Clusters physics and evolution from new X- ray/sz samples

Transcription

1 Clusters physics and evolution from new X- ray/sz samples Monique ARNAUD (CEA Saclay) with Iacopo BARTALUCCI, Jessica DEMOCLES Etienne POINTECOUTEAU, Gabriel PRATT & Planck collaboration thanks to C. JONES & B. FORMAN

2 Clusters and structure formation P(k)+ΛCDM z=8.55 z=5.7 z=1.4 z=0 Clusters : Nodes of the Cosmic Web Composition of the Universe: 85% Dark matter ; 12 % Hot gas; 3% galaxies Form and evolve through merger/accretion along LSS filaments test of the physics of structure formation (Dark Matter and baryons) cosmological parameters via N(M,z) or f gas

3 X- ray surveys XCS [Llyods- Davies, et al, 11; Mehrtens et al, 12] >400deg 2 ; 463 clusters XDCP [Fassbender et al, 12] ; 76 deg 2; 22 high z clusters 2XMMi/SDSS [Tuckey et al, 2014] ; 210 deg 2 ; 383 clusters XCLASS [Clerc et al 12]; 850 clusters ; cosmo from X only XXL: Pacaud, Clerc, Giles et al A&A subm See N. Clerc Talk + XMM: now extending to high z and low mass - Limited sky coverage => missing rare high z high M clusters

4 X- ray and SZ observations ROSAT Bremsstrahlung Planck Inverse Compton scattering L X α 2 n e Λ (T ) dv Coma V XMM Chandra Y SZ α ( P = n T ) dv e V No z dimming! Complementary information 5/08/2015 IAU XXIV GA FM-06 Monique ARNAUD

5 SZ X- ray survey complementarity Planck 2013 results XXIX SZ: no z dimming X-ray: (still) lower mass Sky coverage versus depth Planck: rarest high M clusters ACT/SPT: higher z/lower M

6 From detection to (X- ray) study 1947 Planck (confirmed) clusters (more to be confirmed) 677 SPT clusters 94 in common SPT: Bleem+, 15 Planck: PC, 11,14,15

7 From detection to (X- ray) study Statistical properties of cluster population (scaling law/profiles) cluster formation physics New samples over wide z-m range X-ray versus SZ selection? Evolution XMM- REXCESS: Reference for sta3s3cal proper3es of local clusters Bohringer et al, 07 Croston et al, 08; Pra\, et al, 10; Arnaud et al, 10

8 The (large) follow- up programs Complete SZ flux selected sample 80 clusters 0.3 < z <1.2 Medium deep Chandra observations global properties profiles from innovative stacking and/or constrained models Evolution study See M. McDonald Talk

9 The (large) follow- up programs All ESZ 164 z<0.35 extended to PSZ1 cosmo sample Chandra + XMM observations global properties & profiles Local reference for SZ selected sample (e.g. as compared to REXCESS) M for cosmo study

10 The (large) follow- up programs 33 PSZ1 z>0.5 4 SPT + 1 z>0.9 Deep XMM (+1Chandra) observations global properties & profiles Evolution including DM profiles M500 > M

11 Cluster selection Adiabatic Cooling+heating Allen, Evrard & Mantz, 12 Stanek et et al, 10 Proper modeling of Obs-Mass relation & scatter and cluster detection procedure critical SZ signal (expected to be) tightly related to Mass SZ catalogue (expected to be) less biased

12 X- ray versus SZ selection? M~ M 0 PC12, Planck Intermediate Results IV Larger M L X dispersion and smaller normalisation than thought? Dynamically perturbed clusters under-represented and/or Cool core over-represented at limit of X-ray surveys? M~ M 0

13 Chandra XVP: All ESZ z<0.35 clusters Relaxed CC cavity CC no cavity Non - CC Chandra XVP(PI C.Jones) GT (S.Murray) + Archive (P.Mazzotta) Pre merger merger Post merger credit C.Jones+ A variety of morphology

14 Chandra XVP: All ESZ z<0.35 clusters Many merging clusters Planck cluster sample X-ray HIFLUGCS (Zhang+ 2011) relaxed 44% (Chandra) to 61% (XMM) 66% (XMM) disturbed 56% (Chandra) to 39% (XMM) 34% (XMM) But merger identification depends on resolution Not yet clear SZ selected significantly different in morphology from X-ray cluster catalogs Higher fraction of Non CC cluster ~70% compared to 40% of X-ray selected HIFLUGCS + B55 (Birzan+12) credit C.Jones+

15 The ICM pressure and Y SZ /Y X Pike+14 Directly measured by SZ signal Y SZ α P = n e T ( ) V dv Reflect the state of the gas in the potential well A probe of gravitational physics; weaker dependence on galaxy feedback

16 Local X- ray & SZ Pressure profiles PLANCK XMM XMM PC13, Planck Intermediate Results V Profile from 0.02 to 5 R500 from X-ray+SZ X-ray and SZ view consistent See also Eckert et al, 2013 Probing outskirt physics

17 Pressure profile evolution Self-similar evolution (as expected) To be confirmed using purely SZ selected local reference Arnaud, Democles, +, in prep.

18 The Y SZ - Y X relation Tight YSZ-YX relation as expected from P(r) Error now dominated by systematics limit clumpiness constrain (but small ~ 5% or <R500) Y SZ - Mass using XMM Y X - M HE Planck 2013 results XXIX (adapted); Update of PER XI,IX +PIR I,IV Rozo, Vikhlinin & More, 2012 (Planck + Chandra) See also Andersson et al, 11 (SPT+ Chandra+XMM) Error dominated by systematics (calibration, HE bias, correction of selection effect..)

19 The Y SZ - Y X relation No (obvious) evolution (as expected) To be confirmed using purely SZ selected local reference full study of selection effect Arnaud, Democles, +, in prep. Pike+14

20 The DM profiles Universal profiles with concentration (z-m) A key prediction of LCDM structure formation scenario Good agreement in local Universe what about evolution?

21 Pilot study of mass Chandra LP (PI P.Mazzotta) XMM LP (PI MA) [to be completed ] The 5 most massive SZ z>0.9

22 Pilot study of mass 80 ksec 120 ksec SPT CL =15 McDonald+13 3D-PSF corrected Making use of XMM higher sensitivity 23/01/2015 Monique ARNAUD

23 Pilot study of mass MA, Bartalucci+ in prep. Suggest less concentrated than average local cluster Higher dispersion? consistent with theory? Need larger sample and new numerical simulations (on going)

24 Summary Finding Clusters Complementarity in z, M coverage between X-ray & SZ surveys Chandra and XMM allow essential large follow-ups Wavelength dependence of selection function and scatter less CC in SZ selected clusters L-M difference Probing Cluster formation and evolution Pressure content Complementarity and consistency between X-ray and SZ information Pressure profiles from core to outskirt; constrain outskirt physics Tight and non evolving YSZ-YX constrains on clumpiness and YSZ good mass proxy Mass distribution SZ surveys + XMM sensitivity made possible the study of DM Some evidence for evolution from pilot study; need larger samples.