1 / 7

Evolution of clusters

Evolution of clusters. M. Arnaud CEA - service d’astrophysique Saclay. Assuming favored cosmology W =0.3 L =0.7. The sample. • Clusters from SHARC survey [Romer et al 00; Nichol et al 99; Burke et al 03] • XMM follow up [ Sharc/SSC/SOC/EPIC collaboration] in

ianthe
Download Presentation

Evolution of clusters

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evolution of clusters M. Arnaud CEA - service d’astrophysique Saclay Assuming favored cosmology W =0.3 L=0.7

  2. The sample • Clusters from SHARC survey [Romer et al 00; Nichol et al 99; Burke et al 03] • XMM follow up [Sharc/SSC/SOC/EPIC collaboration] in - GT time (P.I J. Bartlett) [Lumb et al 03]7 clusters 0.45 < z < 0.62 - OT time (P.I MA) 7(6) clusters 0.3 < z < 0.4 ==> Work in progress from combined set Some Images: RX J0256 z=0.36 kT =5 ±0.5 keV RX J2237 z=0.30 kT =3 ±0.5 keV RX J1120 z=0.6 kT =5.3 ±0.5 keV [Majerowicz et al, A&A, 03] [Arnaud et al, A&A, 02]

  3. XMM Abell 3158 z=0.06 RXJ 1120 z=0.6 2.6 M pc ROSAT What do we expect ? • ICM: evolving in the gravitational potential of the DM: fgas = cst ; GMV/R a kT • Clusters collapsed at z correspond to a fixed density contrast: GMV/R3 = <rDM> =d rc (z) ; d~200 Evolution with z viarc (z)a h2(z) Scaling laws: Q = A(z)Ta: Mgasa MVa h-1(z) T3/2 Rv a h-1(z) T1/2 LX a h(z) T2 For a given mass: at higher z: clusters are denser, smaller, brighter

  4. For standard DM model: Lxºf2gas(T,z)< n2gas >/<ngas>2h(z) T2 Could indicate evolving: fgas(T)and/orshape The evolution of the Lx -T relation There is evolution ! A bit larger than expected ? in agreement with Chandra [ Vikhlinin et al, 2002] ==> Look at gas density (EM) profiles (normalisation and shape)

  5. Self -similar evolution of the the gas distribution ? Prediction: clusters are denser: rgas arDM arc (z) a h(z)2 and smaller: Rv a h(z)-1 Sx EM = ∫ n2gas dl a h(z)3 ? • Scaled according to standard evolution: EMsc = h(z)-3 T-1.38 EM NB ‘ non standard ’ but cst EM-T slope • Compared to local profile • ~ agreement for individual profiles[ taken into account local dispersion and errors] • ~ Similar shape • BUT systematic discrepancies... Most profiles above local curve [stronger effect for higher z sample] More evolution ? (as for Lx-T) [Arnaud et al, in prep]

  6. RXJ 1120 T =5.3 keV z=0.6 Temperature profile • XMM observation of RXJ 1120 [Arnaud et al A&A, 2002] First (~ precise) measurement of temperature distributionat z=0.6 Flat kT profile up to 0.5 virial radius (as at z~0)

  7. CONCLUSIONS XMM results show: Clusters do form a self-similar population down to kT~ 2keV and up to high kT and z • Self similarity of formbeyond core • Scaling lawswith z (and kT) • First evidence that numerical simulation predict thecorrect shape for the DM distribution up to virial radius Self-similarity differs from purely gravitational model • Normalisation of the M-T relation ==> (universal) ICM structure not correct • Slopes : EM-T : steeper ; S-T shallower: likely due to overall gas content • Possible stronger evolution of ICM scaling laws ==> modelling of the DM collapse probably OK ==> Gas physics still to be better understood Current pre-heating models failure What is needed: • Larger local samples on wide kT range ==> e.g. M-T relation; c(M) ?; dispersion in ICM scaling laws and origin • Larger distant samples ==> e.g. evolution of both normalisation and slopes

More Related