English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We investigate the redshift evolution of the intrinsic alignments (IA) ofgalaxies in the \texttt{MassiveBlackII} (MBII) simulation. We select galaxysamples above fixed subhalo mass cuts ($M_h>10^{11,12,13}~M_{\odot}/h$) at$z=0.6$ and trace their progenitors to $z=3$ along their merger trees. Darkmatter components of $z=0.6$ galaxies are more spherical than their progenitorswhile stellar matter components tend to be less spherical than theirprogenitors. The distribution of the galaxy-subhalo misalignment angle peaks at$\sim10~\mathrm{deg}$ with a mild increase with time. The evolution of theellipticity-direction~(ED) correlation amplitude $\omega(r)$ of galaxies (whichquantifies the tendency of galaxies to preferentially point towards surroundingmatter overdensities) is governed by the evolution in the alignment ofunderlying dark matter~(DM) subhaloes to the matter density of field, as wellas the alignment between galaxies and their DM subhaloes. At scales$\sim1~\mathrm{cMpc}/h$, the alignment between DM subhaloes and matteroverdensity gets suppressed with time, whereas the alignment between galaxiesand DM subhaloes is enhanced. These competing tendencies lead to a complexredshift evolution of $\omega(r)$ for galaxies at $\sim1~\mathrm{cMpc}/h$. Atscales $>1~\mathrm{cMpc}/h$, alignment between DM subhaloes and matteroverdensity does not evolve significantly; the evolution of the galaxy-subhalomisalignment therefore leads to an increase in $\omega(r)$ for galaxies by afactor of $\sim4$ from $z=3$ to $0.6$ at scales $>1~\mathrm{cMpc}/h$. Thebalance between competing physical effects is scale dependant, leading todifferent conclusions at much smaller scales($\sim0.1~\mathrm{Mpc}/h$).

The evolution of galaxy intrinsic alignments in the MassiveBlack II universe