论文标题
银河动力学的基础功能扩展:球形与圆柱坐标
Basis function expansions for galactic dynamics: Spherical versus cylindrical coordinates
论文作者
论文摘要
目标。星系的轨道结构受到轨道整合过程中力计算的准确性的强烈影响。我们探讨了两种扩展方法的力量计算的准确性,并确定哪一种优于轨道积分。 方法。我们专门比较了两种方法,一种是由Hernquist \&ostriker(HO)介绍的,该方法使用球形坐标系,并专门为Hernquist模型构建,另一种是由Vasiliev \&Athanassoula(Cylsp)具有圆柱形坐标系统。 Our comparisons include the Dehnen profile, its triaxial extension (of which the Hernquist profile is a special case) and a multicomponent system including a bar and disk density distributions for both analytical models and $N$-body realizations.We specifically compare two methods, one was introduced by Hernquist \& Ostriker (HO), which uses a spherical coordinate system and was built specifically for the Hernquist model, and the other Vasiliev \&Athanassoula(Cylsp)具有圆柱坐标系。我们的比较包括Dehnen配置文件,其三轴扩展(Hernquist概况是一种特殊情况)以及一个多组分系统,包括用于分析模型和$ n $ body实现的条和磁盘密度分布。 结果。对于广义的DEHNEN密度,对于几乎所有内部幂律指数和所有半径,CylSP方法比HO方法更准确。对于$ n $ - 体的dehnen模型的实现,或$ n $ body仿真的快照,CylSP方法比中央区域中的HO方法更准确,如果粒子的粒子数为$ 5 \ times 10^5 $。对于具有球形形状的Hernquist模型的快照,首选HO方法。 (简略)
Aims. The orbital structure of galaxies is strongly influenced by the accuracy of the force calculation during orbit integration. We explore the accuracy of force calculations for two expansion methods and determine which one is preferable for orbit integration. Methods. We specifically compare two methods, one was introduced by Hernquist \& Ostriker (HO), which uses a spherical coordinate system and was built specifically for the Hernquist model, and the other by Vasiliev \& Athanassoula (CylSP) has a cylindrical coordinate system. Our comparisons include the Dehnen profile, its triaxial extension (of which the Hernquist profile is a special case) and a multicomponent system including a bar and disk density distributions for both analytical models and $N$-body realizations.We specifically compare two methods, one was introduced by Hernquist \& Ostriker (HO), which uses a spherical coordinate system and was built specifically for the Hernquist model, and the other by Vasiliev \& Athanassoula (CylSP) has a cylindrical coordinate system. Our comparisons include the Dehnen profile, its triaxial extension (of which the Hernquist profile is a special case) and a multicomponent system including a bar and disk density distributions for both analytical models and $N$-body realizations. Results. For the generalized Dehnen density, the CylSP method is more accurate than the HO method for nearly all inner power-law indices and shapes at all radii. For $N$-body realizations of the Dehnen model, or snapshots of an $N$-body simulation, the CylSP method is more accurate than the HO method in the central region for the oblate, prolate, and triaxial Hernquist profiles if the particle number is more than $5\times 10^5$. For snapshots of the Hernquist models with spherical shape, the HO method is preferred. (Abridged)