At best, galaxy-galaxy lensing and satellite dynamics have the potential
to constrain the dependence of the line of sight velocity
dispersion on the projected radius, v(rp).
Determining
v(rp) has proven to be quite a
challenge to
galaxy-galaxy lensing studies, in large part because the shear profiles
of NFW lenses and isothermal sphere lenses are not dramatically different,
except on the very smallest (r < rs) and
very largest (r > rvir) scales
[93].
To date, only one tentative measurement of
v(rp) has been made from
observations of galaxy-galaxy lensing
[24].
Kleinheinrich et al.
[24]
modeled the lens galaxies in the COMBO-17 survey
as singular isothermal spheres with velocity dispersions that scaled
with luminosity as
![]() |
(19) |
where v* is the line of sight
velocity dispersion of the halo of an
L* galaxy. Kleinheinrich et al.
[24]
fixed
to be 0.35
and determined best-fitting values of
v* for projected radii in the
range 20 h-1 kpc < rp <
rmax. When
they considered all lenses in their sample, Kleinheinrich et al.
[24]
found
v* ~ 139 km
sec-1for
rmax = 50 h-1 kpc,
v* ~ 164 km
sec-1for rmax = 150 h-1 kpc,
and
v* ~ 123 km
sec-1for
rmax = 500 h-1 kpc.
This suggests a velocity dispersion profile that rises at small
radii, reaches a maximum, then decreases at large radii.
However, the formal error bars on these measurements show that
all of these values of
v* agree to
within one to two standard deviations.
In addition, it should be kept in mind that each of these measurements of
v* is not independent (as they
would be if a differential measurement of
v*(rp) were
made), so the
data points and their error bars are all correlated with one another.
Considerably stronger constraints on the dependence of the halo velocity dispersion with projected radius have come from the most recent investigations of the motions of satellites about host galaxies. In particular, both Prada et al. [27] and Brainerd [67] have measured decreasing velocity dispersion profiles for the satellites of host galaxies in the SDSS and 2dFGRS, respectively. Although they used different data sets and different host-satellite selection criteria, both Prada et al. [27] and Brainerd [67] used the same technique to make measurements of the velocity dispersion profiles. That is, the distribution of velocity differences, N(|dv|), for satellites found within projected radii of rmin < rp < rmax was modeled as a combination of a Gaussian and an offset due to interlopers. In both studies, the interloper fraction was determined separately for each of the independent radial bins.
Prior to correcting for the contamination of interlopers, Prada et al.
[27]
found a velocity dispersion profile,
v(rp), that
increased with projected radius.
After the removal of the interlopers, however, Prada et al.
[27]
found
decreasing velocity dispersion profiles in both cases. The corresponding
velocity dispersion profiles are shown in
Figure 5. Moreover, their
corrected velocity dispersion profiles were fitted well by the velocity
dispersion profiles of NFW halos with virial masses of
1.5 × 1012
M
(hosts
with absolute magnitudes -19.5 < MB < - 20.5)
and 6 × 1012
M
(hosts with absolute magnitudes
-20.5 < MB < - 21.5). Since Prada et al.
[27]
adopted a value of h = 0.7 and since the
absolute magnitude of an L* galaxy is
MB* ~ - 19.5, these
results suggest that the virial mass of the halo of an
L* galaxy is
10 ×
1011 h-1
M
.
![]() |
Figure 5. Velocity dispersion profiles for
satellites of SDSS host galaxies
[27].
Circles: host galaxies with -20.5 < MB < - 21.5,
Squares: host galaxies with
-19.5 < MB < - 20.5. Left panel: "raw" velocity
dispersion profiles prior to correction for contamination by interlopers.
Right panel: velocity dispersion profiles after correction for
contamination by interlopers. After correction for interlopers,
|
Brainerd
[67]
selected hosts and satellites from the
final data release of the 2dFGRS using criteria identical
to those of Sample 3 in Prada et al.
[27].
In addition, she used these same criteria to select hosts and satellites
from the present epoch galaxy catalogs of the flat,
-dominated the GIF
simulation
[94].
This is a publicly-available simulation
which includes semi-analytic galaxy formation in a CDM universe.
Brainerd
[67]
restricted her analysis to hosts with luminosities in the range
0.5 L*
L
5.5
L*, and found a roughly similar number
of hosts and satellites in both the 2dFGRS (1345 hosts, 2475 satellites)
and the GIF simulation (~ 1200 hosts, ~ 4100 satellites,
depending upon the viewing angle). Like Prada et al.
[27],
Brainerd [67]
obtained a decreasing velocity dispersion
profile for the satellites of the 2dFGRS galaxies once the effects of
interlopers were removed. In addition, excellent agreement between
v(rp) for the 2dFGRS galaxies
and
v(rp) for
the GIF galaxies was found, showing consistency between the motions
of satellites in the 2dFGRS and the expectations of a
-dominated
CDM universe. See Figure 6.
![]() |
Figure 6. Velocity dispersion profiles for
satellites in the final data release of the 2dFGRS and the flat,
|
Further, Brainerd
[67]
divided her sample of 2dFGRS
host galaxies into thirds based upon the spectral index parameter,
[95],
and computed the dependence of the velocity dispersion
profile on host spectral type. The subsamples corresponded to hosts
which are expected to have morphologies that are approximately:
(i) E/S0, (ii) Sa, and (iii) Sb/Scd. The median luminosities of
the hosts in the subsamples were all fairly similar:
(i) 2.64 LbJ*, (ii)
2.25 LbJ*, and (iii)
2.11 LbJ*. The velocity
dispersion profiles of all three samples decreased with radius and,
moreover,
v(rp) was found to have a much
higher amplitude and steeper decline for the satellites of early-type
hosts than it did for the satellites of
late-type hosts. See Figure 7. Although there is
some difference in the median luminosities of the hosts in the
subsamples, the difference is too small to have a significant effect on the
velocity dispersion profiles. Therefore, the results of Brainerd
[67]
seem to indicate that early-type galaxies
have deeper potential wells (and hence
more massive halos) than late-type galaxies.
![]() |
Figure 7. Velocity dispersion profiles for
satellites in the final data release
of the 2dFGRS as a function of the host spectral parameter,
|
Previous work on the dependence of
v with projected
radius using SDSS galaxies
[65]
and 2dFGRS galaxies
[67]
concluded that
v(rp) was consistent with an
isothermal profile; i.e.,
v(rp) = constant.
In both of these investigations, the hosts and satellites were selected in a
manner that was identical to that of Sample 3 in Prada et al.
[27].
In both previous analyses, however, the number of hosts and satellites
was significantly smaller than the more recent studies, and the
formal error bars were correspondingly larger. In addition,
the original analysis of SDSS host-satellite systems
[65]
neglected to account for the fact that the interloper fraction
increases with radius, which would have biased measurements of
v at large
rp towards values which are higher than
the actual satellite velocity dispersion at those radii.
Even more recently, Conroy et al.
[96]
used satellites of z ~ 0.8 host galaxies in the DEEP2 survey to
investigate v(rp). DEEP2
(Deep Extragalactic Evolutionary Probe 2) is
being carried out with the DEIMOS spectrograph at the Keck-II
telescope, and will ultimately collect spectra of ~ 60, 000
galaxies with redshifts of
0.7
z
1.4 to a limiting
magnitude of RAB = 24.1
[97].
Unfortunately, the
survey is still far from complete and only 61 isolated host
galaxies (having a total of 75 satellites) were found in the current
DEEP2 data. Because of this, the errors on
v(rp)
are large, and formally
v(rp) for the DEEP2 galaxies
is fitted well by a constant value:
v(110
h-1 kpc) = 162+44-30 km
sec-1,
v(230
h-1 kpc) = 136+26-20 km
sec-1,
v(320
h-1 kpc) = 155+55-38 km
sec-1.
Therefore, isothermal halos for the DEEP2 galaxies cannot
be ruled out at the moment. Conroy et al.
[96]
show, however, that their velocity dispersion measurements are consistent
with expectations for NFW halos with virial masses in the
range 3.5 × 1012 h-1
M
M200
8.0 × 1012 h-1
M
. This
is in good general agreement with the results of Prada et al.
[27],
especially considering that the DEEP2 hosts are of order one magnitude
brighter than the SDSS hosts (i.e., the virial mass implied for
the halos of the brightest galaxies in the SDSS sample is
~ 4 × 1012 h-1
M
). At
the moment, however, the
DEEP2 data are too severely limited by small number statistics
to place strong constraints on the nature of the dark matter
halos of galaxies with redshifts of order unity.