tests:collision:gc1_archive
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
tests:collision:gc1_archive [2014/10/22 15:42] – v.henault-brunet | tests:collision:gc1_archive [2022/10/24 12:26] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | ====== | + | ====== |
- | ==== Challenge 1: Equal mass clusters in a tidal field ===== | + | ===== Challenge 1: Equal mass clusters in a tidal field ===== |
^ ^ ^ All Stars ^^^^ 1000 stars^^^^ | ^ ^ ^ All Stars ^^^^ 1000 stars^^^^ | ||
Line 82: | Line 82: | ||
| | Parametric Jeans | | | | Parametric Jeans | | ||
| | Discrete Jeans | | | | Discrete Jeans | | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ===== Challenge 3: Clusters in tidal fields with stellar evolution ===== | ||
+ | (Simulations ran and kindly made available by Holger Baumgardt)\\ | ||
+ | |||
+ | Here we consider 2 clusters which are slightly more realistic: | ||
+ | |||
+ | - IC: King (1966) W_0 = 5 model, N = 131072, Kroupa (2001) mass function between 0.1-15 Msun (no black-holes). | ||
+ | - No primordial binaries, no central black hole, circular orbit in logarithmic halo with V = 220 km/s. | ||
+ | - Z = 0.001 | ||
+ | - Stellar evolution and mass-loss according to Hurley et al. (2000, 2002) | ||
+ | - Two Galactocentric radii: 8.5 kpc and 15 kpc. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | Below are 2 snapshots at an age of roughly 10 Myr, 100 Myr, 1Gyr and 12 Gyr. The columns are the same as in Challenge 2. | ||
+ | |||
+ | - {{: | ||
+ | - {{: | ||
+ | - {{: | ||
+ | - {{: | ||
+ | - {{: | ||
+ | - {{: | ||
+ | - {{: | ||
+ | - {{: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Questions are the same as in Challenge 2, and in addition: | ||
+ | - Is the presence of the tidal field affecting the velocity anisotropy in the outer parts? | ||
+ | - Can the mass segregation be reproduced by multi-mass King models? | ||
+ | |||
+ | | ||
+ | {{: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Different models to fit: | ||
+ | - $f_\nu$ | ||
+ | - Multi-mass King | ||
+ | - Discrete "Jeans like" modelling | ||
+ | - DF fitting (Mark W?) | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== Results: ==== | ||
+ | Using all stars: | ||
+ | ^ ^ ^ ^ All Stars ^^^^ 1000 stars^^^^ | ||
+ | ^ Cluster ^ Snapshot ^ Method | ||
+ | |1 | 1 | Isotropic King | ||
+ | | | 1 | Multimass Michie King | | | | ||
+ | | | 1 | $f_\nu$ | ||
+ | | | 1 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |1 | 2 | Isotropic King | ||
+ | | | 2 | Multimass Michie King | | | | ||
+ | | | 2 | $f_\nu$ | ||
+ | | | 2 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |1 | 3 | Isotropic King | ||
+ | | | 3 | Multimass Michie King | | | | ||
+ | | | 3 | $f_\nu$ | ||
+ | | | 3 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |1 | 4 | Isotropic King | ||
+ | | | 4 | Multimass Michie King | $2.118$ | | $11.353$ | | | ||
+ | | | 4 | $f_\nu$ | ||
+ | | | 4 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |2 | 1 | Isotropic King | ||
+ | | | 1 | Multimass Michie King | | | | ||
+ | | | 1 | $f_\nu$ | ||
+ | | | 1 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |2 | 2 | Isotropic King | ||
+ | | | 2 | Multimass Michie King | | | | ||
+ | | | 2 | $f_\nu$ | ||
+ | | | 2 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |2 | 3 | Isotropic King | ||
+ | | | 3 | Multimass Michie King | | | | ||
+ | | | 3 | $f_\nu$ | ||
+ | | | 3 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |2 | 4 | Isotropic King | ||
+ | | | 4 | Multimass Michie King | | | | ||
+ | | | 4 | $f_\nu$ | ||
+ | | | 4 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |||
+ | Plots | ||
+ | ^ Cluster | ||
+ | |1 | 1 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | | | ||
+ | | | 1 | Multimass Michie King | | | ||
+ | | | 1 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |1 | 2 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | | | ||
+ | | | 2 | Multimass Michie King | | | ||
+ | | | 2 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |1 | 3 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | | | ||
+ | | | 3 | Multimass Michie King | | | ||
+ | | | 3 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |1 | 4 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | | | ||
+ | | | 4 | Multimass Michie King | ||
+ | | | 4 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |2 | 1 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | | | ||
+ | | | 1 | Multimass Michie King | | | ||
+ | | | 1 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |2 | 2 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | | | ||
+ | | | 2 | Multimass Michie King | | | ||
+ | | | 2 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |2 | 3 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | | | ||
+ | | | 3 | Multimass Michie King | | | ||
+ | | | 3 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |2 | 4 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | | | ||
+ | | | 4 | Multimass Michie King | | | ||
+ | | | 4 | Discrete modelling | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== Results: ==== | ||
+ | Velocity dispersion for different mass species: the multi-mass King models assume that the product $m\sigma_K^2$= constant. The parameters $\sigma_K$ is not exactly the velocity dispersion. | ||
+ |
tests/collision/gc1_archive.1413992553.txt.gz · Last modified: 2022/10/24 12:26 (external edit)