4.7 Article

DELVING DEEPER INTO THE TUMULTUOUS LIVES OF GALACTIC DWARFS: MODELING STAR FORMATION HISTORIES

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 686, 期 2, 页码 1030-1044

出版社

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/591496

关键词

cosmology: theory; galaxies: dwarf; galaxies: formation

资金

  1. NSF [AST-0708087]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paucity of observed dwarf galaxies in the Local Group relative to the abundance of predicted dark matter halos remains one of the greatest puzzles of the Lambda CDM paradigm. Solving this puzzle now requires not only matching the numbers of objects but also understanding the details of their star formation histories. We present a summary of such histories derived from the HST data using the color-magnitude diagram fitting method. To reduce observational uncertainties, we condense the data into five cumulative parameters: the fractions of stellar mass formed in the last 1, 2, 5, and 10 Gyr, and the mean stellar age. We interpret the new data with a phenomenological model based on the mass assembly histories of dark matter halos and the Schmidt law of star formation. The model correctly predicts the radial distribution of the dwarfs and the fractions of stars formed in the last 5 and 10 Gyr. However, in order to be consistent with the observations, the model requires a significant amount of recent star formation in the last 2 Gyr. Within the framework of our model, this prolonged star formation can be achieved by adding a stochastic variation in the density threshold of the star formation law. The model results are not sensitive to late gas accretion, the slope of the Schmidt law, or the details of cosmic reionization. A few discrepancies still remain: our model typically predicts too large stellar masses, only a modest population of ultrafaint dwarfs, and a small number of dwarfs with anomalously young stellar populations. Nevertheless, the observed star formation histories of Local Group dwarfs are generally consistent the expected star formation in cold dark matter halos.

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