Paper detail

Hydrostatic equilibrium profiles for gas in elliptical galaxies

We present an analytic formulation for the equilibrium gas density profile of early-type galaxies that explicitly includes the contribution of stars in the gravitational potential. We build a realistic model for an isolated elliptical galaxy and explore the equilibrium gas configurations as a function of multiple parameters. For an assumed central gas temperature k_B*T_0=0.6 keV, we find that neglecting the gravitational effects of stars, which can contribute substantially in the innermost regions, leads to an underestimate of the enclosed baryonic gas mass by up to ~65% at the effective radius, and by up to ~15% at the NFW scale radius, depending on the stellar baryon fraction. This formula is therefore important for estimating the baryon fraction in an unbiased fashion. These new hydrostatic equilibrium solutions, derived for the isothermal and polytropic cases, can also be used to generate more realistic initial conditions for simulations of elliptical galaxies. Moreover, the new formulation is relevant when interpreting X-ray data. We compare our composite isothermal model to the standard beta-model used to fit X-ray observations of early-type galaxies, to determine the value of the NFW scale radius r_s. Assuming a 10% stellar baryon fraction, we find that the exclusion of stars from the gravitational potential leads to (i) an underestimate of r_s by ~80%, and to (ii) an overestimate of the enclosed dark matter at r_s by a factor of ~2, compared to the equivalent beta-model fit results when stars are not taken into account. For higher stellar mass fractions, a beta-model is unable to accurately reproduce our solution, indicating that when the observed surface brightness profile of an isolated elliptical galaxy is found to be well fitted by a beta-model, the stellar mass fraction cannot be much greater than ~10%.

preprint2010arXivOpen 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.