Recognition: unknown
The number density of superdense early-type galaxies at 1<z<2 and the local cluster galaxies
read the original abstract
Many of the early-type galaxies observed so far at z>1 turned out to have smaller radii with respect to that of a typical present-day early-type galaxy with comparable mass. This has generated the conviction that in the past early-type galaxies were more compact, hence denser, and that as a consequence, they should have increased their radius across the time to reconcile with the present-day ones. However, observations have not yet established whether the population of early-types in the early Universe was fully represented by compact galaxies nor if they were so much more numerous than in the present-day Universe to require an evolution of their sizes. Here we report the results of a study based on a complete sample of 34 early-type galaxies at 0.9<z_{spec}<1.92. We find a majority (62 per cent) of normal early-type galaxies similar to typical local ones, co-existing with compact early-types from ~2 to ~6 times smaller in spite of the same mass and redshift. The co-existence of normal and compact early-type galaxies at <z>~1.5 suggests that their build-up taken place in the first 3-4 Gyr, followed distinct paths. Also, we find that the number density of compact early-types at <z>~1.5 is consistent with the lower limits of the local number density of compact early-types derived from local clusters of galaxies. The similar number of compact early-types found in the early and in the present day Universe frustrates the hypothesized effective radius evolution while provides evidence that also compact ETGs were as we see them today 9-10 Gyr ago. Finally, the fact that (at least) most of the compact ETGs at high-z are accounted for by compact early-types in local cluster of galaxies implies that the former are the direct progenitors of the compact early-type cluster galaxies establishing a direct link between environment and early phases of assembly of ETGs.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.