The kinematic connection between galaxies and dark matter haloes

By A. Dutton, C. Conroy, F. V. D. Bosch, Francisco Prada, S. More. 2010

145 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Using estimates of dark halo masses from satellite kinematics, weak gravitational lensing and halo abundance matching, combined with the Tully-Fisher (TF) and Faber-Jackson relations, we derive the mean relation between the optical, V opt, and virial, V 200, circular velocities of early- and late-type galaxies at redshift z � 0. For late-type galaxies, VoptV200 over the velocity range V opt = 90-260 km s −1 , and is consistent with V opt = V max,h (the maximum circular velocity of NFW dark matter haloes in the concordancecold dark matter (� CDM) cosmology). However, for early-type galaxies VoptV200, with the exception of early-type galaxies with Vopt � 350 km s −1 . This is inconsistent with early-type galaxies being, in general, globally isothermal. For low-mass (Vopt 250 km s −1 ) early-types V opt > V max,h, indicating that baryons have modified the potential well, while high-mass (Vopt 400 km s −1 ) early-types have V opt < V max,h. Folding in measurements of the black hole mass-velocity dispersion relation, our results imply that the supermassive black hole-halo mass relation has a logarithmic slope which varies from � 1. 4a t halo masses of� 10 12 h −1 Mto � 0.65 at halo masses of 10 13.5 h −1 M� . The values of V opt/V 200 we infer for the Milky Way (MW) and M31 are lower than the values currently favoured by direct observations and dynamical models. This offset is due to the fact that the MW and M31 have higher V opt and lower V 200 compared to typical late-type galaxies of the same stellar masses. We show that current high-resolution cosmological hydrodynamical simulations are unable to form galaxies which simultaneously reproduce both the V opt/V 200 ratio and the V opt-Mstar (Tully-Fisher/Faber-Jackson) relation.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fe38357ecac279c496b1724ecb851aae229b3f2c

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. P. Hopkins
  2. L. Hernquist
  3. Volker Springel
  4. R. Dav'e
  5. R. Somerville
  6. Andrey V. Kravtsov
  7. C. Conroy
  8. A. Dekel

In Instrumentation

  1. P. Hopkins
  2. L. Hernquist
  3. A. Dekel
  4. C. Conroy
  5. R. Dav'e
  6. Volker Springel
  7. James S. Bullock
  8. R. Somerville

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

  1. P. Hopkins
  2. James S. Bullock
  3. M. Boylan-Kolchin
  4. C. Faucher-Giguére
  5. A. Dekel
  6. James Wadsley
  7. Volker Springel
  8. Andrey V. Kravtsov

Citations in the corpus