arxiv:astro-ph/ v2 6 Dec 1999

Transcription

1 Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., () Printed 13 August 213 (MN LATEX style file v1.4) Galaxy Clusters: Oblate or Prolate? Asanta R. Cooray Department of Astronomy and Astropysics, University of Cicago, Cicago IL 6637, USA. arxiv:astro-p/99594v2 6 Dec 1999 Accepted for Publication in Montly Notices of Royal Astronomical Society 1 INTRODUCTION ABSTRACT It is now well known tat a combined analysis of te Sunyaev-Zel dovic (SZ) effect and te X-ray emission observations can be used to determine te angular diameter distance to galaxy clusters, from wic te Hubble constant is derived. Given tat te SZ/X-ray Hubble constant is determined troug a geometrical description of clusters, te accuracy to wic suc distance measurements can be made depends on ow well one can describe intrinsic cluster sapes. Using te observed X-ray isopotal axial ratio distribution for a sample of galaxy clusters, we discuss intrinsic cluster sapes and, in particular, if clusters can be described by axisymmetric models, suc as oblate and prolate ellipsoids. Tese models are currently favored wen determining te SZ/X-ray Hubble constant. We sow tat te current observational data on te aspericity of galaxy clusters suggest tat clusters are more consistent wit a prolate rater tan an oblate distribution. We address te possibility tat clusters are intrinsically triaxial by viewing triaxial ellipsoids at random angles wit te intrinsic axial ratios following an isotropic Gaussian distribution. We discuss implications of our results on current attempts at measuring te Hubble constant using galaxy clusters and suggest tat an unbiased estimate of te Hubble constant, not fundamentally limited by projection effects, would eventually be possible wit te SZ/X-ray metod. Key words: galaxies:clusters:general distance scale Over te last few years, tere as been a tremendous increase in te study of galaxy clusters as cosmological probes, initially troug te use of X-ray emission observations, and in recent years, troug te use of Sunyaev-Zel dovic (SZ) effect. Briefly, te SZ effect is a distortion of te cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation by inverse-compton scattering of termal electrons witin te ot intracluster medium (Sunyaev & Zel dovic 198; see Birkinsaw 1998 for a recent review). Te initial motivation for te study of SZ effect was to establis a cosmic origin to te cosmic microwave background (CMB), rater tan a galactic one. It was later realized, owever, tat by combining te SZ intensity cange and te X-ray emission observations, and solving for te number density distribution of electrons responsible for bot tese effects after assuming a certain geometrical sape, angular diameter distance, D A, to galaxy clusters can be derived (e.g., Cavaliere et al. 1977; Silk & Wite 1978; Gunn 1978). Combining te distance measurement wit redsift allows a determination of te Hubble constant, H, troug te well known angular diameter distance relationsip wit redsift, and after assuming a geometrical world model wit values for te cosmic matter density, Ω m, and te cosmological constant, Ω Λ. On te oter and, angular diameter distances wit redsift for a sample of clusters, over a wide range in redsift, can be used to constrain cosmological world models; An approac essentially similar to te one taken by two groups to constrain Ω m and Ω Λ using luminosity distance relationsip of Type Ia supernovae as a function of redsift (Perlmuetter et al. 1998; Riess et al. 1998). Te cosmological parameter measurements using Type Ia supernovae are based on te fact tat tese supernovae are standard candles, or standard candles after making appropriate corrections (see, Branc 1999 for a recent review). Since te SZ/X-ray distance measurements are based on geometrical metod, one requires detailed knowledge on galaxy cluster sapes. However, suc details are not always available; in some cases, e.g., te cluster inclination angle, suc details are not likely to be ever available. Also, given tat te two effects involved are due to te spatial distribution of electrons and teir termal structure, additional details on te pysical properties of electron distribution are needed. c RAS

2 L2 Cooray Tus, te accuracy to wic te Hubble constant can be determined from te SZ/X-ray route depends on te assumptions made wit regards to te cluster sape and its pysical properties, or ow well suc information can be derived a priori from data. Current measurements on te Hubble constant using cluster X-ray emission and SZ are mostly based on te assumption of an isotermal temperature distribution and a sperical geometry for galaxy clusters. In recent years, improvements to te sperical assumption ave appeared in te form of axisymmetric elliptical models (e.g., Huges & Birkinsaw 1998). Using analytical and numerical tools, several investigations ave now studied te accuracy to wic te Hubble constant can be derived from te current simplified metod. Using numerical simulations, Inagaki et al. (1995) and Roettiger et al. (1997) sowed tat te Hubble constant measured troug te SZ effect can be seriously affected by systematic effects, wic include te assumption of isotermality, cluster gas clumping, and aspericity. Te effects due to nonisotermality and density distribution, suc as gas clumping, can eventually be studied wit upcoming ig quality X-ray imaging and spectral data from te Candra X-ray Observatory (CXO) and X-ray Multiple Mirror Mission. In addition to suc expected improvements on te pysical state of te electron distribution responsible for te two scattering and emission effects, one sould consider te possibility tat te SZ/X-ray measurements are affected troug cluster projection effects and te intrinsic cluster sape distribution. Using analytical metods, Cooray (1998) and Sulkanen (1999) investigated projection effects on te Hubble constant due to an assumption involving ellipsoidal sape for galaxy clusters. Tese studies led to te conclusion tat current measurements may be biased and tat from a large sample of clusters, it may be possible to obtain an unbiased estimate of te Hubble constant provided tat cluster ellipsoidal sapes can be identified accurately. Here, large depends on wat was assumed in te calculation; If te ellipticities of clusters follow te observed distribution by Mor et al. (1995), ten a sample as small as 25 clusters can, in principle, provide a measurement of te Hubble constant witin few percent of te true value. Te real scenario, owever, can be muc different as te assumptions tat ave been made may be too simple. As an attempt to understand intrinsic cluster sape distribution, we used te available cluster data to constrain te accuracy to wic clusters can be described by simple ellipsoidal models. Apart from previous work involving cluster axial ratios measured troug optical galaxy distributions (e.g., Ryden 1996), we note tat no study as yet been performed on intrinsic cluster sapes using gas distribution data, suc as te X-ray isopotal axial ratio distribution. Compared to optical galaxy isopotes, a study on cluster sapes using X-ray data would be more appropriate as te gas distribution is likely to be a better tracer of intrinsic ttp://asc.arvard.edu ttp://astro.estec.esa.nl/xmm cluster sapes. Here, our primary goal is to quantify te nature of cluster sapes using X-ray observations reported in te literature. We essentially follow te framework presented in Cooray (1998) and describe intrinsic cluster sapes using axisymmetric models, mainly prolate (or cigar-like) and oblate (pancake like) speroidal distributions. In Section 2, we briefly introduce te apparent cluster sapes of axisymmetric galaxy clusters and move on to discuss intrinsic sapes. We also extended our discussion to consider te possibility tat clusters are triaxial ellipsoids wit an intrinsic distribution for axial ratios tat follow a Gaussian form. Given tat te calculational metods to obtain intrinsic sapes given apparent or projected distributions are well known, especially for galaxies and stellar systems suc as globular clusters, we only present relevant details ere. We refer te interested readers to Merritt & Tremblay (1994), Vio et al. (1994), Ryden (1992; 1996) for furter details and applications. Given te wide and timely interest in using cluster SZ and X-ray data to derive cosmological parameters, we follow well establised procedures in tese papers to address wat can be learnt of intrinsic sapes of clusters from current observational data. 2 GALAXY CLUSTER SHAPES 2.1 Apparent Sapes Given tat tere is a large amount of literature, including textbooks (e.g., Binney & Tremaine 1991), tat describe tecniques to calculate te apparent axial ratio distribution of projected bodies, mainly galaxies, we skip all te intermediate details and start by presenting te expected distribution of apparent axial ratios for prolate and oblate speroids. In te case of a intrinsic prolate sape distribution, te apparent axial ratio distribution, f(η), is: f(η) = 1 η N p(γ)γ 2 dγ, (1) η 2 [(1 γ 2 )(η 2 γ 2 1/2 )] wile for te oblate distribution: f(η) = η η N o(γ)dγ. (2) [(1 γ 2 )(η 2 γ 2 1/2 )] In Eq. 1 & 2, N p(γ) and N o(γ) represent, respectively, te intrinsic axial ratio distribution wen clusters are assumed to be prolate and oblate. In order to obtain te underlying distribution of apparent axial ratios using a measured series of axial ratio values (η), we use te nonparametric kernel estimator given by: ˆf(η) = 1 N N ( ) η ηi K i=1 were K is te kernel function wit kernel widt (e.g., Merritt & Tremblay 1994) and N is te total number of clusters. For te present calculation, we use a smoot function to describe te Kernel: K(x) = 1 2π exp ( x2 2 ) (3). (4) c RAS, MNRAS,

3 In general, te kernel widt is calculated by minimizing te mean integrated square error (MISE), defined as te expectation value of te integral: [ ˆf(η) f(η) ] 2 dη. (5) 5 4 Intrinsic Sapes of Galaxy Clusters L3 Suc an estimation is problematic wen f(η) is not known initially, and requires, usually, iterative scemes to obtain te optimal value. Here, we take te approac presented Vio et al. (1994) and used in Ryden (1996). Vio et al. (1994) sowed tat a good approximation to kernel widt for a wide range of density distributions wic are reasonably smoot and not strongly skewed is: f(η) =.9AN.2. (6) Here, A is cosen suc tat it is te smaller of eiter te standard deviation of te sample or te interquartile range of te sample divided by Accordingly, tis approximation is expected to usually produce an estimate witin 1% of te distribution wen is calculated by minimizing MISE. Since η is limited by definition to te range between and 1, we use te so-called reflective boundary conditions at η = and η = 1 (e.g., Silverman 1986). Tis is done by replacing te Gaussian kernel K above wit te kernel (Ryden 1996): K (η, η i, ) = K ( η η i ) ( + K η+ηi ) +K ( 2 η η i suc tat te Gaussian tails tat extended less tan and greater tan 1 are folded back into te interval between and 1, wit and 1 inclusive. Suc reflective boundary conditions ensure tat te proper normalization is upold: 1 ), (7) ˆf(η)dη = 1 (8) as long as << 1. However, tese reflective boundary conditions forces te estimated distribution to ave zero derivatives at te two boundaries. Suc artificial modifications may be problematic wen interpreting te observed distribution near boundaries of and 1; One sould be cautious on te accuracy of te estimated distribution and te inverted profiles near suc values. 2.2 Intrinsic Sapes In order to obtain te intrinsic distribution, one can easily invert Eqs. 1 & 3, respectively. Suc an inversion can now be carried out directly as we now ave an estimator for te underlying distribution of apparent axial ratios. If clusters are all randomly oriented ellipsoids following a strict oblate distribution, ten te estimate distribution for te intrinsic axis ratio, ˆN(γ) is given by te relation: γ ( ) ˆf(η) ˆN o(γ) = 2γ 1 γ 2 π d dη η dη γ2 η 2. (9) However, if clusters are assumed to randomly oriented ellipsoids following a prolate distribution, ten te intrinsic distribution is: η Figure 1. Nonparametric kernel estimate of te distribution of apparent axial ratios for a sample of galaxy clusters (solid line, using X-ray isopotal data from Mor et al. (1995). Te longdased lines sow te 9% confidence range on te estimate using a bootstrap monte-carlo calculation of te observed distribution. ˆN p(γ) = 2 1 γ 2 γπ γ d ( ) η 2 dη ˆf(η) dη γ2 η. (1) 2 Oter tan suc a direct inversion, various oter iterative (e.g., Lucy s metod; Lucy 1974) tecniques can also be used to obtain te intrinsic distribution. However, for te purpose of tis calculation, we use te direct inversion using above integrals. To be pysically meaningful, ˆNo and ˆN p sould be nonnegative over te entire range of γ values from to 1. Since we directly compute ˆN o and ˆN p witout making any restrictions on te values it can take between γ of and 1, our approac allows us to test te null ypotesis tat all objects are eiter oblate or prolate. However, we note tat certain iterative scemes available in te literature, wic can be utilized for an inversion of te observed axial ratio distribution, do not necessarily make suc a test possible as suc scemes impose a priori constraint tat ˆN o, or ˆN p, is positive for all values between and 1. To impose a reasonably accurate constraint tat objects cannot be eiter prolate or oblate, we conduct a monte carlo study of te observed data by using a bootstrap resampling procedure; From te original data set of η i values fom Mor et al. (1995) sample, we draw, wit replacement, a new set of axial ratios tat represent te same data set. Here, we now consider te uncertainties associated wit Mor et al. (1995) axial ratio measurements and allow tese bootstrap samples to take axial ratio values wic are witin ± 1 σ of te measurement error range. Tese points are ten used to create a new bootstrap estimate for ˆf (Fig. 1), wic is inverted to compute estimates for ˆN o and ˆN p. We create a substantial number of suc bootstrap datasets to place robust confidence intervals on te original dataset. At eac value of γ, confidence intervals are placed on eiter ˆN o or ˆN p by finding values of ˆNo or ˆN p suc tat te bootstrap c RAS, MNRAS,

4 L4 N p (γ) Cooray γ Figure 2. Distribution of intrinsic axial ratios, assuming tat clusters are prolate. Te saded region represent te 9% confidence band found by bootstrap resampling of te Mor et al. (1995) cluster sample. N o (γ) γ Figure 3. Distribution of intrinsic axial ratios, assuming tat clusters are oblate (same as Fig. 2). estimates lie above some confidence limit. If tis confidence limit drops below zero for any value of γ between and 1, te ypotesis tat all objects are oblate, or prolate, can be rejected (see, Ryden 1996). For te purpose of tis paper, we use 1 4 bootstrap resamplings, in order to ave sufficiently accurate measurements of te underlying distribution function to impose confidence levels at wic eiter te prolate or te oblate ypotesis is rejected. Tis approac is essentially similar to wat Ryden (1996) as utilized to constrain te intrinsic sapes of various sources, suc as globular clusters and elliptical galaxies. In order to obtain constraints on te intrinsic cluster sapes, we use te Mor et al. (1995) cluster sample. Here, te autors studied 65 nearby clusters and presented apparent axial ratios of tese clusters using X-ray isopotal data. Tis is te largest suc study available in te literature, wile oter studies, involving a less number of clusters, essentially contains more or less te same clusters as te Mor et al. (1995) sample. Anoter advantage of te Mor et al. (1995) cluster sample is tat it is X-ray flux limited and clusters were not selected based on te X-ray surface brigtness. Te original sample in Mor et al. (1995) was defined by Edge et al. (199) based on observations by HEAO-1 and Ariel-V surveys combined wit Einstein Observatory imaging observations. Suc a flux-limited complete, or nearcomplete, sample, instead of a surface brigtness selected sample, as te advantage tat clusters are not likely to be biased in teir selection. Suc selection effects, say due to elongated nature by enancing te surface brigtness, would be problemtic bot for te current study on te intrinsic sapes of clusters as well cosmological studies using clusters based on te X-ray luminosity and temperature function. For te purpose of tis paper, we assume tat clusters in te Mor et al. (1995) sample as been selected in an unbiased manner wen teir intrinsic sapes are considered (see, also, Edge et al. 199). We use tabulated axial ratio measurements in Table 3 of Mor et al. (1995), wic contains measurements for 58 clusters, to obtain a nonparametric estimates for te underlying distribution. Tese were ten inverted to obtain intrinsic axial ratio distributions, assuming prolate and oblate sapes for clusters. In Figs. 2 & 3, we sow our results; te saded region represent te 9% confidence limits from bootstrap resampling tecnique. If we assume tat all clusters are prolate, te observed distribution is consistent wit suc an assumption; except wen γ 1, te distribution is always positive. However, if we assume tat all clusters are oblate, ten te resulting intrinsic distribution is inconsistent wit suc an assumption at te 98% confidence. Returning to previous works, we find tat suc a conclusion is consistent wit constraints on intrinsic cluster sapes using optical data. In Ryden (1996), for various optically selected samples, randomly oriented oblate ypotesis was rejected at a iger confidence level tan te randomly oriented prolate ypotesis. However, we note an alternative possibility tat clusters are in fact triaxial ellipsoids. Anoter possibility is tat our assumption tat clusters are randomly oriented ellipsoids may be incorrect; clusters can still be oblate ellipsoids, owever, tey sould be oriented in preferred directions tan random directions. Since we do not ave additional information on suc scenario, we may be left wit te possibility tat clusters are eiter randomly oriented prolate or randomly oriented triaxial ellipsoids. 2.3 Clusters as Triaxial Ellipsoids In order to test te possibility tat galaxy clusters are triaxial ellipsoids viewed from random angles, we now consider random projections of suc objects. It as been sown in Stark (1977; also, Binney 1985) tat triaxial ellipsoids project into ellipses wen viewed at random angles. Assuming a viewing angle of (θ, φ), in a standard polar coordinate system wit z-axis acting as te pole, te axial ratio of suc an ellipse can be written as (Binney 1985; Ryden 1992): c RAS, MNRAS,

5 q(β, γ, θ, φ) = were, [ ] 1/2 A + C (A C) 2 + B (11) A + C + (A C) 2 + B Intrinsic Sapes of Galaxy Clusters L5 A = ( cos 2 φ + β 2 sin 2 φ ) cos 2 θ + γ 2 sin 2 θ, B = 4cos 2 θ sin 2 φcos 2 φ ( 1 β 2) 2 C = sin 2 φ + β 2 cos 2 φ (12) (13) and β and γ are te intrinsic axis ratios of te ellipsoid. Following Ryden (1992), were a similar calculation was applied to elliptical galaxies to address teir intrinsic sape distribution, we test te possibility tat clusters are intrinsically triaxial ellipsoids wit axis ratios of ellipsoids distributed according to a Gaussian distribution: f(β, γ) exp [ (β β)2 + (γ γ ) 2 2σ 2 ], (14) and te constraint 1 β γ. Here, β, γ and σ describe te intrinsic Gaussian distribution and wose parameters can be constrained by a comparison of te observed axial ratios given by Eq. 11. For a set of β, γ and σ values, we randomly generate (β, γ) values tat follow te above Gaussian distribution and te associated constraint. We tem view eac pair of (β, γ) values wit randomly cosen set of viewing angles (θ, φ). Following tis procedure, we randomly generate 1 5 q values for wic we apply te non-parametric kernel estimator to obtain te underlying distribution. Using χ 2 statistic, we compare tis underlying distribution to te observed distribution and its error from te Mor et al. (1995) dataset. Finally, we repeat tis procedure for different values of te basic parameters tat define te Gaussian distribution. In Fig 4, we sow constraints obtained on te intrinsic sape parameter distribution by comparing to present observations. Here, we sow te 99%, 95.4% and 99.99% confidences on β and γ for several values of σ. As sown, te observed distribution of axial ratios are consistent wen β is at te ig end, wile γ varies from low values to ig values as σ is increased. For low σ values, te observations are more consistent wit te possibility tat clusters are oblate (β = 1) rater tan prolate (β = γ ). However, as σ is increased te observed distribution becomes more consistent wit te possibility tat clusters are intrinsically prolate. Still, we note tat tere is a large range of possibilities were te observations are consistent wit values for β and γ wic are neiter consistent wit te prolate nor te oblate ypotesis. For te parameter space considered ere, te best fit model as same β and γ values of.92 and σ =.21. Te reduced χ 2 value of tis model and data is 1.1. In general, wen σ >.1, statistically acceptable fits are found wen β is close to γ, suggesting tat current cluster data are more consistent wit an intrinsically prolate distribution. Figure 4. Confidence limits on β, γ and σ parameter space. Sown ere are te β and γ confidences for tree values of σ (.5,.15 &.25). Te contours are at 95.4%, 99% and 99.99% respectively. c RAS, MNRAS,

6 L6 Cooray 3 DISCUSSION & SUMMARY Using te Mor et al. (1995) cluster sample, we rule out tat clusters are intrinsically axisymmetrical oblate ellipsoids at te 98% confidence level. As te Mor et al. (1995) cluster sample is a flux limited sample rater tan a surface brigtness selected sample, we can consider suc a sample as a fair representation of clusters in te Universe. Mor et al. (1995) cluster sample also describes clusters wic are now observed bot for te SZ effect and te X-ray emission and are used for te determination of te SZ/X-ray Hubble constant. Tus, conclusions based on te Mor et al. (1995) sample sould be valid for wat one can expect from current attempts to determine cosmological parameters using SZ and X-ray data of galaxy clusters. We ave assumed tat cluster X-ray isopotes represent te true sape of galaxy clusters. It may be likely tat cluster X-ray isopotes are flattened compared to te intrinsic cluster sapes, and by ignoring tis possibility, we may ave introduced a systematic bias in tis study. However, we note tat suc bias, if exists, is likely to be small and tat compared to oter cluster data available to conduct a study on intrinsic cluster sapes, X-ray isopotal axial ratios allow a strong possibility to obtain reliable conclusions on cluster sapes. Also, we note tat any correction to te measured Hubble constant due to aspericity is likely to be based on te sape of X- ray isopotes, wic is also expected to be similar to SZ isopotes as bot essentially measure te same distribution. Terefore, te use of X-ray isopotes to constrain intrinsic sape distribution sould be accurate and valid, wen considering te cosmological applications. Our study sows tat clusters are more likely to be prolate rater tan oblate ellipsoids, owever, we cannot rule out te possibility tat clusters are intrinsically triaxial. Considering our previous discussions in Cooray (1998) related to cluster projection effects on te SZ/X-ray Hubble constant, intrinsic prolate distributions allow a less biased determination of te Hubble constant, wile an intrinsic oblate distribution results in a mean value for te Hubble constant wic can be biased as large as 1% from te true value. In Cooray (1998), we only considered te projection effect arising from te unknown inclination angle of galaxy clusters by averaging over a uniform distribution in inclination angles, wile only considering a mean value for te axial ratio of clusters from Mor et al. (1995). Given tat we ave now determined te intrinsic distribution of axial ratios, we can now extend our calculations presented in Cooray (1998) to also consider intrinsic axial ratio distribution. Here, we assume tat SZ and X-ray sape parameters coincide, owever, tis is only true if clusters are triaxial ellipsoids. If te true sape of clusters were to be more complicated, ten a detailed analysis would be necessary to obtain te individual sape parameters associated wit SZ and X-ray data and to determine te Hubble constant. Assuming a simple scenario in wic clusters are triaxial ellipsoids, for a cluster sample of 25 clusters randomly drawn from te intrinsic prolate and oblate distributions, we find tat te oblate assumption and its distribution results in a biased measurement of te Hubble constant by 8%, wile for a prolate distribution, te resulting mean value for te Hubble constant is unbiased, or witin 3%. For bot prolate and oblate distributions, te widt of te resulting distribution of Hubble constant values agree wit eac oter. Tese estimates bot over and underestimates suc tat true value is witin te range. Tese calculations and ones presented elsewere (e.g., Sulkanen 1999) suggest tat te measurement of te Hubble constant based on galaxy clusters is not fundamentally biased by cluster projection effects and te sape distribution. Terefore, it is likely tat a reliable measurement of te Hubble constant will soon be possible wit galaxy clusters using SZ and X-ray data, owever, suc a calculation would still require tat we improve our knowledge on cluster pysical properties suc as isotermality and gas clumping. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge useful discussions wit Scott Dodelson on inversion tecniques and Joe Mor on cluster projections. REFERENCES Birkinsaw, M. 1998, Pysics Reports (in press). Binney, J. 1985, MNRAS, 212, 767. Binney, J., Tremaine, S. 1991, Galactic Dynamics (Princeton: Princeton University Press). Branc, D. 1998, ARA&A, in press (astro-p/98165). Cavaliere, A., Danse, L., De Zotti, 1977, ApJ, 217, 6. Cooray, A. R. 1998, A&A, Gunn, J. E., 1978, in Observational Cosmology: Advanced Course, 8t, Sass-Fee, Geneva Observatory (Switzerland), pp Huges, J. P., Birkinsaw, M. 1998, ApJ, 51, 1. Inagaki, Y., Suginoara, T., Suto, Y., PASJ, 47, 411. Lucy, L. B. 1974, AJ, 79, 745. Merritt, D., Tremblay, B. 1994, AJ, 18, 514. Mor, J. J. et al. 1995, ApJ, 447, 8. Perlmutter, S., Aldering, G., Valle, M. D., et al. 1998, Nature, 391, 51. Riess, A. G., Filippenko, A. V., Callis, P., et al. 1998, AJ, 116, 19. Roettiger, K., Stone, J. M., Musotzky, R. F. 1997, ApJ, 482, 588. Ryden, B. S., 1992, ApJ, 396, 445. Ryden, B. S., 1996, ApJ, 461, 146. Sulkanen, M. E., 1999, ApJ, in press (astro-p/993379). Sunyaev, R. A., & Zel dovic, Ya. B., 198, ARA&A, 18, 537. Silk, J., Wite, S. D. 1978, ApJ, 223, L59. Silverman, B. W. 1986, Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis (New York: Capman & Hall) Stark, A. A. 1977, ApJ, 213, 368. Vio, R., Fasano, G., Lazzarin, M., Lessi, O. 1994, A&A, 289, 64. c RAS, MNRAS,