4.7 Article

Most pseudo-bulges can be formed at later stages of major mergers

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stx2453

关键词

galaxies: bulges; galaxies: evolution; galaxies: formation; galaxies: spiral

资金

  1. TS PhD grant from PSL (Paris Sciences et Lettres - France)
  2. Region Ile de France
  3. project Equip@Meso of the programme 'Investissements d'Avenir' [ANR-10-EQPX-29-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most giant spiral galaxies have pseudo or disc-like bulges that are considered to be the result of purely secular processes. This may challenge the hierarchical scenario predicting about one major merger per massive galaxy (> 3 x 10(10) M-circle dot) since the last similar to 9 billion years. Here, we verify whether or not the association between pseudo-bulges and secular processes is irrevocable. Using GADGET2 N-body/SPH simulations, we have conducted a systematic study of remnants of major mergers for which progenitors have been selected (1) to follow the gas richness-look back time relationship, and (2) with a representative distribution of orbits and spins in a cosmological frame. Analysing the surface mass density profile of both nearby galaxies and merger remnants with two components, we find that most of them show pseudo-bulges or bar dominated centres. Even if some orbits lead to classical bulges just after the fusion, the contamination by the additional gas that gradually accumulates to the centre and forming stars later on, leads to remnants apparently dominated by pseudo-bulges. We also found that simple smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) simulations should be sufficient to form realistic spiral galaxies as remnants of ancient gas-rich mergers without the need for specifically tuned feedback conditions. We then conclude that pseudo-bulges and bars in spiral galaxies are natural consequences of major mergers when they are realized in a cosmological context, i.e. with gas-rich progenitors as expected when selected in the distant Universe.

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