1—5
m
(N
The stellar disk thickness of LSB galaxies
D.Bizyaev^'^'^
dmbizOsai . msu . ru
and
O . S.Kajsin
O
(N
skaiOsao.ru
ABSTRACT
We present surface photometry results for a sample of eleven edge-on galaxies
^ I observed with the 6m telescope at the Special Astrophysical Observatory (Rus-
Q\ [ sia). The photometric scale length, scale height, and central surface brightness of
^ I the stellar disks of our sample galaxies are estimated. We show that four galax-
O ! ies in our sample, which are visually referred as objects of the lowest surface
Q I brightness class in the Revised Flat Galaxies Catalog, have bona fide low surface
(--| ! brightness (LSB) disks. We find from the comparison of photometric scales that
Q-i\ the stellar disks of LSB galaxies are thinner than those of high surface brightness
O I (HSB) ones. There is a clear correlation between the central surface brightness
^ \ of the stellar disk and its vertical to radial scale ratio. The masses of spherical
^ ' subsystems (dark halo + bulge) and the dark halo masses are obtained for the
sample galaxies based on the thickness of their stellar disks. The LSB galaxies
rS \ tend to harbor more massive spherical subsystems than the HSB objects, whereas
c^ I no systematic difference in the dark halo masses between LSB and HSB galaxies
is found. At the same time, the inferred mass-to-luminosity ratio for the LSB
disks appears to be systematically higher than for HSB disks.
Subject headings: galaxies: spiral — galaxies: structure — dark matter
^Physics Department, University of Texas at El Paso, TX 79968
^Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow, 119899, Russia
■^Isaac Newton Institute of Chili, Moscow Branch
^Special Astrophysical Observatory of RAS, pos. Nizhnij Arkhyz, 357147, Karachaevo-Cherkessia, Russia
-2-
1. Introduction
Low surface brightness spiral galaxies (hereafter, LSB galaxies) have been studied exten-
sively in recent years. Their main distinctive feature from "regular", high surface brightness
(HSB) galaxies, is roughly a two magnitude lower central surface brightness of their stellar
disks. They are thought to harbor massive dark halos (de Blok et al. 2003). The LSB rota-
tion curves are shallower in their central parts (McGaugh et al. 2001), which points toward
a large dark matter fraction.
By observing the thickness of the stellar disk in a galaxy, one can constrain the relative
mass of the dark halo (Zasov et al. 1991). Until recently, only few edge-on LSB galaxies have
been explored in detail (e.g. UGC 7321 Matthews (2000) and IC 5249 van der Kruit et al.
(2001)).
We conducted a study of a small uniform sample of LSB and HSB galaxies observed
with the same instrument to compare their structural parameters. Here we present the
results of photometric observations in the V and R bands of a sample of eleven edge-on
galaxies. The paper is structured as follows: in section 2 we describe the sample of galaxies
and observations. In section 3 we discuss the data reduction and present the structural
parameters of our galaxies. In section 4 we use the inferred disk thickness to estimate the
dark halo mass. Section 5 contains a discussion of selection effects and relations between the
inferred parameters. The main results are summarized in section 6.
2. Sample of galaxies and observations
Our sample is based on the Revised Catalog of Flat Galaxies (Karachentsev et al.
(1999), RFGC hereafter). All galaxies included in this catalog are highly inclined objects.
We select object from the faintest surface brightness (SB) class (IV according to RFGC) as
candidates to LSB galaxies, and objects from intermediate or high surface brightness classes
as reference HSB objects. We narrowed the sample of objects to galaxies large enough for
srtuctural studies (major axis size >2 ' in RFGC) which fit inside the 3.5 ' field-of-view of
our CCD imager. In three observing nights of our program we obtained data for 11 galaxies.
Photometric observations were performed with the prime focus camera on the 6-m
telescope at the Special Astrophysical Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
This setup provides a plate scale of 0.2 arcsec/pixel and good sensitivity for faint regions
of galaxies. The data were taken on April 27, 28, and 30, 2000 in the Johnson-Cousins V
and R photometric bands. The V-band images were utilized mostly for calibration purposes,
while the R images were used for the measurements of structural parameters. For most
of the galaxies in our sample we made two to four images shifted by a few pixels in both
photometric bands.
The Landolt photometric standards (Landolt 1992) were observed every night. Table 1
summarizes our observations listing object names, surface brightness class (according to
RFGC), date of the observation, total integration time in every photometric band, number
of exposures, and average seeing when the target was observed.
-3-
3. Data reduction and results
The data were reduced using standard tools in the MIDAS package. The images of
galaxies and photometric standards were corrected for the bias and dark current, and fiat
fielded. The images were then sky subtracted, aligned, and combined. We checked the quality
of fiat fielding and sky subtraction by comparing the background level in those parts of the
image that are free of foreground stars and are located close to a sample galaxy. The large-
scale pattern of the background does not introduce uncertainties above 0.1%. Three galaxies
have very bright stars in their fields, which raises the large-scale background fluctuations up
to 0.2%.
Eight and twelve Landolt's stars from three selected areas were available on April 27
and 30, respectively. The residuals for photometric solutions were 0.'"02 for April 27 (in
both V and R bands), and 0.™04 (in both V and R bands) for the night on April 30. The
sky brightness level is tabulated in Table 1. The surface brightness corresponding to a 3 a
level of the background noise in the final combined images is shown in Table 1 as well.
The observing conditions were non-photometric during part of the night on April 28.
However, most of our galaxies have the major axes photometric profiles in the R band
published by Karachentsev et al. (1992). It enables us to verify the calibration and to adjust
it for the non-photometric night. The mean difference between the surface brightnesses we
derived and those published by Karachentsev et al. (1992) is of the order of 0.™3. The largest
source of the discrepance comes from the use of different procedures of the major axis profiles
extraction.
Comparison of the sky brightness in R images can be used to estimate roughly the zero
point of calibration for the objects taken on April 28. If we use this way of calibration, the
R-band surface brightnesses of UGC 9138 and UGC 9556 would be 0*^.4 lower than those
used in the present paper.
The combined and calibrated images were utilized to obtain the radial scale length h,
vertical scale height zq, and "face-on" central surface brightness of the stellar disk, as well
as bulge-to-disk luminosity ratio Lb/La-
The images were rotated to align the galactic plane parallel to the horizontal axis.
Choosing the rotation angle, we point our attention at the intermediate regions of galactic
disks where a possible bulge does not reveal itself and the signal-to-noise ratio (S/N hereafter)
is high enough.
We applied a standard method (van der Kruit & Searle 1981) to derive the structural
parameters extracting photometric profiles parallel to the major and minor galactic axes.
The radial scale length was obtained from two photometric profiles extracted parallel to
the major axis and displaced with respect to the galactic midplane. This allows us to
minimize the effects of dust absorption, because we avoid the galactic midplane. An average
displacement is of the order 0.7 Zq (see below). If the bulge was present, the central part of
radial photometric profiles (typically, 1 h from the center) is excluded from further analysis.
We fit the function /(r) = 2Iq sech"^ {z / Zq) f^ """^ exp{—l/h)r dl to the radial profiles and
find mean values of Jq and h. Here, r is the distance to the center, and Rmax is the distance
to the edge of disk. One can assume that Rmax = 4/i according to Pohlen et al. (2002);
Holley-Bockelmann & Mihos (2001). The integration was made along the line of sight /.
Two radial profiles utilized for the fitting are shown in the middle panels of Fig. 1-14 by the
solid lines. Note that each a profile was manually cleaned from foreground stars before the
-4-
fitting. The radial profile drawn through the galactic plane is shown in the middle panels of
Fig. 1-14 by the dashed line.
As a next step, we draw 10 to 14 cuts made parallel to the minor axis of a galaxy
and fit each photometric profile with the function f{z) = I sech'^{\z + dz\/ Zq). Here \z\
designates the distance to the galactic plane. The "displacement term" dz enables us to
correct the values of the disk scale height for a possible disorientation of major axis or disk
warp. The resulting value of the scale height Zq and its error were found by averaging the
values throughout the disk. Our galaxies show no significant variations of the scale height
with radius. Hence, we defined the mean scale height with no weights.
Fitting the profiles, we convolved the functions f{z) with the gaussian smearing function
assuming its FWHM from Table 1. The corresponding vertical profiles are shown in the upper
frames of Fig. 1-11. They were manually cleaned of the foreground stars and artifacts before
the fitting.
The value of the disk central surface brightness /xq corrected to the face-on inclina-
tion was calculated with the parameters Jq and zq inferred above taking into account the
photometric calibration equations. The extinction of our Galaxy (according to the LEDA
database) is also included into the analysis and listed in Table 2.
In order to check how examining only a limited number of brightness profiles (two radial
and 10-14 vertical) affects the inferred values, we derive the same values for each a galaxy by
extracting the radial profiles (drawn along the major axis) with the increment of one pixel
from 0.2 z^ax to 0.8 z^ax in the vertical direction, where Zmax is the minor axis of an ellipse
encompassing the galaxy by the level of S/N=3. The vertical profiles in this analysis were
drawn with one-pixel increment taking a step off the disk edge and its center. The resulting
structural parameters are similar to those obtained above using only a few photometric
profiles. All conclusions of the paper remain unchanged in this case.
As was shown by de Grijs et al. (1997), we can neglect inclination corrections for in-
clinations larger than 86-87 degrees. Our V images are deep enough to see obscuration by
dust in most of our galaxies. Although dust is not seen in the galaxy FGC 1273, its bulge
has a high degree of symmetry. Because its edge-on disk is very thin, we assume that its
inclination angle is 90°. For all other galaxies we can estimate the inclination angle of the
galactic plane from the shape and positions of their dust layers and asymmetric position of
center of brightness respective to external isophotes. The value of the inclination is shown in
Table 3, its typical error is 0.7°. Based on those values, we applied no additional correction
for non edge-on inclination to the photometric parameters derived above.
Assuming the inferred disk parameters, we subtracted the disk and extracted the bulge
images from the central parts of our galaxies. Then, the central parts of two radial pro-
files mentioned above, as well as the vertical profiles extracted along the minor axis, were
utilized to estimate the bulge parameters. The King's profile p5,(l + {'"'/'AY)'^^'^-! ^^ ^^^^
as the exponential one p\exp{—r/al), were used to fit the bulge volume luminosity density
distribution. Here, p^, denotes the central volume luminosity density. The bulge scales a\
and al could be different in the vertical and radial directions (i.e. for oblate bulges). The
inner part of the vertical profiles were excluded from the analysis.
Bulges of most galaxies in our sample are best fitted by the King's profile. The only
exception is UGC 9556, the bulge of which is best fitted by the exponential profile. Because
the central part of the latter galaxy is oblate, we suggest that that it probably has two
-5-
disks: an HSB disk is encompassed by more extended LSB one. We consider its LSB disk
throughout the paper. According to RFGC, UGC 9556 may have a lens in its central part.
On the other hand, its type was defined as a galaxy with a bar (SB?c) in the UGC catalog
(Nilson 1973). More over, UGC 9556 has an asymmetry of bright isophotes close to the
galactic plane, which points toward a possible bar shielded by dust whose nerby side is seen.
Indeed, photometric identification of bars in edge-on galaxies can rarely be conclusive.
With the help of the obtained parameters we infer the bulge-to-disk luminosity ratio
Lfj/ Ld. The main results of the fitting are shown in Table 3. The values of h and zq
are converted to the spatial units according to the adopted distances to the galaxies D.
Table 3 also shows R-magnitudes and colors (V-R) derived for our objects. The magnitudes
were obtained by integrating background-subtracted images of the galaxies within elliptical
diaphragms. Major and minor axes of the diaphragms correspond to the sizes from the
RFGC cataloge, which are quite similar to the galaxies' dimensions at S/N=3 level.
The distribution of /xq (see Table 3) indicates the presence of two subsamples: that with
/io greater than 23.5 mag / arcs ec^ , which we define as LSB galaxies, and that with a higher
surface brightness, which is designated as HSB galaxies in this paper. Hence, our sample
consists of four LSB and seven HSB galaxies. Note that all galaxies in the faintest RFGC
surface brightness class were classified here as LSB objects.
Although our sample of objects enables to compare the structural parameters of LSB
and HSB disks, the sample is very limited. We incorporated one more sample of edge-
on galaxies whose photometric parameters have been published by Barteldrees & Dettmar
(1994). They made use of similar red photometric band and technique to extract the pho-
tometric parameters. We will utilize their data together with ours throughout the paper in
order to increase the available sample of HSB galaxies. As it will be seen, the sample of
Barteldrees & Dettmar includes also one object, which can be classified as a LSB galaxy.
4. LSB versus HSB: the vertical scale height of galactic disk as a new feature
to compare
As was shown in Bizyaev (2000); Bizyaev & Mitronova (2002); Reshetnikov et al. (2003),
the galaxies of lower surface brightness tend to have smaller zo/h ratios. However, this
conclusion was based on studies of mostly HSB galaxies. Now, we can incorporate our LSB
subsample and consider the relation between Zo/h and the central surface brightness fiQ.
The objects from our sample are denoted by squares in Fig. 12. The open squares show the
HSB subsample, whereas the filled ones designate LSB galaxies. The galaxies taken from
Barteldrees & Dettmar (1994) are shown in Fig. 12 with the crosses.
Furthermore, the near-infrared Ks-hand sample of edge-on galaxies from Bizyaev &
Mitronova (2002) is available for comparison (the 2MASS sample hereafter). Here we have
to take into account the systematic difference in the brightness and Zo/h between the R and
K photometric bands. As was noticed by Zasov et al. (2002), the ratio of scales Zo/h is 1.4
times less for the stellar disk in K against R. It can be explained by stronger dust extinction
in the R band, and was well illustrated by Xilouris et al. (1998). We corrected zo/h for
the 2MASS galaxies taken from Bizyaev & Mitronova (2002) according to this value. The
typical color (R-K)=2™'.1 inferred for late-type face-on spirals by de Jong (1996) was added
to the central surface brightnesses of the 2MASS galaxies as well. The final correction that
-6-
we applied was addition of the internal extinction to the 2MASS central surface brightness,
because it is low in the infrared band and non-negligible in the R band. The value of this
correction, 1™.2, is chosen so that the 2MASS sample coincides with our HSB objects in
Fig.l2.
Fig. 12 shows all three samples together, where the 2MASS objects are denoted by the
small filled triangles. A trend in Fig. 12 is seen, an average difference of 2™" in /iq leads to
1.5 change in the ratio of scales. At the same time, there is no clear correlation found when
h and zq were plotted against jj,q separately. The correlation of /iq versus h was shown by
Graham (2001), but that conclusion was based on mostly early-type spiral galaxies.
We also incorporate general galactic properties taken from the LEDA database into the
analysis: absolute B magnitude Bahs) maximum of the rotation curve Vm-, and HI index. The
latter index denotes the difference between the B magnitude and the "HI magnitude". We
found that LSB and HSB subsamples do not differ systematically in Babs-, Kn, and HI index.
There is no correlation found between the values of /xq and z^/h on the one hand, and Babs-,
Vm, or HI index on the other hand.
In Fig. 13 one can see a relation of Tully-Fisher type, where the values of the radial scale
length are well correlated with the maximum of rotational velocity Vm- According to Zwaan
et al. (1995); Sprayberry et al. (1995); Chung et al. (2002), LSB and HSB spiral galaxies
follow the same Tully-Fisher relation, and our Fig. 13 is in a good agreement with this. It
argues that we did not made a mistake deriving the spatial values. Thus, the galaxy UGC
7808 was investigated by de Grijs & van der Kruit (1996) where the shorter scale height value
(in kpc) was inferred because of the lower adopted distance to the galaxy. Fig. 13 shows that
our value of the scale length for the galaxy, 13.55 kpc, places the galaxy very close to the
general dependence in Fig. 13, whereas the scale length of 1.9 - 2.7 kpc taken from de Grijs
& van der Kruit (1996) would place this object far off. At the same time, the angular values
of the scale length found in the present work and in the latter cited one, are very similar.
Following Zasov et al. (2002), we calculated the ratio of the total mass Mt inside the
optical radius to the luminosity of the galactic disk in the B band. Lb- We suppose that
Mt = G^^AhV^, where G is the gravitational constant and Ah radius encompasses the whole
galaxy. The value of Lb is obtained from the absolute B-magnitude, which was taken from
the LEDA and corrected for the internal galactic absorption. The values of Mi/Lb are
plotted against the ratio Zo/h in Fig. 14.
The notation in Fig. 14 is the same as in Fig. 12. As was noticed by Zasov et al. (1991),
the ratio of scales z^/h indicates the total mass of the spherical component of a galaxy
expressed in its disk mass Ms/Md- The relation between zo/h and Mg/Md obtained from
numerical modeling (N body simulations) was published by Mikhailova et al. (2001) and
shown in Fig. 15. We made use of that dependence to evaluate the model values of Mg/Md
for our galaxies.
Here, we have to clarify that we distinguish between a spherical and disk subsystem
throughout the paper. By the "spherical subsystem" we refer to both a stellar bulge and
dark halo, even if their shapes are not spherical but rather oblate (see discussion in section
5.5). In a general case, the spherical subsystem means a non-disk component, either stellar
or not. The disk in our understanding is the galactic stellar disk. It consists mostly of stars
for our objects. Later in the paper we also evaluate the ratio of dark-to-luminous masses.
The dark mass belongs to the dark halo, whereas the luminous matter means the stellar
bulge and disk.
-7-
Then, we take into account that Mt = Ms + Ma and Lb = Md/{M/L), where (M/L)
denotes the B-band stellar mass-to-light ratio in the disk. Hence Mt/ Lb = {Ms/Md + 1) •
[M/L). It is seen that the model value of Mt/ Lb depends on the adopted B-band stellar
mass-to-light ratio. The three curves in Fig. 14 present the model values of M^/L^ which
were calculated based on Fig. 15 with the mass to light ratio (M/L) of 1, 5, and 15. As
is seen in Fig. 14, most of the galaxies have values of (M/L) between 3 and 10. The B-
band stellar mass-to-light ratio (M/L) in Fig. 14 corresponds to the distance taken along the
horizontal axis toward the curve of (M/L)=l. The value of the stellar mass-to-light ratio is
systematically higher for our LSB galaxies as compared to that of HSB galaxies.
This conclusion contradicts the bluer color of LSB galaxies found by (de Blok et al.
1995) who give lower values for their (M/L), but the bulge-dominated LSB galaxies have
colors comparable with HSB ones (Beijersbergen et al. 1999). The dereddened colors from
our both LSB and HSB subsamples are almost the same (Table 3). On the other hand, LSB
spirals have low metallicity as a rule. It might give the comparable colors, whereas stellar
disk's (M/L) takes larger values in LSB spirals. Another reasonable explanation might be
an excess of the dark matter in the disks of bulge dominated LSB spirals.
Large LSB galaxies have, on average, two times more mass in their gaseous component
(Romanishin et al. 1982) in comparison with HSB. Our LSB subsample has almost twice
larger value of " HI index" against the HSB one. But this difference is not enough to explain
the systematic difference in (M/L) in Fig. 14 since the gas component does not dominate by
mass in our galaxies.
The mass of the dark halo Mh can be estimated from the relation shown in Fig. 4. The
dark-to-luminous ratio is {Md + Mb)/Mh = (l + Mb/Md) ■ (Md/Mh), where Mb and Md denote
masses of bulge and dark halo, respectively. On the other hand, Mg/Md = {Mh + Mb)/Md
and hence, M^/Md = Mg/Md — Mb/Md- Combining previous equations, one can obtain:
Mh _ MjMd - Mb/Md ,^.
Md + Mb 1 + Mb/Md ^ '
The values of Mb/Md can be estimated from observations making a rough assumption that
the bulge-to-disk luminosity ratio follows the bulge-to-disk mass ratio Mb/Md = Lb/ Ld (we
consider how our conclusions might change for real galaxies where (M/L) is different for
bulges and disks in section 5). At the same time, Ms/Md can be estimated from Fig. 15.
The ratio of dark-to-luminous mass Mh/iMd + Mb) for our galaxies is shown in Fig. 16.
Surprisingly, there is no systematic difference between the values of dark-to-luminous mass
ratio for the galaxies with different central surface brightnesses, see Fig. 14. It is generally
assumed that the LSB galaxies are dark-matter dominated, but all those conclusions were
based on studies of bulgeless galaxies. Our sample, on the contrary, comprises mostly of the
galaxies possessing non-negligible bulges.
We can also compare masses of the spherical subsystem Mg (i.e. the sum of the bulge
and halo) in our galaxies. In Fig. 17 we present how the spherical to disk mass ratio Mg/Md
depends on the disk central surface brightness. We kept the same notation as in Fig. 12 and
Fig. 14. Fig. 17 indicates that the LSB galaxies do not have more massive dark matter halos.
Instead, they have more massive spherical subsystems. This supports a result by Graham
(2002) that not all LSB galaxies are dark matter dominated objects. Nevertheless, our result
does not contradict previously made conclusions since the dark matter halo and the spherical
subsystem become identical for bulgeless galaxies.
Differentiation between the bulge and halo allows us to demonstrate that there are dark-
matter halo dominated large LSB galaxies as well LSB galaxies, the halos of which are less
massive than their disks.
5. Discussion
5.1. The sample selection
There is no systematic difference in the obtained values of /xq among our sample galaxies
of I - III surface brightness class (it was noticed by Bizyaev (2000) as well). On the other
hand, most galaxies of IV SB class are apparently bona fide LSB galaxies. They constitute
a small part of all RFGC objects (3%). As was noticed by McGaugh et al. (1995), there is
a significant fraction of LSB galaxies with a large bulge to disk ratio. Bulges of LSB and
HSB systems are indistinguishable (Beijersbergen et al. 1999), yet their disks are different.
Hence, one have to distinguish between LSB galaxies with and without bulges and take these
possible bulges into account while undertaking a study of properties of dark halos in LSB
galaxies.
Our paper does not attempt to present a statistically completed study of LSB spiral
galaxies with large bulges. Instead, we compare two samples of objects of opposite properties.
To make statistically reliable conclusions the sample has to be extended.
5.2. Selection effects
Fig. 12 presents a correlation between /io and z^/h. Indeed, the values of Hq and Zq/H
have not been obtained independently from each other, as it follows from the formulae in
section 3. Let us consider how the non-90° inclination of the disk plane affects /io and Zo/h.
If the inclination angle is less than 90°, the scale height zq calculated in section 3 becomes
overestimated. At the same time, the scale length h is much less affected by the value of
inclination angle. On the other hand, the value of zq was taken into account when the central
surface brightness was calculated. While overestimating the ratio zo/h, we underestimate
the disk central surface brightness (hence, its numerical value will be larger). It means that a
non-90°inclination of disks shifts data points in Fig. 12 toward the right upper corner. Hence,
the systematic errors due to inclination may only scatter the dependence shown in Fig. 12
(say, for the 2MASS galaxies) and do not explain a good correlation.
The second effect that has to be considered is the internal dust absorption in galaxies.
According to Xilouris et al. (1999), the scale length in dusty disks appears higher because
of the scattering and absorption effects. On the other hand, the dust absorption decreases
the derived central surface brightness. In our case it would shift data points in Fig. 12 from
the upper left to the lower right corner and would form a dependence similar to that seen
in Fig. 12. Nevertheless, we decreased the influence of dust by avoiding the dust layer when
extracting the radial proflles. This allowed us to minimize the dust absorption. Furthermore,
one can see that the infrared and optical subsamples follow the similar dependence in Fig. 12.
This argues that the internal absorption has little effect on the difference between LSB and
HSB photometric parameters and Fig. 12 has a physical meaning.
-9-
5.3. Internal absorption in galactic disks and the ratios Ms/Ma and
Mh/{M, + M,)
As was noted in section 4, the disk thickness is different when it is estimated in different
photometric bands. All the considered relations between the mass of a dark halo, stellar disk,
and spherical component are made using the data taken in the R band. On the other hand,
the infrared ratios of photometric scales zo/h are less than the optical ones. The infrared
values are more preferable because of the lower dust absorption, so we could decrease all our
ratios zq/H by a factor of 1.4. As is seen in Figs. 14 and 15, a proportional decrease of the
scale ratio affects Figs. 16 and 17 only quantitatively. Hence, all previous conclusions remain
unchanged.
The values of /xq inferred for our HSB galaxies are less than the Freeman's value (taking
into account a difference between the R and B bands). It implies that the internal extinction
may be important in the disks of our galaxies. Since all the galaxies are spiral and are
relatively nearby, one can assume roughly the same dust-to-stars ratio in them. Then, the
internal extinction proportionally increases the values of fi^. At the same time, it does not
change the main trends in Fig. 12, 14, 16, and 17.
In a more complicated case, the internal dust extinction may be systematically different
in the galaxies of our sample. Thus, according to (McGaugh 1994; Matthews & Wood
2001) LSB spirals are likely to be less dusty than HSB ones. One can see that it strengthens
the relation shown in Fig. 12: extinction correction of fio for HSB spirals moves data points
further to the left than it does for LSB spirals. As a result, we can always distinguish between
these two subsamples. It corresponds to the conclusion made by Beijersbergen et al. (1999)
that the dust extinction alone can not explain the difference in surface brightness between
LSB and HSB spirals.
Another way to take the extinction into account is to connect it with the global galactic
parameters such as the absolute magnitude or rotational velocity, see (Tully et al 1998) and
references therein. Correction of /io for the extinction with the help of absolute R-magnitudes
or Vm moves data points to the left in Fig. 12 and does not change its general trend.
The bulge-to-disk luminosity ratio has been utilized to draw Fig. 12 and 16. Since part
of our galaxies has bulges, attention should be paid to how the extinction may change the
derived values of Lt,/Ld. In addition to the profile fitting, we conducted a direct integration
of bulges. At first, the model disk (constructed according to the parameters defined during
the disk fitting) was subtracted from the images of galaxies. Then, we integrated all the
central part which was above the zero level. The ratio of the integrated luminosity of the
bulge to the model disk luminosity Ll/L^ gives us a lower bound of L^/Ld ratio (because
the model disk is "dust-free", and the bulge is dimmed by the extinction). The value of
Ll/Ld is 2-6 times lower than the value of Li,/Ld given in Table 3. If we use Ll/L^ instead
of Lb/Ld, Fig. 12 does not change qualitatively. On the other hand, in Fig. 16 all our LSB
galaxies move to the right, since a larger fraction of mass of their spherical component is
assigned to the dark halo. Then, if we apply Ll/Ld as a bulge-to-disk luminosity ratio, one
cannot conclude that the ratio "(dark halo -|- bulge) /disk" in the bulge-dominated galaxies
is systematically higher whereas dark-to-luminous ratio not. In this case dark-to- luminous
mass ratio would be higher in our LSB systems too.
Alternatively, one can obtain the ratio Li,/Ld from direct integration of the bulge and
disk from our images. In contrast to the previous case that gives the lower limit on L^/Ld,
-10-
this integration yields values of L^/Ld that are systematically higher than it can be seen in
Table 3. This method of evaluation of bulge-to-disk luminosity ratio does not change our
conclusions as well.
5.4. M/L may be different for bulge and disk
Assuming that M^/Md = Lb/Ld, one can notice that indeed, bulges and disks have
different colors and, hence, their stellar population has to show different mass-to-light ratios.
It does not affect all our results except for Eq. (1) and Fig. 16. Bulges are redder than
disks as a rule (Peletier & Balcells 1996) and have larger M/L. Then, Mh/{Md + M^) is
overestimated for galaxies with significant bulges (LSB galaxies in our sample). Hence,
it supports our conclusion that dark halo does not dominate in LSB galaxies which have
big bulges. It should be noticed that the difference between colors of bulges and disks is
very small (Peletier & Balcells 1996; Gadotti & dos Anjos 2001), which makes the effect
mentioned above insignificant.
5.5. Oblate bulges, non-spherical halos
Dark matter halos and bulges of galaxies may not be exactly spherical, but rather oblate.
Our definition of Mt = G~^4:hV^ works well for the case of spherical symmetry. In a general
case Mt = rjG'^AhVj^, where 77 is a dimensionless parameter, the value of which is determined
by the mass distribution, and rj < 1 for the case of galaxies. If the whole mass of a galaxy was
enclosed in a thin exponential disk, the parameter 77 taken at 4h distance from the center is
approximately equal to 0.5 (Freeman 1970). All other reasonable geometric cases represent
a mixture of disk and spherical components and give rj between 0.5 and 1. For the case of
non-spherical dark halo, the difference between LSB and HSB galaxies in Fig. 14 (and, hence,
in M/L for the stellar disk) would be even more prominent, because Mt calculated using r] is
systematically lower for disk-dominated HSB spirals than for bulge-dominated LSB galaxies
in our sample. Note that once a non-disk component is presented in all our galaxies, the
difference in 77 be significantly less than a factor of 2. At the same time, it does not change
other conclusions of this paper.
A possible existence of a non-spherical, oblate component was not taken into account
by Mikhailova et al. (2001). If one takes it into account, the general trend shown in Fig. 14
remains unchanged. However, a systematic difference between the ellipticity of dark halos
in LSB and HSB galaxies can significantly affect Fig. 14. For instance, an assumption of
oblate halo in LSB spirals and spherical halo in HSB ones decreases the difference between
the B-band mass-to-luminosity ratio in stellar disks mentioned above, since it shifts data
points to the left (though, by less than a factor of 2). On the other hand, we show that the
dark halos are likely to be not too massive and, hence, not dominant by mass in our bulge-
dominated LSB spirals. Therefore, the role of their non-spherical shapes is insignificant. It
is doubtful that the systematic difference between the ellipticity of dark halos in LSB and
HSB galaxies can affect our conclusions. Furthermore, if a significant fraction of dark matter
in the bulge-dominated LSB galaxies is located in their disks, it helps to rise their (M/L)
as it can be seen from Fig. 14. Note that one of candidates to the dark matter, namely cold
molecular clouds, could form a disk-like subsystem (Pfenniger et al. 1994).
-11-
6. Conclusion
1) We present results of photometric observations of a sample of edge-on galaxies. Our
sample includes four LSB and seven HSB galaxies. The photometric disk scales (both vertical
and radial), disk central surface brightness, and bulge-to-disk luminosity ratios were derived.
2) Stellar disks of LSB galaxies are thinner (when parameterized by the ratio zq/K) than
HSB ones. There is a clear correlation between their central surface brightnesses and the
vertical to radial scale ratios.
3) While having different central surface brightnesses and bulge-to-disk ratios, the LSB
and HSB galaxies in our sample follow the same dependence "disk scale length versus the
maximum rotational velocity" .
4) Our LSB galaxies tend to harbor massive spherical subsystems (bulge -|- halo) as well
as to have higher values of the mass-to-luminosity ratio in their disks when compared to
the HSB objects. Nevertheless, the dark halo is not strictly the most massive subsystem in
our bulge-dominated LSB galaxies. The LSB spirals appear to be the "spherical subsystem
dominated" galaxies but not always the " dark matter dominated" .
D.B. is supported by NASA/JPL through the grant 99-04-OSS-058. The project was
partially supported by Russian Foundation for Basic research via the grant 04-02-16518. We
have made use of the LEDA database. We thank Verne Smith and Michael Endl for their
comments on the manuscript and the anonymous referee whose commentaries and corrections
essentially improved the paper. D.B. is grateful to A.Khoperskov and Eduard Vorobyov for
fruitful discussions and help.
REFERENCES
Peletier, R., Balcells, M., 1996, AJ, 111, 2238
Barteldrees, A., Dettmar, R.-J. 1994, A&AS, 103 ,475
Beijersbergen, M., de Blok, W., and van der Hulst, J. 1999, a, 351, 903
Bizyaev, D. 2000, Sov. Astron. Lett., 26, 219
Bizyaev, D., Mitronova, S. 2002, A&A, 389, 795
de Blok, W., van der Hulst, J., Bothun, G. 1995, MNRAS, 274, 235
de Blok, E., van der Hulst, T., & McGaugh, S. 1996, AAS, 189, 8402
de Blok, W., Bosma, A., & McGaugh, S. 2003, MNRAS, 340, 657
Chung, A., van Gorkom, J., O'Neil, K., Bothun, G. 2002 AJ, 123, 2387
de Grijs, R., van der Kruit, R 1996 A&AS, 117, 19
de Grijs, R., Peletier, R., van der Kruit, P. 1997, A&A, 327, 966
- 12-
de Jong, R. 1996 A&A, 313, 377
Gadotti, D., dos Anjos, S. 2001 AJ, 122, 1298
Freeman, K. 1970, ApJ, 160, 811
Graham, A. 2001, MNRAS, 326, 543
Graham, A. 2002, MNRAS, 334, 721
Holley-Bockelmann, J., Mihos, J. 2001, AAS, 198, 08.15
Karachentsev, I., Georgiev, Ts., Kajsin, S., Kopylov, A., Ryadchenko, V., Shergin, V. 1992,
Astron & Astrophys. Transact., 2, 265
Karachentsev, I., Karachentseva, V., Kudrya, Y., et al. 1999, Bull, of Special Astrophys.
Obs., 47, 5
Kregel, M., van der Kruit, R, de Grijs, R. 2002, MNRAS, 334, 646
Landoh, A. 1992 AJ, 104, 340
Matthews, L. 2000, AJ, 120, 1764
Matthews, L., Wood, K. 2001, ApJ,
McGaugh, S. 1994, ApJ, 426, 135
McGaugh, S., Schombert, J., and Bothun, G. 1995, AJ, 109, 2019
McGaugh, S., Rubin, V., & de Blok, W. 2001, AJ, 122, 2381
Mikhailova, E., Khoperskov, A., Sharpak, S. 2001, Conf. proc. "Stellar Dynamics: From
Classic to Modern", ed. Ossipkov & Nikiforov, p. 147.
Uppsala General Catalogue of Galaxies, 1973, Acta Universitatis Upsalienis, Nova Regiae
Societatis Upsaliensis.
Pfenniger, D., Combes, F., Martinet, L. 1994, A&A, 285, 79
Pohlen, M., Dettmar, R.-J., Lutticke, R., and Aronica, G. 2002, A&A, 392, 807
Reshetnikov, V., Dettmar, R.-J., & Combes, F. 2003 A&A, 399, 879
Romanishin, W., Krumm, N., Salpeter, E., et al. 1982 ApJ, 263, 94
Sprayberry, D., Bernstein, G., Impey, & C, Bothun, G. 1995, ApJ, 438, 72
Tully, R., Pierce, M., Huang, J.-S., et al. 1998, ApJ, 115, 2264
van der Kruit, P., Searle, L., 1981, A&A, 95, 105
van der Kruit, P., Jimenez- Vicente, J., Kregel, M., & Freeman, K. 2001, A&A, 379, 374
Xilouris, E., Ahon, P., Davies, J., et al. 1998, A&A, 331, 894
-13-
Xilouris, E., Byun, Y., Kylafis, N., Paleologou, E., Papaniastorakis,J. 1999, A&A, 344, 868
Zasov A., Makarov D., Mikhailova E. 1991, Sov. Astron. Lett., 17, 374
Zasov, A., Bizyaev, D., Makarov, D., Tyurina, N. 2002, Sov. Astron. Lett., 28, 527
Zwaan, M., van der Hulst, J. , de Blok, W., & McGaugh, S. 1995, MNRAS, 273, L35
This preprint was prepared with the AAS I^TJtjX macros v5.2.
-14-
Table 1: Summary of the observing run
Name
SB class
Band
Date
Int. time
Nexp
Seeing
Sky
S/N=3 level
1999
sec.
arcsec
mag/arcsec^
mag/arcsec^
UGC 10111
IV
V
27 Apr
600
1
1.9
21.37
26.58
R
27 Apr
1200
4
2.0
20.72
26.77
UGC 11301
III
V
27 Apr
700
3
1.6
20.76
25.17
R
27 Apr
1000
4
1.6
20.38
25.81
UGC 5662
III
V
30 Apr
600
1
3.0
21.39
26.64
R
30 Apr
1200
2
2.4
20.59
26.63
UGC 6080
II
V
30 Apr
600
1
1.9
21.49
26.46
R
30 Apr
1200
2
1.7
20.68
26.60
UGC 6686
III
V
27 Apr
1200
2
1.8
21.35
26.85
R
27 Apr
900
3
1.7
20.48
26.45
UGC 7808
IV
V
27 Apr
600
1
2.2
21.35
26.40
R
27 Apr
1200
2
2.0
20.56
26.66
UGC 9138
I
V
28 Apr
900
2
1.1
21.37
26.48
R
28 Apr
900
2
1.0
20.63
26.90
UGC 9422
I
R
30 Apr
1200
2
1.7
20.57
26.91
UGC 9556
IV
V
28 Apr
1800
4
1.0
21.46
26.51
R
28 Apr
2900
6
1.0
20.68
27.26
FGC 1273
IV
V
27 Apr
600
2
1.8
21.43
26.54
R
27 Apr
900
2
1.7
20.50
26.59
NGC 4738
I
R
30 Apr
1200
2
1.5
20.45
26.56
Name of galaxy, surface brightness class (according to the RFGC catalog), photometric band,
date of observations, exposure time (total), number of expositions, average seeing, level of
sky brightness, and S/N=3 SB level in combined frames.
-15-
Table 2: General galactic parameters utilized in the paper
Name
D,Mpc
Type
logD25
bt
Ab
logVm
Babs
UGC 10111
139.6
Sc
1.221
16.
0.178
2.370
-21.3
UGC 11301
62.3
Sc
1.295
15.5
1.273
2.379
-21.2
UGC 5662
17.1
SBb
1.495
15.4
0.115
1.899
-17.6
UGC 6080
30.3
Scd
1.3
15.8
0.036
1.877
-18.6
UGC 6686
86.4
Sb
1.418
15.0
0.135
2.283
-21.2
UGC 7808
96.3
Sb
1.492
14.6
0.098
2.403
-21.8
UGC 9138
61.9
Sc
1.284
14.8
0.108
2.161
-20.9
UGC 9422
45.6
Sc
1.279
14.7
0.1
2.140
-20.5
UGC 9556
32.5
SBc
1.099
16.0
0.043
1.974
-18.1
FGC 1273
49.4
Sc
0.801
16.5
0.103
2.166
-18.0
NGC 4738
63.6
Sc
1.297
14.3
0.076
2.335
-21.4
Name of galaxy, adopted distance (corresponding to the Hubble constant Hq = 75
km s~^ Mpc~^), morphological type, the major axis size logD25 (in 0.1'), total B-band mag-
nitude, foreground extinction in our Galaxy in B, logarithm of rotational velocity log Vm,
and absolute B-magnitude (all those values are taken from the LEDA).
-16-
Table 3: The derived structural parameters of the galaxies
Name i PA h zq z^/h jiq L^/Ld mji V-R
deg deg kpc kpc mag/arcsec^ mag mag
UGC 10111
88.2
37.5
15.84 ± 0.14
2.60 ± 0.42
0.168
24.63 ± 0.11
0.58
15.08
0.63
UGC 11301
88.2
110.
8.24 ± 0.84
1.30 ± 0.08
0.160
22.12 ± 0.13
0.25
13.01
0.81
UGC 5662
89.3
147.5
2.16 ± 0.51
0.50 ± 0.06
0.237
22.70 ± 0.37
0.21
13.62
0.61
UGC 6080
86(?)
125.
2.93 ± 0.18
0.70 ± 0.05
0.236
22.69 ± 0.16
0.00
14.45
0.50
UGC 6686
88.0
50.
9.82 ± 1.27
1.89 ± 0.21
0.196
22.51 ± 0.13
0.10
13.44
0.71
UGC 7808
88.7
93.5
13.55 ± 2.63
1.44 ± 0.18
0.158
23.97 ± 0.18
0.86
13.60
0.69
UGC 9138
87.0
168.5
4.71 ± 0.12
1.05 ± 0.06
0.214
22.42 ± 0.38
0.07
14.79
0.76
UGC 9422
88.3
159.
3.54 ± 0.13
0.80 ± 0.05
0.225
22.64 ± 0.35
0.00
14.96
—
UGC 9556
87.0
133.
3.63 ± 0.49
0.54 ± 0.09
0.141
24.77 ± 0.60
1.00
15.39
0.39
FCC 1273
89.7
170.
5.17 ±0.98
0.63 ± 0.10
0.118
24.33 ± 0.18
1.37
14.70
0.68
NGC 4738
85.7
32.5
4.68 ± 0.21
1.23 ± 0.08
0.270
21.11 ± 0.16
0.01
13.39
—
Parameters derived for our galaxies: inclination angle, position angle, disk scale length in
kpc, disk scale height, ratio of scales Zo/h, stellar disk central surface brightness, bulge to
disk ratio, R-magnitude integrated within the elliptical diaphragm with axes size taken from
the RFGC catalog, and color (V-R). The R-magnitude and the color are uncorrected for the
foreground extinction.
-17-
o
UGC 10111 R
•12
■
■
23
L
v^T^^v
M
:
/v ^"-^
■
/y ^^
7+
Uj
xV^ ^i^
k
:
Jr^ X.
25
!■ J
^ N
fvs "^
26
h W
^v
^) 1
2/
. . . .
.
.
15
10
-SOS
V«rircol dl5t€nc«, orcGCC
10
15
Rodfol (Jistonce, Ofcsec
WWTT
{?A, arc3«
Fig. 1. — Upper: Examples of the vertical profiles of UGC 10111 extracted parallel to its minor axis. Both
lines show profiles taken along two vertical cuts closest to the galactic center, see isophotal map in the lower
panel. The 10 arcseconds bar indicates the level of S/N=3. Middle: The radial profiles extracted along
the major axis (dashed curve) and parallel to it (solid curves). The latter were used to derive the structural
parameters of the galaxy. Upper and lower curves are shifted by +2 and -2 mag/arcsec^ respectively from
their real position. They are extracted along the upper and lower radial cuts shown on the isophotal map.
The 10 arcseconds bar indicates the level of S/N=3. Lower: the isophotal map of UGC 10111. The isophotes
correspond to 20.5, 21, 21.5, 22, 22.5, 23, 23.5, 24, 24.5, 25, and 25.5 mag/arcsec^ in the R band. The places
where the profiles were extracted are shown by lines. All artifacts and stars which can be seen in the picture
were cleaned out manually before the structural parameters were found.
-18-
UGC 11301 R
■to 10
Vertical dtsiGncc, Oficsec
-roo
100
rr
g D
° -2D
^^^^N^ ■ ■ ^ . ^' ':
-1Q0
-50
50
100
RA, nrcaec
Fig. 2.— The same for UGC 11301. The isophotes correspond to 19.5, 20.5, 21, 21.5, 22,
22.5, 23 ,23.5, and 24.5 mag/arcsec^.
-19-
UGC 5662 R
2D
:
1
21
"
jf\^J:s^
J^^"^'^ ^"^^^
-
i22
■
y^^^ ^v
A
1"
-
v^ \.
-j
^ _
=
J^ ^^v».
3
a 24
\^f ^^^
—
E
i r^
^W|
:
m 2b
^ ./Cr
v^
''^<iA^ -^
ifl
i A/
^^ 1
26
f r
\ 1
27
= ,,/....
\, , J
-20
•10
VerliccI distance, arcsec
10
20
IS
_
1 • ■ ■ » 1 ^ ■ .■|i.i.i,.itifi
■
j*»^
« 20
_
^^Z'^^^'*^,,,,^^ -
u
B
JL J^^^J"^*^^ ^ "V ^^"^ ■
-
-Y^c^'^LCj^^
E -i*
-
^'^ ^^^^''^^ ^""^^^^^v^ ^^^^-A ~:
Of
_
j^ ^^****'^->-***
tf* 26
—
\j/Wr^ ^^*^ ■:
2B
■
/v4r
-100
-50 50
Podj'ol di 9^0 nee, orcsec
100
-100
-50
D
50
1O0
Fig. 3.— The same for UGC 5662. The isophotes correspond to 20.5, 21, 21.5, 22, 22.5, 23,
23.5, and 24 mag/arcsec^.
-20-
UGC 5080 R
'10 10
Varlicol disicncc, orcsec
20
20
10
a
y -ID
-20|^
RodJoJ diabnce, orcsec
-SO
SO
R^, arcsec
Fig. 4.— The same for UGC 6080. The isophotes correspond to 20.5, 21, 21.5, 22, 22.5, 23,
23.5, 24, 24.5, and 25.5 mag/arcsec^.
-21-
UGC 5686 R
• 10 10
Verlicol distance, orcsec
20
le
2D
u
^
q
2?
E
ar
24
VI
25
-1
00
-50 50
f^od/oJ dislonce, orcsec
2D
i!
ID
u
a
U
y
-ID
o
-20
-100
-50
D
RA, orcsec
50
IDO
Fig. 5.— The same for UGC 6686. The isophotes correspond to 20.5, 21, 21.5, 22, 22.5, 23,
23.5, 24, 24.5, and 25.5 mag/arcsec^.
-22-
^20
UGC 7608 R
'10
Verlicol distance, orcs«c
10
20
-50 50
-ICX)
Fig. 6.— The same for UGC 7808. The isophotes correspond to 20.5, 21, 21.5, 22, 22.5, 23,
23.5, 24, 24.5, and 25.5 mag/arcsec^.
-23-
UGC 9158 R
10 Q
Verlicol disicncc, orcsec
20
t^
■
^jf^^- xT>^_^_
1
■
w
-
j.p^^*''''**^"C^ '^ ■^'*'^w/
Ij
-
^ 2?
—
^y^w-J''^--' ^Vl
^^^"^wJl
—
u
■
S**^ J *^ ^ "
V ^ IM"*l^ ^
■
a
id
vj -» '" ^^^
■*■ ^ ^S \
J»
~ V
1
y-.^"''''''^"^^'''^^'''^"--*^
V ^*^
1* "
E
y"""
^^^^^ \
y :
Erf 26
Iff
.r
/*v^
X
V-
2B
^ r
^
^ ^
-60 -40
-20 2Q
RodJoJ diatonce, orcsec
40
60
-60 -40 -2D D
RA, orcsec
20
4'C]
6D
Fig. 7.— The same for UGC 9138. The isophotes correspond to 20.5, 21, 21.5, 22, 22.5, 23,
23.5, 24, 24.5, 25, and 26 mag/arcsec^.
-24-
UGC 9422 R
-5 5
Vertical distance, orcs«c
-20 2Q
-6D -40 -10 D 20
40
EO
Fig. 8.— The same for UGC 9422. The isophotes correspond to 20.5, 21, 21.5, 22, 22.5, 23,
23.5, 24, 24.5, 25,25.5 mag/arcsec^.
-25-
UGC 9556 R
-5 5
Vertical distance, orcs«c
IS
20
u
<«*
^ 2fi
Of 2B
in
30
32 1
_■ I i-
-50
50
la^il
■.■■■■ J
■ .J *
-50
50
f?^, arcsec
Fig. 9.— The same for UGC 9556. The isophotes correspond to 20.5, 21, 21.5, 22, 22.5, 23,
23.5, 24, 24.5, 25, 26, and 26.7 mag/arcsec^. The diagonal feature in the lower panel is a
remainder of a bright satellite track.
-26-
FGC 1273 R
Varlicol disicncc, orcsec
.'
le
|-
/v
-j
1 2D
u
^ 11
S 26
|-
g^TN^.
-j
/ ^^^'\rt
2B
-
-€0 -40
-20 20
HodioJ dislonce, orcsec
40
60
-W -40 -2n D
20
40
60
Fig. 10.— The same for FGC 1273. The isophotes correspond to 20.5, 21., 21.5, 22., 22.5,
23. ,23.5,24., 24.5,25., and 25.5 mag/arcsec^.
-27-
^20
NGC 4738 R
-10 10
Verlicol disi€nc«, orcsec
20
i^od/oJ dislonce, orcsec
-50
50
RA, orcsec
Fig. 11.— The same for NGC 4738. The isophotes correspond to 20.5, 21, 21.5, 22, 22.5,
23, 23.5, 24, 24.5, 25, and 25.5 mag/arcsec^.
-28-
o
N
0.5
[ ▲
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
+
1 1 1 ■
1 1 1
0.4
- ▲
▲
A
+
-
-
▲
+
-
-
+
-
▲
A
-
0.3
. A
A
+
-
A
A
A
_
▲
^^A
A
A
A
V' u^^
-
_
A
A +
_
0.2
-
A
A
A + ++
■
■ :
:
A
i
:
0.1
;
■
;
0.0
-
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
, , 1 .
1 1 1
21
22 23 24
/J.0, mag/arcsec^
25
Fig. 12. — The vertical to radial scales ratio of the stellar disks zq/H versus their central
surface brightness /xq in the R band. The objects from our sample are denoted by squares.
The open squares are for the HSB subsample whereas the filled ones designate the LSB
galaxies. The galaxies taken from Barteldrees & Dettmar (1994) are shown as crosses, and
the 2MASS objects are denoted by the small filled triangles.
-29-
10 -
u
Q_
-\ — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — r
+
D
+
+ +
+
+
D
+
+
+
+
+ Oh
+ D
.++
D
+
D
D
_i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i_
50 100 150 200 250 500
Vmox, km/s
Fig. 13. — The radial scale length h is well correlated with the maximum rotational velocity
Vm- The notation is the same as in Fig. 12.
-30-
o
N
0.30
'1 1
' 1
0,25
- \ n \
1
1
-
0,20
0.15
■ \ +^4 +
\
\
\
\
\
■ \
-
0.10
\ *\
s
\ \
■:
0.05
-
-
0.00
1 1 1 1
1
1 1 '
10
Mt/Le
100
Fig. 14. — Tlie ratio of tlie total mass to B-luminosity of disk Mf/Ls (see in tlie text) plotted
against the disk scales ratio zo/h. The notation in the figure is the same as in Fig. 12. The
three curves present the model values of Mt/Ls which were calculated based on Fig. 15 with
the mass to light ratios M/L of 1 (solid), 5 (dot-dashed) , and 15 (dashed).
-31-
0.4
0.3 K
o
N
0.2 -
0.1 -
0.0
2 3
Ms/Md
Fig. 15. — Relation between the stellar disk thickness z^/h and its relative mass of the
spherical component M^jM^ obtained from numerical simulations (N body experiments).
The figure is adopted from Mikhailova et al. (2001).
-32-
25
u
CD
(f)
U
D
D
24 :
25 :
o
^ 22 :
21
T 1 1 1 1 — I — I — r
"+
D
d- n
n
+
nF
D
D
_i I I I I I I i_
T r
+
_i i_
0.1 1.0
Mh/(Md + Mb)
Fig. 16. — The ratio of dark-to-luminous mass Mh/{Md + Mh) for our galaxies. The notation
in the figure is the same as in Fig. 12.
25
u
CD
(f)
U
D
D
24 :
25 :
o
^ 22 :
21
+
0.1
-33-
T 1 1 1 1 — I — I — r
T r
+ '
^ +
+n °
+
+
n
n
_i I I I I I I i_
_i i_
1.0
Ms/M.
Fig. 17. — The spherical to disk mass ratio Ms/Md for our galaxies in dependence on the
disk central surface brightness. We kept the same notation as in Fig. 12.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11