4.7 Article

SEXTANS' COLD SUBSTRUCTURES AS A DYNAMICAL JUDGE: CORE, CUSP, OR MOND?

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 777, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/777/1/65

Keywords

dark matter; galaxies: dwarf; galaxies: halos; Galaxy: kinematics and dynamics; methods: numerical

Funding

  1. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
  2. FRONTIER grant
  3. CONACyT [165584]
  4. PAPIIT [IN106212]
  5. German Research Foundation (DFG) [Sonderforschungsbereich SFB 881]
  6. Volkswagen foundation [I/80041-043, I/84678/84680]
  7. Ministry of Science, Research and the Arts of Baden-Wurttemberg [823.219-439/30, 823.219-439/36]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The cold dark matter model predicts cuspy dark matter (DM) halos. However, it has been found that in some low-mass galaxies, cored dark halos provide a better description of their internal dynamics. Here we give constraints on the dark halo profile in the Sextans dwarf spheroidal galaxy by studying the longevity of two cold kinematic substructures detected in this galaxy. We perform N-body simulations of a stellar clump in the Sextans dwarf galaxy, including a live DM halo and the main stellar component. We find that if the dark halo is cuspy, stellar clumps orbiting with semi-major axis approximate to 400 pc are disrupted in similar to 5 Gyr, even if the clump is initially as compact stellar cluster with a radius of r(c) = 5 pc. Stellar clusters in an initial orbit with semi-major axis <= 250 pc may survive to dissolution, but their orbits decay toward the center by dynamical friction. In contrast, the stellar clumps can persist for a Hubble time within a cored DM halo, even if the initial clump's radius is as extended as r(c) = 80 pc. We also study the evolution of the clump in the MONDian context. In this scenario, we find that even an extended stellar clump with radius r(c) = 80 pc survives for a Hubble time, but an unrealistic value for the stellar mass-to-light ratio of 9.2 is needed.

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