The Baryonic Faber-Jackson Relation and Fundamental Plane of Galaxy Groups, Elliptical Galaxies, and Dwarf Galaxies

Abstract

The baryonic Faber-Jackson relation (BFJR) links the baryonic mass of pressure-supported systems to their mean velocity dispersion. For elliptical galaxies, the BFJR is thought to be a projection of the fundamental plane (FP), which includes the stellar half-mass radius as a third variable. We study the BFJR and FP across eight orders of magnitude in baryonic mass, encompassing galaxy groups, ellipticals, dwarf ellipticals, and dwarf spheroidals. We compile and homogenize data for 1400 pressure-supported systems and measure their mean internal baryonic acceleration gbar. We find that the properties of the BFJR and FP systematically depend on the internal acceleration of the sampled systems, with a transition around the acceleration scale a0 1.2×1010 m s-2. For low-acceleration systems with gbar < 0.6\,a0 (dwarf galaxies and galaxy groups), the BFJR relation takes the form 10(Mbar/M) = (4.19 0.10) 10(σ los/km s-1) + (2.55+0.16-0.16) with an orthogonal intrinsic scatter of 0.11 0.01 dex. The FP expected from the Newtonian virial theorem is followed by high-acceleration systems (massive ellipticals with gbar 6 \,a0), whereas low-acceleration systems deviate from the FP at both low masses (dwarf galaxies) and high masses (galaxy groups). Our results generally agree with the expectations of MOND: high-acceleration systems follow the Newtonian virial theorem in which a radial variable explicitly appears (the FP), while low-acceleration systems follow the MOND virial theorem in which the radial dependence disappears (the BFJR). On average, the MOND external field effect seems to play a secondary role in dwarf galaxies in galaxy groups and clusters.

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…