2015
DOI: 10.1017/s1743921315010868
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inverting the dynamical evolution of globular clusters: clues to their origin

Abstract: Abstract. Scaling relations for globular clusters (GCs) differ from scaling relations for pressure supported (elliptical) galaxies. We show that two-body relaxation is the dominant mechanism in shaping the bivariate dependence of density on mass and Galactocentric distance for Milky Way GCs with masses 10 6 M , and it is possible, but not required, that GCs formed with similar scaling relations as ultra-compact dwarf galaxies. We use a fast cluster evolution model to fit a parameterised model for the initial p… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 45 publications
(43 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The distribution at the high-mass end of the CMF falls sharply, which is found to be a common characteristic (Larsen 2009 is often fitted with a Schechter function (Schechter 1976). Clusters loose mass during their evolution, both due to stellar evolution, and dynamical processes (Gieles & Alexander 2017). The former process is not expected to alter the slope of the function, as long as the IMF of stars is independent of the mass of the clusters, whereas the impact of the latter process is mass-dependent and hence will influence the CMF of evolving clusters (Gieles 2009).…”
Section: Cluster Mass Functionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…The distribution at the high-mass end of the CMF falls sharply, which is found to be a common characteristic (Larsen 2009 is often fitted with a Schechter function (Schechter 1976). Clusters loose mass during their evolution, both due to stellar evolution, and dynamical processes (Gieles & Alexander 2017). The former process is not expected to alter the slope of the function, as long as the IMF of stars is independent of the mass of the clusters, whereas the impact of the latter process is mass-dependent and hence will influence the CMF of evolving clusters (Gieles 2009).…”
Section: Cluster Mass Functionmentioning
confidence: 93%