2010
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2010.00941.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Constraining the low-mass end of the initial mass function with gravitational lensing

Abstract: The low‐mass end of the stellar initial mass function (IMF) is constrained by focusing on the baryon‐dominated central regions of strong lensing galaxies. We study in this Letter the Einstein Cross (Q2237+0305), a z= 0.04 barred galaxy whose bulge acts as lens on a background quasar. The positions of the four quasar images constrain the surface mass density on the lens plane, whereas the surface brightness (H‐band HST/NICMOS imaging) along with deep spectroscopy of the lens (VLT/FORS1) allows us to constrain t… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

6
41
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(47 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
6
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There are three independent ways of constraining the IMF: i) Dynamical: based on constraints from the kinematics (see, e.g., Cappellari et al 2012); 2) Lensing: focusing on strong gravitational lenses over galaxy scales (see, e.g. Ferreras et al 2008Ferreras et al , 2010Treu et al 2010;Auger et al 2010); 3) Spectroscopic: targeting selected line strengths sensitive to the presence of low-mass stars (see, e.g., Cenarro et al 2003;van Dokkum & Conroy 2010;Fer-reras et al 2013;La Barbera et al 2013). Over the past few years, these studies have independently found a significant change in the IMF of early-type galaxies (hereafter ETGs), with a heavier mass function in the most massive galaxies (according to the dynamical and lensing studies), more specifically with a bottom-heavy shape (according to spectroscopic studies).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are three independent ways of constraining the IMF: i) Dynamical: based on constraints from the kinematics (see, e.g., Cappellari et al 2012); 2) Lensing: focusing on strong gravitational lenses over galaxy scales (see, e.g. Ferreras et al 2008Ferreras et al , 2010Treu et al 2010;Auger et al 2010); 3) Spectroscopic: targeting selected line strengths sensitive to the presence of low-mass stars (see, e.g., Cenarro et al 2003;van Dokkum & Conroy 2010;Fer-reras et al 2013;La Barbera et al 2013). Over the past few years, these studies have independently found a significant change in the IMF of early-type galaxies (hereafter ETGs), with a heavier mass function in the most massive galaxies (according to the dynamical and lensing studies), more specifically with a bottom-heavy shape (according to spectroscopic studies).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Observational measurements of the IMF have also proved to be particularly challenging, both for resolved stellar populations, where individual stars can be counted, and for distant (e.g., Chabrier 2003b), unresolved stellar populations, where the IMF must be inferred more indirectly (e.g., Tang & Worthey 2015). Recent observations suggesting a variable IMF, as measured within massive elliptical galaxies, serve to further compound the elusive origin of the IMF (e.g., Ferreras et al 2010;Cappellari et al 2012;Conroy & van Dokkum 2012b;Spiniello et al 2014). While understanding the shape of the IMF would certainly provide insight into the physical processes that control star formation, the IMF also has vast implications for the study of galaxy populations as the IMF influences nearly all observable galaxy properties, including stellar mass, luminosity, metal content, and star formation history.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Surprisingly, observations over the past few years of more distant stellar populations suggest deviations from the universal IMF inferred in the Local Group. Several independent methods have been implemented to study the IMF in unresolved stellar populations, including (1) dynamical studies where stellar population synthesis (SPS) mass-to-light ratios are compared to dynamically derived mass-to-light ratios (e.g., Dutton et al 2011;Cappellari et al 2012Cappellari et al , 2013Conroy & van Dokkum 2012b;Conroy et al 2013;Martín-Navarro et al 2015c), (2) absorption-line studies where spectral features either sensitive or anti-sensitive to dwarf stars provide the constraints (e.g., Cenarro et al 2003;Ferreras et al 2013;La Barbera et al 2013;Spiniello et al 2014;McConnell et al 2016), and (3) lensing studies where SPS masses are compared to masses derived from gravitational lensing (e.g., Ferreras et al 2008Ferreras et al , 2010Auger et al 2010;Treu et al 2010;Thomas et al 2011;Posacki et al 2015;Leier et al 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Gravitational lenses can be also used to constrain the stellar initial mass function (e.g., Treu et al 2010;Ferreras et al 2010;Spiniello et al 2011;Brewer et al 2012;Sonnenfeld et al 2015;Posacki et al 2015;Leier et al 2016) and to independently measure the Hubble constant through time delays (e.g., Suyu et al 2010;Bonvin et al 2016). In addition, strong lensing gives magnified views of background objects otherwise inaccessible to observations (e.g., Impellizzeri et al 2008;Swinbank et al 2009;Richard et al 2011;Deane et al 2013;Treu et al 2015;Mason et al 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%