Misc,

nIFTY galaxy cluster simulations III: The Similarity & Diversity of Galaxies & Subhaloes

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and .
(2015)cite arxiv:1511.08255Comment: 17 pages (+4 page appendix), 16 figures, 2 tables; submitted to MNRAS.

Abstract

We examine subhaloes and galaxies residing in a simulated LCDM galaxy cluster ($M^crit_200=1.1\times10^15M_ødot/h$) produced by hydrodynamical codes ranging from classic Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH), newer SPH codes, an adaptive mesh code and a moving mesh scheme. These codes use subgrid models to capture galaxy formation physics. We compare how well these codes reproduce the same subhaloes/galaxies in gravity only, non-radiative hydrodynamics and full radiative physics runs by looking at the overall subhalo/galaxy distribution and on an individual objects basis. We find the subhalo population is reproduced to within $łesssim10\%$ for both dark matter only and non-radiative runs, with individual objects showing code-to-code scatter of $łesssim0.1$ dex, although the gas in non-radiative simulations shows significant scatter. Including radiative physics significantly increases the diversity seen. The subhalo mass and $V_max$ distributions vary by $\approx20\%$, a result of feedback moving significant baryonic mass around. Galaxies also show striking code-to-code variations. Although the Tully-Fisher relation is similar in almost all codes, the number of galaxies with $10^9M_ødot/hM_*10^12M_ødot/h$ can differ by a factor of 4. Individual galaxies show code-to-code scatter of $\sim0.5$ dex in stellar mass. Moreover, strong systematic differences exist, with some codes producing galaxies $70\%$ smaller than others. The diversity partially arises from the inclusion/absence of AGN feedback. Our results combined with our companion papers, Sembolini et al. (2015a,b), demonstrate that subgrid physics is not just subject to fine-tuning, but the complexity of building galaxies in all environments remains a challenge. We argue that even basic galaxy properties, such as the stellar mass to halo mass, should be treated with errors bars of $\sim0.2-0.5$ dex.

Tags

Users

  • @miki

Comments and Reviews