4.7 Article

THE SMITH CLOUD: HIGH-VELOCITY ACCRETION AND DARK MATTER CONFINEMENT

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 707, 期 2, 页码 1642-1649

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/2/1642

关键词

dark matter; Galaxy: evolution; Galaxy: halo; ISM: clouds; ISM: individual (Smith Cloud)

资金

  1. Australian Postgraduate Award
  2. Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Smith Cloud is a massive system of metal-poor neutral and ionized gas (M-gas greater than or similar to 2 x 10(6) M-circle dot) that is presently moving at high velocity (V-GSR approximate to 300 km s(-1)) with respect to the Galaxy at a distance of 12 kpc from the Sun. The kinematics of the cloud's cometary tail indicates that the gas is in the process of accretion onto the Galaxy, as first discussed by Lockman et al. Here, we re-investigate the cloud's orbit by considering the possibility that the cloud is confined by a dark matter halo. This is required for the cloud to survive its passage through the Galactic corona. We consider three possible models for the dark matter halo (Navarro-Frenk-White (NFW), Einasto, and Burkert) including the effects of tidal disruption and ram pressure stripping during the cloud's infall onto and passage through the Galactic disk. For the NFW and Einasto dark matter models, we are able to determine reasonable initial conditions for the Smith Cloud, although this is only marginally possible with the Burkert model. For all three models, the progenitor had an initial (gas+dark matter) mass that was an order-of-magnitude higher than inferred today. In agreement with Lockman et al., the cloud appears to have punched through the disk approximate to 70 Myr ago. For our most successful models, the baryon-to-dark matter ratio is fairly constant during an orbital period but drops by a factor of 2-5 after transiting the disk. The cloud appears to have only marginally survived its transit and is unlikely to retain its integrity during the next transit approximate to 30 Myr from now.

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