Improved Ways to Compare Simulations to Data

Theoretical models for structure formation with Gaussian initial fluctuations have been worked out in considerable detail and compared with observations on various scales. It is on nonlinear scales \lsim 10 \ h^{-1}\ {\rm Mpc} that the greatest differences exist between $\Omega=1$ models that have been normalized to agree on the largest scales with the COBE data; here especially there is a need for better statistical tests which are simultaneously {\it robust}, {\it discriminatory}, and {\it interpretable}. The era at which galaxy and cluster formation occurs is also a critical test of some models. Needs for the future include faster and cleverer codes, better control of cosmic variance in simulations, better understanding of processes leading to galaxy formation, better ways of comparing observational data with models, and better access to observational and simulation data.Comment: 9 pages, self-extracting uuencoded postscript, encoded with uufile

Simulations of Dust in Interacting Galaxies

A new Monte-Carlo radiative-transfer code, Sunrise, is used to study the effects of dust in N-body/hydrodynamic simulations of interacting galaxies. Dust has a profound effect on the appearance of the simulated galaxies. At peak luminosities, about 90% of the bolometric luminosity is absorbed, and the dust obscuration scales with luminosity in such a way that the brightness at UV/visual wavelengths remains roughly constant. A general relationship between the fraction of energy absorbed and the ratio of bolometric luminosity to baryonic mass is found. Comparing to observations, the simulations are found to follow a relation similar to the observed IRX-Beta relation found by Meurer et al (1999) when similar luminosity objects are considered. The highest-luminosity simulated galaxies depart from this relation and occupy the region where local (U)LIRGs are found. This agreement is contingent on the presence of Milky-Way-like dust, while SMC-like dust results in far too red a UV continuum slope to match observations. The simulations are used to study the performance of star-formation indicators in the presence of dust. The far-infrared luminosity is found to be reliable. In contrast, the H-alpha and far-UV luminosity suffer severely from dust attenuation, and dust corrections can only partially remedy the situation.Comment: 4 pages, 5 figures, to appear in the proceedings of the conference "The Spectral Energy Distribution of Gas-Rich Galaxies", eds. C.C. Popescu & R.J. Tuffs (Heidelberg, October 2004

A Correlation Between Hard Gamma-ray Sources and Cosmic Voids Along the Line of Sight

We estimate the galaxy density along lines of sight to hard extragalactic gamma-ray sources by correlating source positions on the sky with a void catalog based on the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). Extragalactic gamma-ray sources that are detected at very high energy (VHE; E>100 GeV) or have been highlighted as VHE-emitting candidates in the Fermi Large Area Telescope hard source catalog (together referred to as "VHE-like" sources) are distributed along underdense lines of sight at the 2.4 sigma level. There is also a less suggestive correlation for the Fermi hard source population (1.7 sigma). A correlation between 10-500 GeV flux and underdense fraction along the line of sight for VHE-like and Fermi hard sources is found at 2.4 sigma and 2.6 sigma, respectively. The preference for underdense sight lines is not displayed by gamma-ray emitting galaxies within the second Fermi catalog, containing sources detected above 100 MeV, or the SDSS DR7 quasar catalog. We investigate whether this marginal correlation might be a result of lower extragalactic background light (EBL) photon density within the underdense regions and find that, even in the most extreme case of a entirely underdense sight line, the EBL photon density is only 2% less than the nominal EBL density. Translating this into gamma-ray attenuation along the line of sight for a highly attenuated source with opacity tau(E,z) ~5, we estimate that the attentuation of gamma-rays decreases no more than 10%. This decrease, although non-neglible, is unable to account for the apparent hard source correlation with underdense lines of sight.Comment: Accepted by MNRA