Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
V.M.Kontorovich- The Weak Turbulence Methods in the Problem of Galaxy Mass Distribution Function

V.M.Kontorovich- The Weak Turbulence Methods in the Problem of Galaxy Mass Distribution Function

Ratings: (0)|Views: 0 |Likes:
Published by Tuoma2

More info:

Published by: Tuoma2 on Jan 28, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/12/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 UDC 533.984
Problems of Atomic Science and Technology. 2000.
6. Series: Plasma Physics (6). p. 84-87
 
THE WEAK TURBULENCE METHODSIN THE PROBLEM OF GALAXY MASS DISTRIBUTION FUNCTION
V.M.Kontorovich Institute of Radio Astronomy of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine,Chervonopraporna Str., 4,Kharkiv, 61002, Ukraine. E-mail: vkont@ira.kharkov.ua
The analogy between the turbulent Kolmogorov type spectra and the distribution of galaxies on masses isdiscussed. Due to nonlocality [1] of galaxy mass spectrum formed by merging the additional approximateconservation law affects its intermediate asymptotics power index, which proves to be intervening between theconstant mass flux and this of the number of massive galaxies. Analytical description of this asymptotics, whichessentially uses the Smoluchowsky kinetic equation symmetry transformation, is presented. The result is comparedwith the recently discovered steepness of galaxy luminosity function on its faint edge. The problem of the main partof barionic mass in the Universe is shortly discussed in this context.In the expanding Universe the galaxies as we knowrun away from each other. In the ideal scheme of suchHubble's expanding there is no converging of galaxies:merely the distances between the galaxies grow. Undersuch conditions the galaxies evolve independently andtheir masses do not essentially change.In reality the galaxies have not only the Hubble'srecession velocities. They also have some "peculiar"components which are the result of fluctuations. Thelatter are also relevant for formation of galaxiesthemselves - the gravitationally coupled systems.Immediate confirmation of existing of such initialfluctuations has been received by investigation of therelic radiation (on the microkelvin's level).With such fluctuation the Jeans gravitation instabilityevolves. In the expanding Universe it transforms fromexponential to power type, but is not removed underexpansion.In the issue the galaxies gather in groups. OurGalaxy - the Milky Way - belongs to the Local Groupcontaining one dozen odd members. The big groups -clusters - contain themselves groups as a rule. Manyclusters are parts of super clusters, and so on, thusforming hierarchical structure of the Universe.In the vicinity of the Milky Way three colossal superclusters have been detected. The most famous is theGreat Attractor (GA) on which our Local Group falls.This falling is reflected even in the dipole anisotropy of relic radiation on the millikelvin's level corresponding tothe velocity of about 600 km/s. The Hubble low (asstraight observation show) fails in the direction of GA:near GA (remote from us at about 60 Mpc) galaxiesaccelerate or decelerate due to their falling on GA. Insimilar cases of different scales the galaxy-numberdensity grows, the peculiar velocity components changeand the collisions and mergers of galaxies take place(see the review lectures in [2] and the numerousreferences there).As a result of mergers the mass function (MF), i.e.distribution of galaxies on masses is formed. The answerto the question: "Where is the main part of barionicstellar mass of the Universe is concentrated?" dependsvery essentially on some of the MF-details.On the other hand the activity of galaxies and theirnuclei arises owing to merging and such objects as radiogalaxies and quasars appear. The correlation betweenthe merger process and activity proves this. Probablyeven the Black Holes which are responsible for thenuclear activity may appear in the merging processes.But this side of the problem goes beyond the scope of this article (see, for example, [3] and the referencesthere).We will be interested only in the galaxy MF andtheir analogy with the Kolmogorov spectrum of turbulence in liquid and with the similar weak turbulentspectra in plasma.As we will see the methods being developed inplasma physics prove to be useful for the analysis of galaxy mass distribution. The difference is that we havein the MF case the mass flux on the spectrum instead of energy flux in the Kolmogorov turbulence case. And theformer is found to be the nonlocal.The main part of the computations of this paper willbe published in PysicaD, 2000, with more details.
1
.
So, we will be interested in the mass spectrumformed while merging, the main attention being paid tothe index of power intermediate asymptotics (IA), whichin the merging model assumes a clear physical sense andcan be obtained by analytical methods. This MF part is juxtaposed with the recently discovered greatersteepness of the galaxy luminosity function at its faintedge (see as example [4]). This also may serve as anargument in favor of the galaxy evolution due tomerging.Below we will realize what could give us the pureanalytical methods analogous to those in the weak turbulence theory [5,6]. The idea of nonlocality of theweak turbulent spectra which was discussed by Balk,Zakharov and Nazarenko in the plasma physicsproblems context [1] and symmetry transformations of kinetic equations [5,7] will play the most essential rolein this description.
 
85
2.
Before examining the real galaxy interaction wemust recall that SE for MF,
∂ ∂ 
 fmmdmdm
(,)
=
∫ 
12
[
Uf
m
1212
δ 
 
cyclebicycle
] (1)where
( )
 ffm
,
,
( )
 ffmt 
11
,,
etc, are MFs,
( )
δ δ 
m
mmm
12
,
δ 
— Dirac’s delta-function,
( )
UUmm
1212
,
, which describes the merging,permits two nontrivial (here we do not touch the case of 
U = const 
) exact solutions describing the MF evolutionfrom its initial state localized on small masses [8]. In thesecond and third terms we have
δ 
(m
2
-m-m
1
)
and
δ 
(m
1
-m
2
-m)
correspondingly.For the merging probability proportional to the productof colliding masses the power index of IA is s
1
=-5/2.Expressed through the uniformity power u of coagulation coefficient
( ) ( )
( )
UamaUm
u
=
 
it equals
s
1
= – (u+3)/2 (u=2).
As known (see also below) suchindex corresponds to the constant mass flux on thespectrum. In the case of 
U = c(m
1
+m
2
)
the power of IAis
s
0
= – 3/2
or
s
0
= (u+2)/2 (u=1).
The lattercorresponds to the constant flux of the number of massive objects. Though at first sight such aconservation law fails with the mergers it is realized inthe form of approximate integral in the case of predominant interaction of large objects with the smallones. Such a "nonlocal" situation fits the last solution.The condition of locality, i.e. that of convergence of thecollision integral in SE for s
1
- solution is in the form of 
|u
2
- u
1
|<1
[9], where the indexes
u
1
and
u
2
are definedby the expression for
provided the masses differstrongly
Umm
uu
12
12
 
( )
mm
12
<<
. Obviously, inthe first case
( )
uu
12
1
= =
the locality criterion isfulfilled and in the second the marginal case occurs (
u
1
 =0, u
2
=1
). That is, the galaxy interaction with the mostdistinguished scales prevails in the latter case and, thus,the conservation law of the "number of particles" isrealized.
3.
For gravitational galaxy interaction the cross-sectionof coagulations is usually taken as product of co-factors,which describe, respectively, the geometrical cross-section, gravitational focusing and conditional mergingprobability at the frontal collision of galaxies (seereferences in 3]):
( ) ( )
σ π γ ϕ γ γ 
= +
rvv
g
222
1,,
 
vGmrmmmrr
g
21212
2
= = + = +
,,
.The homogeneity index differs for "large" and "small"masses. Further we will focus on this particular region,regarding a small mass region as contracted to zero.This scheme can be attributed with a more accurateformal meaning. On the assumption that
ϕ 
decreases assquare of relative velocity we can take it in the form of 
( )
ϕ γ 
= +
11
1
. The resulting cross-section will be auniform function in all of the mass-changing interval:
σ π γ 
=
2
. By averaging over velocities we come tothe coagulation coefficient
Uv
=< >
σ 
in the form
( )
( )
Ummmm
+ +
1212
β β 
where the radius-massdependence is chosen as
rm
β 
. Below we employonly the fact that U is the uniform function of masseswith
uuuu
= + = =
10
12
β 
,,
 
( )
β 
= ÷
1312
 For u>1, as known from general theory of SE
1
, theevolution of MF has an explosive character and a quasipower asymptotics is established in a wide mass intervalbetween the region of initial mass localization
mm
*
 and the coagulation front which is turned to the infinitymass for the finite time [11,12]. Our goal is to find thepower IA of the spatial homogeneous
2
solutions of theSE (1) with the considered kernel
discussed above.
( )
 Jmdmm
st m
1
=
∫ 
,
( )
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ 
mf  Jmm
+ =
1
0
(2)Here the
 I 
st 
is the right part of SE (1).
4
. Both the numerical solution of SE and modelling byMonte Carlo method show that the power index of IA
α 
lies between
s
0
 
= (
u+2)/2
and
s
1
= – (u+3)/2
(seefor example [10] Fig. 2b; [13]). In order to understandwhat it means consider the symmetry properties of thecollision integral of SE in the case of exact uniformity:
Ua
amamamummm
1212
=
.To utilize the similarity of 
we must changesimultaneously the scale of all three arguments
mm
12
,
 and m. But, as one of them (m) is fixed in SE, from thecontinuous group transformation only two discretetransformations remain (except a trivial one):
G
1
,transforming
mm
1
, and
G
2
, transforming
mm
2
. These Zakharov transformations are
1
 
In this case the initial distribution localized on small masseswithin a finite time forms a power "tail" spreading on theregion of formally infinite masses [8]. This the so-calledkinetic phase transition was first discovered and studied indetail by Stockmayer for the above-mentioned model with
= cm
1
m
2
 
and was utilized for describing polymerization, inparticular, zol–gel transition (in addition to the above-mentioned see also the references in [10]). In the case of thegravitating systems we are interested in, the new phase whichemerges at the transition and corresponds to the "infinite"mass is juxtaposed with cD-galaxies in the center of thecluster.
2
This surely leads to the loss of a number of distributionfeatures, including spatial stratification of galaxy clusters, witha more compact central and less dense periphery, etc. At thesame time the chaotization in the systems considered confirmsthe made assumption.
 
86
considered as some change of variables
m
1
,
 
m
2
withthe fixed mass
m
conditions:
GmmmmmmmmGmmmmmmmm
11122122122221
=      =      
,,.
 
(3)They form a symmetry group of SE [7]. For theseconformal transformations the integrating paths tendingto infinity in the second and third terms in (1) convertinto the integrating path with the finite mass variation inthe first term of SE. In the issue (using also
 xmx
symmetry) SE acquires the form of:
( )
{ }
∂ ∂ 
 fmt dx
mxmxm
,,
,
=
∫ 
2
02
 
{ }
=
 
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
 fmxfxm x f m xmxfm
u
          
+
2
 
( )
          
+
mmx f mxmx fm
u
2
(4)If in addition a power-law character of the solution isassumed
( )
( )
 fmm
s
, then
{ }
in SE is reduced to[5,14]:
{ }
( ) ( )
=           
 fmxfxm xmmx
1
ν ν 
,
ν 
= + +
22
us
(5)In the stationary case we get the exact power solution
 fm
s
1
,
ν 
= −
1
, which corresponds to the constantmass flux
P
on the spectrum
 fcPm
Ps
=
112
1
. Thiscan be easily proved by using the definition of massflux, thus finding the normalization factor and the fluxsign [9]. The obtained formal solution, however, isnonlocal: the integrals diverge on small masses, whichthus must contribute mainly.
5.
Now consider the MF decreasing steeper than thepower on the largest masses. With this condition thesecond term in
{ }
(3) vanishes in the case of essentialcontribution of small masses due to nonlocality. In theissue the approximate power solution arises thatcorresponds to conservation of the number of massivegalaxies (if their interaction with the small-mass onesprevails):
 fm
s
=
0
0,
ν 
(6)Really, the flux of the number of massive galaxies(below – the galaxy flux) on the mass axis is
( )
 Jmdm
st m
0
= −
∫ 
, (7)where through
 I 
st 
we defined the right part of SE (1).This corresponds rewriting the latter in the form of approximate conservation law
( )
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ 
 f  Jmm
+ =
0
0
. (8)For the power spectrum the galaxy flux
( ) ( ) ( )
 Jmdmmm
m
0100
= =
∫ 
ν ν 
ν ν ν 
,where
( )
0
ν 
=
(9)
( ) ( )
21111
11012
dUf
ζ ζ ζ ζ 
ζ ζ ν 
,
     
∫ 
 At
( )
ν 
→ +
0
(onesiding limit corresponds tointegrability of the expression for
( )
 jm
0
in the origin)in accordance with (5)
0
0
and we obtain thesolution with constant galaxy flux
 JmQ
0
()
=
>0 (cf.[15]):
Q
=
=
( )
2111
11012
dU
ζ ζ ζ 
ζ ζ 
,
ln
∫ 
. (10)The positive sign of the flux corresponds with thephysics of mergers. Using the definition of particle flux
Q
we can normalize this distribution too:
 fcQm
Qs
=
012
0
(cf. [16]). With the two concurrentfluxes it is easy to find the analogous solutions, whenone of the fluxes is smaller than the other. The value of this ratio depends on the mass:
mQP
. Obtain in theissue the spectrum with the break at
PmQ
br 
~1
 which overpasses on its ends to single-flux distributions.However, our whole case is nonlocal in principle [10],and even the additional conservation law is connectedwith this nonlocality (cf. [1] ).
6.
Thus, we have to proceed to the differentialdescription primarily accounting for the interaction withmultiple dwarf galaxies. With the original SE form (1)this is difficult to do in view of the equal character of divergence on small
m
1
 
and
m
2
,
as well as on theinfinity masses. After Zakharov transformations we haveonly one singular point
( )
m
1
0
=
, near-whichexpanding gives us the equation:
( )
( )( )
∂ τ ∂ ∂ 
 fM A fmmum fm
,
= − ++     
2
 
-
( )
 fmdxm x f m x
u
          
∫ 
+
022
-
 
( ) ( )
 fmmdxx fx x
20
∂ ∂ 
∫ 
; (11)

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->