Paper detail

Mass Deficits, Stalling Radii, and the Merger Histories of Elliptical Galaxies

A binary supermassive black hole leaves an imprint on a galactic nucleus in the form of a "mass deficit," a decrease in the mass of the nucleus due to ejection of stars by the binary. The magnitude of the mass deficit is in principle related to the galaxy's merger history, but the relation has never been quantified. Here, high-accuracy N-body simulations are used to calibrate this relation. Mass deficits are shown to be approximately 0.5M_{12}, with M_{12} the total mass of the binary; the coefficient in this relation depends only weakly on the binary mass ratio or on the galaxy's pre-existing density profile. Hence, after N mergers, the mass deficit is ~0.5 N M_h with M_h the final (current) black hole mass. When compared with observed mass deficits, this result implies between 1 and 3 mergers for most galaxies, in accord with hierarchical galaxy formation models. Implications for binary stalling radii, the origin of hyper-velocity stars, and the distribution of dark matter at the centers of galaxies are discussed.

preprint2007arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 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.