1 / 96

X-ray Searches for Distant Clusters

X-ray Searches for Distant Clusters. Chris Mullis University of Michigan. Special Thanks To: Pat Henry, Piero Rosati, Hans Böhringer, Alexey Vikhlinin, Harald Ebeling, Isabella Gioia. Overview. Motivations X-ray Selection & Methodology Brief History Current Surveys Future Prospects.

brownr
Télécharger la présentation

X-ray Searches for Distant Clusters

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. X-ray Searches for Distant Clusters Chris Mullis University of Michigan Special Thanks To: Pat Henry, Piero Rosati, Hans Böhringer, Alexey Vikhlinin, Harald Ebeling, Isabella Gioia

  2. Overview • Motivations • X-ray Selection & Methodology • Brief History • Current Surveys • Future Prospects

  3. A Few Caveats… • Just highlighting examples (NOT COMPLETE REVIEW) • Recognize important work at low/intermediate redshifts • Mostly focused on z>0.5 results

  4. Motivations for the Study of High-Redshift Galaxy Clusters • Key Tracers of Large-Scale Structure  Cosmological Probes

  5. The evolution of cluster space density reflects underlying cosmology & physics Borgani & Guzzo 2001, Nature, 409, 39

  6. Requirements for Cosmology • Sensitivity over a long redshift baseline • Observational proxy for cluster mass • Accurate selection function • High completeness / low contamination

  7. F(Lx): Constraints on σ8-Ωm from RDCS Clusters Borgani et al. 2001, Rosati, Borgani & Norman 2002

  8. F(Tx): Constraints from Evolution of EMSS XTF Henry 1997, 2000, 2004 also Donahue & Voit 1999 z~0.05 z~0.42

  9. F(Mb): Baryon MF of 160SD Clusters at z~0.5 Ωm=0.27 z~0.05 z~0.55 Vikhlinin et al. 2003

  10. Motivations for the Study of High-Redshift Galaxy Clusters • Laboratories for Cosmic Evolution • Formation & evolution of galaxies in high-density environments • Feedback and Chemical Yield of SNe • Thermal & chemical evolution of ICM

  11. Galaxy Formation & Evolution Poggianti et al. 2004

  12. Massive, High-z Clusters = TestbedsHierarchical vs. Monolithic MS 1054-03 z=0.83 High-z X-ray-Selected Cluster van Dokkum et al. 2000

  13. ICM Metal Enrichment History  Star Formation History of Cluster Galaxy Population Non-Evolving(?) Gas Iron Abundance out to z=1.2 Tozzi et al. 2003 See also Ettori 2005

  14. High redshift = leverage  precision of cosmological parameters  efficacy of evolution studies

  15. RXJ1716+6709 z=0.81 ROSAT NEP Survey Henry et al. 1997, Gioia et al. 1999, Mullis 2001

  16. Chandra ACIS-I, 51ks, 3-10 kev RXJ1716+6709 z=0.81 ROSAT NEP Survey Henry et al. 1997, Gioia et al. 1999, Mullis 2001

  17. Advantages of X-ray Selection • Basic X-ray observable (Lx) directly related to a fundamental physical property (M)

  18. X-ray Luminosity versus Mass Reiprich & Böhringer 2002; see also Popesso et al. 2005

  19. Advantages of X-ray Selection • Essentially free of projection effects - low X-ray background • Lx ne2 clusters appear more sharply in X-ray than optical light complete samples

  20. galaxy group HCG 94 galaxy cluster Abell 2572 DSS

  21. galaxy cluster z=0.042 galaxy cluster z=0.155 galaxy group z=0.039 DSS + ROSAT PSPC Ebeling et al. 1995

  22. Advantages of X-ray Selection • Basic X-ray observable (Lx) physically motivated and directly related to a fundamental physical property (M) • Essentially free of projection effects complete samples • Well-defined selection function, (fx)  volume normalized diagnostics (e.g. XLF, XTF  MF)

  23. Building X-ray SamplesNumber Density - Flux Relation Cluster logN-logS: Rosati, Borgani & Norman 2002 (ARAA)

  24. Local Cluster XLF REFLEX Böhringer et al. 2002 See aso Ebeling et al. 1997; De Grandi et al. 1999

  25. Predicted RedshiftDistribution of Clusters foreground XLF no evolution XLF AB evolution Rosati et al. 02 Mullis et al. 04 Sky Coverage

  26. Contiguous Regions: All-Sky or Raster ROSAT image of the NEP Henry et al. 2001 Voges et al. 2001 Gioia et al 2001 Mullis 2001

  27. Cluster z=0.243160SD #210 Cluster z=0.242160SD #208 QSO Serendipitous Survey

  28. Ground-Based Follow-up • Initial Goals: • Confirm presence of galaxy overdensity • Redshift Measurement • Classical approach …one cluster at a time • Wholesale multi-λ coverage …photometric redshifts

  29. Optimizing for Very High-Z • Optical Follow-up is the Challenge • Leverage Existing Data • Utility of color information Cluster ellipticals with old stellar pops (e.g., Dressler et al. 1997, Postman et al. 1998) • Red-Sequence + Bracketing the 4000A Break(e.g. Gladders & Yee 2000, Kodama & Arimoto 1997) • Spectroscopy is expensive • major problem at z>1.45 (or z>1.63 using OII) • B2640A, MgII2800A, MgI2852A (e.g,. Cimatti et al. 2004) • NIR photometry enables zphot & science

  30. Brief History ROSAT Surveys 1990s Einstein EMSS 1980s See Rosati, Borgani & Norman 2002 forthorough review

  31. Key Characteristics of X-ray Sats * First with imaging optics

  32. First X-ray Detection of Distant Clusters • EinsteinObservatory(Giaconi et al. 1979) • e.g., Henry et al. 1979 • Einstein obs. of optically-selected clusters (mostly Abell z~0.2)

  33. What’s Distant? • EMSSGioia et al. 1990ab, Stocke et al. 1991Henry et al. 1992 • 93 X-ray-selected clusters (zmax=0.58)

  34. Einstein EMSSEvolution of the Cluster XLF z = 0.17 z = 0.17 Low-redshift XLF <z>=0.17 z = 0.33 High-redshift XLF <z>=0.33 Nov 1978 - Apr 1981 Gioia et al. 1990 Henry et al. 1992

  35. MS1054-0321 z=0.83HST / van Dokkum & Franx EMSS Clusters • Cluster Evolution -> Cosmology (Ωm) • e.g., Oukbir & Blanchard 1996, Bahcall & Cen 1997, Eke et al. 1998, Henry 2004 • CNOC Cluster Surveye.g., Carlberg, Yee, Ellingson 1996, Balogh et al. • Cluster Masses & Cosmology • Galaxy Evolution in Clusters & Field • Distant Clusters • MS1054-0321 z=0.83 • most distant EMSS cluster • e.g., Luppino & Kaiser 1997 (WL)Donahue et al. 1998 (X-ray) • MS1137.5=6025 z=0.78 • e.g., Donahue et al. 1999

  36. X-ray Cluster Universe Surveyed by Einstein zmax ~ 0.8

  37. Key Characteristics of X-ray Sats

  38. Ebeling, Edge & Henry 2001

  39. ROSAT Distant Cluster Surveys

  40. Compilation of 8 High-Redshift Cluster XLFs Mullis et al. 2004

  41. ML Contours for the fitting parameters of an Evolving Schechter Function no evolution A=B=0 Rosati et al. 2002 Henry 2003 Mullis et al. 2004

  42. Cluster Co-moving Volume Density Prediction based on 160SD + others at Lx < 1045 Data from the eBCS+MACS at Lx > 1045 (Ebeling et al. 2004) Mullis et al. 2004

  43. z>1 X-ray Clusters ClG J0848+4453 z=1.273RDCS (IR-selected) RX J0848.6+4453 z=1.261RDCS RX J1252.9+2927 z=1.237 RDCS RX J1053.7+5735 z=1.14 Lockman Hole Hashimoto et al. 2004 RX J0910+5422 z=1.106RDCS Cl J1415.1+3612 z=1.03 WARPS Doland, Ebeling, Barrett 2006 . Low-z: >1000 clusters Med-z: 100s clusters Very Hi-z: only a few clusters

  44. 5 keV 3 keV RDCS0849 RDCS0848 1.5’  0.75 Mpc z=1.106 z=1.263 z=1.272 5.5 keV 6 keV RDCS1252 RDCS0910 z=1.237 Clusters at z > 1 observed with Chandra, HST and Spitzer RDCS z>1 Clusters • Advanced stage of formation • No signs of mergers • Present-day metalicity • Dominated by old stellar pops • Formation epoch z>1.3 courtesy Piero Rosati

  45. Challenges to Hierarchical Structure Formation RDCS1252.9-2927 (z=1.237) Rosati et al.

  46. Tight Red Sequence at z=1.24 Blakeslee et al. 2003, Lidman et al. 2003, Rosati et al. 2004

  47. Slowly Evolving K-band LF Toft et al. 2004; see also Strazzullo et al. 2005

More Related