Mass and Light distributions in Clusters of Galaxies - Henry A ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Mass and Light of A1703, A370 & RXJ1347-11 and the gas is susceptible to ram pressure from the ICM. In contrast, for early-type galaxies the M/L profile we obtained for each cluster is fairly flat, with only a shallow radial decline for r > 200 h −1 kpc. Interestingly CDM based N-body simulations aimed at evaluating the tidal influence of the cluster potential do claim to predict a shallow radial decline in the ratio of cluster mass to the number of sub-halos (Nagai & Kravtsov 2005; Reed et al. 2005; Natarajan et al. 2009), matching well our observed trend. The simulations indicate that although up to 70% of a galaxy halo mass can be stripped over a Hubble time for those objects with orbits bringing them close to the cluster center, the stellar content is not likely to be significantly affected, at least for early-type galaxies, as the stars are more tightly bound. Hence, a relatively flat relation is expected reflecting the relatively collisionless behavior of both galaxies and DM. Therefore, even though tidal effects are significant, the luminous component that we measure when examining the M/L profile of early-type galaxies is expected to be only slightly affected, in good agreement with the mild decline we observe for each cluster. Further work on the tidal evolution of clusters is obviously needed. This is particularly important in view of the interesting tension that has now emerged between the relatively concentrated mass profiles measured for many high mass clusters, compared to the much shallower mass profiles predicted by standard ΛCDM (Duffy et al. 2008; Broadhurst et al. 2008; Oguri et al. 2009). Steeper mass profiles lead to stronger tidal effects and compounded with the greater ages implied by the relatively high concentrations should lead to more significant tidal effects. Measuring directly the tidal truncation of luminous cluster member galaxies should be feasible via lensing in favorable cases where multiple images are locally affected by individual halos. The statistical influence on the general lensing deflection field has been claimed to be detected for two clusters independently by Natarajan et al. (2009) for Cl0024+16 and by Halkola et al. (2007) for A1689. These first results encourage further deeper work with an emphasis on the degree of correlation of the lensing signal with cluster member galaxies, a formidable challenge but one well worthy of pursuit. 112
Chapter 4 A Weak Lensing Determination of the Cosmological Distance-Redshift Relation Behind Abell 370 A version of this chapter has been submitted for publication in MNRAS as Medezinski et al. (2010) 4.1 Introduction Constraining cosmological parameters has been the focus of major surveys in the last decade, via precision cosmic microwave background (CMB) temperature correlations (Spergel et al. 2007; Brown et al. 2009) and SN-Ia light curves (Riess et al. 1998; Perlmutter et al. 1999). A standard, ΛCDM, cosmological model has been defined by this work, albeit at the price of accepting an accelerating expansion driven by a cosmological constant, and non-baryonic DM of an unknown nature dominating the mass density of the Universe. Measurements of the angular diameter 113
Page 1:
TELAVIVUNIVERSITY SCHOOLOFPHYSICS&A
Page 5:
To my parents
Page 8 and 9:
1.2.3 Weak Gravitational Lensing .
Page 10 and 11:
5 Discussion 139 5.1 Summary . . .
Page 12 and 13:
negligibly contaminated by the clus
Page 15 and 16:
Acknowledgments I would like to tha
Page 17 and 18:
Chapter 1 Introduction Clusters of
Page 19 and 20:
1.1 Clusters of Galaxies The space
Page 21 and 22:
1.1 Clusters of Galaxies and a grav
Page 23 and 24:
1.1 Clusters of Galaxies to the sph
Page 25 and 26:
1.1 Clusters of Galaxies 1.1.5 X-ra
Page 27 and 28:
1.2 Gravitational Lensing increase
Page 29 and 30:
1.2 Gravitational Lensing Broadhurs
Page 31 and 32:
1.2 Gravitational Lensing If we ins
Page 33 and 34:
1.2 Gravitational Lensing Figure 1.
Page 35 and 36:
1.2 Gravitational Lensing 1.2.3.1 M
Page 37 and 38:
1.2 Gravitational Lensing a transfo
Page 39 and 40:
1.2 Gravitational Lensing effects c
Page 41:
1.3 The Structure of the Thesis 1.3
Page 44 and 45:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 clus
Page 46 and 47:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 beha
Page 48 and 49:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 Figu
Page 50 and 51:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 blue
Page 52 and 53:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 gala
Page 54 and 55:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 0.5
Page 56 and 57:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 not
Page 58 and 59:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 lens
Page 60 and 61:
2.5 Photometric redshifts Weak Lens
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 the
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 expe
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 et a
Page 74 and 75:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 g +
Page 76 and 77:
Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 Note
Page 78 and 79: Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 Usin
Page 80 and 81: Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 We a
Page 82 and 83: Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 limi
Page 84 and 85: Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 rela
Page 86 and 87: Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 To s
Page 88 and 89: Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 30 2
Page 91 and 92: Chapter 3 Detailed Cluster Mass and
Page 93 and 94: 3.1 Introduction Stars are not expe
Page 95 and 96: 3.2 Subaru data reduction § 3.3 we
Page 97 and 98: 3.3 Sample selection from the color
Page 103 and 104: 3.4 Evolutionary color tracks 0.25
Page 105 and 106: 3.5 Depth estimation from SDF/COSMO
Page 107 and 108: 3.5 Depth estimation from SDF/COSMO
Page 109 and 110: 3.6 Weak lensing analysis 3.6 Weak
Page 111 and 112: 3.6 Weak lensing analysis where θ
Page 113 and 114: 3.8 Cluster light profiles 600 A168
Page 115 and 116: 3.9 M/L profiles Broadhurst et al.
Page 117 and 118: 3.9 M/L profiles 10 5 r [Mpc/h] bri
Page 119 and 120: 3.9 M/L profiles very moderate decl
Page 121 and 122: 3.9 M/L profiles 0.6 0.4 0.2 log 10
Page 123 and 124: 3.10 Cluster luminosity functions b
Page 125 and 126: 3.11 Discussion and conclusions Tab
Page 127: 3.11 Discussion and conclusions law
Page 131 and 132: 4.1 Introduction Zitrin et al. 2009
Page 139 and 140: 4.4 Weak lensing measurements objec
Page 141 and 142: 4.5 Results tion N i (z s ) of i-th
Page 143 and 144: 4.5 Results n [arcmin −2 ] 10 1 1
Page 145 and 146: 4.5 Results 3.5 3 2.5 4 3.5 3 B −
Page 147 and 148: 4.5 Results 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 foreg
Page 149 and 150: 4.5 Results Γ (g T amplitude ratio
Page 151 and 152: 4.5 Results 1.6 1.4 1.2 Γ (g T amp
Page 153 and 154: 4.7 Discussion and conclusions is t
Page 155 and 156: Chapter 5 Discussion 5.1 Summary In
Page 157 and 158: 5.1 Summary excluding the foregroun
Page 159 and 160: 5.3 Future work observations we obt
Page 161 and 162: References Abadi, M. G., Moore, B.,
Page 163 and 164: REFERENCES Broadhurst, T., Umetsu,
Page 165 and 166: REFERENCES Gaidos, E. J. 1997, AJ,
Page 167 and 168: REFERENCES Kaiser, N. 1995, ApJ, 43
Page 169 and 170: REFERENCES Natarajan, P., Loeb, A.,
Page 171 and 172: REFERENCES Schrabback, T. et al. 20
Page 173 and 174: כפי שמתואר בפרק השל
Page 175 and 176: עבודה זו נעשתה בהנח
show all

Mass and Light distributions in Clusters of Galaxies - Henry A ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?