4.6 Article

TESTING STRICT HYDROSTATIC EQUILIBRIUM IN SIMULATED CLUSTERS OF GALAXIES: IMPLICATIONS FOR A1689

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL LETTERS
卷 724, 期 1, 页码 L1-L4

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/2041-8205/724/1/L1

关键词

cosmology: theory; galaxies: clusters: individual (A1689); gravitational lensing: strong; gravitational lensing: weak; methods: numerical; X-rays: galaxies: clusters

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [AST-05-07161, AST-05-47823]
  2. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  3. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1009749] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Accurate mass determination of clusters of galaxies is crucial if they are to be used as cosmological probes. However, there are some discrepancies between cluster masses determined based on gravitational lensing and X-ray observations assuming strict hydrostatic equilibrium (i.e., the equilibrium gas pressure is provided entirely by thermal pressure). Cosmological simulations suggest that turbulent gas motions remaining from hierarchical structure formation may provide a significant contribution to the equilibrium pressure in clusters. We analyze a sample of massive clusters of galaxies drawn from high-resolution cosmological simulations and find a significant contribution (20%-45%) from non-thermal pressure near the center of relaxed clusters, and, in accord with previous studies, a minimum contribution at about 0.1 R-vir, growing to about 30%-45% at the virial radius, R-vir. Our results strongly suggest that relaxed clusters should have significant non-thermal support in their core region. As an example, we test the validity of strict hydrostatic equilibrium in the well-studied massive galaxy cluster A1689 using the latest high-resolution gravitational lensing and X-ray observations. We find a contribution of about 40% from non-thermal pressure within the core region of A1689, suggesting an alternate explanation for the mass discrepancy: the strict hydrostatic equilibrium is not valid in this region.

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

4.6
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