1 / 15

Confusion, Shocks and the WHIM: Cosmological AMR simulations of upcoming SZ surveys

Confusion, Shocks and the WHIM: Cosmological AMR simulations of upcoming SZ surveys. Brian O’Shea Los Alamos National Lab & Michigan State University. With: Eric Hallman, Jack Burns Michael Norman, Robert Harkness, Rick Wagner (UCSD). Constraints from clusters. Borgani, 2003.

yetta
Download Presentation

Confusion, Shocks and the WHIM: Cosmological AMR simulations of upcoming SZ surveys

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. Confusion, Shocks and the WHIM:Cosmological AMR simulations of upcoming SZ surveys Brian O’Shea Los Alamos National Lab & Michigan State University With: Eric Hallman, Jack Burns Michael Norman, Robert Harkness, Rick Wagner (UCSD)

  2. Constraints from clusters Borgani, 2003

  3. Current & Upcoming SZE surveys Rvir ~ several arcmin @ z ~ 0.5

  4. Integrated cluster observables better measure of mass (no surprise here) Motl et al. 2005

  5. Why hydrodynamical simulations? • N-body only sims make many assumptions (clusters spherical, in hydrostatic equilibrium, “neat”) • Real universe is messy: clusters highly elongated, not in equilibrium, merging, etc. • Also, intervening material (WHIM/filaments) may play an important role

  6. Constructing a light cone • Start with Enzo simulations: 512 Mpc/h, 5123 root grid, 7 levels of AMR (8 kpc resolution), N-body + hydro • Output simulation at appropriate intervals (dz ~ 0.5 box width) • Rotate, shift, stack images (shift+rotate to avoid stacking same clusters on top of each other) to make 10x10 degree light cone • Degrade images to appropriate resolution, add noise, instrumental effects, etc.

  7. Angular power spectrum Planck (7.1’, 6 muK @ 144 Ghz) APEX/SPT (1.0’, 10 muK @ 144 Ghz) ACT (1.7’, 2 muK @ 144 Ghz)

  8. Confusion from overlapping clusters

  9. Non-cluster contribution to integrated SZ flux “no cl” = Flux left over after all halos >5e13 Msun removed Note: much greater contribution when halos below obs’n cutoff threshold counted (~50%)

  10. Flux contribution by gas temperature 106-107 K >= 107 K 104-105 K 105-106 K

  11. Integrated Y value for simulated clusters

  12. Clusters as extracted from light cone

  13. Mean contribution to cluster Y from groups/filaments

  14. Conclusions • Inclusion of hydrodynamics (and most likely other baryonic physics) critical for getting “right” answer in estimation of errors in SZ observations • Some confusion is unavoidable, given SZ telescope beam sizes • Non-negligible boost in signal from WHIM (filaments/groups), particularly at low halo galaxy cluster mass

More Related