Paper detail

The average submillimetre properties of Lyman-alpha Blobs at z=3

Ly-alpha blobs (LABs) offer insight into the complex interface between galaxies and their circumgalactic medium. Whilst some LABs have been found to contain luminous star-forming galaxies and active galactic nuclei that could potentially power the Ly-alpha emission, others appear not to be associated with obvious luminous galaxy counterparts. It has been speculated that LABs may be powered by cold gas streaming on to a central galaxy, providing an opportunity to directly observe the `cold accretion' mode of galaxy growth. Star-forming galaxies in LABs could be dust obscured and therefore detectable only at longer wavelengths. We stack deep SCUBA-2 observations of the SSA22 field to determine the average 850um flux density of 34 LABs. We measure S_850 = 0.6 +/- 0.2mJy for all LABs, but stacking the LABs by size indicates that only the largest third (area > 1794 kpc^2) have a mean detection, at 4.5 sigma, with S_850 = 1.4 +/- 0.3mJy. Only two LABs (1 and 18) have individual SCUBA-2 > 3.5 sigma detections at a depth of 1.1mJy/beam. We consider two possible mechanisms for powering the LABs and find that central star formation is likely to dominate the emission of Ly-alpha, with cold accretion playing a secondary role.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access14 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.

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.