Advertisement

Chemo-Dynamical Models and the Star Formation History of Galaxies

  • M. Samland
  • G. Hensler
Conference paper
Part of the International Astronomical Union / Union Astronomique Internationale book series (IAUS, volume 171)

Abstract

Sandage (1986) showed what the star formation rate (SFR) of galaxies of different Hubble type might look like. His curves are based on the study of Gallagher et al. (1984), who determined the SFR at three different epochs of galactic evolution. Sandage’s figure establishes a connection of SFR and Hubble type but, as was already mentioned by Sandage, it “contains no physics” In order to explore the background of this connection, however, it is necessary either to improve the observations or to model the evolution of galaxies self-consistently. However, the results of modelling the SFR are not reliable, if simplified models are used, which only describe some structural properties of galaxies. It is necessary to apply self-consistent models which take into consideration all relevant interaction processes between the gaseous and stellar components of a galaxy. Such models can be checked by comparison with observations like density and abundance distributions, star-gas content, velocities, velocity dispersions, mass-luminosity relations and age distributions of stars. A detailed model will show, whether the initial conditions, the feedback mechanisms during the evolution or the environment determine the evolution of a galaxy.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Condon, J.J., Helou, G., Sanders, D.B., Soifer, B.T., 1990, ApJS 73, 359ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dressler, A., 1979, ApJ 231, 659ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gallagher, J.S., Hunter, D.A., Tutukov, A.V., 1984, ApJ 284, 544ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gott, J.R., Thuan, T.X., 1976, ApJ 204, 649ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hunter, D.A., Gallagher, J.S., 1986, PASP 98, 5ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Miyamoto, M., Satoh, C., Ohashi, M., 1980, Astrophys. Space Sci. 67, 147ADSCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Roberts, M.S., Haynes, M.P., 1994, ARAA 32, 115ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Samland, M., 1994, Dissertation, University of Kiel, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  9. Samland, M., Hensler, G., 1995, IAU-Symp. 169, in pressGoogle Scholar
  10. Samland, M., Hensler, G., Theis, C., 1995, ApJ submittedGoogle Scholar
  11. Sandage, A., Freeman, K., Stokes, N., 1970, ApJ 160, 831ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sandage, A., 1986, A&A 161, 89ADSGoogle Scholar
  13. Sofue, Y., Habe, A., 1992, PASJ 44, 325ADSGoogle Scholar
  14. Thronson, H.A.J., Telesco, C.M., 1986, ApJ 311, 98ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Tally, R.B., Mould, J.R., Aaronson, M., 1982, ApJ 257, 527ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tully, R.B., 1988, Nearby Galaxies Catalog, Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Samland
    • 1
  • G. Hensler
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Astronomie und AstrophysikUniversität KielKielGermany

Personalised recommendations