1 / 26

Authors: Leila C. Powell, Scott T. Kay and Arif Babul

Authors: Leila C. Powell, Scott T. Kay and Arif Babul. Substructure in 2D X-ray images and weak lensing mass maps of galaxy clusters: A simulation study. Summary.

hidi
Télécharger la présentation

Authors: Leila C. Powell, Scott T. Kay and Arif Babul

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Authors: Leila C. Powell, Scott T. Kay and Arif Babul Substructure in 2D X-ray images and weak lensing mass maps of galaxy clusters: A simulation study

  2. Summary • Make 2D mass maps and X-ray surface brightness maps from cluster simulation to mimic perfect observations • Give statistics on mass substructure and X-ray substructure in 2D • Explore the relation among 2D mass, X-ray SB and 3D subhalo, to give insights into the gas stripping process and interpretations for observational data

  3. Outline • Motivation & Background • Simulation & Data preparation(Map making and substructure detection) • 2D mass map: Completeness and Purity • 2D X-ray map • Discussion (Selection effect, Case study, gas physics, noise-adding) • Conclusion

  4. Motivation & Background • Much Observational Study • X-ray: hot gas (T~1keV) emission • Weak lensing: DM mass • Do not necessarily trace each other: gas stripping • Tidal stripping • Ram pressure • Simulation: • DM subhalo (well-studied) • Gas substructure (not much systematic statistics, and mainly DM-bound gas) • Aim • Provide insight into the link between lensing map and X-ray map through underlying DM distribution • One way to give statistics on gas stripping, through the matching or mismatching of maps • Give predictions/expectations for future observations

  5. Gas Stripping

  6. Motivation & Background • Much Observational Study • X-ray: hot gas (T~1keV) emission • Weak lensing: DM mass • Do not necessarily trace each other: gas stripping • Tidal stripping • Ram pressure • Simulation: • DM subhalo (well-studied) • Gas substructure (not much systematic statistics, and mainly DM-bound gas) • Aim • Provide insight into the link between lensing map and X-ray map through underlying DM distribution • One way to give statistics on gas stripping, through the matching or mismatching of maps • Give predictions/expectations for future observations

  7. Simulation & Data Preparation • Resimulations using GADGET2, standard cosmology • mp(DM)=4.3x10^8 (Msun/h), softening 10 kpc/h (z<1: 5kpc/h) • L~500Mpc/h • z=49~0, 50 outputs • adiabatic • three clusters, ~10^14Msun each, different MAHs • Fof group, R500, SUBFIND subhalo(DM+Gas)

  8. Simulation & Data Preparation • Map making • z=0~1 • Cuboid projection(V=2R500X2R500X8R500),400x400 pixels (pixel size ~ softening) • Re-centered at brightest X-ray pixel

  9. Simulation & Data Preparation • Detection technique • PSF smoothing to get observation • Background making: convolution with a broad filter • Background subtraction • Significance rejectionand FoF group-finding

  10. Simulation & Data Preparation

  11. Simulation & Data Preparation • Properties of 2D map

  12. 2D mass Map vs. 3D sub • Completeness and Obscuration (best: 3sigma)

  13. 2D mass Map vs. 3D sub • Purity (3sigma case)

  14. 2D mass vs. X-ray • A large fraction unmatched

  15. Fraction of subs with little or no hot gas

  16. Scaling relations

  17. Discussion: Selection effect • halo dynamical state (characterized by RMS centroid shift)

  18. Discussion: Case Study • Case I: Partial stripping

  19. Discussion: Case Study • Case II: Detachment • Dependent on numerical techniques (e.g, KHI)

  20. Discussion: Case Study • Case III: missing mass-sub

  21. Discussion: Case Study • Case IV: shared X-ray peak during merger

  22. Discussion: Effect of Cooling • Cooling turned on till z~5, ~10% of gas had formed stars

  23. Discussion: Effect of Cooling • Matching success with cooling

  24. Discussion: adding noise and degraded resolution

  25. Conclusion • Completeness and purity of mass observations • The constructed 2D mass catalogue is 90% complete down to DM mass of 10^13Msun/h ( current weak lensing obs. limit) • Purity threshold of A>10^-3 (Mpc/h)^2, can be applied to other simulated maps • Scaling relation, can be used for mass estimation

  26. Conclusion • A large fraction of substructures unmatched between 2D mass and X-ray, due to detachment or stripping • Dynamical state of clusters plays a role in the fraction of matching success • Inclusion of high-z cooling has only mild impact on the results • Future observations would detect more unmatched substrutures when noise is reduced and resolution enhanced

More Related