A unified scenario for the origin of spiral and elliptical galaxy structural scaling laws
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elliptical (E) and spiral (S) galaxies follow tight, but different, scaling laws that link their stellar masses, radii, and characteristic velocities. Mass and velocity, for example, scale tightly in spirals with little dependence on galaxy radius (the ‘Tully-Fisher relation’; TFR). On the other hand, ellipticals appear to trace a 2D surface in size-mass-velocity space (the ‘Fundamental Plane’; FP). Over the years, a number of studies have attempted to understand these empirical relations, usually in terms of variations of the virial theorem for E galaxies and in terms of the scaling relations of dark matter halos for spirals. We use Lambda cold dark matter (ΛCDM) cosmological hydrodynamical simulations to show that the scaling relations of both ellipticals and spirals arise as the result of (i) a tight galaxy mass–dark halo mass relation and (ii) the self-similar mass profile of cold dark matter halos. In this interpretation, E and S galaxies of a given stellar mass inhabit halos of similar masses, and their different scaling laws result from the varying amounts of dark matter enclosed within their luminous radii. This scenario suggests a new galaxy distance indicator applicable to galaxies of all morphologies and provides simple and intuitive explanations for long-standing puzzles, such as why the TFR is independent of surface brightness, or what causes the ‘tilt’ in the FP. Our results provide strong support for the predictions of ΛCDM in the strongly non-linear regime, as well as guidance for further improvements to cosmological simulations of galaxy formation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".