Paper detail

Hubble Space Telescope proper motion (HSTPROMO) catalogs of Galactic globular clusters. III. Dynamical distances and mass-to-light ratios

We present dynamical distance estimates for 15 Galactic globular clusters and use these to check the consistency of dynamical and photometric distance estimates. For most of the clusters, this is the first dynamical distance estimate ever determined. We extract proper-motion dispersion profiles using cleaned samples of bright stars from the Hubble Space Telescope proper-motion catalogs recently presented in Bellini et al. (2014) and compile a set of line-of-sight velocity-dispersion profiles from a variety of literature sources. Distances are then estimated by fitting spherical, non-rotating, isotropic, constant mass-to-light (M/L) dynamical models to the proper-motion and line-of-sight dispersion profiles together. We compare our dynamical distance estimates with literature photometric estimates from the Harris (1996, 2010 edition) globular cluster catalog and find that the mean fractional difference between the two types is consistent with zero at just $-1.9 \pm 1.7 \%$. This indicates that there are no significant biases in either estimation method and provides an important validation of the stellar-evolution theory that underlies photometric distance estimates. The analysis also estimates dynamical M/L ratios for our clusters; on average, the dynamically-inferred M/L ratios agree with existing stellar-population-based M/L ratios that assume a Chabrier initial mass function (IMF) to within $-8.8 \pm 6.4 \%$, implying that such an IMF is consistent with our data. Our results are also consistent with a Kroupa IMF, but strongly rule out a Salpeter IMF. We detect no correlation between our M/L offsets from literature values and our distance offsets from literature values, strongly indicating that our methods are reliable and our results are robust.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

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.