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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Mass and Light of A1703, A370 & RXJ1347-11 as corrections for gas cooling are not significant (Blumenthal et al. 1986; Broadhurst & Barkana 2008). Lensing work is now able to achieve measurements of projected cluster mass profiles with unprecedented detail, sufficient to usefully address the distinctive prediction of a relatively shallow mass profiles for CDM dominated halos (Navarro, Frenk, & White 1997, hereafter NFW; Duffy et al. 2008). Combined weak and strong lensing measurements have shown that the continuously steepening form of the NFW profile is a reasonable description for the mass profiles of three careful, independent studies (Kneib et al. 2003; Gavazzi 2005; Broadhurst et al. 2005b), although with surprisingly high values derived for the profile concentration parameter in each case (Broadhurst et al. 2005b). More recently, the concordance ΛCDM cosmology has been examined critically with a somewhat larger sample of clusters, indicating that the concentrations derived are significantly higher than predicted over a wide range of cluster mass, after accounting for statistical corrections for lensing-induced biases. This is seen both in terms of the size of the Einstein radius (Broadhurst & Barkana 2008; Oguri & Blandford 2009; Zitrin et al. 2009b) and the weak lensing (WL) mass profiles of several well known clusters (Broadhurst et al. 2008; Sadeh & Rephaeli 2008; Lapi & Cavaliere 2009). Current detailed cluster mass and light profiles can now be used to examine the ratio of M/L all the way out to the virial radius. Comparisons of the general DM distribution with the galaxy distribution are potentially of great interest as the distribution of galaxies is thought to be influenced by significant tidal forces which may substantially modify massive galaxy halos reducing their masses (Ghigna et al. 1998, 2000; Colín et al. 1999; Springel et al. 2001; De Lucia et al. 2004; Gao et al. 2004; Nagai & Kravtsov 2005; Limousin et al. 2009). Mass loss calculated over Hubble time in ΛCDM predict losses of ∼ 30% for orbits extending to the virial radius, with typically a loss of ∼ 70% near cluster centers, so that the ratio of integrated galaxy mass to the general DM distribution falls steadily towards the cluster center (Nagai & Kravtsov 2005). 76
3.1 Introduction Stars are not expected to be stripped significantly in these simulations because of their location deep in the central potential of a galaxy. Hence, for clusters the galaxy light should simply trace mass, assuming both are collisionless, so that a fairly constant M/L is expected (Gao et al. 2004; Nagai & Kravtsov 2005). The presence of high-mass galaxies in the inner core, resulting from both higher merger rates and the effect of dynamical friction, explains the reduced value of the integrated M/L ratio within a radius of ≤ 200 h −1 kpc for the highest mass clusters (Nagai & Kravtsov 2005; El-Zant et al. 2001). Reliable M/L profiles of galaxy clusters have begun to emerge recently based on dynamical (Rines et al. 2000, 2004) and lensing based methods (Medezinski et al. 2007). For the local cluster A576, a careful dynamicallybased M/L profile has been obtained with caustic work by (Rines et al. 2000), who note a puzzling declining behavior, with a peak around M/L ∼ 600M/L R at r ∼ 100 h −1 kpc, declining to a limiting 100M/L B , at r ∼ 1 h −1 Mpc and beyond. Other dynamical estimates from stacking together samples of clusters also show this overall behavior, where the M/L ratio may peak around 10% of the virial radius (Katgert et al. 2004) and declines thereafter (Rines et al. 2000, 2004). Our earlier lensing based determination of the M/L profile of A1689 (Medezinski et al. 2007) shows behavior similar to the above dynamical work, with a peak of M/L B ∼ 400(M/L) ⊙ at r ∼ 100 h −1 kpc, and a steady decline to ∼ 100M/L B at the virial radius, r ∼ 2 h −1 Mpc (Medezinski et al. 2007). In the case of A576 (Rines et al. 2000) and in our own work on A1689 (Medezinski et al. 2007), careful corrections are made for the trend of M/L of the stellar population with cluster radius, using the measured colors of cluster member galaxies which favor predominately redder, earlier-type galaxies in the central region. In both these differing analyses the color trend was found to be weak and not nearly sufficient to account for the measured variation of the M/L profile, leaving a puzzling result which is generally at odds with the known result that M/L is an increasing function of scale. Clearly, it is important to extend the investigation of the M/L profile to more clusters to examine the generality of our earlier work and to examine possible trends 77
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 64 and 65: Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 the
Page 68 and 69: Weak Lensing Dilution in A1689 expe
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: Chapter 3 Detailed Cluster Mass and
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 and 128: 3.11 Discussion and conclusions law
Page 129 and 130: Chapter 4 A Weak Lensing Determinat
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 ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?