Sébastien C. VAUCLAIR, OMP, Toulouse

Transcription

1 XMM-Newton Ω-Project Ω matter from cluster evolution Collaborators : Sébastien C. VAUCLAIR, OMP, Toulouse J.G. Bartlett (PI) J.P. Bernard A. Blanchard M. Boer D.J. Burke* C.A. Collins* M. Giard D.H. Lumb P. Marty J. Nevalainen R.C. Nichol* A.K. Romer* R. Sadat + BAX : X-ray cluster data base by R. Sadat et al. (OMP Toulouse)

2 OUTLINE Basic Idea of the cosmological test Presentation of the XMM-Newton Ω Project Results on the high-z L x -T x relation of X-ray clusters Cluster abundance and cosmological interpretation Discussion-Conclusions S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

3 Low density Λ-CDM Basic Idea: Cluster evolution strongly depends on Ω m (and σ 8, Γ) Z=3 Z=1 Dense flat Universe Virgo Consortium S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

4 XMM-Newton Ω-Project GT: 8 clusters with accurate Lx, Tx, Rc, β, z Nearly all the SHARC flux limited survey at z > 0.45 Goals : I- L-T relation at high-z => key ingredient in the number counts calculation II- Ω matter from the evolution of cluster population at high-z (z > 0.3) => D. Lumb et al., A&A accepted, astro-ph/ => S.C.Vauclair et al., A&A 412, L37-L41 (2003) S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

5 XMM-Newton Ω-Project I : Observations D. Lumb et al., A&A accepted, astroph/ RXJ1120, M. Arnaud et al, 2002 Z 0.6 T x =5.45 ± 0.3 kev bol = erg s -1 L bol S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

6 X-Ray Observations and scaling laws X-Ray emission essentially due to the bremsstrahlung process in the intra-cluster gaz. Flux : f X = L x /4πD L ² ( D L = (1+z)² D a ) L-T relation: L 44 =L bol /10 44 (erg/s/cm 2 ) α T 3 M-T relation (from kt~gm/r) T 15 =[4 kev kev] (normalized from numerical simulations or observations) S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

7 Evolution of L-T L T confirmed + local XMM * Chandra Lx/Tx) z = Lx/Tx) z = 0 (1+z) β with β = 0.65 ± 0.28 in agreement with Chandra (Vikhlinin et al, 2002), and ASCA (Sadat et al., 1998; Novicki et al., ) and with Lumb et al. after cooling flow corrections (β = 0.6 ± 0.3) S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

8 XMM-Newton Ω-Project II : Cosmological interpretation Number counts : models predictions VS observations (Flux limited samples) => L x -T x relation => M-T x relation Published selection function => mass function Jenkins et al. S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

9 Local Normalization: Temperature distribution Function (TDF) TDF Local degeneracy between Ω m and σ ROSAT clusters at z ~ 0.05 Agreement with previous works: Markevitch (1998), Blanchard et al. (2000), Pierpaoli al (2001, 2002), Ikebe et al (2002), Novicki et al (2002) S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

10 Local Normalization (2): The X-ray Luminosity Function (XLF) Observed TDF + Observed L-T Reiprich et al. Local sample High density best model Concordance model => Observed XLF! => Need redshift evolution study to break the degeneracy between Ω m and σ 8 S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

11 Ω m from TDF evolution Using Henri s sample from EMSS (1997), i.e. 9 clusters at z~0.33 Maximum Likelihood Blanchard et al., 2000 Oukbir & Blanchard, 1992 Agreement with: Reichart et al., 1999 Borgani et al., 1999 => Ω m = 0.86 Update : Ω m =[ ] depending on M-T S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

12 Models VS Observations: 7 different flux limited X-Ray surveys: EMSS, RDCS, B-SHARC, 160 deg 2, NEP, MACS and WARPS ~300 clusters with z > 0.3 MACS : 119 clusters at z>0.3 (Ebeling et al.) (NEP, Mullis) Modelling with a) high Ω no free parameters b) Concordance model (Ω λ =0.7, Ω m =0.3, σ 8 ~1, Γ=0.2) [models normalized to local counts] S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

13 RDCS: 50 deg² fx erg/s/cm² MACS: deg² fx erg/s/cm² Ω=0.3, σ 8 ~[.75,1], Γ=0.2 Ω=[0.8,1.], σ 8 ~.55, Γ=0.12 L-T Dispersion M-T Dispersion S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

14 Modelling both groups and clusters with a break in the L-T slope (i.e. LαTL 4 for T<2keV) S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

15 One way out? Concordance model with a break in the M-T scaling 160deg² with fx > erg.cm -2.s -1 S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

16 Conclusions: L-T evolution with redshift confirmed by XMM-Newton Strong Evolution in the abundance of X-ray clusters appears from all existing surveys in a fully consistent way Insensitive to systematics (L-T, M-T, mass function ). Thanks to Self-consistent modelling This provides a strong argument in favor of a high matter density universe within the standard modelling of clusters One way out : major revision of standard scaling of M-T (z) for instance i.e. Tx GM/r What s next: likelihood analysis over all samples at z>0.3 and using MCMC S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

17 Compatible with CMB Blanchard, Douspis, Rowan-Robinson, Sarkar 2003 S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

18 ΛCDM model with low σ 8 Ω λ =0.65, Ω m =0.35, σ 8 =0.66, Γ=0.2 OK! S. C. Vauclair, Moriond

19 Local XLF with Ω λ =0.65, Ω m =0.35, σ 8 =0.66, Γ=0.2 ~4 kev BUT S. C. Vauclair, Moriond