Paper detail

Mergers in Galaxy Groups - I. Structure and Properties of Elliptical Remnants

We present collisionless simulations of dry mergers in groups of three to twenty-five galaxies to test the hypothesis that elliptical galaxies form at the centers of such groups. Mock observations of the central remnants confirm their similarity to ellipticals, despite having no dissipational component. We vary the profile of the original spiral's bulge and find that ellipticals formed from spirals with exponential bulges have too low Sersic indices. Mergers of spirals with de Vaucouleurs (classical) bulges produce remnants with larger Sersic indices correlated with luminosity, as with SDSS ellipticals. Exponential bulge mergers are better fits to faint ellipticals, whereas classical bulge mergers better match luminous ellipticals. Similarly, luminous ellipticals are better reproduced by remnants undergoing many (>5) mergers, and fainter ellipticals by those with fewer mergers. The remnants follow tight size-luminosity and velocity dispersion-luminosity (Faber-Jackson) relations (<0.12 dex scatter), demonstrating that stochastic merging can produce tight scaling relations if the merging galaxies also follow tight scaling relations. The slopes of the size-luminosity and Faber-Jackson relations are close to observations but slightly shallower in the former case. Both relations' intercepts are offset - remnants are too large but have too low dispersions at fixed luminosity. Some remnants show substantial (v/σ> 0.1) rotational support, although most are slow rotators and few are very fast rotators (v/σ> 0.5). These findings contrast with previous studies concluding that dissipation necessary to produce ellipticals from binary mergers of spirals. Multiple, mostly minor and dry mergers can produce bright ellipticals, whereas significant dissipation could be required to produce faint, rapidly-rotating ellipticals.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.