4.6 Article

OBSERVING THE END OF COLD FLOW ACCRETION USING HALO ABSORPTION SYSTEMS

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL LETTERS
卷 735, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/2041-8205/735/1/L1

关键词

cosmology: theory; galaxies: evolution; galaxies: formation; galaxies: halos; methods: numerical

资金

  1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NNX09AG01G]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)
  3. Directorate For Geosciences
  4. Div Atmospheric & Geospace Sciences [0819662] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  5. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  6. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [0907893] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We use cosmological smoothed particle hydrodynamic simulations to study the cool, accreted gas in two Milky Way size galaxies through cosmic time to z = 0. We find that gas from mergers and cold flow accretion results in significant amounts of cool gas in galaxy halos. This cool circum-galactic component drops precipitously once the galaxies cross the critical mass to form stable shocks, M(vir) = Msh similar to 10(12) M(circle dot). Before reaching M(sh), the galaxies experience cold mode accretion ( T < 10(5) K) and show moderately high covering fractions in accreted gas: f(c) similar to 30%-50% for R < 50 comoving kpc and N(HI) > 10(16) cm(-2). These values are considerably lower than observed covering fractions, suggesting that outflowing gas ( not included here) is important in simulating galaxies with realistic gaseous halos. Within similar to 500 Myr of crossing the Msh threshold, each galaxy transitions to hot mode gas accretion, and f(c) drops to similar to 5%. The sharp transition in covering fraction is primarily a function of halo mass, not redshift. This signature should be detectable in absorption system studies that target galaxies of varying host mass, and may provide a direct observational tracer of the transition from cold flow accretion to hot mode accretion in galaxies.

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

4.6
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