this is for holding javascript data
Andrew Wetzel edited summary_discussion.tex
about 9 years ago
Commit id: 900b62d274730163e2181cd727fd4655d184b121
deletions | additions
diff --git a/summary_discussion.tex b/summary_discussion.tex
index f4c8f20..160c702 100644
--- a/summary_discussion.tex
+++ b/summary_discussion.tex
...
We conclude by briefly discussing the complex dependence of satellite quenching timescales on $\mstar$ from Figure~\ref{fig:quench_times} in the context of the underlying physics of environmental quenching.
At $\mstar\gtrsim10^9\msun$, the long quenching timescales suggests quenching driven by gas depletion in the absence of cosmic accretion after infall (``strangulation''), caused by gravitational tidal stripping and/or ram-pressure stripping of the extended gas around the satellite.
Furthermore, this scenario explains the decline of the quenching timescale with increasing $\mstar$, because higher-mass galaxies generally have lower $\mgas/\mstar$ \citep[in either cold atomic or molecular gas, e.g.,][Bradford et al.,
submitted]{Schiminovich2010,Saintonge2011a,Huang2012,Boselli2014} submitted]{Schiminovich2010, Saintonge2011a, Huang2012, Boselli2014} and thus shorter gas depletion timescales in the absence of accretion.
Indeed, at $\mstar\sim10^9\msun$, galaxies transition through $\mgas/\mstar\approx1$, with gas depletion timescales comparable to a Hubble time.
In this scenario, the quenching timescales at $\mstar\gtrsim10^9\msun$ do not necessarily require strong additional environmental processes other than the lack of gas accretion to account for quenching in satellites \citep[see related discussions in, e.g.,][]{Wetzel2013,Wheeler2014,McGee2014}.