Paper detail

Disc Heating: Comparing the Milky Way with Cosmological Simulations

We present the analysis of a suite of simulations run with different particle-and grid-based cosmological hydrodynamical codes and compare them with observational data of the Milky Way. This is the first study to make comparisons of properties of galaxies simulated with particle and grid-based codes. Our analysis indicates that there is broad agreement between these different modelling techniques. We study the velocity dispersion - age relation for disc stars at z=0 and find that four of the simulations are more consistent with observations by Holmberg et al. (2008) in which the stellar disc appears to undergo continual/secular heating. Two other simulations are in better agreement with the Quillen & Garnett (2001) observations that suggest a "saturation" in the heating profile for young stars in the disc. None of the simulations have thin discs as old as that of the Milky Way. We also analyse the kinematics of disc stars at the time of their birth for different epochs in the galaxies' evolution and find that in some simulations old stars are born cold within the disc and are subsequently heated, while other simulations possess old stellar populations which are born relatively hot. The models which are in better agreement with observations of the Milky Way's stellar disc undergo significantly lower minor-merger/assembly activity after the last major merger - i.e. once the disc has formed. All of the simulations are significantly "hotter" than the Milky Way disc; on top of the effects of mergers, we find a "floor" in the dispersion that is related to the underlying treatment of the heating and cooling of the interstellar medium, and the low density threshold which such codes use for star formation. This finding has important implications for all studies of disc heating that use hydrodynamical codes.

preprint2011arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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.

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 graph slice

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.