Paper detail

Massive Galaxies Impede Massive Outflows

A set of 66 3D hydrodynamical simulations explores how galactic stellar mass affects three-phase, starburst-driven outflows. Simulated velocities are compared to two basic analytic models: with (Johnson \& Axford 1971) and without (Chevalier \& Clegg 1985) a gravitational potential. For stellar mass $<10^{10}$ solar masses, simulated velocities match those of both analytical models and are unaffected by the potential; above they reduce significantly as expected from the analytic model with gravity. Gravity also affects total outflow mass and each of the three phases differently. Outflow mass in the hot, warm, and cold phases each scale with stellar mass as $\log M_*=$ -0.25, -0.97, and -1.70, respectively. Thus, the commonly used Chevalier \& Clegg analytic model should be modified to include gravity when applied to higher mass galaxies. In particular, using M82 as the canonical galaxy to interpret hydrodynamical simulations of starburst-driven outflows from higher mass galaxies will underestimate the retarding effect of gravity. Using the analytic model of Johnson \& Axford with realistic thermalization efficiency and mass loading I find that only galaxy masses that are less than $\sim10^{11.5}$ solar masses can outflow.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.