Paper detail

Evolution induced by dry minor mergers onto fast-rotator S0 galaxies

We analysed collisionless N-body simulations of intermediate and minor dry mergers onto S0s to test whether these mergers can generate S0 galaxies with kinematics intermediate between fast and slow rotators. We find that minor mergers induce a lower decrease of the global rotational support than encounters of lower mass ratios, which results in S0s with properties intermediate between fast and slow rotators. The resulting remnants are intrinsically more triaxial, less flattened, and span the whole range of apparent ellipticities up to $ε_\mathrm{e} \sim 0.8$. They do not show lower apparent ellipticities in random projections than initially; on the contrary, the formation of oval distortions and the disc thickening increase the percentage of projections at $0.4 < ε_\mathrm{e} < 0.7$. In the experiments with S0b progenitor galaxies, minor mergers tend to spin up the bulge and to decrease slightly its intrinsic ellipticity, whereas in the cases of primary S0c galaxies they keep the rotational support of the bulge nearly constant and decrease significantly its intrinsic ellipticity. The remnant bulges remain nearly spherical ($B/A \sim C/A > 0.9$), but exhibit a wide range of triaxialities ($0.20 < T < 1.00$). In the plane of global anisotropy of velocities ($δ$) vs. intrinsic ellipticity ($ε_\mathrm{e,intr}$), some of our models extend the linear trend found in previous major merger simulations towards higher $ε_\mathrm{e,intr}$ values, while others depart from it. This is consistent with the wide dispersion exhibited by real S0s in this diagram compared with ellipticals, which follow the linear trend drawn by major merger simulations. The different trends exhibited by ellipticals and S0 galaxies in the $δ$ - $ε_\mathrm{e}$ diagram may be pointing to the different role played by major mergers in the build-up of each morphological type.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.