Paper detail

Disentangling the dark matter halo from the stellar halo

The outer haloes of the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies contain as much important information on their assembly and formation history as the properties of the discs resident in their centres. In this paper we have used the Constrained Local UniversE Simulation project to disentangle the stellar and DM component of three galaxies that resemble the MW, M31 and M33 using both DM only and DM + gas-dynamical simulations. Stars that are accreted in substructures and then stripped follow a completely different radial distribution than the stripped DM: the stellar halo is much more centrally concentrated than DM. In order to understand how the same physical process can lead to different z=0 radial profiles, we examined the potential at accretion of each stripped particle. We found that star particles sit at systematically higher potentials than DM, making them harder to strip. We then searched for a threshold in the potential of accreted particles ϕ_[th], above which DM particles behave as star particles. We found such a threshold at >16 ϕ_{subhalo}, where ϕ_{subhalo} is the potential at a subhaloes edge at the time of accretion. Thus a rule as simple as selecting particles according to their potential at accretion is able to reproduce the effect that the complicated physics of star formation has on the stellar distribution. This niversal result reproduces the stellar halo to an accuracy of within ~2%. Studies which make use of DM particles as a proxy for stars will undoubtedly miscalculate their proper radial distribution and structure unless particles are selected according to their potential at accretion. Furthermore, we have examined the time it takes to strip a given star or DM particle after accretion. We find that, owing to their higher binding energies, stars take longer to be stripped than DM. The stripped DM halo is thus considerably older than the stripped stellar halo.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

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.