Paper detail

The Milky Way's bright satellites as an apparent failure of LCDM

We use the Aquarius simulations to show that the most massive subhalos in galaxy-mass dark matter halos in LCDM are grossly inconsistent with the dynamics of the brightest Milky Way dwarf spheroidal galaxies. While the best-fitting hosts of the dwarf spheroidals all have 12 < Vmax < 25 km/s, LCDM simulations predict at least ten subhalos with Vmax > 25 km/s. These subhalos are also among the most massive at earlier times, and significantly exceed the UV suppression mass back to z ~ 10. No LCDM-based model of the satellite population of the Milky Way explains this result. The problem lies in the satellites' densities: it is straightforward to match the observed Milky Way luminosity function, but doing so requires the dwarf spheroidals to have dark matter halos that are a factor of ~5 more massive than is observed. Independent of the difficulty in explaining the absence of these dense, massive subhalos, there is a basic tension between the derived properties of the bright Milky Way dwarf spheroidals and LCDM expectations. The inferred infall masses of these galaxies are all approximately equal and are much lower than standard LCDM predictions for systems with their luminosities. Consequently, their implied star formation efficiencies span over two orders of magnitude, from 0.2% to 20% of baryons converted into stars, in stark contrast with expectations gleaned from more massive galaxies. We explore possible solutions to these problems within the context of LCDM and find them to be unconvincing. In particular, we use controlled simulations to demonstrate that the small stellar masses of the bright dwarf spheroidals make supernova feedback an unlikely explanation for their low inferred densities.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.

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.