Paper detail

The SLUGGS Survey: Breaking degeneracies between dark matter, anisotropy and the IMF using globular cluster subpopulations in the giant elliptical NGC 5846

We study the mass and anisotropy distribution of the giant elliptical galaxy NGC 5846 using stars, as well as the red and blue globular cluster (GC) subpopulations. We break degeneracies in the dynamical models by taking advantage of the different phase space distributions of the two GC subpopulations to unambiguously constrain the mass of the galaxy and the anisotropy of the GC system. Red GCs show the same spatial distribution and behaviour as the starlight, whereas blue GCs have a shallower density profile, a larger velocity dispersion and a lower kurtosis, all of which suggest a different orbital distribution. We use a dispersion-kurtosis Jeans analysis and find that the solutions of separate analyses for the two GC subpopulations overlap in the halo parameter space. The solution converges on a massive dark matter halo, consistent with expectations from $Λ$CDM and WMAP7 cosmology in terms of virial mass ($\log M_{DM} \sim13.3 M_{sun}$) and concentration ($c_{vir}\sim8$). This is the first such analysis that solves the dynamics of the different GC subpopulations in a self-consistent manner. Our method improves the uncertainties on the halo parameter determination by a factor of two and opens new avenues for the use of elliptical galaxy dynamics as tests of predictions from cosmological simulations. The implied stellar mass-to-light ratio derived from the dynamical modelling is fully consistent with a Salpeter initial mass function (IMF) and rules out a bottom light IMF. The different GC subpopulations show markedly distinct orbital distributions at large radii, with red GCs having an anisotropy parameter $β\sim0.4$ outside $\sim3R_e$, and the blue GCs having $β\sim0.15$ at the same radii, while centrally ($\sim1R_e$) they are both isotropic. We discuss the implications of our findings within the two-phase formation scenario for early-type galaxies.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors2 topics

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.