# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.question
Is gravity the only DM interaction that matters in the physics of galaxies?

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
We'd love to hear your thoughts! Do you find online workshops useful? Vote and feel free to comment on your experience.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.poll_choices[].choice_text
Yes! - All workshop  formats have trade-offs

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.poll_choices[].choice_text
Definately no - we have in-person workshops!

# data[].attributes.headline
Questions for the talk are easily added.

# data[].attributes.subject
Questions for the talk are easily added.

# data[].attributes.body
Participation from a range of countries underlines how online meetings democratise access, bridging geographical barriers and broadening engagement for all

# data[].attributes.body
Since baryonic physics alone can explain DM cores, is there any strong reason that necessitates the consideration of SIDM?

# data[].attributes.body
All of the results are based on numerical simulations, will the simulation resolution affect the results? if so, how large will the effects be? given the huge scales from dark matter particles to halos.

# data[].attributes.body
You can use this space to:

✅ Ask questions before, during, or after talks.
✅ Share thoughts, papers, or relevant links related to the discussions.
✅ Engage with other participants—comment, react, and spark collaborations!
✅ Post takeaways and open questions to keep the conversation going.

How to use this Padlet:

🔹 Click the ‘+’ button to add a new post.
🔹 Use the designated columns for each talk to ask questions.
🔹 Comment on posts to continue the discussion.
🔹 The General Discussion section is for broader topics, ideas, or networking.

Let’s make this an interactive and dynamic space—looking forward to your contributions! 🚀

# data[].attributes.headline
Also here you can easily add questions, add figs, send papers, etc.

# data[].attributes.subject
Also here you can easily add questions, add figs, send papers, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
Hi, I have enjoyed your talk, in particular your nice plot on Z/Z_0 for SIDM and dwarf Sph. I would like to point out that it would be nice to cross correlate with results from denser objects. i.e. neutron stars. When a simplified scalar-vector DM model +astro constraints one obtains additional constraints. See https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/527/3/6795/7452903

# data[].attributes.body
Does the limit of m~5e-21 eV from dynamical study depend on self-interaction or the nature of it?

# data[].attributes.body
A naive question! How does ULDM/Fuzzy DM explain the cold nature of DM?

# data[].attributes.body
Since the constraints from 2203.05750 (dynamical heating) are already stronger than those from Zimmerman+ (kinematic study) or your dynamical study, do these studies have any complementary constraints? Why study e-21eV range if we already have constraints requiring m>e-19eV?

# data[].attributes.body
I wanted to ask if you know about models combining CDM and WDM/SIDM particles and their possible effects since I always feel like it is one or the other, but not both types and I don't know if it is worth exploring these models.

# data[].attributes.headline
Can you run simulations of tidal stripping with fluctuating DM potentials? (e.g. in the time scales of ULDM, which is years or shorter)

# data[].attributes.subject
Can you run simulations of tidal stripping with fluctuating DM potentials? (e.g. in the time scales of ULDM, which is years or shorter)

# data[].attributes.body
In the limits from dynamical heating (or the other limits you presented for ULDM coming from dwarf galaxies) what are the main assumptions on the dwarf dynamics? In particular, I recall an argument that it is possible that the DM content of Segue could have been tidally stripped: would that change the limits on the ULDM mass?

# data[].attributes.body
Dark matter is a fascinating field. Its nature at the moment is mysterious. several hypotheses are put forward to try to explain its nature. some authors think that it would be made up of hypothetical particles called WIMP'S, others think of neutrinos and axions. But no experiments have yet come to confirm or refute these hypotheses. So the debate remains open and the research continues

# data[].attributes.headline
How many resources can be spend on  simulations for "new" ideas?

# data[].attributes.subject
How many resources can be spend on  simulations for "new" ideas?

# data[].attributes.body
I have a question about dark matter interacting with itself, namely how this self-interaction can disrupt gravity and the gravitational field of galaxies. Should we develop a new theory of gravity, a modified gravity model that could even take quantum mechanics into account?

# data[].attributes.body
Hello, sorry if I missed this, but is there some place where one could find the slides from the workshop? Thanks a lot for very ineresting talks!

# data[].attributes.body
the last slide seemed to imply your model could handle potentials with disc shocks - but aren't these non-adiabatic so the assumption of the model fail?

# data[].attributes.body
At a given time, why is the tidal field the same on the point closest to the host and on the point furthest from the host?

# data[].attributes.body
Are there any major differences in the effects of tidal stripping given different DM models?

# data[].attributes.body
I'm confused how your model deals with the non-energy conserving disc shocks? doesn't it require adiabatic assumption

# data[].attributes.body
What is the main reason why Aquarius is still one of the highest resolution simulations after >15 years?

# data[].attributes.headline
Thanks for the beautiful talk. Any idea on how to distinguish between cores formed by SIDM and stellar feedback?

# data[].attributes.subject
Thanks for the beautiful talk. Any idea on how to distinguish between cores formed by SIDM and stellar feedback?

# data[].attributes.body
Is there any observational evidence of the DM spike in the most central part of galaxies? If so, could you share the refs showing the DM density profile in the spike

# data[].attributes.body
https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.06932

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Assessing subhalo finders in cosmological hydrodynamical simulations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Cosmological simulations are essential for inferring cosmological and galaxy population properties based on forward-modelling, but this typically requires finding the population of (sub)haloes and galaxies that they contain. The properties of said populations vary depending on the algorithm used to find them, which is concerning as it may bias key statistics. We compare how the predicted (sub)halo mass functions, satellite radial distributions and correlation functions vary across algorithms in the dark-matter-only and hydrodynamical versions of the FLAMINGO simulations. We test three representative approaches to finding subhaloes: grouping particles in configuration- (Subfind), phase- (ROCKSTAR and VELOCIraptor) and history-space (HBT-HERONS). We also present HBT-HERONS, a new version of the HBT+ subhalo finder that improves the tracking of subhaloes. We find 10%-level differences in the $M_{\mathrm{200c}}$ mass function, reflecting different field halo definitions and occasional miscentering. The bound mass functions can differ by 75% at the high mass end, even when using the maximum circular velocity as a mass proxy. The number of well-resolved subhaloes differs by up to 20% near $R_{\mathrm{200c}}$, reflecting differences in the assignment of mass to subhaloes and their identification. The predictions of different subhalo finders increasingly diverge towards the centres of the host haloes. The performance of most subhalo finders does not improve with the resolution of the simulation and is worse for hydrodynamical than for dark-matter-only simulations. We conclude that HBT-HERONS is the preferred choice of subhalo finder due to its low computational cost, self-consistently made and robust merger trees, and robust subhalo identification capabilities.