4.7 Article

Satellite kinematics - II. The halo mass-luminosity relation of central galaxies in SDSS

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 392, Issue 2, Pages 801-816

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14095.x

Keywords

methods: statistical; galaxies: fundamental parameters; galaxies: haloes; galaxies: kinematics and dynamics; galaxies: structure; dark matter

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The kinematics of satellite galaxies reflect the masses of the extended dark matter haloes in which they orbit, and thus shed light on the mass-luminosity relation (MLR) of their corresponding central galaxies. In this paper, we select a large sample of centrals and satellites from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey and measure the kinematics (velocity dispersions) of the satellite galaxies as a function of the r-band luminosity of the central galaxies. Using the analytical framework presented in More, van den Bosch & Cacciato, we use these data to infer both the mean and the scatter of the MLR of central galaxies, carefully taking account of selection effects and biases introduced by the stacking procedure. As expected, brighter centrals on average reside in more massive haloes. In addition, we find that the scatter in halo masses for centrals of a given luminosity, sigma(log) (M), also increases with increasing luminosity. As we demonstrate, this is consistent with sigma(log L), which reflects the scatter in the conditional probability function P(L(c)|M), being independent of halo mass. Our analysis of the satellite kinematics yields sigma(log L) = 0.16 +/- 0.04, in excellent agreement with constraints from clustering and group catalogues, and with predictions from a semi- analytical model of galaxy formation. We thus conclude that the amount of stochasticity in galaxy formation, which is characterized by sigma(log L) , is well constrained, independent of halo mass and in a good agreement with current models of galaxy formation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available