How the Self-Interacting Model Explains the Diverse Galactic Rotation Curves

Ayuki Kamada,1, 2 Manoj Kaplinghat,3 Andrew B. Pace,3, 4 and Hai-Bo Yu1 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Riverside, California 92521, USA 2Institute for Basic Science, Center for Theoretical Physics of the Universe, Daejeon 34051, South Korea 3Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Irvine, California 92697, USA 4George P. and Cynthia Woods Mitchell Institute for Fundamental Physics and Astronomy, and Department of Physics and Astronomy, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA (Dated: November 10, 2016)

The rotation curves of spiral exhibit a diversity that has been difficult to understand in the cold dark matter (CDM) paradigm. We show that the self-interacting dark matter (SIDM) model provides excellent fits to the rotation curves of a sample of galaxies with asymptotic velocities in the 25 to 300 km/s range that exemplify the full range of diversity. We only assume the halo concentration-mass relation predicted by the CDM model and a fixed value of the self-interaction cross section. In dark matter dominated galaxies, thermalization due to self-interactions creates large cores and reduces dark matter densities. In contrast, thermalization leads to denser and smaller cores in more luminous galaxies, and naturally explains the flat rotation curves of the highly luminous galaxies. Our results demonstrate that the impact of the baryons on the SIDM halo profile and the scatter from the assembly history of halos as encoded in the concentration-mass relation can explain the diverse rotation curves of spiral galaxies.

I. Introduction. The ΛCDM model, with a cosmologi- the self-interactions. The physical effects of thermalization in cal constant (Λ) and cold dark matter (CDM), explains the the inner region are varied but fully determined by the distri- observed large-scale structure of the Universe [1] and many bution of the baryons, up to the scatter from the assembly his- aspects of formation [2, 3], but the diverse observed tory. In many galaxies, thermalization forces particles out of rotation curves do not have a satisfactory explanation. Ob- the center and leads to a lower circular velocity than the dark servations of a number of dwarf and low surface brightness matter-only ΛCDM predictions. In other galaxies where galaxies indicate that the inner halo is often badly fit by the dominate the gravitational potential, the SIDM halo profile cusped halos predicted by ΛCDM simulations [4–13]. The can be as steep as the ΛCDM predictions. In these galaxies, core densities exhibit almost an order of magnitude spread for the total rotation curve is forced to be flat even at radii much similar total halo masses [14], and galaxies with densities at smaller than the scale radius of the dark matter halo, providing the upper end of the range are consistent with ΛCDM [15]. a natural explanation to the disk-halo conspiracy [35]. There is no clear explanation for the diversity in the inner rota- All of the features discussed above are captured in a simple tion velocity profiles of different galaxies within similar mass model that we discuss next. We discuss the scatter due to halos [15]. halo concentration and the baryon distribution in Sec. III. In In this Letter, we demonstrate how this diversity prob- Sec. IV, we provide fits to representative galaxies. We discuss lem [15] can be solved in the self-interacting dark matter the uniformity in the SIDM fits and the self-scattering cross (SIDM) framework [16], where dark matter particles ex- section in Secs. V and VI, respectively. We conclude in Sec. change energy by colliding with one another in halos. Dark VII. matter self-interactions only change the inner halo proper- II. Modeling the SIDM halo with a stellar disk. We have ties in accord with observations, leaving all the successes of developed an analytical method to model the SIDM halo prop- CDM intact on large scales, e.g., [17–20]. While the origi- erties [23, 36], which is based on the isothermal solutions to nal SIDM model [16] posited a cross section that is indepen- the Jeans equations. The spherically symmetric version of the dent of velocity, constraints from galaxy clusters demand an model described below has been tested against cosmological interaction cross section that diminishes with increasing ve- N-body simulations [23] and isolated SIDM simulations of a arXiv:1611.02716v1 [astro-ph.GA] 8 Nov 2016 locity [19, 21–24]. SIDM models based on a Yukawa poten- range of galaxy types including baryons [24]. tial [25–32] or atomic scattering [33] can naturally accom- We divide the halo into two regions, separated by a charac- modate the required velocity dependence. Concrete particle teristic radius r1 where the average scattering rate per particle physics realizations of such models can provide a universal times the halo age is equal to unity. The value of r1 is deter- solution to small-scale issues from dwarf galaxies to galaxy mined by the condition hσviρ(r1)tage/m ≈ 1, where σ is the clusters [23, 34]. scattering cross section, m is the dark matter particle mass, v The diversity in the observed rotation curves is solved by a is the relative velocity between dark matter particles, and h...i combination of interconnected features in the ΛSIDM model. denotes averaging over the velocity distribution. In this Let- 2 In the outer parts of galaxies, the ΛSIDM model is the same ter, we assume σ/m = 3 cm /g and tage = 10 Gyr for all the as the ΛCDM model, inheriting all its successes. In the in- galaxies motivated by previous results [23]. ner regions, the SIDM density profile and its relation to the For radii r < r1, SIDM particles experience multiple col- baryons is changed by the process of thermalization due to lisions over the age of galaxies and reach kinetic equilib- 2

−1 −2 100 ρs(r/rs) (1+r/rs) seen in ΛCDM simulations [39]. We Vmax=70 km/s create the SIDM profile by joining the spherically-averaged 80 isothermal (ρiso) and the spherical NFW (ρNFW) profiles at r = r1 such that the mass and density are continuous at 60 2 ( km / s ) r1. For σ/m = O(1) cm /g, the matching implies that r1 40 is close to rs [18]. The SIDM halo parameters (ρ0, σv0) di- cir,DM rectly map onto (r , ρ ) or (M , c ) of the NFW profile V CDM s s 200 200 20 for a fixed σ/m. We assume that the large-scale structure SIDM only is the same as that in the Planck ΛCDM model [1] and im- 0 pose its halo concentration-mass relation on our solutions, 120 V =120 km/s,M =3.6⨯1011M M =1010M max 200 ⊙, d ⊙ 0.905±0.11 12 −1 −0.101 c200 = 10 M200/10 h M [40], while 100 allowing for the expected scatter 0.11 dex scatter (1σ). 80 III. Halo concentration and the role of baryons. In the ( km / s ) 60 CDM top panel of Fig. 1, we show the circular velocity due to SIDM,R =2 d the dark matter halo, Vcir,DM(r), as a function of the ra- cir, DM 40 SIDM,R =3 V d dius for the SIDM and the corresponding CDM halos for SIDM,R =6 20 d V = 70 km/s. It is clear that dark matter self-interactions SIDM only max 0 can lower circular velocity systematically in the inner regions. 0 2 4 6 8 10 To assess the scatter quantitatively, we use Vcir(2 kpc) [15]. Radius(kpc) At large radii r & r1, both halos have the same Vcir,DM(r), but the SIDM halos have significantly smaller Vcir,DM(2 kpc). FIG. 1: Top: Circular velocity of the SIDM halo and the correspond- The 2σ scatter in Vcir,DM(2 kpc) (from the scatter in the ing CDM halo for Vmax = 70 km/s with the 2σ spread in halo concentration-mass relation) is about a factor of 1.8 in SIDM concentration. Bottom: Circular velocity of the SIDM halo with similar to that in CDM (about 1.6). Vmax = 120 km/s and median concentration including the impact 10 Observationally, Vcir(2 kpc) (total rotation velocity) spans of a stellar disk of mass Md = 10 M for three disk scale lengths from 20 to 70 km/s for Vmax ∼ 70 km/s [15]. The SIDM Rd = 2 kpc, 3 kpc, and 6 kpc. The corresponding SIDM (dashed) and CDM (dotted) circular velocities without disks are also shown. prediction for the lowest Vcir(2 kpc) is consistent with 20 km/s. When baryons are included, the upper end of the pre- dicted range for Vcir(2 kpc) changes significantly. Beyond rium. The density profile from integrating out the veloci- contributing directly to the total Vcir, its presence changes the ties in the Maxwellian phase space distribution is ρiso(~r) = total potential Φtot and the equilibrium isothermal solution is 2 ρ0 exp[−Φtot(~r)/σv0], where ρ0 is the central dark matter consequently denser [36]. The net effect is to increase the up- density, σv0 is the one dimensional dark matter velocity dis- per end of the predicted range for Vcir(2 kpc) to 70 km/s, persion, and Φtot is the total gravitational potential due to dark fully consistent with the data. and baryonic matter normalized such that Φtot(0) = 0. We For larger galaxies, even the low end of the predicted note that features in the stellar or gas potential get imprinted Vcir,DM(2 kpc) can be changed by the presence of the in ρiso through Φtot; while we do not model such baryonic baryons. We illustrate this in the bottom panel of Fig. 1. features here, we expect they will be more strongly reflected We adopt Vmax = 120 km/s and median concentration for 10 in the rotation curve [37] in SIDM than CDM. In addition, the the halo. We set the total disk mass to be 10 M (typical impact of the baryons on the SIDM halo profile is determined for this halo mass) and vary the scale radius of the thin disk 2 by its gravitational potential relative to σv0. Rd = 2, 3, and 6 kpc. We use the matching procedure de- Assuming that the baryons are distributed in a thin disk with scribed in Sec. II to obtain the SIDM halo mass profiles. With central surface density Σ0 and scale radius Rd, we can write Rd = 2 kpc, the SIDM prediction for Vcir,DM(2 kpc) is very the Poisson equation for Φtot as: close to the CDM prediction. The scatter in Vcir,DM(2 kpc) from changing Rd is almost a factor of 2; even the disk with 2 −R/Rd ∇ Φtot(R, z) = 4πG[ρiso(R, z) + Σ0e δ(z)] . (1) Rd = 6 kpc has some effect on the SIDM halo. Thus, the SIDM inner halo mass profile is strongly correlated with the We solve Eq. (1) by expanding it in the Legendre polynomi- distribution of the baryons, which, along with the scatter from als [38]. The solution can be parametrized by two dimen- the concentration-mass relation, leads to the diversity in the 2 2 sionless parameters defined as a ≡ 8πGρ0Rd/(2σv0) and SIDM halo properties. An upcoming work [41] will explore 2 b ≡ 8πGΣ0Rd/(2σv0) [38]. We have calculated 300 tem- these facets of thermalization due to self-interactions in N- plates in total with different combinations of a and b values body simulations of galaxies. and interpolated between them as required. IV. Solving the diversity problem in SIDM models. To For r > r1, where scattering has occurred less than explicitly demonstrate how the diversity is accommodated in once per particle on average, we model the dark matter den- SIDM, we fit to the rotation curves of 30 galaxies that maxi- sity as the Navarro-Frenk-White (NFW) profile ρNFW(r) = mize the diversity and have Vf in the 25–300 km/s range. We 3

250 12 NGC 2903,c 200:median,M 200:1.2×10 M⊙ 11 11 200 NGC 6503,c 200:median,M 200:2.5×10 M⊙ UGC 128,c 200:median,M 200:3.8×10 M⊙ **** ************* 150 ******* Halo ***** ( km / s ) ******************** *** ******************** ********* Halo *** cir 100 *** * ******* Halo ***** *** V ** * * Stars *** *** ** *** *** ** 50 *** Stars ** Gas Gas ** ** Bulge ** Gas ** Stars 0 ** ** 0 5 10 15 20 0 10 20 30 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

FIG. 2: Left two panels show the SIDM fits to the rotation curves of NGC 6503 and UGC 128. They asymptote to Vf ≈ 130 km/s in the outer parts, but their inner rotation curves are very different. The right panel show the SIDM fit to a highly luminous galaxy, NGC 2903. The total fit is displayed in red and it includes contributions from the SIDM halo (blue solid), stars (magenta dashed), gas (magenta dot-dashed), and bulge (magenta long-dashed). The predictions of the corresponding CDM halo (dotted) and the SIDM halo neglecting the influence of the baryons (asterisk) are also shown. obtained excellent fits overall, with χ2/dof < 1 for 23 galax- has a negligible effect on the SIDM halo of UGC 128. ies (DDO 52, 154, 87 126; UGC 128, 5005, 11707, 4483, It is interesting to note that in NGC 6503 the rotation curve 3371, 5721, 12506, 1281; UGCA 442; NGC 2366, 7331, becomes flat at r ≈ 3 kpc, which implies that the total den- 2403, 3109, 1560, 2903, 3198; F583-1, F579-V1, M33), and sity profile scales as a power-law in radius, with index close χ2/dof < 2 for the rest (UGC 2841, 5750; NGC 6503, F571- to −2, from inner regions dominated by the disk to outer re- 8, F563-V2, DDO 133, IC 2574). In Figs. 2 and 3, we show gions dominated by dark matter. Thus, the thermalization of the fits to some of the most extreme examples highlighted dark matter in SIDM models provides a natural mechanism for in [15]1. For each galaxy, we compute the thin disk param- understanding the long-standing puzzle of the disk-halo con- eters (Σ0,Rd) that best match the rotation curves of the stellar spiracy [35]. This power-law behavior of the total mass den- disk in the literature, given a value of the mass-to-light ratio sity is prevalent in large spiral and elliptical galaxies [44, 45]. (Υ∗). In computing ρiso, we have neglected the potential of We show the SIDM fit to the rotation curve of massive spiral the gaseous disk and stellar bulge, which is a good approxi- galaxy NGC 2903 [11] in right panel of Fig. 2 as an example. mation for the fits shown here. In our fits, the outer halo Vmax In Fig. 3, we show SIDM fits for UGC 5721 [46, 47], NGC is essentially set by the measured Vf and the freedom in the 1560 [48], and UGC 5750 [8, 43, 49, 50]. All have similar fits is primarily due to Υ∗ and the scatter allowed in the con- Vf ≈ 80 km/s, but the shapes of the rotation curves are very centration of the outer halo. different in the inner regions. UGC 5721 and UGC 5750 are NGC 6503 [42] and UGC 128 [43] clearly illustrate the di- at opposite extremes for the rotation curve diversity in this verse features in the rotation curves caused by the baryon dis- mass range. Despite the diversity, the SIDM halo model pro- tribution in Fig. 2. Both galaxies have Vf ≈ 130 km/s, but vides an impressive fit to the rotation curves. We find that their inner rotation curves are very different. For NGC 6503, NGC 1560 has a median halo, UGC 5721 has a denser halo, the circular velocity increases sharply in the inner regions and and UGC 5750 has an underdense halo, but all within 2σ of reaches its asymptotic value around 5 kpc; in UGC 128, it the median expectation. The observed Vcir(2 kpc) is close to increases very mildly and reaches Vf at 20 kpc. Despite the 20 km/s for UGC 5750, while the corresponding CDM halo dramatic differences, the SIDM halo with median concentra- has Vcir(2 kpc) ≈ 30 km/s even with a concentration 2σ tion provides a remarkable fit to both galaxies. NGC 6503 lower than the median value. The effect of the disk is most is a high surface brightness galaxy and its inner gravitational significant in UGC 5721, resulting in a SIDM halo similar potential is dominated by the stellar disk, which contributes to the CDM one and a flat Vcir even at 2 kpc. The effect significantly to the observed Vcir. Moreover, the inner SIDM becomes mild in NGC 1560 and negligible in UGC 5750, (isothermal) halo density in the presence of the disk is al- consistent with their luminosities. We have further checked most an order of magnitude larger than when neglecting the that UGC 5721 can also be fit with a 1.5σ higher c200 value 10 influence of the disk, which boosts the halo contribution at and M200 = 6 × 10 M , and UGC 5720 with a 1.5σ lower 10 Vcir(2 kpc) from 20 to 60 km/s. In contrast, the stellar disk c200 value and M200 = 8 × 10 M . This is due to a mild c200–M200 degeneracy. V. Diversity from uniformity. The diversity problem is solved by a combination of features in ΛSIDM that are not 1 In the Appendix, we show the fits for the 24 other galaxies. separate pieces to be tuned but instead arise from the require- 4

10 10 10 100 UGC 5721,c 200:+2σ,M 200:5×10 M⊙ NGC 1560,c 200:median,M 200:6×10 M⊙ UGC 5750,c 200:-2σ,M 200:9×10 M⊙ 80 ***** ************ ****** Halo ************** Halo 60 ***** ******** Halo **** ( km / s ) *** ****** ******* *** **** ***** cir * * * 40 ** *** **** Gas V * ** * ** ** Gas *** ** Gas *** *** 20 ** *** *** ** Stars ** Stars *** Stars ** ** ** 0 ******* ** ** 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 2 4 6 8 0 5 10 15 20 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

FIG. 3: SIDM fits (red solid) to the rotation curves of spiral galaxies UGC 5721, NGC 1560, and UGC 5750, all with Vf ≈ 80 km/s but showing extreme diversity in the inner parts. Line types are the same as Fig. 2. ment that the inner halo at r . r1 is thermalized. While the 1000 ◦ inner rotation curves display great diversity for the same halo ■ Minimal ◦ mass, there are also remarkable similarities. In Fig. 4, we 500 ▽ Moderate ◦

) Maximal 2 ◦ ◦ ◦ plot a measure of the surface density of dark matter defined as ◦ ΣDM,0 = ρ0rc, where ρ0 is the central density inferred from / pc ◦ ◦ ◦▽

⊙ ◦ the fits and rc is the core radius where the dark matter den- 0.7 100 ▽ ∝V max sity is half of ρ0. We split the 30 galaxies into three samples ( M ■▽ ■ c ■ r 50 ■ ■▽ ■ by the effect that the baryons have on the halo profiles: the 0 ■■■ ▽■

ρ ■ “minimal” sample is where the halo profiles are essentially un- ■ ■ ■ changed by the baryons, while the “maximal” sample shows a roughly 1/r2 scaling for the total density profile over most 10 of the halo. The changes to the dark matter density profile of 20 50 100 200 the “moderate” sample is in between that of the minimal and maximal samples. Vmax (km/s)

The minimal sample shows a clear scaling relation for FIG. 4: The inferred SIDM core density times core radius (“surface ΣDM,0 vs. Vmax (of the NFW halo), which is a reflection density”) for the 30 galaxies we have fit. The “minimal” sample of the concentration-mass relation [51]. Our model predicts is composed of dark matter dominated galaxies for which baryons 0.7 ΣDM,0 ∝ Vmax, which may be roughly understood from the don’t change the SIDM profile significantly. The surface densities 2 2 0.7 approximate scalings rc ∝ rs [18] and ρ0 ∝ Vmax/rs from of these galaxies scale as Vmax (dashed line), which can be traced to dimensional arguments. However, there is clear deviation the concentration-mass relation. The “intermediate” (triangles) and when baryons become important, since ρ increases and the “maximal” (circles) samples show progressively increasing effects of 0 the stellar disk on the SIDM halo. core radius is set by the gravitational potential of the baryons. Our ΣDM,0 values for the minimal sample are consistent with previous results [52]. required by the fits are consistent with abundance matching VI. Self-interaction cross section. We fixed σ/m = expectations [56]. We leave a detailed exploration of the cross 3 cm2/g in our analysis and it provided good fits for all 30 section, abundance matching and cosmological dependence galaxies with c200 values within the 2σ range, and mass-to- for a future statistical analysis of a larger sample of galaxies. light ratios in the range preferred by recent measurements VII. Conclusions. The rotation curves of spiral galaxies [53–55]. Galaxies with low Vcir(2 kpc) like UGC 5750 and exhibit considerable diversity, which lacks an explanation. IC 2574 drive the preference for this large σ/m. However, The problem is most severe for flat rotation velocities in there are degeneracies among σ/m, Υ∗ and c200. For higher the range 60–100 km/s, with almost an order of magnitude luminosity galaxies, in particular those with Vf & 200 km/s spread in the inferred dark matter core densities. To address such as NGC 2903, 7331, 2841, and UGC 12560, good fits can this problem in the context of SIDM models, we developed also be found with smaller cross sections, σ/m ∼ 1 cm2/g, numerical templates for modeling the SIDM halo including by varying Υ∗ very mildly. This implies that a mild velocity the presence of a stellar disk and fit a wide variety of ro- dependence, which would be required by the tation curves for spiral galaxies that exemplify the diversity constraints in specific models [23, 34], is also consistent with over three orders of magnitude in total mass. Our model uti- the data. We have checked that the Υ∗ values (disk masses) lizes the ΛCDM concentration-mass relation and a fixed self- 5 interaction cross section. We have demonstrated that the vari- 460, 1399 (2016), 1512.05349. ation in the distribution of baryons and the reaction of the [21] C. Firmani, E. D’Onghia, V. Avila-Reese, G. Chincarini, and SIDM halo to it, when melded with the expected scatter in X. Hernandez, Mon.Not.Roy.Astron.Soc. 315, L29 (2000), the concentration-mass relation due to assembly history of ha- astro-ph/0002376. [22] N. Yoshida, V. Springel, S. D. M. White, and G. Tormen, As- los, can explain the diverse dark matter distributions in spiral trophys. J. 544, L87 (2000), astro-ph/0006134. galaxies. [23] M. Kaplinghat, S. Tulin, and H.-B. Yu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, Acknowledgments: We thank Erwin de Blok, Gianfranco 041302 (2016), 1508.03339. Gentile, Federico Lelli, Stacy McGaugh, Se-Heon Oh, and [24] O. D. Elbert, J. S. Bullock, M. Kaplinghat, S. Garrison- Kimmel, A. S. Graus, and M. Rocha (2016), 1609.08626. Rob Swaters for providing us the rotation curve data. This [25] J. L. Feng, M. Kaplinghat, and H.-B. Yu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, work was supported by IBS under the project code IBS- 151301 (2010), 0911.0422. R018-D1 (AK), the National Science Foundation Grant PHY- [26] M. R. Buckley and P. J. Fox, Phys. Rev. D81, 083522 (2010), 1620638 (MK) and PHY-1522717 (ABP), and the U. S. De- 0911.3898. partment of Energy under Grant No. de-sc0008541 (HBY). [27] A. Loeb and N. Weiner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 171302 (2011), ABP acknowledges support from a GAANN fellowship and 1011.6374. the Mitchell Institute for Fundamental Physics and Astron- [28] S. Tulin, H.-B. Yu, and K. M. Zurek, Phys.Rev.Lett. 110, 111301 (2013), 1210.0900. omy at Texas A&M University. HBY acknowledges support [29] S. Tulin, H.-B. Yu, and K. M. Zurek, Phys.Rev. D87, 115007 from the Hellman Fellows Fund. (2013), 1302.3898. [30] J. M. Cline, Z. Liu, G. Moore, and W. Xue, Phys.Rev. D90, 015023 (2014), 1312.3325. [31] K. K. Boddy, J. L. Feng, M. Kaplinghat, and T. M. P. Tait, Phys. Rev. D89, 115017 (2014), 1402.3629. [1] P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck), Astron. Astrophys. 571, A16 [32] K. Schutz and T. R. Slatyer, JCAP 1501, 021 (2015), (2014), 1303.5076. 1409.2867. [2] V. Springel, C. S. Frenk, and S. D. M. White, Nature 440, 1137 [33] J. M. Cline, Z. Liu, G. Moore, and W. Xue, Phys. Rev. D89, (2006), astro-ph/0604561. 043514 (2014), 1311.6468. [3] S. Trujillo-Gomez, A. Klypin, J. Primack, and A. J. Ro- [34] K. K. Boddy, M. Kaplinghat, A. Kwa, and A. H. G. Peter manowsky, Astrophys. J. 742, 16 (2011), 1005.1289. (2016), 1609.03592. [4] R. A. Flores and J. R. Primack, Astrophys.J. 427, L1 (1994), [35] T. S. van Albada and R. Sancisi, Royal Society of London astro-ph/9402004. Philosophical Transactions Series A 320, 447 (1986). [5] B. Moore, Nature 370, 629 (1994). [36] M. Kaplinghat, R. E. Keeley, T. Linden, and H.-B. Yu, [6] A. Burkert, IAU Symp. 171, 175 (1996), [Astrophys. Phys.Rev.Lett. 113, 021302 (2014), 1311.6524. J.447,L25(1995)], astro-ph/9504041. [37] R. Sancisi, in Dark Matter in Galaxies, edited by S. Ryder, [7] M. Persic, P. Salucci, and F. Stel, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. D. Pisano, M. Walker, and K. Freeman (2004), vol. 220 of IAU 281, 27 (1996), astro-ph/9506004. Symposium, p. 233, astro-ph/0311348. [8] W. J. G. de Blok and A. Bosma, Astron. Astrophys. 385, 816 [38] N. Amorisco and G. Bertin, Astron.Astrophys. 519, A47 (2002), astro-ph/0201276. (2010), 0912.3178. [9] G. Gentile, P. Salucci, U. Klein, D. Vergani, and P. Kalberla, [39] J. F. Navarro, C. S. Frenk, and S. D. White, Astrophys.J. 490, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 351, 903 (2004), astro- 493 (1997), astro-ph/9611107. ph/0403154. [40] A. A. Dutton and A. V. Macci, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [10] R. Kuzio de Naray, S. S. McGaugh, and W. de Blok, Astro- 441, 3359 (2014), 1402.7073. phys.J. 676, 920 (2008), 0712.0860. [41] P. Creasey et. al., in preparation. [11] W. J. G. de Blok, F. Walter, E. Brinks, C. Trachternach, S.- [42] K. G. Begeman, Ph.D. thesis, Kapteyn Institute (1987). H. Oh, and R. C. Kennicutt, Jr., AJ 136, 2648-2719 (2008), [43] J. M. van der Hulst, E. D. Skillman, T. R. Smith, G. D. Bothun, 0810.2100. S. S. McGaugh, and W. J. G. de Blok, AJ 106, 548 (1993). [12] S.-H. Oh, W. de Blok, E. Brinks, F. Walter, and J. Kennicutt, [44] P. J. Humphrey and D. A. Buote, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. Robert C., Astron.J. 141, 193 (2011), 1011.0899. 403, 2143 (2010), 0911.0678. [13] S.-H. Oh et al., Astron. J. 149, 180 (2015), 1502.01281. [45] M. Cappellari, A. J. Romanowsky, J. P. Brodie, D. A. Forbes, [14] R. K. de Naray, G. D. Martinez, J. S. Bullock, and M. Kapling- J. Strader, C. Foster, S. S. Kartha, N. Pastorello, V. Pota, L. R. hat, Astrophys.J. 710, L161 (2010), 0912.3518. Spitler, et al., ApJ 804, L21 (2015), 1504.00075. [15] K. A. Oman et al. (2015), 1504.01437. [46] R. A. Swaters, R. Sancisi, T. S. van Albada, and J. M. van der [16] D. N. Spergel and P. J. Steinhardt, Phys.Rev.Lett. 84, 3760 Hulst, A&A 493, 871 (2009), 0901.4222. (2000), astro-ph/9909386. [47] R. A. Swaters, B. F. Madore, F. C. van den Bosch, and M. Bal- [17] M. Vogelsberger, J. Zavala, and A. Loeb, cells, Astrophys. J. 583, 732 (2003), astro-ph/0210152. Mon.Not.Roy.Astron.Soc. 423, 3740 (2012), 1201.5892. [48] G. Gentile, M. Baes, B. Famaey, and K. van Acoleyen, MNRAS [18] M. Rocha, A. H. Peter, J. S. Bullock, M. Kaplinghat, 406, 2493 (2010), 1004.3421. S. Garrison-Kimmel, et al., Mon.Not.Roy.Astron.Soc. 430, 81 [49] S. S. McGaugh, V. C. Rubin, and W. J. G. de Blok, AJ 122, (2013), 1208.3025. 2381 (2001), astro-ph/0107326. [19] A. H. Peter, M. Rocha, J. S. Bullock, and M. Kaplinghat (2012), [50] R. Kuzio de Naray, S. S. McGaugh, W. J. G. de Blok, and 1208.3026. A. Bosma, ApJS 165, 461 (2006), astro-ph/0604576. [20] M. Vogelsberger, J. Zavala, F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, C. Pfrommer, [51] H. W. Lin and A. Loeb, JCAP 1603, 009 (2016), 1506.05471. T. Bringmann, and K. Sigurdson, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [52] F. Donato, G. Gentile, P. Salucci, C. F. Martins, M. Wilkinson, 6

et al., Mon.Not.Roy.Astron.Soc. 397, 1169 (2009), 0904.4054. A. Schruba, F. Walter, M. P. Rupen, L. M. Young, C. E. Simp- [53] T. P. K. Martinsson, M. A. W. Verheijen, K. B. Westfall, M. A. son, M. C. Johnson, et al., AJ 149, 180 (2015), 1502.01281. Bershady, D. R. Andersen, and R. A. Swaters, Astron. Astro- [59] F. Lelli, S. S. McGaugh, and J. M. Schombert, ArXiv e-prints phys. 557, A131 (2013), 1308.0336. (2016), 1606.09251. [54] S. E. Meidt, E. Schinnerer, G. van de Ven, D. Zaritsky, [60] W. J. G. de Blok, S. S. McGaugh, and J. M. van der Hulst, R. Peletier, J. H. Knapen, K. Sheth, M. Regan, M. Querejeta, MNRAS 283, 18 (1996), astro-ph/9605069. J.-C. Munoz-Mateos,˜ et al., Astrophys. J. 788, 144 (2014), [61] S.-H. Oh, W. J. G. de Blok, E. Brinks, F. Walter, and R. C. 1402.5210. Kennicutt, Jr., AJ 141, 193 (2011), 1011.0899. [55] S. S. McGaugh and J. M. Schombert, AJ 148, 77 (2014), [62] G. Gentile, G. I. G. Jozsa,´ P. Serra, G. H. Heald, W. J. G. de 1407.1839. Blok, F. Fraternali, M. T. Patterson, R. A. M. Walterbos, and [56] S. Garrison-Kimmel, M. Boylan-Kolchin, J. Bullock, and T. Oosterloo, A&A 554, A125 (2013), 1304.4232. K. Lee, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 438, 2578 (2014), [63] E. Corbelli, D. Thilker, S. Zibetti, C. Giovanardi, and P. Salucci, 1310.6746. A&A 572, A23 (2014), 1409.2665. [57] F. Lelli, M. Verheijen, F. Fraternali, and R. Sancisi, A&A 544, [64] Z. S. Kam, C. Carignan, L. Chemin, P. Amram, and B. Epinat, A145 (2012), 1207.2696. MNRAS 449, 4048 (2015), 1503.02538. [58] S.-H. Oh, D. A. Hunter, E. Brinks, B. G. Elmegreen, 7

30 50 9 UGC 4483,c :median,M :1.5×10 M 9 200 200 ⊙ DDO 126,c 200:-σ,M 200:9×10 M⊙ 25 40 * * * * * * * 20 * * * * * * **** * * ****** * * 30 ***** * * **** * *** * * *** ( km / s )

15 ( km / s ) * *** * * ** cir * cir * * ** V * V 20 * * ** 10 * * * ** * * * * * ** * 10 ** 5 * * * * * * * * * 0 0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 0 1 2 3 4 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

10 10 50 DDO 133,c 200:+σ,M 200:1.2×10 M⊙ 60 DDO 154,c 200:+0.5σ,M 200:1.3×10 M⊙

* * * * * * 50 * * * * * 40 * * * * * * * * * **** * * ********* * * 40 ***** * **** * * *** 30 * *** * **

* ( km / s ) * ( km / s ) * * * 30 **

cir * cir * *

V * V * * * 20 ** * * * 20 * * * * * * * * 10 * * * 10 * * * * * * 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 8 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

Appendix – Figure 1: Galaxies with Vf ≈ 25–50 km/s. Data for UGC 4483 from [57] and data DDO 126, 133, 154 from [58]. The total fit is displayed in red and it includes contributions from the SIDM halo (blue solid), stars (magenta dashed) and gas (magenta dot-dashed). The predictions of the corresponding CDM halo (dotted) and the SIDM halo neglecting the influence of the baryons (asterisk) are also shown. In our analysis, we do not take into account the influence of the gas component on the isothermal dark matter profile, which could be moderately important for the DDO 126 fit. 8

80 80 10 NGC 3109,c 200:median,M 200:5.5×10 M⊙ 10 NGC 2366,c 200:median,M 200:2.3⨯10 M⊙

* 60 * * * * * 60 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ****** * * ******* * ***** * **** * * *** ( km / s ) ( km / s ) 40 40 ** * * ** * ** cir cir * ** V V * * * ** * * * ** * * * * 20 20 ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0 * 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 2 4 6 8 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc) 80 80

10 10 DDO 87,c 200:-1.5σ,M 200:3.5×10 M⊙ DDO 52,c 200:+σ,M 200:3×10 M⊙

60 60 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * ****** * ***** * * **** * ( km / s ) 40 * ( km / s ) 40 * *** * *** *

cir * cir * *** * V * V * ** * ** * ** * ** * 20 ** 20 * ** * ** * * * ** ** ** 0 * 0 0 2 4 6 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc) 80 80

10 10 UGC 1281,c 200:median,M 200:3×10 M⊙ UGCA 442,c 200:median,M 200:3×10 M⊙

60 60

***** * * * * * ***** * * * * ***** * * * **** * * * *** * * * ** * * *** ( km / s ) 40 * ( km / s ) 40 * * * ** * * * cir * * * cir ** V * * V ** * * * * ** * * * * ** 20 * 20 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

Appendix – Figure 2: Galaxies with Vf ≈ 60 km/s. Data for NGC 3109, UGC 1281 and UGCA 442 from [59], and data for NGC 2366, DDO 87, and DDO 52 from [58]. The total fit is displayed in red and it includes contributions from the SIDM halo (blue solid), stars (magenta dashed) and gas (magenta dot-dashed). The predictions of the corresponding CDM halo (dotted) and the SIDM halo neglecting the influence of the baryons (asterisk) are also shown. In our analysis, we do not take into account the influence of the gas component on the isothermal dark matter profile, which could be moderately important for the fit to NGC 2366. 9

10 10 100 UGC 5721,c 200:+1.5σ,M 200:6×10 M⊙ 100 UGC 5750,c 200:-1.5σ,M 200:8×10 M⊙

80 80 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 60 * * 60 ****** * ***** * ( km / s ) ( km / s ) ** * * **** * *** cir cir * * * *** V V * ** * 40 ** 40 * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** 20 * 20 ** * ** * ** * * ** 0 * 0 * 0 2 4 6 8 0 5 10 15 20 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

10 10 100 NGC 1560,c 200:median,M 200:6×10 M⊙ 100 LSB F583-1,c 200:+σ,M 200:8×10 M⊙

80 80 ******* ******** ***** **** *** * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * ** 60 * * * * * 60 * * * * * **

( km / s ) * ( km / s ) * * * ** * * * * cir * cir * * * * V * V * 40 * * 40 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 20 * * 20 * * * * * * * * 0 ** 0 * 0 2 4 6 8 0 5 10 15 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

10 10 100 UGC 3371,c 200:-1.5σ,M 200:8×10 M⊙ 100 UGC 3371,c 200:-2σ,M 200:9×10 M⊙

80 80

60 ******* 60 **** ***** ***** ( km / s ) ** ( km / s ) *** **** **** *** *** cir * cir * *** *** V V * *** ** 40 ** 40 *** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 20 ** 20 ** * ** ** * ** 0 0 0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc) 100 100 10 IC 2574,c :-2.5σ,M :1.5×1011M IC 2574,c 200:-1.5σ,M 200:9×10 M⊙ 200 200 ⊙ 80 80

* ***** ***** 60 ***** 60 **** **** **** *** *** *** *** ( km / s ) ** ( km / s ) * ** *** ** ** cir * cir * ** ** V 40 ** V 40 ** ** ** ** * * ** ** * * ** ** * 20 * 20 ** ** * * ** ** * * ** ** ** 0 * 0 * 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

Appendix – Figure 3: Galaxies with Vf ≈ 80 km/s. Data for UGC 5721, UGC 5750, F583-1, IC 2574, NGC 1560, and UGC 3371 from [46, 47], [8, 43, 49, 50], [49, 50, 60], [61], [48], and [8, 46] respectively. The total fit is displayed in red and it includes contributions from the SIDM halo (blue solid), stars (magenta dashed), and gas (magenta dot-dashed). The predictions of the corresponding CDM halo (dotted) and the SIDM halo neglecting the influence of the baryons (asterisk) are also shown. The UGC 5721 and UGC 5750 fits are different from those in the main text: they are less extreme by 0.5σ and demonstrate the mild degeneracy between c200 and M200. We also provide two fits each for UGC 3371 and IC 2574 to demonstrate the effects of changing c200. In our analysis, we do not take into account the influence of the gas component on the isothermal dark matter profile, which could be moderately important for the fit to IC 2574. 10

140 140 LSB F579-V1,c :+1.5σ,M :8×1010M UGC 11707,c :median,M :1011M 200 200 ⊙ 120 200 200 ⊙ 120 100 100

80 *** ** ******* 80 ************* ***** ******

( km / s ) * ** ( km / s ) ** **** **** *** **

cir * * cir 60 ** ***

V * * V 60 * ** ** ** ** ** * 40 ** ** ** 40 * * ** * * ** * * * 20 * 20 * * * * 0 ***** 0 0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc) 140 140 LSB F563-V2,c :+1.5σ,M :1011M 11 200 200 ⊙ UGC 5005,c 200:-σ,M 200:1.8×10 M⊙ 120 120

100 100 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **** 80 * * * * 80 ****** * * * ***** * * * ****

( km / s ) * *

* ( km / s ) * * * *** * * **

cir * 60 * * cir 60 *** V *

V * * ** * * ** * * ** 40 * 40 ** * * ** * * * * * ** * * 20 * 20 * * ** * * * * 0 * 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

Appendix – Figure 4: Galaxies with Vf ≈ 100 km/s. Data for UGC 11707, F579-V1, F563-V2, and UGC 5005 from [46, 47], [49, 60], [47, 50, 60], and [8, 43] respectively. The total fit is displayed in red and it includes contributions from the SIDM halo (blue solid), stars (magenta dashed), and gas (magenta dot-dashed). The predictions of the corresponding CDM halo (dotted) and the SIDM halo neglecting the influence of the baryons (asterisk) are also shown. 11

11 150 UGC 128,c :median,M :3.8×1011M NGC 2403,c 200:median,M 200:5.5×10 M⊙ 200 200 ⊙ 150 ***** *********** ***** * * * * **** * * * * ** * * * ** * * 100 ** * * * * * * ** 100 * * * * * * ( km / s )

( km / s ) * * * * * * * cir cir * * V V * * * * * * * 50 * 50 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0 ********** 0 ** 0 5 10 15 20 0 10 20 30 40 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

11 150 11 NGC 3198,c 200:median,M 200:5×10 M⊙ NGC 6503,c 200:median,M 200:2.5×10 M⊙ 150

**** * * * * * * * * * ******* * * * * * * * * * * ***** 100 * * * * **** * * *** * * * ** * * *** * 100 ** * ( km / s ) ( km / s ) * ** * **

* cir cir * ** V V * * * ** 50 * ** * * * 50 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0 * 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 10 20 30 40 50 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

LSB F571-8,c :+2σ,M : 4×1011M 11 200 200 ⊙ M33,c 200:median,M 200:3×10 M⊙ 150 150 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ******* 100 * ****** * * 100 **** * ***

( km / s ) * * ( km / s ) *** * *** cir * * cir ** V * V ** * ** * ** 50 * * * 50 ** * * ** * * * * * * * * * * 0 0 *** 0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15 20 25 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

Appendix – Figure 5: Galaxies with Vf ≈ 120-150 km/s. Data for NGC 2403, UGC 128, NGC 6503, NGC 3198, and LSB F571-8 from [11], [43], [42], [11, 62], [49], and [63, 64] respectively. The total fit is displayed in red and it includes contributions from the SIDM halo (blue solid), stars (magenta dashed), and gas (magenta dot-dashed). The predictions of the corresponding CDM halo (dotted) and the SIDM halo neglecting the influence of the baryons (asterisk) are also shown. 12

300 12 12 NGC 7331,c 200:median,M 200:2.6×10 M⊙ NGC 2903,c 200:median,M 200:1.2×10 M⊙ 300 250 250 200 200 **** * * * * * * * * ***** * * * * * * * **** * * * * * **** ( km / s ) 150 * * ( km / s ) * * * * *** * * 150 ***

cir * * cir * * * ** V * V ** * * ** 100 * ** * * 100 ** * * ** * ** * * ** 50 * ** 50 **

0 ********** 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

12 400 300 UGC 12506,c 200:median,M 200:1.5⨯10 M 12 ⊙ NGC 2841,c 200:median,M 200:4.4⨯10 M⊙

250 300

200 ********* ************* * ** ***** ************* *** ****** ** ( km / s ) ** * **** ( km / s ) 200 ** 150 *** * cir *

* cir ** * V

* V * ** * * * ** * 100 * * ** * 100 * * * * * 50 * * * * * * 0 * 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Radius(kpc) Radius(kpc)

Appendix – Figure 6: Galaxies with Vf ≈ 200-300 km/s. Data for NGC 2903 and NGC 7331 from [11], UGC 12506 and NGC 2841 from [59]. The total fit is displayed in red and it includes contributions from the SIDM halo (blue solid), stars (magenta dashed), gas (magenta dot-dashed), and bulge (magenta long-dashed). The predictions of the corresponding CDM halo (dotted) and the SIDM halo neglecting the influence of the baryons (asterisk) are also shown.