4.7 Article

Satellites in the field and lens galaxies: SDSS/COSMOS versus SLACS/CLASS

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 403, Issue 2, Pages 826-837

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.16156.x

Keywords

gravitational lensing; galaxies: formation; galaxies: structure

Funding

  1. EU [MEST-CT-2005-19669 'ESTRELA']
  2. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  3. Participating Institutions
  4. National Science Foundation
  5. U.S. Department of Energy
  6. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  7. Japanese Monbukagakusho
  8. Max Planck Society
  9. Higher Education Funding Council for England

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The incidence of subgalactic level substructures is an important quantity, as it is a generic prediction of high-resolution cold dark matter (CDM) models which is susceptible to observational test. Confrontation of theory with observations is currently in an uncertain state. In particular, gravitational lens systems appear to show evidence for flux ratio anomalies, which are expected from CDM substructures although not necessarily in the same range of radius as observed. However, the current small samples of lenses suggest that the lens galaxies in these systems are unusually often accompanied by luminous galaxies. Here, we investigate a large sample of unlensed elliptical galaxies from the Cosmic Evolution Survey (COSMOS) and determine the fraction of objects with satellites, in excess of background counts, as a function of satellite brightness and separation from the primary object. We find that the incidence of luminous satellites within 20 kpc is typically a few tenths of 1 per cent for satellites of a few tenths of the primary flux, comparable to what is observed for the wider but shallower Sloan Digital Sky Survey. Although the environments of lenses in the Sloan Lens ACS survey are compatible with this observation, the Cosmic Lens All-sky Survey (CLASS) radio lenses are significantly in excess of this.

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