4.7 Article

Co-orbiting satellite galaxy structures are still in conflict with the distribution of primordial dwarf galaxies

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stu1005

关键词

methods: data analysis; galaxies: dwarf; galaxies: kinematics and dynamics; Local Group; dark matter

资金

  1. DAAD/Go8 [56265912]
  2. Australian Research Council [DP120100475, DP130100388]
  3. National Science Foundation [AST 1211602]
  4. National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NNX13AG92G]
  5. FONDECYT [3140146]
  6. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  7. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1211602] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Both major galaxies in the Local Group host planar distributions of co-orbiting satellite galaxies, the Vast Polar Structure (VPOS) of the Milky Way and the Great Plane of Andromeda (GPoA). The I > cold dark matter (I > CDM) cosmological model did not predict these features. However, according to three recent studies the properties of the GPoA and the flattening of the VPOS are common features among subhalo based I > CDM satellite systems, and the GPoA can be naturally explained by satellites being acquired along cold gas streams. We point out some methodological issues in these studies: either the selection of model satellites is different from that of the observed ones, or an incomplete set of observational constraints has been considered, or the observed satellite distribution is inconsistent with basic assumptions. Once these issues have been addressed, the conclusions are different: features like the VPOS and GPoA are very rare (each with probability a parts per thousand(2)10(-3), and combined probability < 10(-5)) if satellites are selected from a I > CDM simulation combined with semi-analytic modelling, and accretion along cold streams is no natural explanation of the GPoA. The origin of planar dwarf galaxy structures remains unexplained in the standard paradigm of galaxy formation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据