Paper detail

The Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies in a constrained hydrodynamical simulation: morphological evolution

We study the two main constituent galaxies of a constrained simulation of the Local Group as candidates for the Milky Way (MW) and Andromeda (M31). We focus on the formation of the stellar discs and its relation to the formation of the group as a rich system with two massive galaxies, and investigate the effects of mergers and accretion as drivers of morphological transformations. We use a state-of-the-art hydrodynamical code which includes star formation, feedback and chemical enrichment to carry out our study. We run two simulations, where we include or neglect the effects of radiation pressure from stars, to investigate the impact of this process on the morphologies and star formation rates of the simulated galaxies. We find that the simulated M31 and MW have different formation histories, even though both inhabit, at z=0, the same environment. These differences directly translate into and explain variations in their star formation rates, in-situ fractions and final morphologies. The M31 candidate has an active merger history, as a result of which its stellar disc is unable to survive unaffected until the present time. In contrast, the MW candidate has a smoother history with no major mergers at late times, and forms a disc that grows steadily; at z=0 the simulated MW has an extended, rotationally-supported disc which is dominant over the bulge. Our two feedback implementations predict similar evolution of the galaxies and their discs, although some variations are detected, the most important of which is the formation time of the discs: in the model with weaker/stronger feedback the discs form earlier/later. In summary, by comparing the formation histories of the two galaxies, we conclude that the particular merger/accretion history of a galaxy rather than its environment at the LG-scales is the main driver of the formation and subsequent growth or destruction of galaxy discs.

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.