4.7 Article

On the dynamical state of galaxy clusters: insights from cosmological simulations - II.

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stw2567

关键词

galaxies: clusters: general; galaxies: evolution; galaxies: haloes; galaxies: kinematics and dynamics; cosmology: theory

资金

  1. University of Western Australia [PG12105017, PG12105026]
  2. Survey Simulation Pipeline (SSimPL)
  3. iVEC's Magnus supercomputer under National Computational Merit Allocation Scheme (NCMAS) [gc6]
  4. ARC [DP130100117, DP140100198, FT130100041]
  5. PRIN-INAF12 grant 'The Universe in a Box: Multi-scale Simulations of Cosmic Structures'
  6. INDARK INFN grant
  7. Consorzio per la Fisica di Trieste
  8. Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad (MINECO) in Spain [AYA2012-31101]
  9. Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion (MICINN) [MultiDark CSD2009-00064]
  10. ARC
  11. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for All-sky Astrophysics (CAASTRO) [CE110001020]
  12. [PRINMIUR 01278X4FL]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using a suite of cosmology simulations of a sample of >120 galaxy clusters with log (M-DM,M- vir) <= 14.5. We compare clusters that form in purely dark matter (DM) run and their counterparts in hydro-runs and investigate four independent parameters that are normally used to classify dynamical state. We find that the virial ratio eta in hydro-dynamical runs is similar to 10 per cent lower than in the DM run, and there is no clear separation between the relaxed and unrelaxed clusters for any parameter. Further, using the velocity dispersion deviation parameter zeta, which is defined as the ratio between cluster velocity dispersion sigma and the theoretical prediction sigma(t) = root GM(total)/R, we find that there is a linear correlation between the virial ratio eta and this zeta parameter. We propose to use this zeta parameter, which can be easily derived from observed galaxy clusters, as a substitute of the eta parameter to quantify the cluster dynamical state.

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