build a population of GCs in the stellar formation will help us better understand star formation during a key halo, these GCs must either be flung out of the disc by merger events Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-abstract/495/4/4248/5843285 by Liverpool John Moores University user on 29 June 2020 phase of the Universe’s evolution. (an in situ mechanism), or tidally stripped from accreted galaxies The differences between the populations of stars we see in GCs (an ex situ mechanism), or simply have been formed at large radii and the rest of the field stars have prompted a critical question: (as in Peebles & Dicke 1968). do they signal that special, early Universe physics (distinct from Regardless of the physics involved in the formation of GCs, a ‘normal’ star formation) is required to form GCs? Over time, a second selection step obscures their birth environment: the evolution number of different formation scenarios have been proposed. The of the cluster and dynamical disruption as it orbits within the earliest proposed mechanisms for forming GCs are wildly different galaxy for ∼10 Gyr. Over this time, it will experience heating and to the mechanisms we currently believe produce the vast majority disruption through the tidal field of the galaxy (Ambartsumian 1938; of field stars. Peebles & Dicke (1968) argued that as the Jeans Spitzer 1940;Henon´ 1961;Lee&Ostriker1987; Baumgardt & mass of the typical post-recombination intergalactic medium was Makino 2003), and tidal shocks when eccentric orbits bring them 5 6 comparable to the mass of observed GCs (10 –10 M), and thus the through the galactic disc and bulge (Aguilar, Hut & Ostriker 1988). collapse of pre-galactic gas clouds produced the GCs we see today. Early in the cluster’s lifespan, it may pass through spiral arms and This model cannot produce metal-rich clusters, and would produce giant molecular clouds (GMCs), subjecting it to further intense tidal a cluster population with a radial distribution identical to the dark shocks (Lamers, Gieles & Portegies Zwart 2005; Gieles et al. 2006; matter halo (rather than the more centrally concentrated distribution Elmegreen 2010; Elmegreen & Hunter 2010; Kruijssen et al. 2011; we observe). Naturally, the GCs produced via this mechanism would Kruijssen 2015). Clusters within the halo may inspiral over time, as contain the oldest stars in existence (since the formation of the they lose angular momentum through dynamical friction (Tremaine remaining non-GC stellar populations would necessarily follow the 1976). All of this means that the population of GCs we see today formation of galaxies). Fall & Rees (1985) proposed a mechanism may have little resemblance to the population of proto-GCs that that begins producing GCs once the formation of galaxies has formed within the galaxy. If these disruption processes act much begun, through a two-phase instability in the hot galactic corona.