From JCMT Partner Nations: Rob Ivison, Alexandra Pope, Ian Smail, Douglas Scott, Kristen Coppin, Andy Biggs, Christine Wilson, Mark Halpern, Steve Eales, John Peacock, Alastair Edge, Steve Serjeant, Dave Clements, Sebastian Oliver, Dimitra Rigopoulou, Paul van der Werf, Chris Willott, Colin Borys, Ludo Van Waerbeke, Loretta Dunne, James Dunlop, Mathew Page,Tracy Webb, Jason Stevens, Remo Tilanus From SMA/CSO: David Wilner, Andrew Blain, Thomas Greve… how do we reach/engage these communities? Emigrants (come home, all is forgiven!) Eelco van Kampen, Kirsten Knudsen

Stevens et al. (2003) 6C , z=4.4 (Ivison et al.) RXJ094144, z=1.8 (Stevens et al. 2004) Sought ideas that exploit unique aspects of eSMA (i.e. are not better done with SMA or IRAM PdB; are not plagued by primary beam problems) Many ideas must wait till later (e.g. SASSy, Herschel) Some ideas better suited to SMA than eSMA (e.g. known high-z AGN on scales of ~10 or 10s arcsec)

Other ideas that may yield high-quality science… C+ at z ~ 4.3 (van der Werf) Resolving the central regions of z > 3 highly obscured type-2 submm-bright QSOs to separate AGN emission from surrounding starburst activity (Rigopoulou) Measure statistically the mass of SMGs with SMG-galaxy lensing (van Waerbeke) Several major topics everyone seems to agree on -

Probing the structure and size of “representative SMGs” as a test of galaxy formation mechanisms: 1. lensed examples of faint SMGs 2.those with high-resolution radio data (MERLIN) 3. those with multiple radio/24  m ids 4.those without radio ids (very high z?) (noting that what constitutes a “representative SMG” could engender decades of discussion…)

Goals: Determine distribution of dust and the role of mergers in typical high-z SMGs Are mergers universally responsible for SMGs? Are SMGs with multiple ids a special merging subset? Do monolithic L  starbursts exist? Compare 850-  m morphology with matched-resolution radio (MERLIN) to explore FIR/radio correlation and search for radio-loud AGN Probing size and morphology of submm emission in SMGs is a key piece in the puzzle of galaxy formation Exploits unique resolution/sensitivity of eSMA

Major merger simulations Springel, Di Matteo, & Hernquist (2005)

Major merger simulations Springel, Di Matteo, & Hernquist (2005) Submm phase?

Comparing FIR/radio morphologies Several SMG fields have deep (~10 6 s) MERLIN integrations (GOODS-N and Lockman)… Allows us to compare FIR/radio morphologies with matched resolution explore FIR/radio correlation search for AGN- related radio emission Biggs et al. (2007)

Measuring sizes via lensed SMGs Ivison et al. (2000) Ivison et al. (2001) Cluster samples allow us to explore “typical” SMGs (typical in the sense of “SMGs making dominant contribution to cosmic background”) …perhaps at cost of uncertainty in lens amplification?

Observing lensed SMGs Cluster samples contain several very bright examples, some at S 850  m ~ 25 mJy But also want “representative” sample, so S 850  m ~ 5 mJy(2 mJy intrinsic) Many may be resolved, so need long integrations ~2-3 tracks per faint source

GOODS-N multiple-id SMGs z-band 3.6  m 24  m 1.4GHz 20" Pope et al. (2006) Components separated by 2-6" (15-45/sin i kpc, z~2.5) Often, both sources look to be at the same z (spec-z or photo-z) Often the brightest SMGs in sample (why?) Are we seeing massive mergers in progress? Halo mergers? Confusion?

SHADES multiple-id SMGs 7 in Lockman; 5 in SXDF Ivison et al. (2007) Components separated by 2-6" (15-45/sin i kpc, z~2.5) Often, both sources look to be at the same z (spec-z or photo-z) Often the brightest SMGs in sample (why?) Are we seeing massive mergers in progress? Halo mergers? Confusion?

Observing SMGs with multiple ids GOODS-N/SHADES SMGs typically have S 850  m ~ 8 mJy Worst case for multiple ids: each component is S 850  m ~ 4 mJy eSMA has sensitivity and resolution to: separate the two components possibly resolve each component (~1 mJy r.m.s. in 1 track with ~0.3” fwhm) ~2-3 tracks per source

Observing SMGs with no radio id No radio id because cold? Because at very high z? Because very extended? Because spurious?? Choose several examples with high S/N and exquisite radio coverage Is a long SMA integration a better approach? Do we require eSMA sensitivity? ~2-3 tracks per source Ivison et al. (2007)

Dust entrained in powerful outflows N z=2.4 – mixed young starburst and obscured AGN SFR ~10 3 M o /yr P-Cygni features suggest young starburst (~10Myr) and 500-km/s wind Extended halo around galaxy >20kpc Smail et al. (2004)

Probing the structure and size of “representative SMGs” as a test of galaxy formation mechanisms: 1. lensed examples of faint SMGs ***** 2.those with high-resolution radio data (MERLIN) ***** 3. those with multiple radio/24  m ids **** 4.those without radio ids (very high z?) *** Ideally want a sample of >10 SCUBA/MAMBO/AzTEC sources to explore range of size/separation/flux density

Galaxy and halo merger trees Simple halo/galaxy merger sequence Halo-halo mergers: multiple star-bursts Galaxy-galaxy mergers: single star-burst Eelco van Kampen

Starburst galaxy halo size versus redshift JCMT 850 micron resolution 2 arcsec resolution half-mass radius Eelco van Kampen

850  m galaxies: parent halo properties Halo mass Gas mass Bulge+disk half-mass radius Eelco van Kampen

Science goals Overall science goal: understanding massive galaxy formation… More specifically: the merger sequence as traced by starbursts the distribution and physical properties of the various dust components Need to (at high redshift): decompose the disk, bulge and clouds separate the various dust components Eelco van Kampen

Uniqueness of galaxy-formation models Bursting and quiescent star formation, z=3 Mostly quiescent star formation, z=3 Mostly bursting star formation, z=3 z=0 Eelco van Kampen