![]() |
(L) for just the low luminosity galaxies L << L
, show that
for -2 <
< -1, the total number of galaxies is infinite
but the total light is not.
for
= -1 ?
| (a) | Log (L) dL | vs | Log L/L |
| (b) | Log (M) dM | vs | M - M![]() |
| (c) | Log N(>L) | vs | Log L/L |
| (d) | Log N(< M) | vs | M - M![]() |
to be unity;
take the range in L/L
to be from
10-2 to 10; and overplot lines
with three values of
: -1.5, -1.0, -0.5
(dotted, solid, dashed). Be careful to account for the fact that graph (a) expresses
per unit interval of luminosity (dL), while graph (b) expresses
per magnitude (dM, which is an interval in Log L). Also, note that graphs (c) and (d) are not expressed per interval, but are integrated, and so they should look the same (excluding, possibly, the direction of the x-axis).
Summarize, briefly, the various features you see in the plots and their differences. Why does the graph of Log
(M) dM immediately tell you that
= -1.0 is the critical value separating finite from infinite numbers of galaxies?
(2) Application to the Coma Cluster :
= -1 and MB,
= -19.2 (Ho = 100 km/s/Mpc). The redshift of Coma is 7000 km/s and
its total luminosity is about 250 L
.
and
MB,
change if Ho = 50 km/s/Mpc ?
(in solar luminosity
units) corresponding to MB,
in these two cases (use MB,
= 5.48)
(the normalization of the Schechter function), and hence estimate how many galaxies are brighter than
L
,
0.1 L
, and
0.01 L
.
and as an
apparent magnitude. Compare the latter with the observed apparent magnitude for the brightest Coma galaxy, NGC 4889 (BTo,i from RC3). Comment on any difference you find between the two magnitudes.