2014
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stt2493
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fixing a rigorous formalism for the accurate analytic derivation of halo properties

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

5
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(Ascasibar and Gottlo ¨ber 2008;Neto et al 2007;Brown et al 2020). Despite its importance and several proposed explanations that involve, for instance, a fundamental connection with the mass accretion history (Ludlow et al 2014(Ludlow et al , 2016, maximum entropy or adiabatic invariance arguments (Taylor and Navarro 2001;Dalal et al 2010a;Pontzen and Governato 2013;El Zant 2013;Juan et al 2014), or even the role of numerical noise as the main driver (Baushev 2015), there is not yet a consensus on the physical explanation behind this result. This is even more puzzling when contrasted with analytic predictions, which suggest single power laws as the result of gravitational collapse [see e.g., the self-similar solution of secondary infall by Bertschinger (1985)].…”
Section: Weakly-interacting Massive Particlesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(Ascasibar and Gottlo ¨ber 2008;Neto et al 2007;Brown et al 2020). Despite its importance and several proposed explanations that involve, for instance, a fundamental connection with the mass accretion history (Ludlow et al 2014(Ludlow et al , 2016, maximum entropy or adiabatic invariance arguments (Taylor and Navarro 2001;Dalal et al 2010a;Pontzen and Governato 2013;El Zant 2013;Juan et al 2014), or even the role of numerical noise as the main driver (Baushev 2015), there is not yet a consensus on the physical explanation behind this result. This is even more puzzling when contrasted with analytic predictions, which suggest single power laws as the result of gravitational collapse [see e.g., the self-similar solution of secondary infall by Bertschinger (1985)].…”
Section: Weakly-interacting Massive Particlesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…AMIGA follows this growth in a well-contrasted analytic manner with no free parameters (Salvador-Solé et al 1998, 2007Raig et al 2001). This allows us to accurately calculate, at any given moment, their abundance (Juan et al 2014a(Juan et al , 2014b and inner structure and kinematics (Salvador-Solé et al 2012a, which in turn sets the structure and temperature of their hot gas (Solanes et al 2005). The amount and metallicity of such a hot gas and the properties of the central galaxy and its satellites are monitored in AMIGA from the individual halo aggregation history.…”
Section: Luminous Sourcesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is a one-to-one correspondence between virialized haloes with mass M at the cosmic time t and non-nested peaks with density contrast δ at the scale S in the Gaussian-filtered Gaussian random density field at an arbitrary initial time t i given by (Juan et al 2014a )…”
Section: Haloes and Peaks (I) Halo-peak Correspondencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…CUSP makes the link between haloes and their seeds, peaks (or maxima), in the primordial Gaussian random field of density perturbations in any given hierarchical cosmology (Juan et al 2014a ). Thus, following the collapse and virialization of those seeds, with well-known properties according to Gaussian statistics, one can accurately derive from first principles and with no single free parameter the properties of virialized haloes.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%