LMC SMC Andromeda and 2 dwarf size of

LMC SMC Andromeda and 2 dwarf (size of LMC/SMC) galaxies

QSO 3 C 273+ jet M 85, S 0 LMC M 87 Ellip NGC 3310 M 87 jet

M 87 core and jet

Why was Hubble wrong that Ellipticals evolve into Spirals? • Ellipticals low angular momentum • Spirals and no way to gain it • Ellipticals have very little gas and dust • Spirals have no way to gain it.

Galaxy Formation Scenario: Black Holes at first About 107 years after the BB: the first black holes (BHs) formed as seeds Gas collapses about the BHs to form QSOs = Quasi Stellar Objects.

• The QSOs “turn on” • Powered by the in-fall of the matter • (think Niagra Falls, scaled “way up”). • The gas doesn’t fall the way into the black hole • Due to angular mo. and also light pressure

Why do QSOs have their name? Because they look like stars! Galaxy QSO star

Scenario, cont. If most of the “spin” of the system ends up in the black hole => an elliptical and some times jets These systems formed so long ago, that they have turned all their gas into stars that they can. Spirals are younger due to angular mo. slowing down the gas in-fall, i. e. formed later and star formation continues, so Hubble got the right (early versus late) name.

QSOs , AGNs and Black holes Why do we think QSOs are “powered” by massive(106 -108 solar masses) or more black holes? (1) • Objects are extremely luminous (10 -100 times a galaxy) • If assume the redshift tells us their distance.

QSOs , AGNs and Black holes, cont. (2) • The intensity (brightness) varies on times < week. • Information” is carried from one side to the other to cause brightening • Therefore the emitting region is ≤ 1 week light across. Remember: the distance to the star closest to the sun is 4 light YEARS away! => A great deal of energy out of a very small space.

We know how much light stars make and it’s impossible to have that compact a star system and not have it turn into a black hole. From estimated lifetime of QSO and brightness, can calculate an in-fall rate and mass needed to make the light ( L = GM( d. M/dt)/R) where d. M/dt = mass in-fall rate, L = luminosity, R = radius of “stopping region” just outside BH => Massive = 106 -108 solar mass Black Holes exist at cores of QSOs

QSOs , AGNs and Black holes, cont. (3) The jets we see can only be easily explained by spinning black holes.

QSOs , AGNs and Black holes, cont. How do we get jets and radio lobes? Think “boom” and direction of “boom” defined by the spin axis of the black hole.

M 87 core and jet

QSOs , AGNs and Black holes, cont. AGNs = Active Galactic Nuclei which at their most powerful are QSOs. QSO’s and AGN much more numerous in the past. Why do they die out? We don’t [really] know. We say they used up most of fuel, but this is a “dodge. ”

Mais la vie n’est pas facile [but life is not easy] The “true” story of galaxy evolution is not understood yet and we also have to ask as we do about how people develop abilities and personalities: Do galaxies look they way they do because of “inherited a characteristics” or because of their environment?

Galaxies and collide and change In simplest form: if galaxies collided they can sweep out their gas and dust and turn into S 0 s. So, the higher the local density of galaxies the fewer spirals we’ll see as the higher the density, the higher the probability of collision

Galaxies and collide and change And, when we go back in time, this is more or less what we find. . . The more distant clusters have more spirals and fewer S 0 s and the nearby systems seem to be nearly all ellipticals and S 0 s, and all clusters tend to have most of their spirals near the outside as the spirals are just falling in.

Galaxies caused by collisions? Expanded views Expanded view; Antenna Galaxy Whirlpool galaxy

Connection to BB The universe changing as we go back in time (z) Consistent with there being a “start” and the formation of galaxies out of the “primoridal mist”

Connection with BB, cont. BB gives an age to universe and an expansion rate. Find QSOs back to a 1+z = 7 which is about 90% of the way back in the universe Gas collapse must take place “quickly”. Don’t know how: CDM almost works and HDM doesn’t work Stay tuned.

Summary Brick wall breaks up into fragments. How galaxies and QSOs started and if they started before the first stars we don’t know But simple myth is BHs => QSOs => galaxies. We don’t understand how BHs or QSOs can grow so quickly, and if we see QSOs much further back, we may be embarrassed. And we don’t really know how or why QSOs “die off. ”

The “nay sayers” Halton (Chip) Arp and the Burbidges (Geoff & Margaret) : Redshifts don’t tell us the distances to QSOs! Example: X-ray image. Are these objects physically related or chance coincidences? These X-ray bright (easily detectable with an X-ray telescope) QSOs appear connected, but have wildly different redshifts.

Nay sayers, cont. But if these are physically connected, then either the connections are unreasonably long (Gpc = 1000 Mpc = 1000 cluster of galaxy radii) or the redshifts don’t tell us the distance. Others, say these are chance coincidences. Chip, Geoff and Margaret, say “No way, and z doesn’t tell distance for QSOs and new physics is likely involved. ” Is this worse than L > 0?

Mini Summary: Nearly all the measurements of: expansion, dark matter, galaxy counts, galaxy evolution, measurements, element abundances, cosmic microwave background age fit within our frame work of an expanding universe and a Hot Big Bang

Observational Problems When pushing the limits we’re always in danger of screwing up. How much will stand the test of time? Do we have the z versus distance correct ( Lambda not equal 0; SN) Will our cluster counts hold up? Will the CMB results remain consistent with the standard predictions? Will abundances be made to agree with BBN? Will we find the cosmic web? ?

Conclusion We think we’re on the right track, but Stay tuned!

Theory Problems What the heck is the dark energy? Is dark matter a particle we can predict or is the graitational effect due to branes and other universes? Do we really understand how light and dark matter get distributed and how galaxies and clusters form and evolve? Have we really got BBN right? Can we be sure we’re using the right model of how CMB fluctuations formed?

Time Capsule Predictions (1) The standard Dogma: Inflation L>0 WIMPS the cosmic web, all exist and will be found and or explained.

Time Capsule Predictions, cont. (2) Branes: No Inflation L>0 No WIMPS the cosmic web exists. Other proof of parallel universes?

Time Capsule Predictions, cont. (2) Branes: No Inflation L>0 No WIMPS the cosmic web exists. Other proof of parallel universes?

Time Capsule Predictions, cont. (3) Nay Sayers: Redshift seriously wrong and overall new physics (but not Branes, not WIMPS, not L) is needed to explain cosmology.

Time Capsule Predictions, cont. (4) Prof. Ulmer’s ultra-conservative: in the end we will be able to explain all we see with purely currently known (verified in the lab) conventional physics: No WIMPS (Wb about 0. 1, within errors of cluster, galaxy masses, and nucleo-synthesis); CMB interpretation and measurements will not need a flat universe or “extra physics” (WIMPs) to explain galaxy and cluster formation, smooth CMB, and CMB (and galaxy) “power distribution. ” L > 0 n� (SN measures wrong).

Time Capsule Predictions, cont. (4) Prof. Kibblewhite’s ultra-conservative: in the end we will be able to explain all we see with purely currently known (verified in the lab) conventional physics: No WIMPS (Wb about 0. 1, within errors on cluster, galaxy masses, and nucleosynthesis); CMB interpretation and measurements can have a flat universe (GR is not right) no need for extra physics to explain galaxy and cluster formation, smooth CMB, and CMB (and galaxy) “power distribution. ”L >N�o 0 (SN measures wrong).