Paper detail

A Comparison of Methods for Determining the Age Distribution of Star Clusters: Application to the Large Magellanic Cloud

The age distribution of star clusters in nearby galaxies plays a crucial role in evaluating the lifetimes and disruption mechanisms of the clusters. Two very different results have been found recently for the age distribution chi(t) of clusters in the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC). We found that chi(t) can be described approximately by a power law chi(t) propto t^{gamma}, with gamma -0.8, by counting clusters in the mass-age plane, i.e., by constructing chi(t) directly from mass-limited samples. Gieles & Bastian inferred a value of gamma~, based on the slope of the relation between the maximum mass of clusters in equal intervals of log t, hereafter the M_max method, an indirect technique that requires additional assumptions about the upper end of the mass function. However, our own analysis shows that the M_max method gives a result consistent with our direct counting method for clusters in the LMC, namely chi(t) propto t^-0.8 for t<10^9 yr. The reason for the apparent discrepancy is that our analysis includes many massive (M>1.5x10^3 M_sol), recently formed (t<10^7 yr) clusters, which are known to exist in the LMC, whereas Gieles & Bastian are missing such clusters. We compile recent results from the literature showing that the age distribution of young star clusters in more than a dozen galaxies, including dwarf and giant galaxies, isolated and interacting galaxies, irregular and spiral galaxies, has a similar declining shape. We interpret this approximately "universal" shape as due primarily to the progressive disruption of star clusters over their first ~few x 10^8 yr, starting soon after formation, and discuss some observational and physical implications of this early disruption for stellar populations in galaxies.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.