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

Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689
We also plot lower concentration profiles, including C vir = 14, which was
found previously by Broadhurst et al. (2005a), to fit best the overall lensing
derived mass profile from combining the mass profile derived from the
multiply lensed images in the central region, r < 2 ′ , with the mass distribution
derived from weak lensing distortion and magnification measurements
from the red background galaxy sample. This model fit, as pointed out by
Broadhurst et al. (2005b), is not as pronounced as the observed surface mass
profile, being too shallow at larger radius and too steep at small radius (see
figures 1&3 of Broadhurst et al. 2005b). Here we see more clearly that this
fit with C vir = 14 increasingly overpredicts the observed distortion profile
with radius. We also plot C vir = 8.2 which best fits the central strongly
lensed region (Broadhurst et al. 2005a) r < 2 ′ , derived from 106 multiply
lensed images. Again this fit overpredicts the g T profile in the weak lensing
regime, as pointed out in Broadhurst et al. (2005b). We clearly exclude
the low concentration profile generally predicted by CDM based models of
structure formation. A value of C vir ∼ 5 is generally anticipated for massive
clusters, although the scatter in concentration at a given mass is considerable
(e.g., Bullock et al. 2001). Figure 2.21 shows clearly how this profile is much
too shallow to generate the relatively steeply declining observed distortion
profile. The triaxiality of realistic halos means that projection effects will
bias somewhat the derived distortion profile, as examined carefully by Oguri
et al. (2005) and Hennawi et al. (2005), showing that the level of such bias
effect is expected to enhance the derived concentration by approximately
∼ 20% on average. Whilst A1689 is clearly an anomalous cluster in terms
of the size of the Einstein radius, the cluster is very round in terms of the
projected X-ray emission, with only minimal substructure observed in the
optical near the center. Hence we are left with a clearly unresolved problem,
that the observed concentration would seem to far exceed any reasonable
estimate. Other independent work on the combined profile from strong and
weak lensing measurements for the clusters Cl0024+17 (Kneib et al. 2003)
and MS2137-23 (Gavazzi et al. 2003) also point to surprisingly high concentrations,
and it is therefore important to extend this type of detailed work
to other clusters to test the generality of the profile derived here.
64