4.7 Article

Core-collapse supernova enrichment in the core of the Virgo cluster

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19664.x

关键词

galaxies: abundances; galaxies: clusters: intracluster medium; galaxies: individual: M87; X-rays: galaxies: clusters

资金

  1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration [PF8-90056, PF9-00070, NAS8-03060]
  2. US Department of Energy [DE-AC02-76SF00515]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using a deep (574 ks) Chandra observation of M87, the dominant galaxy of the nearby Virgo cluster, we present the best measurements to date of the radial distribution of metals in the central intracluster medium (ICM). Our measurements, made in 36 independent annuli with similar to 250 000 counts each, extend out to a radius r similar to 40 kpc and show that the abundance profiles of Fe, Si, S, Ar, Ca, Ne, Mg and Ni are all centrally peaked. Interestingly, the abundance profiles of Si and S which are measured robustly and to high precision are even more centrally peaked than Fe, while the Si/S ratio is relatively flat. These measurements challenge the standard picture of chemical enrichment in galaxy clusters, wherein Type Ia supernovae (SN Ia) from an evolved stellar population are thought to dominate the central enrichment. The observed abundance patterns are most likely due to one or more of the following processes: continuing enrichment by winds of a stellar population pre-enriched by core-collapse supernova (SNCC) products; intermittent formation of massive stars in the central cooling core; early enrichment of the low-entropy gas. We also discuss other processes that might have contributed to the observed radial profiles, such as a stellar initial mass function that changes with radius; changes in the pre-enrichment of SNCC progenitors; and a diversity in the elemental yields of SN Ia. Although systematic uncertainties prevent us from measuring the O abundance robustly, indications are that it is about two times lower than predicted by the enrichment models.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据