4.7 Article

Modeling the structure and dynamics of dwarf spheroidal galaxies with dark matter and tides

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 679, 期 1, 页码 346-372

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/587125

关键词

dark matter; galaxies : kinematics and dynamics; galaxies : stellar content; Local Group

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report the results of N-body simulations of disrupting satellites aimed at exploring whether the observed features of dSphs can be accounted for with simple, mass-follows-light (MFL) models including tidal disruption. As a test case, we focus on the Carina dwarf spheroidal (dSph), which presently is the dSph system with the most extensive data at large radius. We find that previous N-body, MFL simulations of dSphs did not sufficiently explore the parameter space of satellite mass, density, and orbital shape to find adequate matches to Galactic dSph systems, whereas with a systematic survey of parameter space we are able to find tidally disrupting, MFL satellite models that rather faithfully reproduce Carina's velocity profile, velocity dispersion profile, and projected density distribution over its entire sampled radius. The successful MFL model satellites have very eccentric orbits, currently favored by CDM models, and central velocity dispersions that still yield an accurate representation of the bound mass and observed central M/L similar to 40 of Carina, despite inflation of the velocity dispersion outside the dSph core by unbound debris. Our survey of parameter space also allows us to address a number of commonly held misperceptions of tidal disruption and its observable effects on dSph structure and dynamics. The simulations suggest that even modest tidal disruption can have a profound effect on the observed dynamics of dSph stars at large radii. Satellites that are well described by tidally disrupting MFL models could still be fully compatible with Lambda CDM if, for example, they represent a later stage in the evolution of luminous subhalos.

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