Paper detail

Evidence of Cosmic Evolution of the Stellar Initial Mass Function

Theoretical arguments and indirect observational evidence suggest that the stellar initial mass function (IMF) may evolve with time, such that it is more weighted toward high mass stars at higher redshift. Here we test this idea by comparing the rate of luminosity evolution of massive early-type galaxies in clusters at 0.02<z<0.83 to the rate of their color evolution. A combined fit to the rest-frame U-V color evolution and the previously measured evolution of the M/L_B ratio gives x~-0.3 for the logarithmic slope of the IMF in the region around 1 Solar mass, flatter than the present-day value in the Milky Way disk of x=1.3. The best-fitting luminosity-weighted formation redshift of the stars in massive cluster galaxies is ~3.7, and a possible interpretation is that the characteristic mass m_c had a value of ~2 Solar masses at z~4 (compared to m_c~0.1 Solar masses today), in qualitative agreement with models in which the characteristic mass is a function of the Jeans mass in molecular clouds. Such a ``bottom-light&#39;&#39; IMF for massive cluster galaxies has significant implications for the interpretation of measurements of galaxy formation and evolution. Applying a simple form of IMF evolution to literature data, we find that the volume-averaged star formation rate at high redshift may have been overestimated (by a factor of 3-4 at z>4), and the cosmic star formation history may have a fairly well-defined peak at z~1.5. The M/L_V ratios of galaxies are less affected than their star formation rates, and future data on the stellar mass density at z>3 will provide further constraints on IMF evolution. The formal errors likely underestimate the uncertainties, and confirmation of thes results requires a larger sample of clusters and the inclusion of redder rest-frame colors in the analysis.

preprint2007arXivOpen 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.