Paper detail

Faint dwarfs as a test of DM models: WDM vs. CDM

We use high resolution Hydro$+$N-Body cosmological simulations to compare the assembly and evolution of a small field dwarf (stellar mass ~ 10$^{6-7}$ M$\odot$, total mass 10$^{10}$ M$\odot$ in $Λ$ dominated CDM and 2keV WDM cosmologies. We find that star formation (SF) in the WDM model is reduced and delayed by 1-2 Gyr relative to the CDM model, independently of the details of SF and feedback. Independent of the DM model, but proportionally to the SF efficiency, gas outflows lower the central mass density through `dynamical heating&#39;, such that all realizations have circular velocities $<$ 20kms at 500$~$pc, in agreement with local kinematic constraints. As a result of dynamical heating, older stars are less centrally concentrated than younger stars, similar to stellar population gradients observed in nearby dwarf galaxies. Introducing an important diagnostic of SF and feedback models, we translate our simulations into artificial color-magnitude diagrams and star formation histories in order to directly compare to available observations. The simulated galaxies formed most of their stars in many $\sim$10 Myr long bursts. The CDM galaxy has a global SFH, HI abundance and Fe/H and alpha-elements distribution well matched to current observations of dwarf galaxies. These results highlight the importance of directly including `baryon physics&#39; in simulations when 1) comparing predictions of galaxy formation models with the kinematics and number density of local dwarf galaxies and 2) differentiating between CDM and non-standard models with different DM or power spectra.

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.