Size matters: abundance matching, galaxy sizes, and the Tully-Fisher relation in EAGLE
Ismael Ferrero, Julio F. Navarro, Mario G. Abadi, Laura V. Sales,, Richard G. Bower, Robert A. Crain, Carlos S. Frenk, Matthieu Schaller, Joop, Schaye, Tom Theuns

TL;DR
This study uses the EAGLE cosmological simulations to analyze the Tully-Fisher relation, demonstrating that galaxy sizes, halo properties, and abundance matching models collectively explain the observed mass-velocity scaling and its weak evolution over time.
Contribution
It shows that EAGLE simulations can reproduce the Tully-Fisher relation and its evolution by incorporating galaxy size constraints and abundance matching, providing insights into galaxy-halo connections.
Findings
EAGLE galaxies match observed TFR with tight mass-velocity scaling.
Galaxy sizes and halo properties are crucial for reproducing the TFR.
Weak TFR evolution is consistent with abundance matching models.
Abstract
The Tully-Fisher relation (TFR) links the stellar mass of a disk galaxy, , to its rotation speed: it is well approximated by a power law, shows little scatter, and evolves weakly with redshift. The relation has been interpreted as reflecting the mass-velocity scaling () of dark matter halos, but this interpretation has been called into question by abundance-matching (AM) models, which predict the galaxy-halo mass relation to be non-monotonic and rapidy evolving. We study the TFR of luminous spirals and its relation to AM using the EAGLE set of CDM cosmological simulations. Matching both relations requires disk sizes to satisfy constraints given by the concentration of halos and their response to galaxy assembly. EAGLE galaxies approximately match these constraints and show a tight mass-velocity scaling that compares favourably with the observed TFR.…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
