Paper detail

The Case Against Bimodal Star Formation in Elliptical Galaxies

We consider the present-day photometric and chemical properties of elliptical galaxies, adopting the bimodal star formation scenario of Elbaz, Arnaud & Vangioni-Flam (1995). These models utilise an initial mass function (IMF) biased heavily toward massive stars during the early phases of galactic evolution, leading to early Type II supernovae-driven galactic winds. A subsequent lengthy, milder, star formation phase with a normal IMF ensues, responsible supposedly for the stellar population observed today. Based upon chemical evolution arguments alone, this scenario has been invoked to explain the observed metal mass, and their abundance ratios, in the intracluster medium of galaxy clusters. Building upon the recent compilations of metallicity-dependent isochrones for simple stellar populations, we have constructed a coupled photometric and chemical evolution package for composite stellar populations in order to quantify the effects of such a model upon the photo-chemical properties of the resultant elliptical galaxies. We demonstrate that these predicted properties are incompatible with those observed at the current epoch.

preprint1995arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 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.