Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T03:47:42.078Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A universality of dark-halo surface density for the Milky Way and Andromeda dwarf satellites as a probe of the coldness of dark matter

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 May 2016

Kohei Hayashi
Affiliation:
Kavli Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe, University of Tokyo, 5-1-5 Kashiwa-no-ha, Kashiwa, 277-8568, Japan email: [email protected]
Masashi Chiba
Affiliation:
Astronomical Institute, Tohoku University, 6-3 Aoba-ku, Sendai, 980-8578, Japan 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.

We propose a new astrophysical test on the nature of dark matter based on the properties of dark halos associated with dwarf spheroidal galaxies. The method adopts a mean surface density of a dark halo defined within a radius of maximum circular velocity, which is derivable for a wide variety of galaxies with any dark-matter density profiles. We find that even though dark halo density profiles are derived based on the different assumptions for each galaxy sample, this surface density is generally constant across a wide mass range of galaxy. We find that at higher halo-mass scales, this constancy for real galaxies can be naturally reproduced by both cold and warm dark matter (CDM and WDM) models. However, at low-mass scales, for which we have estimated from the Milky Way and Andromeda dwarf satellites, the mean surface density derived from WDM models largely deviates from the observed constancy, whereas CDM models are in reasonable agreement with observations.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2016 

References

de Blok, W. J. G., Walter, F., Brinks, E., et al. 2008, AJ, 136, 2648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donato, F., Gentile, G., Salucci, P., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 397, 1169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentile, G., Burkert, A., Salucci, P., Klein, U., & Walter, F. 2005, ApJL, 634, L145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentile, G., Salucci, P., Klein, U., & Granato, G. L. 2007, MNRAS, 375, 199Google Scholar
Hayashi, K. & Chiba, M. 2015, ApJ, 810, 22Google Scholar
Lovell, M. R., Frenk, C. S., Eke, V. R., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 439, 300Google Scholar
Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. 1997, ApJ, 490, 493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spano, M., Marcelin, M., Amram, P., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 383, 297Google Scholar