1: % Beginning of file 'sample.tex'
2: %%
3: %% Modified 2005 December 5
4: %%
5: %% This is a sample manuscript marked up using the
6: %% AASTeX v5.x LaTeX 2e macros.
7:
8: %% The first piece of markup in an AASTeX v5.x document
9: %% is the \documentclass command. LaTeX will ignore
10: %% any data that comes before this command.
11:
12: %% The command below calls the preprint style
13: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
14: %% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
15: %% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
16: %%
17: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
18: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{emulateapj}
19:
20: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
21:
22: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
23:
24: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
25:
26: %\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
27:
28: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
29: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
30: %% use the longabstract style option.
31:
32: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
33:
34: %% If you want to create your own macros, you can do so
35: %% using \newcommand. Your macros should appear before
36: %% the \begin{document} command.
37: %%
38: %% If you are submitting to a journal that translates manuscripts
39: %% into SGML, you need to follow certain guidelines when preparing
40: %% your macros. See the AASTeX v5.x Author Guide
41: %% for information.
42:
43: \newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
44: \newcommand{\myemail}{spd3@st-and.ac.uk}
45:
46: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
47:
48: \slugcomment{For submission to ApJ}
49:
50: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
51: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
52: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
53: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
54: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
55: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
56:
57: \shorttitle{Cosmic Energy Spectrum}
58: \shortauthors{Driver et al.}
59:
60: %% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
61: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.
62:
63: \begin{document}
64:
65: %% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than
66: %% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if
67: %% you desire.
68:
69: \title{The energy output of the Universe from $0.1$ $\mu$m to $1000$ $\mu$m}
70:
71: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
72: %% author and affiliation information.
73: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
74: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
75: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
76: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.
77:
78: \author{Simon~P.~Driver\altaffilmark{1},
79: Cristina~C.~Popescu\altaffilmark{2}, Richard~J.~Tuffs\altaffilmark{3},
80: Alister~W.~Graham\altaffilmark{4}, Jochen~Liske\altaffilmark{5},
81: Ivan~Baldry\altaffilmark{6}}
82:
83: \altaffiltext{1}{Scottish Universities' Physics Alliance (SUPA), School of Physics and Astronomy,
84: University of St Andrews, North Haugh, St Andrews, Fife, KY16 9SS, UK; spd3@st-and.ac.uk}
85: \altaffiltext{2}{Centre for Astrophysics, University of Central Lancashire,
86: Preston, PR1 2HE, UK}
87: \altaffiltext{3}{Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Kernphysik, Saupfercheckweg 1, 69117
88: Heidelberg, Germany}
89: \altaffiltext{4}{Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University
90: of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria 3122, Australia}
91: \altaffiltext{5}{European Southern Observatory, Karl-Schwarzschild-Str.~2, 85748
92: Garching, Germany}
93: \altaffiltext{6}{Astrophysics Research Institute, Liverpool John Moores
94: University, Twelve Quays House, Egerton Wharf, Birkenhead CH4 1LD, UK}
95:
96: %% Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
97: %% are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. Specify alternate
98: %% affiliation information with \altaffiltext, with one command per each
99: %% affiliation.
100:
101: %% Mark off your abstract in the ``abstract'' environment. In the manuscript
102: %% style, abstract will output a Received/Accepted line after the
103: %% title and affiliation information. No date will appear since the author
104: %% does not have this information. The dates will be filled in by the
105: %% editorial office after submission.
106:
107: \begin{abstract}
108: The dominant source of electromagnetic energy in the Universe today
109: (over ultraviolet, optical and near-infrared wavelengths) is
110: starlight. However, quantifying the amount of starlight produced has
111: proven difficult due to interstellar dust grains which attenuate some
112: unknown fraction of the light. Combining a recently calibrated
113: galactic dust model with observations of 10,000 nearby galaxies we
114: find that (integrated over all galaxy types and orientations) only
115: $(11 \pm 2)$\% of the $0.1$ $\mu$m photons escape their host galaxies;
116: this value rises linearly (with $\log \lambda$) to $(87 \pm 3)$\% at
117: $2.1$ $\mu$m. We deduce that the energy output from stars in the
118: nearby Universe is $(1.6\pm0.2) \times 10^{35}$ W Mpc$^{-3}$ of which
119: $(0.9\pm0.1) \times 10^{35}$ W Mpc$^{-3}$ escapes directly into the
120: inter-galactic medium. Some further ramifications of dust attenuation
121: are discussed, and equations that correct individual galaxy flux
122: measurements for its effect are provided.
123: \end{abstract}
124:
125: \keywords{galaxies: spiral - galaxies: structure - galaxies:
126: photometry - galaxies: fundamental parameters - ISM: dust, extinction}
127:
128: \section{Introduction} The cosmic spectral energy distribution (CSED;
129: e.g., Primack, Bullock \& Sommerville 2005) provides a description of
130: the current total (electromagnetic) energy output of the Universe over
131: all wavelengths. In the ultraviolet, optical and near-infrared
132: wavebands the CSED is dominated by starlight and its measurement can
133: be used to constrain the current stellar mass density and cosmic
134: star-formation rate as well as models of galaxy formation
135: \citep[e.g.,][]{baldry03,hopkins06}. The CSED is measured by
136: constructing the galaxy luminosity function (GLF)
137: \citep{schechter76,felten77,mgc05} at a specified wavelength (or
138: bandpass). The first moment of the GLF (extrapolated to bright and
139: faint magnitudes), gives the total luminosity density at this
140: wavelength and hence provides a single datum on the CSED.
141:
142: Constructing the full CSED therefore requires accurate measurements of
143: the GLF in a variety of bandpasses. However, galaxies contain dust,
144: which, while negligible in terms of mass \citep{mgc07}, attenuates some
145: unknown fraction of the starlight before it exits a galaxy into the
146: inter-galactic medium (IGM) \citep{seares31,giovanelli95}. The
147: severity of this effect has proven difficult to quantify
148: \citep{disney89,valentijn90,burstein91}, leading to large
149: uncertainties in individual galaxy flux measurements and consequently
150: a systematic underestimation of the luminosity density (or individual
151: CSED measurements). The degree to which the CSED is underestimated
152: will, of course, be wavelength dependent \citep{cardelli89,calzetti01}
153: and it will depend critically on the amount and distribution of the
154: interstellar dust grains within the host galaxy (and an individual
155: galaxy's orientation to our line-of-sight).
156:
157: Since the heated debate of the 90s, direct evidence from a number of
158: methods have led to the perspective that galaxies are predominantly
159: optically thin (at least in their outer regions). In particular,
160: evidence from overlapping galaxies \citep{white00}, have strongly
161: supported the stance that galaxies are optically thin, at least in the
162: inter-arm regions \citep{holwerda07}. Further detailed modeling of
163: extensive optical data on edge-on galaxies also appeared to support
164: the view that galaxies were optically thin throughout
165: \citep{xilouris99}. However, the optically thin case has proven
166: difficult to reconcile with the observed high level of far-infrared
167: emission which is presumed to arise from dust reradiating the
168: attenuated starlight \citep{bianchi00,popescu00,misiriotis01}. The
169: resolution to this conflict may lie in a more complex dust
170: distribution whereby galaxies may contain both optically thick (core
171: and arm) regions and optically thin (inter-arm and outer)
172: regions. \citet{tuffs04} and \citet{popescu00} (hereafter TP) have
173: advocated a three component dust model (optically thick inner disc,
174: thin outer disc and clumpy components), which is capable of
175: reproducing the detailed multiwavelength surface photometry from UV to
176: far-IR of edge-on galaxies such as NGC891 and the other galaxies
177: modelled by \cite{xilouris99}.
178:
179: Recently, \citet{mgc07} identified evidence for strong and
180: inclination-dependent attenuation in a large sample of discs and
181: bulges which is not anticipated (or reproduceable) in models with a
182: purely optically thin dust distribution (e.g., see fig~5 in Popescu \&
183: Tuffs 2007). Similar and related results, albeit lacking bulge-disc
184: decompositions, have also now been reported for SDSS data \citep[e.g.,
185: Choi, Park \& Vogeley 2007;][]{shao07, unterborn08,
186: maller08,padilla08}. Using the TP-model we were able to reproduce the
187: attenuation-inclination relation for both discs and bulges and to
188: constrain the mean {\it central} $B$-band face-on opacity (the only
189: free parameter) for the galaxy population at large:
190: $\tau^{f}_{B}=3.8\pm0.7$. In this Letter we explore the implications
191: of this result on estimates of the CSED and ask whether the high value
192: for the central opacity can be reconciled with the far-IR output from
193: the nearby galaxy population. Throughout we adopt a standard flat
194: cosmology with $\Omega_{\rm M} = 0.3$, $\Omega_{\Lambda} = 0.7$ and
195: $H_0 = 70$~$h_{70}$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$.
196:
197: \section{Dust and its impact on galaxy photometry}
198: The dust model we adopt here is described fully in a sequence of
199: papers \citep{popescu00,tuffs04,mollenhoff06} and is summarised by
200: \citet{popescu07}. In brief the model incorporates three distinct
201: components: an extended optically thin dust disc associated with the
202: neutral hydrogen and older stellar population (i.e., the outer disc
203: and inter-arm regions); a less extended optically thick dust layer in
204: the spiral arms associated with the molecular hydrogen and younger
205: stellar population (i.e., primarily the inner disc); and a clumpy
206: component (representing star-forming molecular clouds). Ideally
207: the optically thick component should be distributed according to a
208: spiral pattern, to better mimick the observed variation in opacity
209: between arm and inter-arm regions. For the purposes of this work this
210: distinction, between an additional disc of uniform opacity or one with
211: a built in spiral density pattern is not particularly relevant as both
212: imply a uniform high opacity disc in the central bulge-dominated
213: regions.
214:
215: In \citet{mgc07} we constrained the TP-model's single free parameter,
216: the central face on opacity in $B$, which was found to be
217: $\tau^f_B=3.8\pm0.7$. Briefly, this constraint was obtained by
218: measuring the luminosity functions of galaxy bulges and discs at
219: various inclinations and comparing the dependence of the turn-over
220: point on inclination (i.e., the $M^*$--$\cos(i)$ relation) to
221: predictions of the TP-model (see \citealp{mgc07} for full details).
222:
223: Having constrained the TP-model we can now determine the
224: inclination-dependent attenuation correction at any wavelength. From
225: Fig.~1 we see that the attenuation for bulge starlight can be as high
226: as $2$~B~mag (i.e., only $6$\% of the photons escape), and as high as
227: $1.2$~B~mag for discs (i.e., only $33$\% of the photons escape),
228: depending on wavelength and inclination. While the level of
229: attenuation of the disc is relatively consistent with previous
230: estimates, the bulge attenuation is a surprise and has not previously
231: been considered in detail. This is because while bulges are
232: traditionally considered to be dust free, like elliptical galaxies,
233: the dust in the galaxy disc attenuates bulge light, particularly from
234: the far-side. We can parameterize the dust attenuation curves of
235: Fig.~1 as follows:
236: \begin{eqnarray}
237: M^c_{\rm bulge} & = & M^o_{\rm bulge} - b_1 - b_2 [1-\cos(i)]^{b_3} \\
238: M^c_{\rm disc} & =& M^o_{\rm disc} - d_1 - d_2 [1-\cos(i)]^{d_3}
239: \end{eqnarray}
240: where $M^o$ and $M^c$ represent the observed and corrected magnitudes,
241: respectively, $i$ is the disc inclination, and the coefficients $b_1$,
242: $b_2$, $b_3$ and $d_1$, $d_2$, $d_3$ are listed in Table 1.
243:
244: Using the Millennium Galaxy Catalogue data
245: \citep[MGC;][]{mgc01,mgc05,allen06} we now derive the total $B$-band
246: GLF incorporating the impact of dust attenuation.
247: This involves
248: seperating all galaxies into their bulges and disc components,
249: correcting their fluxes according to the formulae above, and then
250: rederiving their combined fluxes (note: pure elliptical systems are
251: not modified). Fig.~2 shows the raw observed GLF (red dotted line),
252: the inclination corrected GLF (green dashed line), and the fully
253: dust-corrected GLF (blue solid line, i.e., corrected for both the
254: empirically verified inclination-dependent attenuation plus the
255: residual face-on attenuation determined by the model). The
256: corresponding Schechter function fits to the GLFs, obtained using a
257: standard step-wise maximum likelihood estimator \citep{efstathiou88},
258: are also shown on Fig.~2 and tabulated in Table 2. The changes due to
259: the dust correction are significant. Going from the original, observed
260: $B$-band GLF to the final, fully dust-corrected GLF, we find a
261: $19$$\sigma$ shift in the characteristic luminosity ($M^*$), and a
262: $5$$\sigma$ change in the faint-end slope (which determines the space
263: density of dwarf galaxies). Nearby galaxies therefore produce far more
264: photons in the $400$--$450$~nm range ($B$-band) than previously
265: supposed. In fact, after first removing the contribution to the GLF
266: due to ellipticals ($0.14$ $h_{70}$~L$_{\odot}$~Mpc$^{-3}$;
267: \citealp{mgc05}), only $(58\pm5)$\% of $B$-band photons escape from
268: the nearby spiral galaxy population into the IGM (or $60\pm5$\% if one
269: includes the ellipticals).
270:
271:
272: \subsection{Extrapolating the impact of dust on the GLF to other bandpasses}
273: The above result provides us with a single dust corrected datum for
274: the CSED. Unfortunately we cannot repeat this measurement at other
275: wavelengths because we lack the appropriate imaging data at this time.
276: We can however resort to a simplification: For all possible B/T values
277: from 0 to 0.8 we derive, using the equations given above, the implied
278: photon escape fraction integrated over $\cos(i)$. We then adopt as the
279: effective mean B/T, that model galaxy whose photon escape fraction is
280: the same as that determined from our GLF analysis. This yields an
281: intrinsic $\langle B/T \rangle = 0.13^{+0.22}_{-0.13}$. Essentially,
282: this is an effective average $B/T$ value that corresponds to the
283: volume and luminosity weighted average of the individual escape
284: fractions of all the galaxies in our sample in the absence of dust.
285: %Since the luminosity density is dominated by galaxies near $M*$,
286: %the above observed $\langle B/T \rangle$ ratio is not surprisingly
287: %very close to the average B/T of $M*$ galaxies.
288:
289: The above has provided us with an effective average galaxy that
290: represents the galaxy population at large in the $B$-band. To now
291: derive the equivalent effective average galaxy at other wavelengths we
292: need to know the mean bulge and disc colours in order to modify the
293: bulge-to-total ratio accordingly. For example, galaxy bulges are
294: typically red (relative to the disc) so as we move towards longer
295: wavelengths we expect the canonical $\langle B/T \rangle$ ratio to
296: rise a little. To obtain the mean bulge and disc colours we supplement
297: our $B$-band MGC data with multi-wavelength data provided by the
298: overlapping Sloan Digital Sky Survey \citep{mgc05,mgc07};
299: \citealp{mgc01}; \citealp{allen06}). Using the median colours for
300: bulge-only or disc-only systems we transpose our canonical
301: bulge-to-total ratio to the SDSS bandpasses: $\langle B/T \rangle =
302: 0.11$ ($u$), $0.14$ ($g$), $0.14$ ($r$), $0.14$ ($i$), $0.16$
303: ($z$). For $JHK$ we adopt the $z$-band $\langle B/T \rangle$ ratio and
304: for the UV range we adopt $\langle B/T \rangle=0$ (which implicitly
305: assumes that star-formation has ceased in the bulge regions).
306: %Note that the $\langle B/T \rangle$ changes are relatively modest.
307:
308: \subsection{The photon escape fraction} We can now derive the mean photon
309: escape fraction at any wavelength using the bulge and disc
310: attenuation-inclination relations predicted by our calibrated dust
311: model (see Section 2) coupled with the above $\langle B/T \rangle$
312: values. Fig.~3 displays the corresponding photon escape fractions for
313: a variety of bandpasses averaged over all viewing angles. To
314: understand how critically this depends on the adopted $\langle B/T
315: \rangle$ values we also show on Fig.~3 the photon escape fractions
316: that result from assuming, in each bandpass, the extreme values of
317: $\langle B/T \rangle = 0$ (pure disc, upper dotted line) and $\langle
318: B/T \rangle = 0.35$ (early/mid-type disc galaxy, lower dotted line),
319: respectively. Evidently, the photon escape fractions do not depend
320: critically on the assumed "canonical" values of $\langle B/T \rangle$
321: and hence our shortcut method should be considered robust (i.e.,
322: Fig.~3 is essentially a direct prediction from the MGC calibrated dust
323: model with little dependence on $\langle B/T \rangle$).
324:
325:
326: \subsection{The Cosmic Energy Spectrum}
327: The values shown in Fig.~3 can be used to derive the CSED corrected
328: for dust attenuation. A compendium of recent GLF measurements
329: (\citealp{mgc07}; \citealp{budavari05}; \citealp{blanton03};
330: \citealp{kochaneck01}; \citealp{bell03}; \citealp{babbedge06};
331: \citealp{huang07}; \citealp{takeuchi06}) based on nearby samples (all
332: allegedly complete, corrected to redshift zero, and converted to $H_0
333: =70$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$, but uncorrected for dust attenuation) are
334: shown in Fig.~4. Where necessary these have been converted from
335: luminosity density units to energy density units and together they
336: span the wavelength range from the far-UV to the far-IR. Also shown on
337: Fig.~4 is our single fully dust-corrected $B$-band luminosity density
338: value (from Table 2), which lies significantly above the previous
339: uncorrected estimates.
340:
341: Using the photon escape fractions from Fig.~3 we now correct the
342: attenuated GLF measurements to produce, for the first time, the
343: unattenuated CSED (grey data points on Fig.~4). This constitutes the
344: actual spectral energy output in the Universe today due to the total
345: integrated starlight before dust attenuation. To calculate the total
346: energy of starlight versus that which escapes into the IGM we need to
347: integrate over these two datasets. In order to interpolate across the
348: full far-UV, optical, and IR wavelength range we adopt a recent
349: stellar synthesis model (PEGACE, \cite{pegace} see \cite{baldry03} for
350: details of the modelling) which provides a reasonable fit to both the
351: attenuated (orange line) and, when corrected, the unattenuated (black
352: line) CSED. Integrating these two curves yields a total stellar
353: energy output of $(1.6\pm0.2) \times 10^{35}$~W~Mpc$^{-3}$ of which
354: $(0.9 \pm 0.1) \times 10^{35}$~W~Mpc$^{-3}$ escapes into the IGM. Note
355: that these numbers take into account a $10$\% component of the CSED
356: longwards of $400$~nm due to ellipticals \citep{mgc05}. For the CSED
357: to be in equilibrium (and energy conserving) the difference between
358: these two energy values, $(0.7\pm0.2) \times 10^{35}$~W~Mpc$^{-3}$,
359: should not exceed the total emission from dust in the far-IR, the
360: traditional sticking point for optically thin models. Fig.~4 also
361: shows a model of the dust emission \citep[red line;][]{dale02} that
362: reproduces fairly well the observed data
363: %\footnote{Note that both the
364: %PEGACE model to the optical data and the far-IR dust model are simply
365: %being used to provide a continuous description of the energy output
366: %for the purpose of integrating across the available data. The physical
367: %motivation and accuracy of these models are not particularly relevant,
368: %(they simply provide good functional fits).}
369: Integrating the far-IR
370: curve we obtain a total radiant dust energy of $(0.6 \pm 0.1) \times
371: 10^{35}$~W~Mpc$^{-3}$, in excellent agreement with our prediction.
372: This provides independent support that the high value for the central
373: face-on opacity is correct, and implies that significant corrections
374: to the observed flux of individual galaxies are necessary. This result
375: also leaves little or no room for other sources of dust heating in the
376: nearby Universe, such as active galactic nuclei, and provides the
377: first fully reconciled estimate of the CSED.
378:
379: \section{Discussions and Ramifications}
380: This work has reconciled three apparently inconsistent observations,
381: namely; the severe attenuation-inclination relation seen in the MGC
382: data \citep{mgc07}; the conclusion that inter-arm regions are
383: optically thin \citep{white00,holwerda07}; and the relatively high
384: far-IR dust emission. The TP-model achieves this by incorporating
385: distinct dust components that allow for optically thin inter-arm and
386: outer regions coupled with an optically thick central region. This
387: relatively simple development,
388: %and perhaps obvious given the high
389: %opacity of the Galactic centre,
390: has a number of far-reaching
391: ramifications. Firstly, all basic measurements of galaxy fluxes that
392: do not correct for dust attenuation will require significant revision
393: (i.e., $0.2$--$2.5$~mag in $B$) depending on an individual galaxy's
394: inclination, bulge-to-total ratio and wavelength of
395: observation. Second, many galaxies will contain heavily embedded
396: bulges due to the centrally concentrated dust in their discs. This can
397: easily lead to significant errors in optical estimates of their fluxes
398: and stellar masses; this is because although stellar mass estimates do
399: correct for optically thin dust attenuation they cannot, of course,
400: correct for mass hidden behind an entirely optically thick
401: screen. Finally, dust attenuation could conceivably play a part in the
402: morphology-density relation and the proposed transformation of disc
403: galaxies from late- to early-type as they enter the cluster
404: environment. For example, using the corrections provided, it is easy
405: to show that an Sab galaxy at the median inclination ($60^\circ$) will
406: see its observed $B/T$ change from $0.3$ to $0.6$, its color get
407: significantly redder, and its luminosity get brighter, if all its dust
408: was to be removed.
409: %Dust attenuation is clearly a major issue which
410: %demands our attention if we are to robustly compare galaxy samples
411: %across different environments, wavelength ranges, orientations, and
412: %epochs.
413: %The corrections given provide the starting point to this
414: %process.
415:
416: \acknowledgments Richard Tuffs is grateful for the support of a
417: Livesey Award whilst working on this paper at UCLan.
418: %The Millennium
419: %Galaxy Catalogue consists of imaging data from the Isaac Newton
420: %Telescope and spectroscopic data from the Anglo Australian Telescope,
421: %the ANU 2.3m, the ESO New Technology Telescope, the Telescopio
422: %Nazionale Galileo, and the Gemini Telescope. The survey has been
423: %supported through grants from the Particle Physics and Astronomy
424: %Research Council (UK) and the Australian Research Council (AUS). The
425: %data and data products are publicly available from
426: %http://www.eso.org/$\sim$jliske/mgc/ or on request from J.~Liske or
427: %S.P.~Driver.
428:
429: \begin{thebibliography}{}
430: \bibitem[Allen et al.(2006)]{allen06} Allen, P., Driver, S.P., Graham,
431: A.W., Cameron, E., Liske, J., Cross, N.J.G., De Propris, R.\ 2006,
432: MNRAS, 371, 2
433: \bibitem[Babbedge et al.(2006)]{babbedge06} Babbedge, T.S.R., et al.\
434: 2006, MNRAS, 370, 1159
435: \bibitem[Baldry \& Glazebrook(2003)]{baldry03} Baldry, I., Glazebrook,
436: K.\ 2003, ApJ, 593, 258
437: \bibitem[Bell et al.(2003)]{bell03} Bell, E., McIntosh, D., Katz, N.,
438: Weinberg, M.D.\ 2003, ApJSS, 149, 289
439: \bibitem[Bianchi et al.(2000)]{bianchi00} Bianchi, S., Davies, J.I.,
440: Alton, P.B.\ 2000, A\&A, 359, 65
441: \bibitem[Blanton et al.(2003)]{blanton03} Blanton, M., et al.\ 2003,
442: ApJ, 592, 819
443: \bibitem[Budavari et al.(2005)]{budavari05} Budavari, T., et al.\
444: 2005, ApJ, 619, 31
445: \bibitem[Burstein et al.(1991)]{burstein91} Burstein, D., Haynes,
446: M.P., Faber, M.\ 1991, Nature, 353, 515
447: \bibitem[Calzetti(2001)]{calzetti01} Calzetti D.\ 2001, PASA, 113, 162
448: \bibitem[Cardelli et al.(1989)]{cardelli89} Cardelli, J.A., Clayton,
449: G.C., Mathis, J.S.\ 1989, ApJ, 345, 245
450: \bibitem[Choi et al.(2007)]{choi07} Choi Y., Park C., Vogeley M.S., 2007, ApJ, 658, 884
451: \bibitem[Dale \& Helou(2002)]{dale02} Dale, D.A., Helou, G.\ 2002,
452: ApJ, 576, 159
453: \bibitem[Disney et al.(1989)]{disney89} Disney, M.J., Davies, J.I.,
454: Phillipps, S.\ 1989, MNRAS, 239, 939
455: \bibitem[Driver et al.(2005)]{mgc05} Driver, S.P., Liske, J., Cross,
456: N.J.G., De Propris, R., Allen, P.D.\ 2005, MNRAS, 360, 81
457: \bibitem[Driver et al.(2007)]{mgc07} Driver, S.P., Popescu, C., Tuffs,
458: R.J., Graham, A.W., Liske, J., Allen, P.D., De Propris R.\ 2007,
459: MNRAS, 379, 1022
460: \bibitem[Efstathiou et al.(1988)]{efstathiou88} Efstathiou, G., Ellis,
461: R.S., Peterson, B.A.\ 1988, MNRAS, 232, 431
462: \bibitem[Felten(1977)]{felten77} Felten, J.E.\ 1977 AJ, 82, 861
463: \bibitem[Fioc \&Rocca-Volmeragen(1997)]{pegace} Fioc, M.,
464: Rocca-Volmerange, B., 1997, A\&A, 326, 950
465: \bibitem[Giovanelli et al.(1995)]{giovanelli95} Giovanelli, R., et
466: al.\ 1995, AJ. 110, 1059
467: \bibitem[Holwerda et al.(2007)]{holwerda07} Holwerda, B.W., Keel,
468: W.C., Bolton, A.\ 2007, AJ, 134, 2385
469: \bibitem[Hopkins \& Beacom(2006)]{hopkins06} Hopkins, A.M., Beacom,
470: J.F.\ 2006, ApJ, 651, 142
471: \bibitem[Huang et al.(2007)]{huang07} Huang, J.-S., et al.\ 2007,
472: ApJ, 664, 840
473: \bibitem[Kochanek et al.(2001)]{kochaneck01} Kochanek, C.S.\ 2001,
474: ApJ, 560, 566
475: \bibitem[Liske et al.(2003)]{mgc01} Liske, J., Lemon, D.J., Driver,
476: S.P., Cross, N.J.G., Couch, W.J.\ 2003, MNRAS, 344, 307
477: \bibitem[Maller et al.(2008)]{maller08} Maller A., Berlind A.A., Blanton M.R., Hogg D.W., 2008, ApJ, submitted (astro-ph/0801.3286)
478: \bibitem[Misiriotis et al.(2001)]{misiriotis01} Misiriotis, A.,
479: Popescu, C.C., Tuffs, R.J., Kylafis, N.D.\ 2001, A\&A, 372, 775
480: \bibitem[M\"ollenhoff et al.(2006)]{mollenhoff06} M\"ollenhoff, C.,
481: Popescu, C.C., Tuffs, R.J.\ 2006, A\&A, 456, 941
482: \bibitem[Padilla \& Strauss(2008)]{padilla08} Padialla N.D., Strauss M.A., 2008, MNRAS, submitted (astro-ph/0802.0877)
483: \bibitem[Popescu et al.(2000)]{popescu00} Popescu, C.C., Misiriotis,
484: A., Kylafis, N.D., Tuffs, R.J., Fischera, J.\ 2000 A\&A, 362, 138
485: \bibitem[Popescu \& Tuffs(2007)]{popescu07} Popescu, C.C., Tuffs, R.J.\
486: 2007, arXiv:0709.2310v1
487: \bibitem[Primack et al.(2005)]{primack05} Primack, J., Bullock, J.S.,
488: Somerville, R.S.\ 2005, {\sl Observational Gamma-ray Cosmology}, in
489: Proc of AIP, Vol 745, Eds: F.A.~Aharonian, H.J.~V\"olk, \& D.~Horns (Publ: AIPC), p22-33
490: \bibitem[Schechter(1976)]{schechter76} Schechter, P.\ 1976, ApJ, 203, 297
491: \bibitem[Seares(1931)]{seares31} Seares, F.H.\ 1931, PASP, 43, 371
492: \bibitem[Shao et al.(2007)]{shao07} Shao Z., Xiao W., Shen S., Mo H.J., Xia X., Deng Z., 2007, ApJ, 659, 1159
493: \bibitem[Silva et al.(1998)]{silva98} Silva, L., Granato, G.L.,
494: Bressan, A., Danese, L.\ 1998, ApJ, 509, 103
495: \bibitem[Takeuchi et al.(2006)]{takeuchi06} Takeuchi, T.T., Ishii,
496: T.T., Dole, H., Dennefeld, M., Lagache, G., Puget, J.-L.\ 2006, A\&A, 448, 525
497: \bibitem[Tuffs et al.(2004)]{tuffs04} Tuffs, R.J., Popescu, C.C.,
498: V\"olk, H.J., Kylafis, N.D., Dopita M.A.\ 2004, A\&A, 419, 821
499: \bibitem[Unterborm \& Ryden(2008)]{unterborn08} Unterborn C.T., Ryden B.S., 2008, ApJ, submitted (astro-ph/0801.2400)
500: \bibitem[Valentijn(1990)]{valentijn90} Valentijn, E.A.\ 1990, Nature, 346, 153
501: \bibitem[White et al.(2000)]{white00} White (III), R.E., Keel, W.C.,
502: Conselice, C.J.\ 2000, ApJ, 542, 761
503: \bibitem[Xilouris et al.(1999)]{xilouris99} Xilouris, E.M., Byun,
504: Y.I., Kylafis, N.D., Paleologou, E.V., Papamastorakis, J.\ 1999,
505: A\&A, 344, 868
506:
507: \end{thebibliography}{}
508:
509: \clearpage
510:
511: \begin{table}
512: \caption{Coefficients for use in
513: Equations 1 and 2 to provide bulge and disc attenuation corrections
514: (with $<5$\% error in the predicted values due to the adopted fitting
515: function).}
516:
517: \begin{tabular}{ccccccc} \hline
518: Bandpass & $b_1$ & $b_2$ & $b_3$ & $d_1$ & $d_2$ & $d_3$ \\ \hline \hline
519: $u$ & $1.10$ & $0.95$ & $2.18$ & $0.45$ & $2.31$ & $3.42$ \\
520: $B$ & $0.89$ & $1.27$ & $1.73$ & $0.24$ & $1.20$ & $2.73$ \\
521: $g$ & $0.83$ & $1.29$ & $1.71$ & $0.22$ & $1.18$ & $2.74$ \\
522: $r$ & $0.63$ & $1.33$ & $1.73$ & $0.16$ & $1.10$ & $2.80$ \\
523: $i$ & $0.48$ & $1.35$ & $1.84$ & $0.11$ & $1.03$ & $2.89$ \\
524: $z$ & $0.38$ & $1.35$ & $1.84$ & $0.09$ & $0.96$ & $2.98$ \\
525: $J$ & $0.25$ & $1.22$ & $2.26$ & $0.06$ & $0.80$ & $3.21$ \\
526: $H$ & $0.18$ & $1.02$ & $2.43$ & $0.05$ & $0.64$ & $3.51$ \\
527: $K$ & $0.11$ & $0.79$ & $2.77$ & $0.04$ & $0.46$ & $4.23$ \\ \hline
528: \end{tabular}
529: \end{table}
530:
531:
532: \begin{table*}
533: \footnotesize
534: \caption{Derived Schechter luminosity function parameters for the MGC
535: with varying degrees of dust attenuation corrections.}
536:
537: \begin{tabular}{lcccc} \hline
538: \footnotesize
539: Sample & $M^* - 5 \log h_{70}$ & $\alpha$ & $\phi_*$ & $j_B$ \\
540: & [mag] &
541: & [$10^{-3}$ $h^3_{70}$ Mpc$^{-3}$ ($0.5$~mag)$^{-1}$]
542: & [$10^8$ $h_{70}$ $L_{\odot}$ Mpc$^{-3}$]
543: \\ \hline \hline
544: No dust corr. & $-20.57\pm0.04$ & $-1.14\pm0.03$ & $6.7\pm0.3$ & $1.9\pm0.2$ \\
545: Inclination corr. & $-20.78\pm0.04$ & $-1.16\pm0.03$ & $7.0\pm0.3$ & $2.4\pm0.2$ \\
546: Incl.+face-on corr. & $-21.32\pm0.05$ & $-1.32\pm0.02$ & $4.8\pm0.3$ & $3.1\pm0.5$ \\ \hline
547: \end{tabular}
548: \end{table*}
549:
550: \clearpage
551:
552: \begin{figure}
553: \vspace{-3.5cm}
554: \plotone{f1.eps}
555: %\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig1.eps}
556: \caption{The dust attenuation--inclination relations for galaxy discs
557: (right) and bulges (left) shown for a variety of bands (as indicated
558: on the right hand sides) as predicted by the TP-model calibrated on
559: $B$-band disc data \citep{mgc07}. The non-zero attenuation at $1 -
560: \cos(i) = 0$ is the residual face-on attenuation predicted by the
561: model.}
562: \end{figure}
563:
564: \clearpage
565:
566: \begin{figure}
567: \vspace{-2.5cm}
568: \plotone{f2.eps}
569: %\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig2.eps}
570: \caption{Main panel: the $B$-band galaxy luminosity function; ignoring
571: all consideration of dust (dotted line), after consideration of the
572: empirically derived attenuation--inclination relation only (dashed
573: line), and after a full treatment of dust attenuation (including the
574: face-on model correction; solid line). Side panel: the projected
575: $3\sigma$ error contours for two of the three fitting parameters,
576: $\alpha$ (the faint-end slope) and $M^*$ (the characteristic
577: luminosity).}
578: \end{figure}
579:
580: \clearpage
581:
582: \begin{figure}
583: \plotone{f3.eps}
584: %\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig3.eps}
585: \caption{The global photon escape fraction averaged over all
586: inclinations versus wavelength. The dotted lines show estimated error
587: boundaries (see text).}
588: \end{figure}
589:
590: \clearpage
591:
592: \begin{figure}
593: \plotone{f4.eps}
594: %\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig4.eps}
595: \caption{The cosmic energy output covering the region dominated by
596: starlight (left peak) and by dust emission (right peak). The orange
597: line shows the observed (uncorrected) cosmic energy output from the
598: total nearby galaxy population, while the black line shows the same
599: after correction for the fraction of photons attenuated by dust. The
600: discrepancy in the integrals over these two curves yields the total
601: energy of starlight lost to heating of the dust grains. If starlight
602: is the only source of dust heating then this energy loss must equal
603: the total radiant energy of the dust emission (i.e., the two shaded
604: regions must and do contain equal energy).}
605: \end{figure}
606:
607:
608: %\begin{figure}
609: %\plotone{fig1.eps}
610: %\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig1.eps}
611: %\caption{A schematic of our dust model indicating the bulge (red) and
612: %disc (orange) stellar distributions along with the three dust
613: %components which consist of: an optically thin disc (black); an
614: %optically thick disc (shaded); and a clumpy component (stars). For
615: %completeness the equations we use to model these components are also
616: %shown.}
617: %\end{figure}
618:
619: \end{document}
620: