1 / 35

Boötes III: a Disrupted Dwarf Galaxy?

Boötes III: a Disrupted Dwarf Galaxy?. Jeff Carlin (University of Virginia). Collaborators. Ricardo Muñoz (Yale) Carl Grillmair (Spitzer Science Center) Steve Majewski (UVa) David Nidever (UVa). For more details, see Carlin et al. 2009 (astro-ph 0907.3738) – ApJL accepted.

calvinrichardson
Download Presentation

Boötes III: a Disrupted Dwarf Galaxy?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Boötes III: a Disrupted Dwarf Galaxy? Jeff Carlin (University of Virginia)

  2. Collaborators • Ricardo Muñoz (Yale) • Carl Grillmair (Spitzer Science Center) • Steve Majewski (UVa) • David Nidever (UVa) For more details, see Carlin et al. 2009 (astro-ph 0907.3738) – ApJL accepted.

  3. “Transition objects” – dSphs in the throes of tidal disruption “Field of streams” from V. Belokurov UMa II Draco Willman I UMa CVn II CVn I Coma Bootes I Hercules Segue 1 Bootes II Leo V Leo IV We see disrupting dwarf galaxies (e.g. Sgr, Carina, Leo I), and a multitude of remnant streams, but what about the intermediate stage?

  4. “Transition objects” – dSphs in the throes of tidal disruption “Field of streams” from C. Grillmair We see disrupting dwarf galaxies (e.g. Sgr, Carina, Leo I), and a multitude of remnant streams, but what about the intermediate stage?

  5. Some expected properties of transition objects • Distorted morphology, large size • Associated tidal stream? • Low surface brightness • Power-law component of surface brightness profile • High velocity dispersion • Rotation / velocity gradient • Radial (i.e. destructive) orbit • Metal poor • Metallicity gradient? See, e.g., Muñoz, Majewski, & Johnston 2008; Peñarrubia et al. 2009; Oh, Lin, & Aarseth 1995; Piatek & Pryor 1995 for modeling of tidal effects on dSphs

  6. Boötes III Stellar overdensity discovered by Grillmair 2009 (ApJ 693, 1118) using matched-filter technique. (l,b) = (35.3, 75.4) d = 46 kpc Boo III

  7. Boötes III “Styx stream” passes through the same line of sight

  8. Boötes III “Styx stream” passes through the same line of sight

  9. Boötes III CMD Background-subtracted CMD shows clear overdensity Best matched by M15 ridgeline ([Fe/H] = -2.26) shifted to 46 kpc g g - i g - r

  10. Boötes III CMD Prominent blue horizontal branch (BHB), also at 46 kpc. g g - i

  11. Boötes III spatial distribution

  12. Boötes III spatial distribution ~ 1 sq. degree

  13. BooIII surface brightness profile Unfiltered surface density from Grillmair 2009: (-1 < (g-i) < 1) r a R-1

  14. BooIII surface brightness profile Background-subtracted surface density of red clump stars from Correnti et al. 2009: r a R-1 Integrated magnitude: MV = -5.8, ellipticity: e ~ 0.5

  15. Tidal disruption and surface brightness • With each pericentric passage, outer SBP exhibits a break, with power-law “break” population. • As tidal disruption proceeds, the power-law portion moves inward, until in final stages, complete SBP approaches a power-law. Peñarrubia et al. 2009

  16. Spectroscopic Observations, Feb. 2009 • MMT 6.5m + Hectospec multiobject spectrograph • 227 targets, 18.5 < g < 22.5, along the turnoff and lower RGB • Includes 6 BHB candidates • 4550-7050 Angstroms, R~3000 • 9 x 1800 sec. exposure • RV uncertainties: 3 – 15 km/s

  17. BooIII Radial Velocities • 193 stars with reliable RVs (i.e. S/N > 10) • Central peak matches predicted MW halo distribution (from Besançon model) • Two peaks in RVs: • ~ 200 km/s • ~ -200 km/s Vhelio (km/s)

  18. BooIII Radial Velocities • All 6 BHB candidates in our sample are in 200 km/s peak •  Boötes III RV signature • (red arrow on figure) Vhelio (km/s)

  19. CMD w/ RV membership candidates • RV candidates follow isochrone for [Fe/H]=-2.3, 10.2 Gyr population at 46 kpc (which also fits BHB and turnoff) • We excluded as likely foreground stars those more than 0.25 mags from this isochrone  20 candidates in final sample (large filled symbols)

  20. Mean velocity, dispersion • Using maximum likelihood method for all 20 candidates, we obtain the systemic velocity and velocity dispersion of Boötes III:

  21. Mean velocity, dispersion • Using maximum likelihood method for all 20 candidates, we obtain the systemic velocity and velocity dispersion of Boötes III: High Galactocentric RV for an object at b=75.4, dist=46 kpc  radial (and thus potentially destructive) orbit.

  22. Mean velocity, dispersion • Using maximum likelihood method for all 20 candidates, we obtain the systemic velocity and velocity dispersion of Boötes III: Highest measured LOS velocity dispersion for MW dSph

  23. Mass, M/L estimate • Following Wolf et al. 2009 (see talk on Tuesday), we estimate mass based on: • No reliable measurement yet for half-light radius. Substitute σo = 14.0 km/s: • (similar to common mass scale found by Strigari et al. 2008, Mateo 1998)

  24. Mass, M/L estimate • Taking MV = -5.8 (Correnti et al. 2009), • Combining with the mass estimate:

  25. [Fe/H] measurement Vhelio (km/s) g [Fe/H] Metallicities based on Lick spectroscopic indices <[Fe/H]> ≈ -2.1 ± 0.2 (but σ[Fe/H]~0.6 dex)

  26. Spatial distribution of members/targets • Large, filled symbols: BooIII RV members • Small diamonds: all observed stars Contours from Grillmair 2009 data

  27. Radial metallicity gradient? [Fe/H] r (arcmin)

  28. No sign of velocity gradient or rotation Vhelio (km/s) position angle (degrees)

  29. No sign of velocity gradient or rotation Vhelio (km/s) RA (degrees) – roughly along major axis

  30. Expected properties of transition objects – comparison to Boötes III properties • Distorted morphology, large size •  Associated tidal stream? (Styx stream) •  Low surface brightness •  Power-law component of surface brightness profile •  High velocity dispersion (σo = 14.0 km/s) • Rotation / velocity gradient ??? •  Radial (i.e. destructive) orbit (VGSR=239 km/s) •  Metal poor ([Fe/H] ~ -2.1) • Metallicity gradient ???

  31. Further study • Deep photometry to derive structural properties • Identify more RV members, both in the core and over a larger area • Velocity dispersion profile • Rotation or velocity gradient? • High-resolution spectra for detailed abundances • Detailed comparison with models of tidally disrupting satellites For more details, see Carlin et al. 2009 (astro-ph 0907.3738).

  32. Absolute magnitude vs. half-light radius Martin et al. 2008

  33. [Fe/H] vs. abs. magnitude for dSphs, globular clusters Simon & Geha 2007

  34. Simon & Geha 2007

  35. Boötes III

More Related