The claim that there is no strong theoretical support for the disks to be exponential (Böker et al. 2003) is partly substantiated by the fact that theories are often tuned so as to reproduce an exponential light profile. While reproducing exponential light profiles is considered to be a test for viable models of disk formation (e.g., Dalcanton, Spergel, & Summers 1997; Silk 2001), it is certainly true that most of the current disk models and simulations do predict large mass fractions with low-angular momentum material that is in excess of the extrapolation of the outer exponential density distribution to the center (see Section 1.1 and references therein). However, the real problem is to understand whether this excess low-angular momentum material does remain in the disk, or rather forms a three-dimensional bulge.
Furthermore, it is also possible that, rather than being born denser than exponential, the disks may become so during the subsequent galactic evolution. Indeed many processes can occur during the Hubble time that can transform exponential disks into the more complex structures that are observed in late-type disks. In this context, it is worth stressing that a third of the late-type disks remais well described by the simple single-exponential form, showing that this channel of disk formation is indeed accessible to real galaxies.
An obvious example of change in central concentration in disks is the one
induced by the formation and subsequent buckling of a stellar bar. To study
at unprecedented resolution the effects of secular evolution processes
on the central regions of disks, we are conducting state-of-the-art
N-body and
N-body+SPH numerical simulations of disk galaxies (details will
be published in
Debattista et al. 2003
and Mayer et al. 2003).
The first N-body experiments that I briefly discuss here (from
Debattista et al. 2003)
consist
of live disk components inside frozen halos described either by a spherical
logarithmic potential with a central core or a cuspy
Hernquist (1990)
potential. The initially axisymmetric disks are modeled assuming an
exponential profile with a Gaussian thickening; the disks are represented by
(4 - 7.5) × 106 equal-mass particles. The spatial
resolution that is achieved in the central regions is ~ 50 pc. The
simulations are run on a 3-D cylindrical polar-grid code (described in
Sellwood & Valluri
1997).
In certain areas of parameter space, the axisymmetric systems are found
to be unstable and form bars. Systems in which bars fail to form have
only modest heating, indicating that our results are not driven by
noise. Every 20 time steps of the disk evolution, we measure the disk
velocity dispersions and
streaming velocities in annuli, the amplitude of the bar from the
m = 2 Fourier moment, and the amplitude of the buckling from the
m = 2 Fourier
moment of the vertical displacement of particles. We use these quantities to
determine when the bar forms, when it buckles, and the evolution of disk
properties such as mass density, morphological diagnostics (for any
inclination angle of the disk and orientation of the bar), and the
V /
ratio. As an example, Figure 1.1 shows, for
various disk inclination angles
and tilt angles of the bar with respect to the disk major axis, the
isophotal
contours of the projected surface density of the system after the bar has
formed and buckled. As already pointed out in, for example,
Raha et al. (1991),
for some projections, including but not uniquely for the edge-on one,
the buckled bar looks very much like a normal (three-dimensional)
"rounder-than-the-disk" bulge. Figure 1.2 shows,
for two different
simulations, how the systems would appear on the sky as observed from a
specific line-of-sight before and after the buckling of the bars. For the
same two models, Figure 1.3 plots the initial
surface density profiles (exponential by construction), the surface
density profiles after the buckling of the bars, and the post-buckling
ellipticity profiles of the systems.
Figure 1.3 points out that an initially
exponential disk that "nature" makes can be observed to
be a more centrally concentrated structure at a later stage, after it has
formed and buckled a stellar bar. The final, post-buckling profile in the
simulations is well described by the sum of an outer exponential disk and an
inner Sérsic component, as observed in real disk galaxies. If the
denser-than-exponential profiles in the real late-type spirals were due
to the
effects of nurture rather than nature, the inner light/mass excesses in the
late-type disks would be better associated with "bulge" structures;
that is, they would be the "bulges" produced by secular evolution of the
disks, which has been extensively discussed in the literature.
![]() |
Figure 1.1. Contour plots for a live-disk/frozen-halo simulation after the development and buckling of a stellar bar. The halo has a Hernquist (1990) profile; the disk initially has a single-exponential profile. Shown are the face-on and edge-on views of the system (upper panels, left and right, respectively), and two different views with disk inclination angles of 30° (left) and 60° (right), respectively. Different panels from second-top to bottom show different orientation angles for the buckled bar of 0°, 45°, and 90°, respectively, with respect to the major axis of the disk. Axes are in units of the initial exponential disk scale length. (From Debattista et al. 2003.) |
![]() |
Figure 1.2. A Hernquist halo simulation (upper panels) and a core halo simulation (lower panels). The images are taken before the buckling (left panels) and after the buckling (right panels) of the bars. The models have inclination angles of 60° and 30°, and bar orientation angles of 90° and 45°, respectively. (From Debattista et al. 2003.) |
![]() |
Figure 1.3. For the same core halo (left) and Hernquist halo (right) models shown in Figure 1.2, we plot here the initial surface density profiles (upper panels: superimposed with the single-exponential fits), the surface density profiles after buckling (middle panels: dotted lines, the single exponential fits; solid lines, exponential plus Sérsic fits), and the ellipticity profiles after buckling (lower panels). The x-axis is in units of the initial exponential disk scale length. (From Debattista et al. 2003.) |
Bars are not the only possible solution to increase the central densities in disk galaxies by means of processes that occur after the original baryonic collapse inside the dark halos: viscosity may be important (e.g., Lin & Pringle 1987), and also mergers, satellite accretion, dynamical friction of globulars, etc. Nonetheless, it is fair to conclude that, at this stage, the issue whether the disks are born as denser-than-exponential structures remains open. If this were the case, it will be important to quantify the systematic uncertainties on, for example, bulge scale lengths and luminosities, black hole masses and other galactic properties that are derived assuming that nature, when it makes a disk, makes it exponential.
The investigations of the past few years indicate that even the most
massive, early-type bulges are not r1/4-law systems
and have disklike imprints in
their kinematics. How do we reconcile, under a common denominator, the
differences between bulges and ellipticals with the quoted similarities of
stellar population and scaling laws? It is certainly not clear what, for
instance, the Mg2 index and the velocity dispersion
represent in the
Mg2 -
relation. Are the key
parameters metallicity, age, or a combination of the two? Are they the
depth of potential well, local physics of star formation, or, again, a
combination of the two? Local physics imposes
thresholds for star formation (e.g.,
Meurer et al. 1997),
which is likely to have an impact on scaling laws such as the
Mg2 -
relation. Indeed,
the same Mg2 -
relation is observed to hold over orders of magnitude
of scale lengths, in systems that are very different, ranging from
elliptical galaxies to dwarf spheroidals
(Bender, Burstein, &
Faber 1993).
The conclusion is that the
Mg2 -
and
similar relations are certainly
telling us something important about the formation of stellar systems over a
large range of scales, but not necessarily that they all share a similar
formation process.
On the other hand, the claims that violent relaxation is not a major
player in
the formation of bulges, based on the observed Sérsic profiles with
n 3
(Balcells et al. 2003)
may also be premature. The consequence of violent
relaxation during dissipationless processes such as stellar clumpy collapses
(van Albada 1982),
mergers of disk galaxies
(Barnes 1988),
satellite accretion onto disk galaxies
(Aguerri, Balcells, &
Peletier 2001)
is to produce an
r1/4 profile. However, other studies of violent
relaxation in a finite volume
show deviations from the r1/4 law
(Hjorth & Madsen
1995).
Furthermore, the same problem of separating nature from nurture may be
relevant also in this context. Physical processes may occur during the
Hubble time that modify
the stellar density profiles in the centers of galaxies, including dynamical
friction of globular clusters, dissipative accretion of matter,
black hole-driven cusp formation, mergers of black holes (quantitative
studies
of the latter show that central mass deficits are created from the binding
energy liberated by the coalescence of the supermassive binary black holes;
see, e.g.,
Milosavljevic et
al. 2002,
Ravindranath, Ho, &
Filippenko 2002,
and references therein). Numerical studies of these processes are still
rather sketchy and do not explore a vast volume of parameter space;
nonetheless, they make the point that the nuclear stellar density
profiles may be modified by subsequent evolution. Quantitative work
remains to be done to assess whether these or other processes can
reproduce the n
3
Sérsic profiles typical of the massive bulges and the weak trend
between Sérsic shape parameter n and bulge luminosity. The
possibility that the disks may not be purely exponential also introduces
additional uncertainties on the derived bulge parameters, including the
shape index n. If the outer
disk can have a Sérsic shape with n values as steep as
~ 2.5, bulge-disk decompositions that use an exponential for the outer
disks can systematically offset the bulge parameters. This could even open
the question as to whether the observed sequence in n values
between the late-type and early-type bulges is a pure bulge sequence,
or, rather, at least in part a sequence of different underlying disk
profiles.
![]() |
Figure 1.4. V /
|
Concerning support for bulge-building secular evolution processes inside
preexisting disks, there is certainly at this point good evidence from
high-resolution numerical experiments that the intrinsic evolution of the
disks results in transformations of the disks, which can generate
three-dimensional structures that resemble bulgelike components. Numerical
studies
(Pfenniger & Friedli
1991;
Zhang & Wyse 2000;
Scannapieco &
Tisseira 2003;
Debattista et al. 2003,
see Fig. 1.3) also show that the
bulgelike, three-dimensional structures that generally result from the
evolution of the disks have the rather low-n Sérsic profiles
typical of real bulges.
MacArthur et al. (2003)
report that simulations by D. Pfenniger
(2002, private communication) of self-gravitating disks form bars that may
later dissolve into bulgelike components, which show a nearly universal
ratio
of bulge-to-disk scale lengths, also in agreement with the observed
correlations. In the simulations, the universal ratio of bulge-to-disk
scale lengths is related to the stellar dynamics of the barred system, for
example to the relative position of the vertical to horizontal resonances.
There is an additional important ingredient that has been missing so far
in the debate
concerning the possibility that disk secular evolution processes play a
substantial role in forming bulgelike structures: namely, the bulges that
result from the secular evolution of the disks are, in contrast to what is
commonly asserted, not necessarily dynamically cold, "disklike" stellar
systems. Due to the fact that eccentric orbits are quickly erased by shocks
(Friedli & Benz
1995),
the secular evolution of mostly gaseous disks indeed
produces cold stellar structures such as the pseudo-bulges discussed by
Kormendy (1993);
however, the buckling of stellar bars, for example, can produce
structures that are, at least from certain viewing angles, indistinguishable
from the alleged "normal" bulges in classical diagnostic planes such as the
V / -
plane. This is
shown in Figure 1.4, where the locations
on the V /
-
of a few
representative buckled bars from our
simulations are shown (right panel) in comparison with what is typically
considered the bona fide bulge behavior (left panel, figure from
Davies & Illingworth
1983).
In summary, from Figures 1.1-1.4, it is evident that, depending on the viewing angle, buckled bars can appear as structures that are simultaneously rounder than the surrounding disks, photometrically identifiable as additional components in excess of outer exponential disks, and kinematically similar to what are considered to be "bona fide bulges." In this light, it seems appropriate to question indeed what is a meaningful definition for a bona fide bulge. Clearly, the situation is more complex than what is captured in the theorist-versus-observer dichotomy discussed by Böker et al. (Section 1.4). First, from an observational perspective, even early-type, bona fide bulges have been claimed to be thickened disks (Falcón-Barroso et al. 2003). Second, from a theoretical perspective, evolutionary disk processes such as the buckling of progenitor bars inside the disks can produce structures that, in contrast to common belief, are dynamically similar to the bona fide bulges that should be the benchmark for the comparison. Thus, as with the photometric classification, even the kinematic classification of bulges is quite fuzzy. Ultimately, this is due to the lack of a proper physical boundary between structures that are forced into different categories by what may be unfolding into an obsolete and confusing classification scheme.
1.6.3. The Nature and Role of Nuclei and Central Black Holes
Recent surveys show that central, distinct, compact components, in addition to the disk and the bulge, are present in the large majority of disk galaxies of all Hubble types. Many are clearly star clusters with no AGN contamination. This includes, for example, the "naked" ones in the late-type disks studied by Walcher et al. (2003) and probably the relatively faint population of nuclei embedded in the relatively clean surroundings of the exponential-type bulges (Carollo et al. 1997a, 1998). AGNs are known to be rare in late-type galaxies (Ho, Filippenko, & Sargent 1997; Ulvelstad & Ho 2002; Ho 2003). An AGN component may, however, be present in a fraction of the nuclei. This would be statistically consistent with the fact that about 70% of spirals host a distinct nucleus, and about half of them are known to host some form of AGN, even if weak (Ho et al. 1997). Some of the point sources embedded in the early-type bulges of Balcells et al. (2003) may also have an AGN origin or component; pointlike sources associated with AGNs are seen in massive elliptical galaxies (Carollo et al. 1997b, c; Ravindranath et al. 2001).
The young stellar ages plus high velocity dispersions of the central star
clusters of late-type disks reported by
Walcher et al. (2003)
may certainly imply a large spread in stellar population ages, and thus an
iterative mass assembly and star formation for the central star clusters, as
discussed by the authors. However, the nuclei that are typically
selected for the spectroscopic investigations populate the bright end of
the luminosity distribution of nuclei.
Walcher et al. (2003)
stress that in their sample there is no indication that brighter means
younger; nevertheless, it is still possible that selection effects are
important and that fainter nuclei may have less complex mass assembly
and star formation histories. A wide range of star
formation histories would be more consistent with a process of growth of
central star clusters that is regulated by local physics, for instance
by the amount of fuel (either gas or smaller star clusters) available at
various epochs in the circumnuclear regions, the angular momentum
distribution
or orbital structure of this "fuel," and the physical state of the central
regions of the disk (e.g., its density or dynamical temperature, in turn
determining or originating from the steepness of the gravitational
potential, the conditions to develop non-axisymmetric perturbations on
small scales, etc.). Furthermore, it is still unknown whether
fuel-starved, silent AGN engines - massive black holes - may be present
in the central star clusters (e.g.,
Marconi et al. 2003).
The question of whether massive black
holes reside in general in the centers of star clusters is far from
settled. The case of G1, a globular cluster in
Andromeda in which a
central black hole of the mass expected from the linear extrapolation of
the relationship reported for the massive spheroids (e.g.,
Gebhardt et al. 2000)
has been detected
(Gebhardt, Rich, & Ho
2002),
argues for the presence of massive black holes in the centers of star
clusters, and supports the suggestion that black holes are ubiquitous and
proportionally sized in all spheroids, from mass scale of globular clusters
to elliptical galaxies. A small, ~ 104-5
M black hole
is found embedded in the central star cluster of NGC 4395, one of the least
luminous and nearest known Type 1 Seyfert galaxies
(Filippenko & Ho
2003).
On the other hand, the nondetection of a central black hole in the central
star cluster of M33 contrasts with the G1 case and argues for the
absence of massive black holes in the centers of the distinct nuclei of
bulgeless disks.
Gebhardt et al. (2001)
discuss that, if the mass of a central black hole in
the nucleus of M33 was related to its velocity dispersion in the same
way that
the known supermassive black holes are related to the dispersions of their
bulges, then a black hole with mass in the range ~
7 × 103 - 6 × 104
M
would
be expected, well above the measured upper limit of 1500
M
.
Solutions to this inconsistency include those
suggested by the authors: the relationship between the mass of the
black hole and the velocity dispersion of the host spheroid may be
nonlinear; the conditions to make a massive black hole were better in
the earlier, denser Universe, when the stars in G1 were made; or M33's young nucleus has not
had enough time to create its own black hole. Given the observational
uncertainties, other possibilities remain. It could be that G1 is not a
star cluster but a harassed spheroidal galaxy [a fact mentioned by
Gebhardt et al. (2002)
but not considered by the authors as the cause for the
discrepancy]. Another possibility is that at least in small-sized spheroids
such as star clusters, black holes may not be ubiquitous, or there may not
exist a tight correlation between black hole mass and spheroid mass. Or
perhaps normal star clusters and the central star clusters in disk
galaxies have a different origin.
The case of M33 serves also as a smoking gun in another context.
Kormendy & Gebhardt
(2001;
see also
Kormendy et al. 2003)
report that the same
correlation between the mass of the central black hole and the host
luminous spheroid holds for galaxies with both "normal" and
kinematically cold, disklike bulges (i.e., the "pseudobulges" discussed by
Kormendy 1993).
In contrast, M33, a pure disk galaxy with no bulge component of any
sort, is indeed found to lack a black hole.
Kormendy & Gebhardt
(2001)
conclude that the basic requirement for making a supermassive central
black hole appears to be that the galaxy is capable of forming
some kind of dense, bulgelike structure, whatever its nature.
Reinterpreting this comment in the light of the bulge/dense-disk conundrum
discussed above, the results of
Kormendy & Gebhardt
(2001)
and Gebhardt et
al. (2001)
may imply that the requirement for making a supermassive central
black hole is that the galaxy is capable of reaching sufficiently high
central baryonic densities. Either way, from these analyses it appears
that black hole masses are not correlated with the total gravitational
potential of the disks, and thus of the host dark matter halos. A
contrasting report, however, comes from
Ferrarese (2002) and
Baes et al. (2003),
who claim a tight correlation
between the circular velocities of galaxies and the masses of their central
supermassive black holes, and thus an intimate link between the black holes
and the host dark matter halos. Supermassive black holes do form in some
pure disk systems, as shown by
Filippenko & Ho
(2003)
for the case of NGC 4395.
However, these authors stress that in this galaxy the estimated black hole
mass is consistent with the
M
-
relation of
Tremaine et al. (2002),
if the central cluster is considered in lieu of the bulge. For
a
= 30 km
s-1, a good upper limit for the velocity dispersion of
central star cluster in NGC 4395, this relation predicts a
M
=
6.6 × 104
M
,
consistent with the mass independently
estimated from the AGN properties
(Filippenko & Ho
2003).
Furthermore, it remains a fact that M33, possibly the best candidate to
test for the validity
of a correlation between the black hole mass and the dark matter halo mass,
appears not to support it. As stressed by
Gebhardt et al. (2001),
if a black
hole in M33 were indeed related to the dark matter potential
well, then M33
should contain a black hole of mass significantly in excess of
106
M
,
which it does not. It may be best to wait for the observational picture
to be cleared up before attempting interpretations of the claimed
correlation between black hole and dark halo masses.
Finally, given the large frequency of occurrence of nuclei in disk galaxies and the generally accepted idea of hierarchical galaxy assembly, an interesting question is whether the formation and evolution of the nuclei of disk galaxies play any relevant role in the formation of supermassive black holes in the centers of galaxies. More generally, a key question for the future is whether the nearly ubiquitous nuclei are a nuance or rather an important ingredient in the formation process of disk galaxies.