Paper detail

Physical properties of galaxies: toward a consistent comparison between hydrodynamical simulations and SDSS

We study the effects of applying observational techniques to derive the properties of simulated galaxies, with the aim of making an unbiased comparison between observations and simulations. For our study, we used fifteen galaxies simulated in a cosmological context using three different feedback and chemical enrichment models, and compared their z=0 properties with data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). We show that the physical properties obtained directly from the simulations without post-processing can be very different to those obtained mimicking observational techniques. In order to provide simulators a way to reliably compare their galaxies with SDSS data, for each physical property that we studied - colours, magnitudes, gas and stellar metallicities, mean stellar ages and star formation rates - we give scaling relations that can be easily applied to the values extracted from the simulations. These scalings have in general a high correlation, except for the galaxy mean stellar ages and gas oxygen metallicities. Our simulated galaxies are photometrically similar to galaxies in the blue cloud/green valley, but in general they appear older, passive and with lower metal content compared to most of the spirals in SDSS. As a careful assessment of the agreement/disagreement with observations is the primary test of the baryonic physics implemented in hydrodynamical codes, our study shows that considering the observational biases in the derivation of the galaxies' properties is of fundamental importance to decide on the failure/success of a galaxy formation model.

preprint2016arXivOpen 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 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.