Paper detail

MIND THE GAP: Is The Too Big To Fail Problem Resolved?

The faintness of satellite systems in galaxy groups has contributed to the widely discussed "missing satellite" and "too big to fail" issues. Using techniques based on Tremaine & Richstone (1977), we show that there is no problem with the luminosity function computed from modern codes per se, but that the gap between first and second brightest systems is too big {\it given} the luminosity function, that the same large gap is found in modern, large scale baryonic $Λ$CDM simulations such as EAGLE and IllustrisTNG, is even greater in dark matter only simulations, and finally, that this is most likely due to gravitationally induced merging caused by classical dynamical friction. Quantitatively the gap is larger in the computed simulations than in the randomized ones by $1.79 \pm 1.04$, $1.51 \pm 0.93$, $3.43 \pm 1.44$ and $3.33 \pm 1.35$ magnitudes in the EAGLE, IllustrisTNG, and dark matter only simulations of EAGLE and IllustrisTNG respectively. Furthermore the anomalous gaps in the simulated systems are even larger than in the real data by over half a magnitude and are still larger in the dark matter only simulations. Briefly stated, $Λ$CDM does not have a problem with an absence of "too big to fail" galaxies. Statistically significant large gaps between first and second brightest galaxies are to be expected.

preprint2019arXivOpen 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.