Paper detail

Ellipticals at $z=0$ from Self-Consistent Hydrodynamical Simulations: Comparison with SDSS Structural and Kinematical Data

We present results of an analysis of the structural and kinematical properties of a sample of elliptical-like objects (ELOs) identified in four hydrodynamical, self-consistent simulations run with the DEVA code (Serna et al. 2003). Star formation has been implemented in the code through a simple phenomenological parameterization, that takes into account stellar physics processes only implicitly through the values of a threshold gas density, $ρ_{\rm g,thres}$, and an efficiency parameter, $c_*$. The four simulations operate in the context of a $Λ$CDM cosmological model consistent with observations, resolve ELO mass assembly at scales up to $\simeq$ 2 kpc, and differ in the values of their star formation parameters. Stellar masses, projected half-mass radii and central l.o.s. velocity dispersions, $σ_{\rm los, 0}$, have been measured on the ELO sample and their values compared with data from the Sloan digital sky survey. For the first time in self-consistent simulations, a good degree of agreement has been shown, including the Faber-Jackson and the $D_n - σ_{\rm los, 0}$ relations, among others, but only when particular values of the $ρ_{\rm g,thres}$ and $c_*$ parameters are used. This demostrates the effect that the star formation parameterization has on the ELO mass distribution. Additionally, our results suggest that it is not strictly necessary, at the scales resolved in this work, to appeal to energy sources other than gravitational (as for example supernovae feedback effects) to account for the structure and kinematics of large ellipticals.

preprint2004arXivOpen 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.

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 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.