4.7 Article

Lowering inferred cluster magnetic field strengths: The radio galaxy contributions

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 588, Issue 1, Pages 143-154

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/373891

Keywords

galaxies : clusters : general; galaxies : individual (PKS 1246-410); magnetic fields; polarization; radio continuum : galaxies; X-rays : general

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present a detailed examination of the relationship between the magnetic field structures and the variations in Faraday rotation across PKS 1246-410, a radio source in the Centaurus cluster of galaxies, using data from Taylor, Fabian, & Allen. We find a significant relationship between the intrinsic position angle of the polarization and the local amount of Faraday rotation. The most plausible explanation is that most or all of the rotation is local to the source. We suggest that the rotations local to cluster radio galaxies may result either from thermal material mixed with the radio plasma, or from thin skins of warm, ionized gas in pressure balance with the observed galaxy or hot cluster atmospheres. We find that the contribution of any unrelated cluster rotation measure (RM) variations on scales of 2-10 are less than 25 rad m(-2): the standard, although model-dependent, derivation of cluster fields would then lead to an upper limit of approximate to0.4 muG on these scales. Inspection of the distributions of rotation measure, polarization angle, and total intensity in 3C 75, 3C 465, and Cygnus A also shows source-related Faraday effects in some locations. Many effects can mask the signatures of locally dominated RMs, so the detection of even isolated correlations can be important, although difficult to quantify statistically. In order to use radio sources such as those shown here to derive cluster-wide magnetic fields, as is commonly done, one must first remove the local contributions. This is not possible at present.

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