4.7 Article

A moving cold front in the intergalactic medium of A3667

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 551, 期 1, 页码 160-171

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/320078

关键词

galaxies : clusters : general galaxies : clusters : individual (Abell 3667); magnetic fields; shock waves; X-rays : galaxies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present results from a Chandra observation of the central region of the galaxy cluster A3667 with emphasis on the prominent sharp X-ray brightness edge spanning 0.5 Mpc near the cluster core. Our temperature map shows large-scale nonuniformities characteristic of the ongoing merger, in agreement with earlier ASCA results. The brightness edge turns out to be a boundary of a large cool gas cloud moving through the hot ambient gas, very similar to the cold fronts discovered by Chandra in A2142. The higher quality of the A3667 data allows the direct determination of the cloud velocity. At the leading edge of the cloud, the gas density abruptly increases by a factor of 3.9 +/- 0.8, while the temperature decreases by a factor of 1.9 +/- 0.2 (from 7.7 to 4.1 keV). The ratio of the gas pressures inside and outside the front shows that the cloud moves through the ambient gas at near-sonic velocity, M = 1 +/- 0.2 or v = 1400 +/- 300 km s(-1). In front of the cloud, we observe the compression of the ambient gas with an amplitude expected for such a velocity. A smaller surface brightness discontinuity is observed further ahead, similar to 350 kpc in front of the cloud. We suggest that it corresponds to a weak bow shock, implying that the cloud velocity may be slightly supersonic. Given all the evidence, the cold front appears to delineate the remnant of a cool subcluster that recently has merged with A3667. The cold front is remarkably sharp. The upper limit on its width, 3.5 or 5 kpc, is several times smaller than the Coulomb mean free path. This is a direct observation of suppression of the transport processes in the intergalactic medium, most likely by magnetic fields.

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