Paper detail

The discrepancy between dynamical and stellar masses in massive compact galaxies traces non-homology

For many massive compact galaxies, their dynamical masses ($M_\mathrm{dyn} \propto σ^2 r_\mathrm{e}$) are lower than their stellar masses ($M_\star$). We analyse the unphysical mass discrepancy $M_\star / M_\mathrm{dyn} > 1$ on a stellar-mass-selected sample of early-type galaxies ($M_\star \gtrsim 10^{11} \ \mathrm{M_\odot}$) at redshifts $z \sim 0.2$ to $z \sim 1.1$. We build stacked spectra for bins of redshift, size and stellar mass, obtain velocity dispersions, and infer dynamical masses using the virial relation $M_\mathrm{dyn} \equiv K \ σ_\mathrm{e}^2 r_\mathrm{e} / G$ with $K = 5.0$; this assumes homology between our galaxies and nearby massive ellipticals. Our sample is completed using literature data, including individual objects up to $z \sim 2.5$ and a large local reference sample from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). We find that, at all redshifts, the discrepancy between $M_\star$ and $M_\mathrm{dyn}$ grows as galaxies depart from the present-day relation between stellar mass and size: the more compact a galaxy, the larger its $M_\star / M_\mathrm{dyn}$. Current uncertainties in stellar masses cannot account for values of $M_\star / M_\mathrm{dyn}$ above 1. Our results suggest that the homology hypothesis contained in the $M_\mathrm{dyn}$ formula above breaks down for compact galaxies. We provide an approximation to the virial coefficient $K \sim 6.0 \left[ r_\mathrm{e} / (3.185 \ \mathrm{kpc}) \right]^{-0.81} \left[ M_\star / (10^{11} \ \mathrm{M_\odot}) \right]^{0.45}$, which solves the mass discrepancy problem. A rough approximation to the dynamical mass is given by $M_\mathrm{dyn} \sim \left[ σ_\mathrm{e} / (200 \ \mathrm{km \ s^{-1}}) \right]^{3.6} \left[ r_\mathrm{e} / (3 \ \mathrm{kpc}) \right]^{0.35} 2.1 \times 10^{11} \ \mathrm{M_\odot}$.

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.