meeting 2024 10 02 n315 - JacobPilawa/TriaxSchwarzschild_wiki_5 GitHub Wiki
Context
- It's been awhile since we've looked at N315, so I've started to remind myself where we were at/what we were hoping to do next.
- In short, we had done quite a bit of the work for N315 already, and were moving toward finalizing the galaxy. Around the same time, we discovered the packinputs.py bug which flipped the outer data relative to the inner data for any galaxy we used the unfolded data for. As we found for N57, this didn't seem to impact that parameters too much since this only impacted the outermost bins and was also before any point-symmetrization. This problem did impact N315 as well, so I've produced maps with the corrected packinputs code. I think the obvious next step is for me to reminimize the kinematics with the corrected binning scheme (and switch over to the new binaries) and compare the before and after. This would mean reminimizing ~4000 models from 4 different grids, and should be about ~2000 SU or so. We also did run scalings for these, but I would hesitate to run the scalings as well before we simply compare the before and after with the corrected kinematics.
- We also had been using the kinem chi2 up to this point. Just another thing to note.
- With all of this said, I think the most obvious thing we should do is simply re-minimize the N315 models with the new binaries, and run a similar set of tests to what we did for N57 -- how does kinem vs. NNLS compare, where are the differences from/does this impact paramters, etc. We can do this all with the new set of binaries as well so that we're using consistent sets of data.
Plots
- First, here's a quick comparison of the old kinematics vs. new kinematics vs. what's posted on BOX. Note that these are the unsymmetrized versions of the kinematics.
| Old |
Corrected |
BOX |
| [images/241001/less_zoom_old.png]]](/JacobPilawa/TriaxSchwarzschild_wiki_5/wiki/[[images/241001/less_zoom.png) |
images/241001/box.png |
|
- And here are the "production" plots we had before revisiting N57. These were not looked at too closely at the time/this is basically where we left off.
Cornerplots from Before
- This is simply a representative cornerplot from when we last left off. Again, this was produced with the kinem chi2 (we are using NNLS now for N57), as well as exlcuding the dummies moments and including all the bins. Reproducing this for the correct binning scheme + with the NNLS chi2 I think is the most obvious next step. There additionally are 1d chi2 vs. parameters on previous pages, but didn't want to clutter/confuse this page.
| Rho0 |
M15 |
| [images/240422/test_angles_shapes-1.png]]](/JacobPilawa/TriaxSchwarzschild_wiki_5/wiki/[[images/240430/test_angles_shapes_M15-1.png) |
|
MGE Plot
-
Here's an attempt at a new MGE figure, this time with both the deprojected 3D density and the 2D surface brightness with HST, CFHT, and Spitzer data overlaid.
- Black points (HST F110W) and red points (Spitzer IRAC1) are taken from Jonelle's paper
- Purple points (CFHT) taken from Matthew's figures with a -0.95 magnitude constant offset applied to match up the middle portion of the galaxy
- MGEs are taken right from Boizelle+21
-
One thing that is strange to me:
- In the N315 paper, Figure 1 shows MGE A in the upper right surface brightness plot, and this seems to disagree with Figure 4 which compares the three MGEs. I can't seem to get the same behavior in the inner portion of the MGEs as is claimed in FIgure 4? And it seems the black squares disagree between the two figures as well.
With that said, here's the updated plot:
Spectra Plot
CO Stellar Comparison
-
NOTE: There seems to be a discrepency with the 4751 in the comparison plot of: https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.11260
- Rusli+2013 says that the BH mass is 1.4e9, but they have this at ~2e9 for the stellar based comparsion.
- Note they also assume the same distance in both measurements, so that can't be the issue.
-
Here's the most up-to-date comparison plot. Note that the M/L values are in different bands and all over the place, so I've only focused on the BH masses for now.
Stellar Dynamics
CO Dynamics
