170 likes | 251 Views
X-Ray Observations of RCS Clusters at High Redshift. Erica Ellingson, U. Colorado Amalia Hicks, U. Colorado/ U. Virginia Mark Bautz, MIT Henk Hoekstra (U. Victoria) Mike Gladders, Carnegie Obs. Howard Yee, U. Toronto. The RCS Surveys.
E N D
X-Ray Observations of RCS Clusters at High Redshift Erica Ellingson, U. Colorado Amalia Hicks, U. Colorado/ U. Virginia Mark Bautz, MIT Henk Hoekstra (U. Victoria) Mike Gladders, Carnegie Obs. Howard Yee, U. Toronto
The RCS Surveys Review by H. Yee earlier today: optically selected clusters via their red sequence RCS-1; 90 square degrees (completed) RCS-2: 1000 square degrees Z ~ 1 Still needed: calibration of cluster mass estimates for optically selected clusters
RCS Chandra Observations Chosen from the sample: 9 clusters (now 12) (0.64) 0.75< z< 1.1 Some initial emphasis on the most massive, lensing systems from the first available RCS catalogs; sample is becoming representative of rich systems ACIS exposures: (10) 30-90Ksec
Optical/Chandra Observations Z=0.78 Z=0.64
z=1.0 8 out of 9 detected with > 5 (2112-6326 at zph=1.1 is 2-3) 3 additional cluster detections on the way (final data arrived this week)
20ksec first exposure (more just arrived): Three new detections: z ~ 0.6-0.9
“Low Redshift” Comparisons 14 X-Ray selected CNOC (EMSS + Abell 2390) 0.17 < z < 0.55 Well determined masses via dynamics, lensing, Xrays (ROSAT +Chandra) Carlberg, Yee & Ellingson 1997 van der Marel et al. 2000 Lewis et al. 1999 Hicks et al. 2005
Lensing Masses for CNOC Weak lensing comparisons at z=0.2-0.55 (with Henk Hoekstra) Slight systematic mass overestimate (10%) for weak lensing masses
Calibrating Optical Richness with X-ray properties Initial mass estimator for RCS is the optical richness from the survey data: Bgc CNOC: Good agreement with expected relationships: Bgc vs. ,Lx,Tx,M200 Yee & Ellingson 2003, updated for Chandra by Hicks, et al., 2005 Black: weak lensing shear composites (Hoekstra) Red: CNOC cluster dynamics
RCS: Lx-Bgc RCS clusters are under-luminous for their optical richness See also: Donahue et al. 99, Gilbank, 2004 Lubin et al., 2004 … L2500 CNOC, CF corrected : diamonds RCS: squares
Tx-Bgc Temperatures show general agreement with lower-z X-ray samples Slightly systematically lower temperature for their optical richnesses Outlier: superposition of groups in small z range (e.g., Gilbank’s talk, also Gonzales’ supergroup?): predicted to be ~5% of RCS? Diamonds= CNOC Squares = 6 RCS clusters with enough signal to measure Tx
Lx-Tx RCS: clusters underluminous for expected Tx? Large uncertainties… Solid: slope=2.2 Dotted = 2.0 Dashed= best fit slope 4+/- 2 See also Lubin, et al., 2004 CNOC: diamonds RCS: squares
Redshift Evolution of Optical/X-ray mass estimates? Tx-Bgc is scaled by M200-Bgc-Tx relation to reduce to a mass ratio Evolution seen in X-ray-selected CNOC sample at z < 0.6? Mass ~ Bgc (1+z) = -0.5 +/- 0.5 Consistent with self-calibrating model for RCS (Majumdar, later today)
SZ detections BIMA/OVRO observations from Kyle Dawson & J. Carlstrom’s group 6 RCS clusters detected Agreement with X-ray results for Mtot and Mgas requires factor of 2 variation in gas fractions, consistent with lowered X-ray luminosities
AGN in Clusters CNOC: excess of X-ray point sources in a few clusters…. Overall, no strong excess Straight line = expected background Histo = 2-8 keV point sources Ellingson et al. 2005
RCS: analysis just beginning RCS0224-002, z=0.78- regular, lensing cluster, possible small cooling core Excess of sources just inside the virial radius (see also Rudman & Ebeling 2005) Significant energy ejection by AGN? (e.g., talk by Donahue)
Conclusions RCS Clusters at z > 0.75 are X-ray sources- all detected “Contamination” by “super group” structures at ~zcluster 1 or 2 out of 12, also X-ray sources X-ray luminosities and gas fractions within R2500 scatter systematically low. Lx-Tx is not unreasonable- ?steeper? (large error bars!). Virialization of all components is required to produce uniform X-ray/optical relations. Tx-richness relation shows that red galaxies reliably indicate mass (not necessarily virialized). Relation shows some evolution, consistent with self-calibrating N(M,z) models. Further comparisons with dynamics, lensing (HST) , IR luminosity (Spitzer) are under way!