FORMATION AND EVOLUTION OF THE DISK SYSTEM OF THE MILKY WAY: [α/Fe] RATIOS AND KINEMATICS OF THE SEGUE G-DWARF SAMPLE

By Y. S. Lee, Timothy C. Beers, D. An, Željko Ivezic´, Andreas Just, C. Rockosi, H. Morrison, Jennifer A. Johnson, R. Schönrich, J. Bird and 3 more. 2011

170 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We employ measurements of the [α/Fe] ratio derived from low-resolution (R ∼ 2000) spectra of 17,277 G-type dwarfs from the SEGUE survey to separate them into likely thin- and thick-disk subsamples. Both subsamples exhibit strong gradients of orbital rotational velocity with metallicity, of opposite signs, −20 to −30 km s−1 dex−1 for the thin-disk and +40 to +50 km s−1 dex−1 for the thick-disk population. The rotational velocity is uncorrelated with Galactocentric distance for the thin-disk subsample and exhibits a small trend for the thick-disk subsample. The rotational velocity decreases with distance from the plane for both disk components, with similar slopes (−9.0 ± 1.0 km s−1 kpc−1). Thick-disk stars exhibit a strong trend of orbital eccentricity with metallicity (about −0.2 dex−1), while the eccentricity does not change with metallicity for the thin-disk subsample. The eccentricity is almost independent of Galactocentric radius for the thin-disk population, while a marginal gradient of the eccentricity with radius exists for the thick-disk population. Both subsamples possess similar positive gradients of eccentricity with distance from the Galactic plane. The shapes of the eccentricity distributions for the thin- and thick-disk populations are independent of distance from the plane, and include no significant numbers of stars with eccentricity above 0.6. Among several contemporary models of disk evolution that we consider, radial migration appears to have played an important role in the evolution of the thin-disk population, but possibly less so for the thick disk, relative to the gas-rich merger or disk heating scenarios. We emphasize that more physically realistic models and simulations need to be constructed in order to carry out the detailed quantitative comparisons that our new data enable.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a34ee64916fd87d8c59d1da67722987d8637cbeb

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

  1. Hans-Walter Rix
  2. I. Minchev
  3. Jo Bovy
  4. P. Hopkins
  5. Simon D. M. White
  6. Volker Springel
  7. L. Hernquist
  8. Joss Bland-Hawthorn

In Instrumentation

  1. I. Minchev
  2. Hans-Walter Rix
  3. Jo Bovy
  4. Joss Bland-Hawthorn
  5. P. Hopkins
  6. Simon D. M. White
  7. A. Helmi
  8. M. Martig

In Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

  1. N. Evans II
  2. P. McMillan
  3. V. Belokurov
  4. I. Ramírez
  5. Timothy C. Beers
  6. Jo Bovy
  7. Sergey E. Koposov
  8. J. Brinkmann

Citations in the corpus