skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: THE SPACE MOTION OF LEO I: HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE PROPER MOTION AND IMPLIED ORBIT

Journal Article · · Astrophysical Journal
;  [1];  [2]; ;  [3]
  1. Space Telescope Science Institute, 3700 San Martin Drive, Baltimore, MD 21218 (United States)
  2. Department of Astronomy, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027 (United States)
  3. Department of Physics and Astronomy, Center for Cosmology, University of California, 4129 Reines Hall, Irvine, CA 92697 (United States)

We present the first absolute proper motion measurement of Leo I, based on two epochs of Hubble Space Telescope ACS/WFC images separated by {approx}5 years in time. The average shift of Leo I stars with respect to {approx}100 background galaxies implies a proper motion of ({mu}{sub W}, {mu}{sub N}) = (0.1140 {+-} 0.0295, -0.1256 {+-} 0.0293) mas yr{sup -1}. The implied Galactocentric velocity vector, corrected for the reflex motion of the Sun, has radial and tangential components V{sub rad} = 167.9 {+-} 2.8 km s{sup -1} and V{sub tan} = 101.0 {+-} 34.4 km s{sup -1}, respectively. We study the detailed orbital history of Leo I by solving its equations of motion backward in time for a range of plausible mass models for the Milky Way (MW) and its surrounding galaxies. Leo I entered the MW virial radius 2.33 {+-} 0.21 Gyr ago, most likely on its first infall. It had a pericentric approach 1.05 {+-} 0.09 Gyr ago at a Galactocentric distance of 91 {+-} 36 kpc. We associate these timescales with characteristic timescales in Leo I's star formation history, which shows an enhanced star formation activity {approx}2 Gyr ago and quenching {approx}1 Gyr ago. There is no indication from our calculations that other galaxies have significantly influenced Leo I's orbit, although there is a small probability that it may have interacted with either Ursa Minor or Leo II within the last {approx}1 Gyr. For most plausible MW masses, the observed velocity implies that Leo I is bound to the MW. However, it may not be appropriate to include it in models of the MW satellite population that assume dynamical equilibrium, given its recent infall. Solution of the complete (non-radial) timing equations for the Leo I orbit implies an MW mass M{sub MW,vir} = 3.15{sub -1.36}{sup +1.58} x 10{sup 12} M{sub Sun }, with the large uncertainty dominated by cosmic scatter. In a companion paper, we compare the new observations to the properties of Leo I subhalo analogs extracted from cosmological simulations.

OSTI ID:
22126726
Journal Information:
Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 768, Issue 2; Other Information: Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); ISSN 0004-637X
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English