Paper detail

The Fundamental Plane of Massive Quiescent Galaxies at z~2

We examine the Fundamental Plane (FP) and mass-to-light ratio ($M/L$) scaling relations using the largest sample of massive quiescent galaxies at $1.5<z<2.5$ to date. The FP ($r_{e}, σ_{e}, I_{e}$) is established using $19$ $UVJ$ quiescent galaxies from COSMOS with $Hubble$ $Space$ $Telescope$ $(HST)$ $H_{F160W}$ rest-frame optical sizes and X-shooter absorption line measured stellar velocity dispersions. For a very massive, ${\rm{log}}(M_{\ast}/M_{\odot})>11.26$, subset of 8 quiescent galaxies at $z>2$, from Stockmann et al. (2020), we show that they cannot passively evolve to the local Coma cluster relation alone and must undergo significant structural evolution to mimic the sizes of local massive galaxies. The evolution of the FP and $M/L$ scaling relations, from $z=2$ to present-day, for this subset are consistent with passive aging of the stellar population and minor merger structural evolution into the most massive galaxies in the Coma cluster and other massive elliptical galaxies from the MASSIVE Survey. Modeling the luminosity evolution from minor merger added stellar populations favors a history of merging with "dry" quiescent galaxies.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access14 authors1 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.

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.