Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:10:13.660Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Triaxial versus Spherical Dark Matter Halo Profiles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2013

Alexander Knebe  and
Volkmar Wießner
Alexander Knebe*
Affiliation:
Astrophysikalisches Institut Potsdam, 14482 Potsdam, Germany
Volkmar Wießner
Affiliation:
Astrophysikalisches Institut Potsdam, 14482 Potsdam, Germany
*
BCorresponding author. E-mail: [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.

When analyzing dark matter halos forming in cosmological n-body simulations, it is common practice to obtain the density profile utilizing spherical shells. However, it is also known that the systems under investigation are far from spherically symmetric but, rather, follow a triaxial mass distribution. In this study we present an estimator for the error introduced by spherically averaging an elliptical mass distribution. We systematically investigate the differences arising when using a triaxial density profile under the assumption of spherical symmetry. We show that the variance in the density can be as large as 50% in the outer parts of dark matter halos for extreme (but still credible) axis ratios of 0.55: 0.67: 1. The inner parts are less affected but still show a scatter at the 16% level for these prolate systems. For more moderate ellipticities, i.e. axis ratios of 0.73: 0.87: 1, the error is smaller but still as large as 10–20% depending on distance. We further provide a simple formula that allows estimation of this variance as a function of radius for arbitrary axis ratios. We conclude that highly prolate and/or oblate systems are better fit by analytical profiles that take into account the triaxial nature of cosmological objects.

Keywords

cosmology: theorycosmology: dark mattermethods: analyticalmethods: n-body simulations
Type
Research Article
Information
Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , 2006 , pp. 125 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © Astronomical Society of Australia 2006

References

Allgood, B., Flores, R. A., Primack, J. R., Kravtsov, A. V., Wechsler, R. H., Faltenbacher, A. & Bullock, J. S. 2006, MNRAS, 367, 1781 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, C. G., Williams, L. R., Barnes, E. I., Babul, A. & Dalcanton, J. 2005, ApJ, 634, 756 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailin, J. & Steinmetz, M. 2005, ApJ, 627, 647 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailin, J. et al. 2005, ApJ, 627, L17 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Blok, W. J. G. & Bosma, A. 2002, MNRAS, 385, 816 Google Scholar
Dehnen, W. & McLaughlin, D. E. 2005, MNRAS, 363, 1057 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diemand, J., Moore, B. & Stadel, J. 2004, MNRAS, 353, 624 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diemand, J., Zemp, M., Moore, B., Stadel, J. & Carollo, M. 2005, MNRAS, 364, 665 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubinski, J. & Carlberg, R. G. 1991, ApJ, 378, 496 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukushige, T. & Makino, J. 1997, ApJ, 447, L9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukushige, T. & Makino, J. 2001, ApJ, 557, 533 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukushige, T., Kawai, A. & Makino, J. 2004, ApJ, 606, 625 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franx, M., Illingworth, G. & de Zeeuw, T. 1991, ApJ, 383, 112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jing, Y. P. 2000, ApJ, 535, 30 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jing, Y. P. & Suto, Y. 2000, ApJ, 529, L69 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jing, Y. P. & Suto, Y. 2002, ApJ, 574, 538 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, S. H. 2004, MNRAS, 352, L41 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, S. H. & Stadel, J. 2006, JCAP, in press (astro-ph/0510656)Google Scholar
Kasun, S. F. & Evrard, A. E. 2005, ApJ, 629, 781 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazantzidis, S., Kravtsov, A. V., Zentner, A. R., Allgood, B., Nagai, D. & Moore, B. 2004, ApJ, 611, L73 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, B., Governato, F., Quinn, T., Stadel, J. & Lake, G. 1998, ApJ, 499, L5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, B., Quinn, T., Governato, F., Stadel, J. & Lake, G. 1999, MNRAS, 310, 1147 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S. & White, S. D. M. 1997, ApJ, 490, 493 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Navarro, J. F., Hayashi, E., Power, C., Jenkins, A., Frenk, C. S., White, S. M. D.,Springel, V.,Stadel, J. & Quinn, T. R. 2004, MNRAS, 349, 1039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oguri, M., Takada, M., Umetsu, K. & Broadhurst, T. 2005, ApJ, 632, 841 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Power, C., Navarro, J. F., Jenkins, A., Frenk, C. S., White, S. D. M., Springel, V., Stadel, J. & Quinn, T. 2003, MNRAS, 338, 14 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Power, C., Jenkins, A., Frenk, C. S., Hayashi, E. & Navarro, J. F. 2006, submitted to MNRASGoogle Scholar
Reed, D., Governato, F., Verde, L., Gardner, J., Quinn, T., Stadel, J., Merritt, D. & Lake, G. 2005, MNRAS, 357, 82 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, J. D., Bolatto, A. D., Leroy, A., Blitz, L. & Gates, E. L. 2005, ApJ, 621, 757 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swaters, R. A., Madone, B. F., Van den Bosch, F. C. & Balcells, M. 2003, ApJ, 583, 732 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tasitsiomi, A., Kravtsov, A. V., Gottlober, S. & Klypin, A. A. 2004, ApJ, 607, 125 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J. E. & Navarro, J. F. 2001, ApJ, 563, 483 CrossRefGoogle Scholar