Paper detail

High redshift Lya emitters: clues on the Milky Way infancy

With the aim of determining if Milky Way (MW) progenitors could be identified as high redshift Lyman Alpha Emitters (LAEs) we have derived the intrinsic properties of z ~ 5.7 MW progenitors, which are then used to compute their observed Lyman-alpha luminosity, L_alpha, and equivalent width, EW. MW progenitors visible as LAEs are selected according to the canonical observational criterion, L_alpha > 10^42 erg/s and EW > 20 A. Progenitors of MW-like galaxies have L_alpha = 10^(39-43.25) erg/s, making some of them visible as LAEs. In any single MW merger tree realization, typically only 1 (out of ~ 50) progenitor meets the LAE selection criterion, but the probability to have at least one LAE is very high, P = 68%. The identified LAE stars have ages, t_* ~ 150-400 Myr at z ~ 5.7 with the exception of five small progenitors with t_* < 5 Myr and large EW = 60-130 A. LAE MW progenitors provide > 10% of the halo very metal-poor stars [Fe/H] < -2, thus establishing a potentially fruitful link between high-z galaxies and the Local Universe.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.