Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge / 2024 / iii / Paper 349 (The Life and Death of Galaxies)

Let the source's hydrogen-ionizing photon production rate bewhere $h{\nu }_0$ is the hydrogen ionization energy. The idealized Strömgren sphere has an almost fully ionized interior and a thin ionization front. In photoionization equilibrium, every ionization is balanced by a Case B recombination, so spherical symmetry givesFor pure hydrogen of constant number density $n$, the interior has $n_e=n_p=n$, and the Strömgren radius is therefore

Now let the effective number of dust grains per hydrogen nucleus be $f_d$, so the dust absorption coefficient is $a(r)=f_d{\sigma }_{d}n(r)$. If $Q(r)$ is the ionizing-photon rate crossing the sphere of radius $r$, recombinations and dust absorption give the linear ordinary differential equationIf $f_d$ denotes a dust mass fraction instead, the grain mass and gas mean particle mass are simply absorbed into the effective product $f_d{\sigma }_d$. Define the dust optical depthMultiplication by the integrating factor $e^{{\tau }_d(r)}$ and integration to the dusty front gives its governing equationThe exponential function weights recombinations at large optical depth by the extra source photons that dust must remove before those photons reach that radius.

For constant $n$, put $a=f_d{\sigma }_{d}n$ and $\tau =a{R}_d$. The elementary integralreduces the equation toEquivalently, with $y=R_d/R_S$ and ${\tau }_S=a{R}_S$,Its dust-free limit is $y\to 1$, while absorption makes $R_d<R_S$ for nonzero dust abundance.

The galaxy mass--metallicity relation is the observed tendency for more massive galaxies to have larger gas-phase metallicity and stellar metallicity. Gas metallicity is commonly inferred from nebular emission-line ratios in star-forming H II regions, often quoted as $12+{\log }_{10}(\mathrm{O}/\mathrm{H})$ and measured within a finite spectroscopic aperture. Stellar metallicity comes from stellar absorption features or population-synthesis fits and is luminosity weighted unless the analysis explicitly reconstructs a mass-weighted distribution. Galaxy stellar mass is inferred from photometry or a spectral-energy-distribution fit and depends on the adopted initial mass function. Radial metallicity gradients, dust, line calibration, and aperture selection must consequently be matched before samples are compared.

The usual physical explanation is that a shallow potential well lets a low-mass galaxy lose a larger fraction of newly synthesized metals in galactic outflows. The closed-box model of galactic chemical evolution is therefore replaced by a leaky-box model of galactic chemical evolution withwhere $\lambda$ is the mass-loading factor. Under the instantaneous recycling approximation, let $y_z$ be the stellar yield, absorb the returned mass fraction into the definitions, and suppose the escaping gas has the current gas metallicity $Z_g$. Then mass conservation and metal conservation areSubstitution of the first equation into the second cancels the terms that merely transfer pre-existing metals and leavesBecause the mass of metals locked into stars obeys $d{M}_{z,\ast }=Z_{g}d{M}_{\ast }$, integration gives $M_{z,\ast }=M_{\ast }{Z}_{\ast }=\int Z_{g}d{M}_{\ast }$. The total newly made metal mass is partitioned between present gas, stars, and the outflow:Writing the gas-to-stellar mass ratio as $r_g=M_g/M_{\ast }$ therefore producesThus simultaneous gas and stellar metallicities, together with the gas fraction and an assumed nucleosynthetic yield, estimate the integrated mass loading. The corresponding effective yield is $y_{\mathrm{eff}}=y_z/(1+\lambda )$, and the leaky box has

The G-dwarf problem is that the local Milky Way disk contains far fewer low-metallicity long-lived G dwarfs than the constant-yield closed-box metallicity distribution predicts. A yield that rises with metallicity may initially sound promising because enrichment would accelerate after the first generations. In fact it worsens the problem. In a closed box, $d{M}_{\ast }=-d{M}_g$ andFor $y_z=kZ$ and a nonzero initial metallicity $Z_0$ at gas mass $M_{g,0}$,Hence the cumulative mass of stars born below metallicity $Z$ isIf the system begins at $Z_0=0$, the assumed yield also vanishes and enrichment never starts. For $Z_0>0$, the metallicity distribution function haswhich puts still more stellar mass near the low-metallicity floor. Metal-poor gas inflow, pre-enrichment, and selective outflow are therefore more plausible ingredients in resolving the G-dwarf problem.

A galactic distribution function $f(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{v},t)$ is the stellar mass or number per six-dimensional phase space volume,Its velocity moments give the spatial density, mean velocity, and velocity dispersion; integrating those quantities along the line of sight and weighting by luminosity produces surface-brightness and line-of-sight-velocity observables. A model is compared with data only after the same projection, selection function, and instrumental convolution have been applied.

Jeans theorem states that every steady solution of the Collisionless Boltzmann equation depends on phase-space coordinates only through integrals of motion. Conversely, every nonnegative function of isolating integrals is a steady collisionless distribution function on the region where those integrals are defined.

For the stated power law in relative energy, isotropy givesWith the requested change of variables $v=\sqrt{2\Psi }\cos \theta$, the density becomeswhere the last equality uses the Beta function and Gamma function. Thusfor $n>1/2$.

The normalized second velocity moment isThe same substitution and the Beta-function recurrence giveConsequently the one-dimensional isotropic velocity dispersion is ${\sigma }^2=\overline{v^2}/3=\Psi /(n+1)$, proving the required linear dependence on the relative potential.

Chandrasekhar dynamical friction is the drag exerted by the overdense gravitational wake that a massive body creates in a background of lighter particles. It transfers orbital energy and angular momentum to the host, causing satellites, star clusters, and massive black holes to spiral inward and promoting galaxy mergers. In a homogeneous isotropic Maxwellian background its force iswhere $\log \Lambda$ is the Coulomb logarithm in stellar dynamics. Its scaling can be reconstructed from the strong-deflection impact parameter $b_{\mathrm{cr}}\sim GM/v^2$: the encountered mass rate is $\sim \rho v\pi b_{\mathrm{cr}}^2$, and multiplying by momentum change $\sim v$ gives $F_{\mathrm{df}}\sim G^2{M}^2\rho /v^2$.

For a spherical host with a flat galaxy rotation curve,This is a singular isothermal sphere with one-dimensional dispersion $\sigma =v_c/\sqrt{2}$, so $X=1$. DefineFor a constant-mass satellite on a circular orbit, the drag magnitude and its torque areIt follows thatThe quadratic radius dependence and inverse mass dependence explain why massive nearby satellites merge much faster than light or distant ones.

Let the satellite also have a flat internal rotation curve of speed $v_s$. Equating its edge density to the host density gives the tidal radiusBecause $M_s(<R_t)=v_s^2{R}_t/G$, the bound mass decreases linearly:Under the question's literal closure that the derivative of the remaining satellite's total orbital angular momentum equals the frictional torque,and henceIf stripped material is explicitly assigned the satellite's instantaneous specific orbital angular momentum, the balance for the bound remnant is instead $M_{s}d(v_{c}r)/dt=-r{F}_{\mathrm{df}}$; that convention gives $t_{\mathrm{df},\mathrm{strip}}=2t_{\mathrm{df},0}$. Both treatments show the robust point: tidal stripping weakens the drag as the orbit shrinks and substantially delays coalescence. In less idealized profiles the mass can fall faster than linearly, producing dynamical-friction stalling by tidal stripping.