4.7 Article

A Chandra view of dark matter in early-type galaxies

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 646, 期 2, 页码 899-918

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/505019

关键词

dark matter; galaxies : elliptical and lenticular, cD; galaxies : halos; galaxies : ISM; X-rays : galaxies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present a Chandra study of mass profiles in seven elliptical galaxies, of which three have galaxy-scale and four have group-scale halos, demarcated at 10(13) M-circle dot. These represent the best available data for nearby objects with comparable X-ray luminosities. We measure approximately flat mass-to-light (M/L) profiles within an optical half-light radius (R-eff), rising by an order of magnitude at similar to 10 R-eff, which confirms the presence of dark matter (DM). The data indicate hydrostatic equilibrium, which is also supported by agreement with studies of stellar kinematics in elliptical galaxies. The data are well fitted by a model comprising an NFW DM profile and a baryonic component following the optical light. The distribution of DM halo concentration parameters (c) versus M-vir agrees with Lambda CDM predictions and our observations of bright groups. Concentrations are slightly higher than expected, which is most likely a selection effect. Omitting the stellar mass drastically increases c, possibly explaining large concentrations found by some past observers. The stellar M/L-K agree with population synthesis models, assuming a Kroupa IMF. Allowing adiabatic compression (AC) of the DM halo by baryons made M/L more discrepant, casting some doubt on AC. Our best-fitting models imply total baryon fractions similar to 0.04-0.09, consistent with models of galaxy formation incorporating strong feedback. The groups exhibit positive temperature gradients, consistent with the universal'' profiles found in other groups and clusters, whereas the galaxies have negative gradients, suggesting a change in the evolutionary history of the systems around M-vir similar or equal to 10(13) M-circle dot.

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