Paper detail

Quiescent Galaxy Size, Velocity Dispersion, and Dynamical Mass Evolution

We use surveys covering the redshift range $0.05 < z < 3.8$ to explore quiescent galaxy scaling relations and the redshift evolution of the velocity dispersion, size, and dynamical mass at fixed stellar mass. For redshift $z < 0.6$ we derive mass limited samples and demonstrate that these large samples enhance constraints on the evolution of the quiescent population. The constraints include 2985 new velocity dispersions from the SHELS F2 survey (Geller et al. 2014). In contrast with the known substantial evolution of size with redshift, evolution in the velocity dispersion is negligible. The dynamical-to-stellar mass ratio increases significantly as the universe ages, in agreement with recent results that combine high redshift data with the SDSS. Like other investigators, we interpret this result as an indication that the dark matter fraction within the effective radius increases as a result of the impact of the minor mergers that are responsible for size growth. We emphasize that dense redshift surveys covering the range $0.07 < z < 1$ along with strong and weak lensing measurements could remove many ambiguities in evolutionary studies of the quiescent population.

preprint2021arXivOpen 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.