4.7 Article

Chandra observation of the central region of the cooling flow cluster A262:: A radio source that is a shadow of its former self?

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 612, Issue 2, Pages 817-824

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/422677

Keywords

cooling flows; galaxies : clusters : general; galaxies : clusters : individual (A262) intergalactic medium; radio continuum : galaxies; X-rays : galaxies : clusters

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present a Chandra observation of the cooling flow cluster A262. Spectral fits show that the intracluster medium (ICM) in A262 cools by a factor of 3, from 2.7 to 0.9 keV, at the cluster center. A mass deposition rate of (M)over dot 19(-5)(+6) M-circle dot yr(-1) is measured. Complex structure is found in the very inner regions of the cluster, including knots of emission and a clear deficit of emission to the east of the cluster center. The bright X-ray structures are located in the same regions as optical line emission, indicating that cooling to low temperatures has occurred in these regions. The X-ray deficit is spatially coincident with the eastern radio lobe associated with the active galactic nucleus hosted by the central cD galaxy. The region surrounding the X-ray hole is cool and shows no evidence that it has been strongly shocked. This joins the ranks of other cooling flow clusters with Chandra-detected bubbles blown by central radio sources. This source is different from the other well-known cases, in that the radio source is orders of magnitude less luminous and has produced a much smaller bubble. Comparing the energy output of the radio source with the luminosity of the cooling gas shows that energy transferred to the ICM from the radio source is insufficient to offset the cooling flow unless the radio source is currently experiencing a less powerful than average outburst and was more powerful in the past.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available