Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T12:32:49.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Properties of luminous spheroids at redshifts z ~ 1 from Keck and HST

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2007

David C. Koo
David C. Koo
Affiliation:
UCO/Lick Observatory, Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA email: [email protected]
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.

Three new and still on-going surveys that combine the power of spectroscopy or adaptive optics from the Keck Telescopes with HST images are DEEP, AEGIS, and CATS. The advantages of each for the study of distant bulges are accompanied by a few highlights. We find that the vast fraction of luminous distant bulges appear very red, independent of the bulge luminosity, bulge fraction, disk color, and environment. Yet early-type galaxies appear to be relatively young at redshifts z ~ 1, are less numerous then, host many X-ray AGN's with some that are highly obscured, and have low but increasing dry-dry and dry-wet merger rates over time.

Keywords

galaxies: bulgesgalaxies: evolutiongalaxies: high-redshiftgalaxies: photometrygalaxies: interactionsgalaxies: kinematicssurveystechniques: high angular resolution
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 3 , Symposium S245: Formation and Evolution of Galaxy Bulges , July 2007 , pp. 379 - 384
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2008

References

Bell, E. F. et al. 2004, ApJ, 608, 752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, M. et al. 2003, SPIE, 4834, 161Google Scholar
Davis, M. et al. 2007, ApJ, 660, L1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faber, S. M. et al. 2003, SPIE, 4841, 1657Google Scholar
Faber, S. M. et al. 2007, ApJ, 665, 265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gebhardt, K. et al. 2003, ApJ, 597, 239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harker, J. et al. 2006, ApJ, 647, L103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Im, M. et al. 2002, ApJ, 571, 136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koo, D. C. et al. 2005a, ApJS, 157, 275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koo, D. C. et al. 2005b, ApJ, 634, L5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kormendy, J. & Kennicutt, R. C. 2004, ARA&A 42, 603Google Scholar
Larkin, J. E. et al. 2006, SPIE, vol. 6269, 42Google Scholar
Le Floch, E. et al. 2007 ApJ, 660, L65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, L. et al. 2004, ApJ, 617, L9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, L. et al. 2007, ApJ, submittedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, M. C. 2006, SPIE, vol. 6272, 14Google Scholar
Melbourne, J. et al. 2005, ApJ, 625, L27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nandra, K. et al. 2007, ApJ, 660, L11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiavon, R. et al. 2006, ApJ, 651, L93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simard, L. et al. 2002, ApJS, 142, 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinbring, E. et al. 2005, PASP, 117, 847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinbring, E. et al. 2007, ApJ, in pressGoogle Scholar
Strateva, I. et al. 2001, AJ, 122, 1861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Dam, M. A. et al. 2006, PASP, 188, 310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Dokkum, P. G. et al. 2000, ApJ, 541, 95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Dokkum, P. G. & Franx, M. 2001, ApJ, 553, 90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogt, N. P. et al. 2005, ApJS, 159, 41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiner, B. J. et al. 2005, ApJ, 620, 595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willmer, C. N. A. et al. 2006, ApJ, 647, 853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wizinowich, P. et al. 2000, PASP, 112, 315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wizinowich, P. et al. 2006, PASP, 118, 297CrossRefGoogle Scholar