Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T11:48:02.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Dwarfs Beyond: Relating Stellar and Halo Mass in Dwarf Galaxies to z ~ 1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2015

Sarah H. Miller
Sarah H. Miller*
Affiliation:
University of California, Irvine, email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Do the kinematics and mass profiles of dwarf galaxies present a fundamental challenge to standard cold dark matter (CDM) models? New, deep spectroscopy using DEIMOS on Keck for hundreds of low stellar mass (107-109 M⊙ star-forming galaxies at intermediate redshift (0.2 < z < 1) addresses this inquiry in a way that is less subject to cosmic variance and environmental bias than previous, more local work. Half of this sample reveals resolved, doppler-shifted nebular emission, used to constrain rotation curves. From these we can construct the stellar mass Tully-Fisher relation to masses as low as ~107 M⊙, and a persistent discrepancy is found between predictions from simulations and models compared to our observations. We suggest on-going and future tests that will be more effective in distinguishing between the effects of baryonic feedback and alternative models of dark matter in this remarkable regime.

Keywords

galaxies: dwarfs - galaxies: evolution - galaxies: formation
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 10 , Issue S311: Galaxy Masses as Constraints of Formation Models , July 2014 , pp. 150 - 153
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2015 

References

Behroozi, P. S., Wechsler, R. H., & Conroy, C. 2013, ApJ, 770, 57Google Scholar
Berlind, A. A. & Weinberg, D. H. 2002, ApJ, 575, 587Google Scholar
Boylan-Kolchin, M., Bullock, J. S., & Kaplinghat, M. 2011, MNRAS, 415, L40Google Scholar
Courteau, S., Dutton, A. A., van den Bosch, F. C., MacArthur, L. A., Dekel, A., McIntosh, D. H., & Dale, D. A. 2007, ApJ, 671, 203Google Scholar
Dutton, A. A., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 410, 1660Google Scholar
Ferrero, I., Abadi, M. G., Navarro, J. F., Sales, L. V., & Gurovich, S. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 2817Google Scholar
Garrison-Kimmel, S., Rocha, M., Boylan-Kolchin, M., Bullock, J. S., & Lally, J. 2013, MNRAS, 433, 3539Google Scholar
McGaugh, S. S. 2012, AJ, 143, 40Google Scholar
Miller, S. H., Ellis, R. S., Newman, A. B., & Benson, A. 2014, ApJ, 782, 115Google Scholar
Munshi, F., et al. 2013, ApJ, 766, 56Google Scholar
Papastergis, E., Giovanelli, R., Haynes, M. P., & Shankar, F. 2014, (arXiv:1407.4665)Google Scholar
Reyes, R., Mandelbaum, R., Gunn, J. E., Nakajima, R., Seljak, U., & Hirata, C. M. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 2610Google Scholar
Wechsler, R., Zentner, A., Bullock, J. S., Kravtsov, A., & Allgood, B. 2006, ApJ, 652, 71Google Scholar
Weinberg, D. H., Bullock, J. S., Governato, F., Kuzio de Naray, R., & Peter, A. H. G. 2013, (arXiv:1306.0913)Google Scholar