1: %---+----1----+----2----+----3----+----4----+----5----+----6----+----7----+----8
2: % \documentstyle[12pt,apjpt4]{article}
3: % \documentstyle[12pt,aaspp4]{article}
4: % \documentstyle[12pt,aasms4]{article}
5: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
6: \usepackage{emulateapj5}
7: \def\gtrsim{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$>$}}}}
8: \let\ga=\gtrsim
9: \def\lesssim{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$<$}}}}
10: \let\la=\lesssim
11: \begin{document}
12:
13: \title{
14: The Merger in Abell 576: A Line of Sight Bullet Cluster?
15: }
16:
17: \author{
18: Renato A. Dupke, Nestor Mirabal, Joel N. Bregman \& August E. Evrard
19: }
20:
21: \affil{
22: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1090
23: }
24:
25: %===============================================================================
26: \begin{abstract}
27:
28: Using a combination of {\sl Chandra} and {\sl XMM} observations, we confirmed the presence of a significant velocity gradient
29: along the NE/E--W/SW direction in the intracluster gas of the cluster Abell 576. The results are consistent
30: with a previous {\sl ASCA} SIS analysis of this cluster.
31: The error weighted average over ACIS-S3, EPIC MOS 1 \& 2 spectrometers for the maximum velocity
32: difference is $>$3.3$\times$10$^3$ km~s$^{-1}$ at the 90\% confidence level,
33: similar to the velocity limits estimated indirectly for the ``bullet'' cluster (1E0657-56).
34: The probability that the velocity gradient is generated by standard
35: random gain fluctuations with {\sl Chandra} and {\sl XMM}
36: is $<$0.1\%. The regions of maximum velocity gradient are in CCD zones that have the lowest temporal
37: gain variations. It is unlikely that the velocity gradient is due to Hubble distance
38: differences between projected clusters (probability$\la$0.01\%).
39: We mapped the distribution of elemental abundance ratios
40: across the cluster and detected a strong chemical discontinuity using the abundance ratio
41: of silicon to iron, equivalent to a variation from 100\% SN Ia iron mass fraction
42: in the West--Northwest regions to 32\% in the Eastern region. The ``center'' of the
43: cluster is located at
44: the chemical discontinuity boundary, which is inconsistent with the
45: radially symmetric chemical gradient
46: found in some regular clusters, but consistent with a cluster merging scenario.
47: We predict that the velocity gradient as measured will produce a variation of the CMB temperature towards
48: the East of the core of the cluster that will be detectable by current and near-future bolometers.
49: The measured velocity gradient opens for the possibility that this cluster is passing through
50: a near line-of-sight merger stage where the cores have recently crossed.
51:
52:
53: \end{abstract}
54:
55: \keywords{
56: galaxies: clusters: individual (Abell 576, 1E0657-56) --- intergalactic medium --- cooling flows ---
57: X-rays: galaxies ---
58: }
59: %===============================================================================
60: \section{
61: Introduction
62: }
63: The characterization of the internal dynamics of the intracluster medium is very important for determining
64: the evolutionary stage of galaxy clusters (Beers et al. 1982), to study cluster formation and
65: to assess the systematics of using clusters of galaxies as cosmological tools.
66: The presence of surface brightness features detected by the {\sl Chandra} satellite such as
67: cold fronts, shock fronts and X-ray cavities shows that the intracluster gas (ICM)
68: is often dynamically
69: active. Furthermore, departure from assumptions such as hydrostatic equilibrium has
70: been justified theoretically
71: (e.g. Kay et al. 2004; Rasia, Tormen \& Moscardini 2004, 2006; Pawl, Evrard \& Dupke 2005),
72: but detection of bulk gas velocities became possible only with the launch of the {\sl ASCA} satellite and more
73: recently with the spectrometers on-board {\sl Chandra} and {\sl XMM-NEWTON}.
74:
75: The key ingredient to quantify the level of activity is the determination of gas
76: bulk (or turbulent) velocities. In order to assess the gas dynamics we would ideally like
77: to have a ``direct'' measurement of intracluster gas
78: velocities. Since the intracluster medium is enriched with heavy elements, this can be done,
79: for example, by measuring the Doppler shift of the spectral lines in X-ray frequencies
80: (Dupke \& Bregman 2001a,b)
81: or by measuring changes in line broadening due to turbulence
82: (Inogamov \& Sunyaev 2003; Sunyaev, Norman \& Bryan 2003;
83: Pawl et al. 2005). The former can currently be done only if there are enough photon counts
84: within the spectral lines, if the instrumental gain is stable and well known and if
85: the instrument has good spectral
86: resolution. Doppler shift analysis of clusters started with the {\sl ASCA} satellite, which set
87: constraints on bulk velocity
88: gradients in 14 nearby clusters (Dupke \& Bregman 2001a,b, 2005). However, {\sl ASCA}
89: relatively high gain temporal variation limited velocity constraints to $\ge$2000 km/s, so that it is
90: crucial to corroborate and improve previous measurements of velocity gradients found
91: in the {\sl ASCA} sample with other instruments if we wish to investigate intracluster gas dynamics.
92:
93: The higher stability and better spectral resolution of ACIS-S3 and MOS 1 \& 2 on-board {\sl Chandra}
94: and {\sl XMM-Newton} satellites provide, currently, a unique opportunity to improve the constraints on ICM velocity
95: gradients, allowing a factor of $\ga$ 2 improvement in the uncertainties of velocity measurements.
96: The two clusters found to have the most significant velocity gradients with {\sl ASCA} were
97: the Centaurus cluster (Abell 3526) and Abell 576. Velocity gradients have been confirmed in the Centaurus
98: cluster in two off-center {\sl Chandra} pointings (Dupke \& Bregman 2006, hereafter DB06; however, see Ota et al. 2007)
99: and here we show a combined
100: velocity analysis of {\sl Chandra} and {\sl XMM-Newton} pointings of Abell 576.
101:
102: Abell 576 is a richness class 1 cluster with relatively low (T$\sim$4 keV) central
103: gas temperatures and average metal
104: abundances (e.g. Rothenflug et al. 1984; David et al. 1993; Mohr et al. 1996). It has an optical redshift of 0.0389. ASCA velocity analysis of this cluster found a
105: significant velocity gradient ($>$4000 km/s, Dupke \& Bregman 2005 (hereafter DB05)).
106: Evidence for dynamic activity in this
107: cluster has been put forward in previous analyses. Rines et al. (2000) determined the mass profile of
108: A576 using the infall pattern in velocity
109: space for more than 1000 galaxies in a radius of 4 h$^{-1}$ Mpc from the cluster's center. They found that
110: the mass of the central Mpc was more than twice of that found from X-ray measurements, suggesting that
111: nonthermal pressure support may be biasing the X-ray derived mass.
112: Additional evidence for strong departures from hydrostatic equilibrium comes
113: from energy excess of the X-ray emitting gas with respect to the galaxies (Benatov et al. 2006).
114: These characteristics can be partially explained by non-thermal pressure
115: support and significant departures from spherical symmetry due to a line of sight merger.
116: Mohr et al. (1996), using
117: galaxy photometric data, found a high velocity tail separated by $\sim$3000 km/s from the cluster's mean.
118:
119: Kempner \& David (2004), hereafter KD04,
120: analyzed a Chandra observation of the core of this cluster and found brightness edges corresponding
121: to mild jumps in gas density and pressure roughly in the N-S direction. The X-ray image
122: of the cluster also shows an ``arm'' extending
123: to the SW and mild evidence of wakes (``fingers'') in the N-NW direction (Figure 1a).
124: The authors suggested
125: that the core substructures are caused by a current merger with
126: core velocities of $\sim$ 750 km~s$^{-1}$, to maintain the gas confined across the surface brightness
127: edge towards the N. In their scenario the merging cluster came in from
128: the direction of the ``fingers'' (N-NW), has passed the core of the main cluster, created the SW and W edges
129: and is now near the second core passage. In this paper, we perform a velocity analysis
130: of Abell 576 using the full field of view covered by
131: {\sl Chandra}'s ACIS-S3 and combine it with two
132: {\sl XMM}'s EPIC MOS 1 \& 2 from two observations, specifically tailored to minimize random
133: gain variations across the CCDs. We also present an analysis of the distributions
134: of intracluster gas temperature,
135: velocity and individual elemental abundances and use them to determine the evolutionary stage of this cluster.
136: All distances shown in this work
137: are calculated assuming a H$_0=70$ km~s$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-1}$ and
138: $\Omega_0=1$ unless stated otherwise.
139:
140: %[Figure 1a-imagescontour, 1b-imageregions]
141: %===============================================================================
142: \section{Data Reduction and Analysis}
143: \subsection{Chandra}
144:
145: Abell 576 was observed for 39 ksec on Oct 2002 centered on ACIS-S3. Nearly a fourth of the observation was affected by
146: flares and we here show the analysis of the unaffected initial 29 ksec of observation. We used CIAO 3.2.1 with
147: CALDB 3.1.0 to screen the data.
148: The data were cleaned using standard procedure\footnote{http://cxc.harvard.edu/ciao/guides/acis\_data.html}.
149: Grades 0,2,3,4,6 were used. ACIS particle background was cleaned as prescribed for VFAINT mode.
150: A gain map correction was applied together with PHA and pixel randomization. Point
151: sources were extracted and the background used
152: in spectral fits was generated from blank-sky observations using
153: the {\tt acis\_bkgrnd\_lookup} script.
154:
155: In order to obtain a overall distribution of the spectral parameters we developed an
156: ``adaptive smoothing'' code that selects regions for spectral extraction based on a pre-determined
157: minimum number of counts, which
158: for the cases shown here was 5000 cnt/cell. The overlap of extraction regions is therefore stronger in
159: the low surface brightness regions, away from the cluster's core. We also excluded the CCD
160: borders by $\sim$ 1$^\prime$ to avoid ``border effects'', characteristic of these type of
161: codes.
162: The responses were created for each individual region with the
163: CIAO tools {\it makeacisrmf} and {\it mkwarf}.
164: Spectra and background spectra were generated and fitted with XSPEC V11.3.1 (Arnaud 1996) with an absorbed
165: {\tt VAPEC} thermal emission models.
166: Metal abundances are measured relative to the solar photospheric values of
167: Anders \& Grevesse (1989).
168: Galactic photoelectric absorption was incorporated using the WABS
169: model (Morrison \& McCammon 1983). Redshifts were determined through spectral fittings using
170: a broad energy range.
171: In the spectral fits we fixed the Hydrogen column density N$_H$ at its corresponding Galactic value
172: of 5.7$\times$10$^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$.
173: Spectral channels were grouped to have at least 20 counts/channel. Energy
174: ranges were restricted to 0.5--9.0 keV. The spectral fitting parameter errors listed here
175: are 1-$\sigma$ unless stated otherwise. For all spectral fittings used here we applied the recursive process
176: to find the best-fit redshift with
177: "true" $\chi^{2}$ minimum as described in DB05.
178:
179: \subsection{{\sl XMM}}
180: Abell 576 was observed with {\sl XMM--Newton} on 2004 March 23 for $\sim$ 22 ksec. A second observation
181: was obtained a few days later on 2004 March 27 for a total of $\sim$ 20 ksec. The observations were
182: planned in such a way as to overlap the cluster's core, while providing
183: sufficient coverage on the northeast and southwest of
184: the cluster, which were the regions expected to have the strongest velocity gradient from a previous
185: {\sl ASCA} observation (DB05) (Figure 1b). This observational strategy was designed to minimize the impact
186: that spatial variations of the gain (conversion between pulse height and energy of an incoming
187: photon) has on redshift measurements.
188:
189: Initial inspection of the EPIC MOS and PN data
190: revealed a number of strong background flares.
191: In order to exclude these periods of high
192: background, good time intervals were produced from events where the threshold did not
193: deviate more than 3 $\sigma$ from the extrapolated mean count rate in the 10--15 keV band. In addition,
194: only events satisfying grade patterns $\leq$12 have been used.
195: The effective exposure times after removal of background flares
196: correspond to $\sim$ 12 ksec (55\% of the total) for the first pointing, and $\sim$ 16 ksec (80\% of the total)
197: for the second. Using these cleaned event lists,
198: background spectra were produced from several source-free regions on the detector away from the source.
199: Blank-sky backgrounds were also used for comparison with no significant changes in the resulting best-fit
200: parameters.
201: The data presented here were processed
202: with {\em XMM-Newton} Science Analysis System SAS 6.0.0. Response files for each region
203: have been generated using the SAS tasks {\it rmfgen} and {\it arfgen}. Bright point sources were
204: extracted and the spectral fitting routine was identical to that used
205: with the {\sl Chandra} data described in the previous section. Only MOSs 1 \& 2 were used
206: because of the high number of interchip boundaries within our regions of
207: interest in the PNs, which would affect significantly the estimation of gain fluctuations. Furthermore,
208: the loss of data due to flares was especially
209: strong for the PNs. Despite the relatively small number of counts the {\sl XMM} observation helped
210: to constrain the spectral parameters derived from {\sl Chandra}.
211:
212:
213: \section{
214: Projected Temperature and Velocity Contour Maps
215: }
216: The resulting temperature and velocity distributions from the adaptive smoothing routine applied to the
217: {\sl Chandra} data are shown in Figures 2a,b. The colors are chosen in a way as to show
218: the average 1-$\sigma$ variations.
219: %[Figure 2a- Tmap, 2b- Velocity map, 2c- Significance map]
220:
221: The temperature map shows that the cluster's core regions is relatively cold ($\sim$ 3.5 keV)
222: and has an overall asymmetric distribution.
223: The coldest region ($\sim$3.0 keV) is not found in the core but at the NE region.
224: Interestingly, it can also be seen that the highest gas temperature is found 2$^\prime$--3$^\prime$
225: towards the NW
226: direction and reaches
227: $\approx$5 keV. This was not noted in KD04, due to their choice of orientation
228: for selection of the extraction regions.
229: Overall, the temperature distribution follows roughly a configuration where a cold core is surrounded by a
230: hotter elliptical ring elongated along the NW-SE direction (shown by the dashed lines in Figure 2a).
231: There are also marginal indications that the temperature
232: decreases again at regions $>$3$^\prime$ to the E and S directions.
233:
234: The velocity map (Figure 2b) is not smooth and shows higher velocities
235: in the Southern regions, and a clear zone of lower
236: redshifts to the NE that extends to the central region.
237: Even though the highest redshift zone is apparently in the SE corner,
238: analysis of the error map in Figure 2c shows that region has very high
239: uncertainties.
240: To find the regions of maximum significance of velocity measurements, in each cell we divided the
241: difference of the best fit redshift from the average over the CCD (denoted by $<>$) by the error
242: of the measured redshift $\delta$z.
243: i.e., $\frac{z-<z>}{\delta z}$ (see DB05 \& DB06 for details).
244: We denote this error-weighted-deviation simply as deviation significance and plot its
245: color contours in Figure 2c. In
246: Figure 2c the black and white represent negative and positive velocities, respectively, with respect to the
247: CCD average velocity.
248: The magnitude of the deviation significance shows how significant the velocity structure is.
249: We can see that the region of maximum negative significance is located slightly to the E of the cluster center.
250: There is also a region of marginally higher positive significance ($\sim$3$\sigma$) to the SW, in good agreement with
251: previous observations with {\sl ASCA}. Based on these two deviation significance peaks we selected two regions
252: for a more detailed study, shown in
253: Figure 1b as black rectangles; a high (redshifted) and low (blueshifted) redshift regions, hereafter called
254: {\b SOUTH} and {\b EAST}, respectively. Although the cluster core seems to be included in the
255: blueshifted zone in both
256: {\sl Chandra}, {\sl XMM} (and was also in {\sl ASCA} SISs) we, conservatively, avoid including it in our velocity analysis due to
257: modeling uncertainties (see DB05 for a more extended discussion on the effects of multiple models
258: in the best-fit redshift with the technique used here). Below we explore in more detail the
259: spectral analysis of these regions.
260:
261: \section{
262: Chandra and XMM Velocity Analysis of Selected Regions
263: }
264:
265: The best-fit gas temperatures, iron abundances and velocities for the two regions with highest deviations from the average
266: redshift are
267: plotted in Figure 3a and listed in Table 1. The spectra corresponding two these two regions are shown in
268: Figures 3b,c,d for different spectrometers.
269: Individual spectral fits of these regions show very similar gas temperatures, with an error weighted average
270: of 3.87$\pm 0.11$ keV for {\b SOUTH} and 4.00$\pm 0.11$ keV for {\b EAST}, and also similar iron
271: abundances, with an error weighted average
272: of 0.54$\pm 0.06$ solar for {\b SOUTH} and 0.52$\pm 0.05$ solar for {\b EAST}).
273:
274: However, they show very discrepant radial velocities. With {\sl Chandra},
275: {\b SOUTH} shows a best-fit redshift of (3.71$^{+0.24}_{-0.60}$),$\times$ 10$^{-2}$ consistent with the overall redshift
276: determined optically (0.039$\pm$0.0003, Mohr et al. 1996\footnote{including all galaxy sub-populations
277: discussed in Mohr et al. 1996}). The {\b EAST} region shows a much lower best-fit redshift of
278: $\la$0.016 (the lower limits are not well constrained and are consistent with 0), implying a
279: velocity difference of $>$ 3900 km~s$^{-1}$ at the 90\% confidence level. The velocity difference is consistent
280: and better constrained than those obtained for similar regions with the {\sl ASCA} spectrometers.
281:
282: %[Figure 3 - T, Fe, z plots]
283:
284: {\sl XMM} MOSs analysis of the same regions show similar
285: velocity gradient. With MOS 2 the upper limit of the redshift values is not well constrained
286: (there is a secondary $\chi^2$ minimum for the best-fit redshift at $\sim 0.035$). Since the overall results are
287: very consistent between the two MOSs, we fitted MOS 1 \& 2 spectra simultaneously to improve statistics.
288: The results of the simultaneous fittings
289: are also displayed in Table 1. The best fit redshift difference between these two regions is found to
290: be $>$ 4000 km~s$^{-1}$ at the 90\% confidence level.
291:
292: We can assess the statistical uncertainties of the velocity differences between
293: these two region using the F-test, i.e.,
294: fitting the spectra of the two regions simultaneously with the redshifts locked together and comparing the
295: resulting $\chi^2$ to that of simultaneous fittings where the redshifts are allowed to vary independently.
296: The F-test indicates that the velocity differences in these two regions is significant at
297: the 99.8\%, 97.6\% confidence level for {\sl Chandra} ACIS-S3, and MOS 1 \& 2, respectively.
298: The error-weighted average velocity difference from all three
299: detectors is (5.9$\pm$1.6)$\times$10$^3$km~s$^{-1}$ (the errors are 1-$\sigma$).
300:
301: \subsection{
302: Inclusion of Gain
303: }
304:
305: The significance of the velocity gradient described above only includes statistical uncertainties. The major source of
306: uncertainty in velocity measurements with current spectrometers is the temporal and spatial
307: variations of the instrumental gain.
308: As in DB06, we can estimate the effects of residual gain fluctuations through Monte Carlo simulations.
309: Given the relatively early date of the observations,
310: we used the study of the gain variations
311: in the first 20 rows of {\sl Chandra} ACIS-S3 by Grant (2001) and assume that they also represent
312: the expected variation for the MOSs as well. For a discussion on the gain stability
313: in the {\sl XMM} detectors see Andersson \& Madejski (2004).
314:
315: In order to assess the impact that random gain fluctuations would have on our results we simulated 500 spectra for
316: {\sl Chandra}, MOS 1 and MOS 2 using the XSPEC tool FAKEIT. The simulated spectra had the same input values as those
317: obtained through spectral fittings of the real data in regions {\b SOUTH} and {\b EAST}
318: for N$_{H}$, temperature, oxygen, neon, magnesium, silicon, sulfur, argon, calcium, iron, nickel, normalization
319: and were set at
320: some intermediary redshift (z=0.029). The background and responses corresponded to that of the real data. Poisson
321: errors were included. The simulated spectra was then used to estimate the probability
322: that a velocity difference similar or greater than
323: that observed in the real data in ACIS-S3, MOS 1 and MOS 2 could be generated by chance and how this
324: probability depended on the
325: magnitude of gain fluctuations. The results are shown in Figure 4a, where we plot the probability that c(z$_{\b SOUTH}$ --
326: z$_{\b EAST}$) $>$ $\Delta$V as a function of the 1-$\sigma$ variation of the gain assumed
327: 300 km~s$^{-1}$ for individual velocity measurements, (Grant 2001)\footnote {There is evidence that both spatial and temporal
328: variations can be larger at later times (DB06).}. We can see from Figure 4a
329: that the significance of the velocity gradient is $>$99\% assuming a 3-$\sigma$ gain variation.
330:
331: %[Figure 4a - monte carlo]
332:
333: \subsection{
334: Temporal and Spatial Gain Stability
335: }
336:
337: The two {\sl XMM} pointings from which the extraction regions were analyzed were taken with a separation of four days.
338: We checked for possible anomalous gain variations that might have occurred between the two off-center
339: observations by using
340: a large elliptical region surrounding the cluster's center discussed in section 6.2 (seen in Figure 2a as
341: the outer dashed lines). We fitted an absorbed APEC model and checked for redshift differences between different epochs in
342: MOS 1 \& 2 data individually. The best fit redshifts in the two epochs for MOS 1 are (3.98$\pm$0.39)
343: $\times$ 10$^{-2}$ and (3.61$\pm$0.26) $\times$ 10$^{-2}$. For MOS 2 the corresponding values are (3.56$\pm$0.39)
344: $\times$ 10$^{-2}$ and (3.66$\pm$0.13) $\times$ 10$^{-2}$. There were no significant changes in best-fit global
345: redshift between the two observations and also between different detectors.
346:
347:
348: Given the random variation of instrumental gain with position and time in the CCDs, it is useful to check whether
349: some particular CCD region has been more affected than others. Similarly to DB06,
350: we split the cleaned final ACIS-S3
351: event file into 3 different epochs (with $\sim$9.7 ksec each) and performed the
352: same velocity mapping as that described previously, i.e., through
353: an adaptive smoothing routine that keeps a fixed minimum number of counts
354: per region (5000 counts) maintaining the range of fitting errors more or less
355: constant for different regions.
356: We then determined the standard deviation of the best fit velocities for the same region over
357: different time periods. We plot the results in Figure 4b, where regions of high scatter are brighter.
358: The color steps in Figure 4b represent the average 1$\sigma$ fitting
359: errors of the individual regions used to construct the velocity map. From Figure 2d, we can see that the
360: regions of significant low and high velocities are located in the zones with minimum redshift scatter ($\sigma_{z}\sim$0.004).
361: This suggests that the velocity gradient is not dominated by local temporal variations of the gain.
362: That was the only instrument with enough counts to perform this analysis, given the loss of photons
363: to flares with the {\sl XMM} data.
364:
365: %[Figure 4b - time cuts]
366:
367:
368: \section{Individual Lines and Abundance Ratios
369: }
370:
371: Elemental abundance ratios can be used to determine the enrichment history of the intracluster gas
372: (e.g. Mushotzky et al. 1996; Loewenstein \& Mushotzky 1996) and can,
373: potentially, be used to characterize the ICM and to trace the
374: origin of the undisturbed gas during merging (e.g. Dupke \& White 2003). This is because the internal variation
375: of these ratios is not random, but show typically a central dominance of SN Ia ejecta
376: (Dupke \& White 2000a,b; Finoguenov et al. 2000; Allen et al. 2001) \footnote {
377: Here we use the term SN Type dominance to denote SN Type Fe mass fraction, not to be confused with the actual number of
378: SNe.}.
379: Dupke \& White (2003) have used the
380: ``lack'' of a chemical discontinuity in some cold fronts to point out that
381: the scenario that cold fronts are
382: caused by the unmixed remnant core of an accreted subsystem (Markevitch et al. 2002) is not the unique
383: way to make cold fronts.
384: Here we use abundance ratios to test the merging
385: scenario, i.e.,
386: looking for a discontinuity that separates two different media with different enrichment histories.
387:
388: Given the low temperatures and poor photon statistics for both {\sl Chandra} and {\sl XMM} observations the
389: abundances of silicon and iron are the best defined and isolated lines in the X-ray spectra
390: in our usable frequency range.
391: The Si/Fe ratio spans a relatively wide
392: range of values between SN Ia and II yields, even when taking into account the theoretical yield uncertainties
393: of different SN models (Gibson et al. 1997; Dupke \& White 2001a,b). Using the same adaptive smoothing routine as described
394: above we mapped the Si/Fe ratio throughout the cluster region with ACIS-S3. The results are shown in Figure 5a. The
395: cluster's core sits on a clear separation between two media, highly discrepant in SN Type dominance. The Fe mass fraction
396: towards the
397: W and NW is strongly dominated by SN Ia ejecta while the E side is SN II ejecta dominated. The transition
398: from SN Ia to II dominance is nearly centered along the arrow shaped brightness edge.
399:
400: Based on the Si/Fe {\sl Chandra} map we selected three characteristic regions for a direct comparison of the
401: chemical enrichment gradient measured with {\sl Chandra} \& {\sl XMM}. These regions are circular and are denoted by
402: CW (circle west),
403: C0 (circle center), CE (circle east) in Figure 1b. Individual silicon and iron abundances are shown in Table 2 and
404: their ratios
405: derived from different instruments are plotted in Figure 5b. In Figure 5b we also show the theoretical limits for
406: 100\% SN II Fe mass fraction (top horizontal line) and 100\% SN Ia Fe mass fraction
407: for four theoretical supernova explosion models that differ in their explosion
408: characteristics (Nomoto et al. 1997a, b). The error weighted average of the SN Ia Fe mass
409: fraction contribution for CW is found to be 100$^{+0.00}_{-0.09}$\% as opposed to 33$\pm$22\% found for the CE region.
410:
411:
412: %[Figure 5a - Si/Fe chandra map 5b - Si/Fe regions]
413:
414:
415:
416: \section{
417: Discussion
418: }
419:
420: In this work we re-analyzed the {\sl Chandra} observation of Abell 576 and determined the spatial distribution
421: of temperatures, individual elemental abundances and radial velocities of the ICM, using the full field of view
422: of the ACIS-S3 and also two new {\sl XMM} observations covering similar spatial scales. This allowed us to compare the
423: results obtained with different instruments having different systematic uncertainties.
424: The velocity distribution near the core of the cluster shows a strong velocity gradient, in very good agreement
425: both in magnitude and direction with the velocity gradient found with both SISs onboard
426: {\sl ASCA}. The error weighted average (over ACIS-S3, MOS 1 \& MOS 2) maximum velocity
427: difference is found to be (5.9$\pm$1.6)$\times$10$^3$km~s$^{-1}$.
428: The combined set of observations makes the significance of velocity detection $>$99.9\% confidence,
429: when standard (1$\sigma$) gain fluctuations are taken into account.
430:
431: We also found a strong chemical gradient in the intracluster gas of this cluster. The distribution of iron
432: and silicon abundances is asymmetric in such a
433: way as to produce a clear separation of the Si/Fe ratio at the cluster's center. If converted to SN Type enrichment,
434: the results indicate that nearly 67\% of the Fe mass has been produced by SN II towards the E and that the Fe mass
435: content in the ICM towards the
436: W and NW direction has been fully produced by SN Ia ($<$ 9\% produced by SN II).
437: This chemical gradient is very asymmetric, not consistent with the radial chemical gradients found
438: in some other clusters (e.g. Dupke 1998; Dupke \& White 2000a,b 2003; Finoguenov et al. 2000; Allen et al. 2001; De Grandi et al. 2004
439: Baumgartner et al. 2005). The general characteristics of this cluster are consistent with a
440: merging origin as proposed by KD04. However, the velocity gradient in A576 suggests a larger line-of-sight component for the
441: merger axis.
442:
443: The distribution of galaxy velocities in the field of A576 do not show any clear
444: spatial segregation (Rines et al. 2000). However, the distribution of galaxies
445: (from the NED database\footnote{nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/}) with redshift within r$_{200}$
446: shows at least two large concentrations between 0.03$<$z$<$0.07 (Figure 6a).
447: The first one is centered at z$\sim$ 0.0387, which is the characteristic cluster redshift.
448: Since the velocity gradient found with {\sl Chandra} \& {\sl XMM} is very high we consider
449: also the second galaxy clump at z$\sim$0.065. We separate three galaxy groups based on redshift: a
450: low z group (0.03$<$z$<$0.0387), a high z group (0.0387$<$z$<$0.05) and a very high z group
451: (0.057$<$z$<$0.07).
452: We plot the galaxies for these three groups in Figures 6b,c. It can be seen from Figure 6b that the
453: distribution of the 97 low z galaxies (blue) seem more isotropic than
454: that of the 76 high z galaxies (red) , which seems to be more concentrated towards the SW of the cluster. The
455: distribution of the 24 very high z galaxies (magenta) is displaced even more to the SW. Figure 6c shows a
456: blow-up of Figure 6b with the velocity centroids of the three redshift groups (shown by ``X''s with the corresponding
457: group colors). The velocity centroids are 2$^\prime$.4 (2$^\prime$.2) away form the X-ray center for the
458: low (high) z group. The X-ray center is also $\ga$1$^\prime$.3 from the line connecting the centroids of the
459: two groups, This difference is significantly out of the error ellipsoid for the velocity centroid (assuming
460: 6$\times$10$^{-5}$ and 2$^{\prime\prime}$.5 errors for redshift \& position, respectively (NED)).
461:
462: It is very difficult to make a direct comparison between the velocity measurements obtained from galaxy
463: velocities and X-ray measurements given the difference of spatial scales. In general, the optical results are
464: not inconsistent with the X-ray measurements. However, the absolute values
465: between the redshifts of the galaxy concentrations and those obtained from X-ray spectroscopy are
466: discrepant and the results can only be compatible if there is an overall gain correction upwards. We
467: do not have an external source to calibrate global gain corrections but it is unlikely that the same correction
468: would affect all three different instruments in different epochs. On the other hand, the methodology used here is sensitive
469: to gain dependence on
470: frequency (e.g., Dupke \& Bregman 2001b) and this is likely the reason for this discrepancy given the low temperatures
471: of teh cluster (the redshift fitting process is weighted by the FeL complex). Even though the {\it absolute}
472: redshift values may be inaccurate, the redshift {\it differences} should not be affected, since the same
473: methodology was applied to all regions/and observations.
474: So, we will assume that a correction of $\delta$z$\sim$0.015--0.02 should be applied to all measured redshifts
475: when comparing the data in X-ray and optical frequencies.
476:
477: The orientation of the low--high velocity regions is
478: very similar to that found in X-ray velocity measurements (NE--SW). We also show the centroid of
479: the joint high \& very high z group in yellow.
480: The centroid of this group coincides with the most significant high velocity region (Figure 2d).
481: The above mentioned results using galaxy velocities can also be interpreted as due to an unusual amount
482: of interlopers (e.g. Wojtak \& Loas 2007) and in this section we discuss two scenarios that can explain
483: the observations, i.e., projection of a background cluster and post-core crossing line of sight merging.
484:
485: %[Figure 6a - galaxy velocity histogram 6b - configuration of galaxies w/ different z 6c- zoom in the center of 6b]
486:
487:
488: \subsection{
489: Projection Scenario
490: }
491:
492:
493: The results presented above can be at least partially interpreted as resulting from a scenario where
494: A576 is, in reality,
495: two clusters closely aligned in the line of sight. The two clusters could be gravitationally unbound
496: or in a pre-merger stage, in which case
497: the velocity gradient would be mostly attributed
498: to the clusters' Hubble distances.
499: In this scenario the cores of both clusters would have to be near aligned in order to escape easy
500: identification of a secondary
501: peak in surface brightness.
502:
503: Optical studies of A576 show several peculiarities that can be interpreted either as consequences
504: of a cluster-cluster merging or as due to projection effects. Rines et al. (2000 - hereafter R00) used the kinematics
505: of the infall region (Diaferio and Geller 1997) of
506: Abell 576 to calculate the mass distribution out to several Mpc. Their method does not need the
507: equilibrium assumptions typically used in X-ray mass estimations and relies on the fact that
508: the velocity field around clusters is determined by the local dynamics of the dark matter halo.
509: The amplitude of the characteristic ``trumpet shaped'' caustics in their velocity $\times$ radius plot
510: is related to the escape velocity around halos.
511: From their analysis one can infer that this cluster is passing through a major disturbance for several reasons,
512: among them, (1) a ``finger''
513: in phase space with high velocities for radii $<$ 2.9 $h_{70}^{-1}$ Mpc (Figure 4 of R00; see also Rines et al. 2003 and
514: Rines \& Diaferio 2006),
515: (2) an apparent deficit of galaxies in the NW of the cluster (Figure 6 of R00),
516: (3) a similar geometrical configuration of high-velocity ``background'' system
517: (centered nearly 8200 km~s$^{-1}$ over the cluster's redshift)
518: to the geometrical configuration of the cluster (Figures 14 \& 6 of R00), (4) an inferred total mass 2.5 times higher than that
519: found from X-ray analysis in the same spatial scale
520: (see also Mohr et al. 1996).
521:
522: In order to estimate the likelihood that the velocity gradient is due to projection effects we
523: looked at the distribution of galaxy clusters
524: from cosmological N-body Hubble volume simulations. For that we use the positions of clusters in
525: a 3 Gpc cube at z$\approx$0 selected in the data generated in Evrard et al. (2002). The virtual
526: clusters were generated in a flat $\Lambda$CDM model, with $\Omega_m$ and $\Omega_\Lambda$ of 0.3 and 0.7, respectively
527: and $\sigma_8$=0.9.
528: Clusters were found using an algorithm that identifies halos as spheres, centered on
529: local density maxima, with radii defined by a mean interior isodensity condition
530: (see Appendix A of Evrard et al. 2002 for details).
531:
532: We searched within 500000 mock clusters those that had a projected core separation within 180 h$_{70}^{-1}$ kpc,
533: corresponding to 3.5$^\prime$ at a redshift $\sim$0.04. To
534: be conservative we searched for a radial distance separation within 2$\sigma$ above and below the
535: average redshift difference value of (5.9$\pm$1.6)$\times$10$^3$~km~s$^{-1}$. The results showed 265 systems that satisfied
536: this criteria indicating a probability of 5$\times$10$^{-4}$ to
537: find such systems in the nearby universe.
538:
539: \subsection{
540: Merging Scenario
541: }
542:
543: Local mergers are, however, much more frequent. The same above mentioned Monte Carlo strategy
544: applied to angular scales equivalent to the virial radius of a
545: 4 keV cluster, i.e., r$_{200} \sim 0.85 \sqrt{kT_{keV}}~h_{70}^{-1}$ Mpc~=~1.7 $h_{70}^{-1}$ Mpc,
546: finds 3.9$\times$10$^4$ in 5$\times$10$^5$ clusters, i.e., a probability of 0.078. This
547: estimate includes pairs of all relative velocities, but a recent analysis of
548: subhalo--host halo velocity differences found for ``bullet clusters'' type
549: (1E 0657-56 -- Markevitch et al. 2002) halos in the Millennium Simulation (Hayashi \& White 2006)
550: indicates that large velocity differences are not uncommon. They find that 40\% of all host halos
551: would have 1 out of the 10 most massive sub-halos
552: with a velocity as high as that of the ``bullet cluster''. From these studies, we roughly estimate
553: that the likelihood of an ongoing merger with sufficiently high relative velocity is at
554: the percent level, and thus a few examples in the local population of observed massive
555: clusters should be expected.
556:
557: The distribution of gas temperature, iron abundance, abundance ratios suggest that the merging axis
558: component on
559: the plane of the sky would follow a NW-SE direction.
560: The best configuration that explains the magnitude of the velocity gradient is a scenario similar to that
561: of the ``bullet'' cluster (1E0657-56), i.e., a violent merger of two colder clusters and a (initial) merger
562: axis making $\sim$ 80$^{\circ}$ with
563: the plane of the sky and a small ($\sim$ 10$^{\circ}$, see below) deviation with respect to the N--S
564: direction\footnote{The closest configuration
565: with the ``bullet'' cluster would be a $\sim 180^{\circ}$ flip over the Y axis of Fig. 2 from Markevitch et al. (2002)
566: where the observer is viewing from the left}.
567:
568:
569: A major prediction of the merging scenario is the presence of a hot ($>$10 keV if we scale from
570: 1E0657-56) component correspondent to the bow shock layer on the line of sight.
571: In order to test the consistency of this prediction with the current data we extracted spectra from a large elliptical
572: region surrounding the cluster's center covering the outer ``temperature ring'' seen in Figure 2a as dashed lines (but
573: also including the center). We compared two spectral models fitting simultaneously
574: five data sets, {\sl XMM} MOS 1 \& 2 data from the two pointings and
575: ACIS-S3 data. The first one (model 1) was a single temperature {\tt WABS APEC}. The second (model 2) was a
576: a double temperature {\tt WABS (APEC + APEC)} corresponding to the cold and hot components. The cold component temperature
577: was fixed at 3.5 keV, the lowest temperature observed throughout the temperature map.
578: The normalization of the hot component was fixed at a fraction, f$_{norm}$
579: of that of the cold component. The number of degrees of freedom in the two models is the same given the constrains imposed to the
580: double temperature component. We varied f$_{norm}$ from 1\% to 99\% and recorded the best-fit parameters. The results
581: are shown in Figure 7a, where we plot the $\chi^2$ distribution as a function of f$_{norm}$. It can be seen that the lowest $\chi^2$
582: is achieved at $\sim$25\% with a corresponding high temperature of 11.8 keV $<$ T $<$ 21 keV at the 1$\sigma$ level.
583: From Figure 7a we can see that model 2 spectral fittings with f$_{norm}\ga$~12\%
584: is better than those using a single temperature component (model 1), which has a
585: $\chi^2$ of 1407 and is shown in Figure 7a as a straight line with a best fit temperature of 4.1 keV.
586:
587: For comparison, we estimated the fractional contribution
588: of the hot component using a recently archived 100 ksec Chandra exposure of
589: 1E0657-56 (Observation ID 5356). In Figure 7b we show the raw X-ray image and the rectangular region used to
590: extract a surface brightness profile along the main direction of motion of the ``bullet''
591: to estimate the relative emission measure. The size of the rectangular region
592: ($\sim$25$^{\prime\prime}$) corresponds
593: to $\sim$3$^\prime$ region in A576. On Figure 7c we show
594: the surface brightness profile along the slice. From right to left the first surface brightness
595: enhancement before the ``spike'' associated with the cool ``bullet'' is that of the shock region.
596: Then, we see the colder
597: ``bullet'' followed by extended peak of the disturbed core of the primary cluster.
598: The last component is a hot tail. We separated the regions in three parts based on the temperature
599: map in Markevitch et al. (2002). The distribution of photon counts
600: for these three components (again from right to left) is approximately
601: 1000 counts (shock region), 14500 counts (the two cold cores) and 3000 counts (hot tail),
602: which would place the f$_{norm}$ (hot/cold) at $\sim$ 26\% assuming that
603: the bow shock symmetrically covers the two cluster cores. This fraction can be directly compared
604: to that derived using spectral fittings up to the precision of a (weak) function of temperature f(T)
605: ($number counts \propto Projected Area \times Surf Brightness \propto density^2 \times f(T) \times Projected Area
606: \propto \frac {normalization_{VAPEC}}{characteristic~size} \times f(T)$). It is beyond the
607: scope of this paper to carry out detailed modeling of 1E0657-56.
608: Nevertheless, we point out that the overall agreement of f$_{norm}$ with what would be expected from
609: ``seeing'' the ``bullet'' cluster along the merging axis is very consistent with a A576 passing through
610: a near line of sight collision.
611:
612: With the available data we do not have enough photon statistics and energy coverage to
613: disentangle the multiple temperature components in the line
614: of sight, i.e., cold gas from the pre-shocked ICM, a relatively thin bow shock,
615: the projected high density cold cores, and finally
616: the post and pre shocked material at the largest depth. However, we can roughly estimate a few
617: merger parameters with the data at hand. From simple geometrical principles for a line of sight
618: merger started at a time ``-t$_{shock}$'', the perturbation perpendicular to the surface of the Mach
619: cone will propagate with the sound speed, so that
620: the $cos \alpha=\frac{B}{c_{s}~t_{shock}}$, where $\alpha$ is half angle of the cone,
621: c$_{s}$ is the sound speed given by
622: $\sqrt{\frac{5kT_{ICM}}{3\mu m_{p}}} \approx 10^3~(\frac{T_{keV}}{3.7 keV})^{(\frac{1}{2})}$~km~s$^{-1}$, and
623: B the projected distance
624: from the merging axis to the point where the sonic perturbation is at a time $t_{shock}$.
625: Since the Mach number $M=\frac{1}{sin \alpha}$, the time when the shock front was effectively
626: initiated is then $t_{shock}= \frac{B}{c_{s}\sqrt{1-M^{-2}}}$ or
627: $t_{shock}\approx (0.08\pm0.015)~h_{70}^{-1}$ Gy ago, assuming B to be
628: $B = 86 \pm 16~h_{70}^{-1}~kpc \sim 1^{\prime}.75\pm 0^{\prime}.5 $, where 2B$\sim$3$^{\prime}$.5 would be
629: the projected distance between the two ``hot'' regions (NW \& E of the central region) in Figure 2a.
630: The distance traveled by the core along the line of sight
631: during this time is $L\approx (0.45 \pm 0.15) h_{70}^{-1}$ Mpc for M=6$\pm$1.6, using the
632: error-weighted average velocity derived from {\sl Chandra} \& {\sl XMM} data.
633:
634: The point in the past that the two merging clusters overcome the Hubble flow, with zero
635: relative radial velocity (half the orbital period),
636: can be given by
637: $r_0 = (\frac{2G}{\pi^2})^{\frac{1}{3}} (M_c~t_{cross}^2)^{\frac{1}{3}}~\approx~5.5~(M_{c_{15}}~t_{cross_{Hub}}^2)^{\frac{1}{3}}$ Mpc,
638: where $M_{c_{15}}$ and $t_{cross_{Hub}}$ are the total mass normalized by $10^{15} M_{\odot}$ and $t_{cross_{Hub}}$
639: is the core crossing time normalized by a Hubble time (set to 1.37$\times10^{10}$yr). From conservation of energy and angular momentum the
640: relative velocity of the sub-systems at a distance ``r'' from each other is given
641: by (e.g. Ricker and Sarazin 2001)
642:
643: %\begin {equation}
644: \begin{eqnarray*}
645: v \sim \sqrt{2~G~M_c}~r^{-\frac{1}{2}}~(\frac{1-\frac{r}{r_0}}{1-(\frac{b}{r_0})^2})^{\frac{1}{2}}~\approx \\
646: 4160\sqrt{M_{c_{15}}}~r_{0.5Mpc}^{-\frac{1}{2}}~(\frac{1-\frac{r}{r_0}}{1-(\frac{b}{r_0})^2})^{\frac{1}{2}} km~s^{-1},
647: \end{eqnarray*}
648: % \end {equation}
649:
650: where b is the impact parameter.
651: If we use the distance between the X-ray peak and the midpoint between the two ``hot'' regions ($=2B$)
652: in Figure 2a as the
653: impact parameter we obtain b=50$\pm$25~$h_{70}^{-1}$~kpc. Taking the total mass derived by Rines et al. (2000),
654: i.e., $M_c~=~(0.72 \pm 0.07) \times 10^{15} h_{70}^{-1} M_{\odot}$, the relative velocity at $r~=~L$, when the merger shock is
655: effectively initiated, is found to be (3.8 $\pm$ 0.63)$\times$10$^3$~km~s$^{-1}$.
656: This is in the lower end, but consistent, within the errors, with the observed
657: velocity gradient, described in the previous paragraphs.
658:
659: As pointed by Dupke \& Bregman (2002) and Sunyaev et al. (2003) ICM velocity detections can be
660: corroborated by the use of the kinetic S-Z effect (Sunyaev \& Zel'dovich 1970, 1972, 1980).
661: Intracluster gas bulk velocities as high as those detected in A576 should
662: generate significantly different levels of Comptonization of the cosmic microwave
663: background radiation (CMBR) towards different direction of the cluster (red-shifted and blue-shifted sides).
664: The total CMBR temperature variation towards the direction of a moving
665: cluster has a thermal and a kinetic component:
666:
667: \begin {equation}
668: (\frac{\Delta T}{T})_{\nu}~ =~ [\frac{kT_{e}}{m_{e}c^{2}} (x \frac{e^{x} + 1}{e^{x} - 1} -4) - \frac{V_{r}(b)}{c}]~ \tau,
669: \end {equation}
670:
671: where $T_{e}$ \& $T$ are respectively the ICM and CMBR temperatures, V$_{r}$ is the radial velocity, $x=\frac{h\nu}{kT}$ and the other
672: parameters have
673: their usual meanings (Sunyaev \& Zel'dovich 1970, 1972, 1980). If the gas
674: number density $n(r)$ follows a king-like profile
675: $n(r)= n_{0}(1 + (\frac{r}{r_{c}})^{2})^{- \frac{3}{2} \beta}$,
676: where ${r_{c}}$ and $n_{0}$ are respectively the core radius and the central density,
677: the Thompson optical depth is given as a function of the projected radius ``$r_{proj}$'' by
678: $\tau(r_{proj}) = \sigma_{T} n_{0} r_{c} B(\frac{1}{2} , \frac{3}{2} \beta - \frac{1}{2})(1 +
679: (\frac{r_{proj}}{r_{c}})^{2})^{- \frac{3}{2} \beta + \frac{1}{2}}$,
680: where $B(p,~q)= \int_{0}^{\infty} x^{p-1} (1+x)^{p+q} dx$ is the Beta function of p, q.
681: Using $\beta$=0.64, $r_{c}$=240 $h_{50}^{-1}$ kpc,
682: and $n_{0}$=2$\times$10$^{-3}$ cm$^{-3}$ (Mohr et al 1996), $\tau \sim 1.3 \times10^{-3}$ and
683: from equation (1) we get ($\frac{\Delta T}{T})_{217GHz}$~=~2.6$\times$10$^{-5}$, near the optimal
684: frequency to observe the kinetic effect.
685: This effect could be detected with current (or in development) instruments, such as the
686: {\sl BOLOCAM}\footnote{http://www.astro.caltech.edu/\~lgg/},
687: {\sl ACBAR} (Runyan et al. 2003), SuZIE (Holzapfel et al. 1997) or
688: {\sl Planck}\footnote{http://www.rssd.esa.int/index.php?project=PLANCK\&page=index}.
689:
690:
691: The low photon statistics
692: limits our ability to fully disentangle the 3-D physics of
693: the merging event to make a close comparison to theoretical/numerical models. However, this work
694: suggests that the temperature, abundance and velocity distributions in Abell 576 are consistent
695: with a scenario where the cluster is passing through a line of sight merger similar to that in the ``bullet'' cluster.
696: If corroborated, this could provide a unique template to study supersonic line of sight cluster merger collisions.
697: This work also illustrates the power of elemental abundance gradient
698: distribution in determining the evolutionary stage of clusters.
699:
700:
701: \acknowledgments
702: The authors would like to thank Jimmy Irwin, Ed Lloyd-Davies, Maxim Markevitch, Chris Mullis,
703: Kenneth Rines and Ming Sun for useful
704: discussions and suggestions. We also thank the anonymous referee for useful suggestions. We acknowledge support
705: from NASA Grants NAG 5-3247, NNG05GQ11 \& GO5-6139X. This research made use of the HEASARC
706: {\sl ASCA} database and NED.
707:
708:
709: %===============================================================================
710: \begin{references}
711:
712: \reference{}
713: Allen, S. W., Fabian, A. C., Johnstone, R. M., Arnaud, K. A., \& Nulsen, P. E. J. 2001, \mnras, 322, 589
714:
715: \reference{}
716: \reference{}
717: Anders, E., \& Grevesse N. 1989, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 53, 197
718:
719: \reference{}
720: Andersson, K. E., \& Madejski, G. M. 2004, \apj, 607, 190
721:
722: \reference{}
723: Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V,
724: ASP Conf. Series volume 101, eds. Jacoby, G., \& Barnes, J., p.17
725:
726: \reference{}
727: Baumgartner, W. H., Loewenstein, M., Horner, D. J.\& Mushotzky, R. F. 2005, \apj, 620, 680
728:
729: \reference{}
730: Beers, T., 1982, \apj, 257, 23
731:
732: \reference{}
733:
734: Benatov, L., Rines, K., Natarajan, P., Kravtsov, A., \& Nagai, D, 2006, \mnras, in Press
735:
736: \reference{}
737: Churazov, E., Gilfanov, M., Forman, W., \& Jones, C. 1999, ApJ, 520, 105
738:
739: \reference{}
740: David, L. P., Slyz, A., Jones, C., Forman, W., Vrtilek, S. D., \& Arnaud, K. A. 1993, \apj, 412, 479
741:
742: \reference{}
743: De Grandi, S., Ettori, S., Longhetti, M., \& Molendi, S. 2004, \aa, 419, 7
744:
745: \reference{}
746: Diaferio, A., \& Geller, M. J 1997, \apj 481, 633
747: \reference{}
748: Dupke, R. A., 1998 PhD Thesis. University of Alabama
749: \reference{}
750: Dupke, R. A., \& White, R. E. III 2000a, \apj, 528, 139
751: \reference{}
752: Dupke, R. A., \& White, R. E. III 2000b, \apj, 537, 123
753: \reference{}
754: Dupke, R. A., \& White. R. E. III 2003, \apjl, 583, L13.
755: \reference{}
756: Dupke, R. A., \& Bregman, J. N. 2001a, ApJ, 547, 705.
757: \reference{}
758: Dupke, R. A., \& Bregman, J. N. 2001b, ApJ, 562, 266.
759: \reference{}
760: Dupke, R. A., \& Bregman, J. N. 2002, ApJ, 575, 634.
761: \reference{}
762: Dupke, R. A., \& Bregman, J. N. 2005, ApJS, 161, 224 (DB05)
763: \reference{}
764: Dupke, R. A., \& Bregman, J. N. 2006, \apj 639, 781 (DB06)
765:
766:
767: \reference{}
768: Evrard, A. E. 1990, \apj, 363, 349;
769:
770: \reference{}
771: Evrard, A. E., Metzler, C. A., \& Navarro, J. F. 1996, \apj, 469, 494;
772:
773: \reference{}
774: Finoguenov, A., David, L. P.;\& Ponman, T. J. 2000, \apj, 544,188
775: \reference{}
776: Fukazawa, Y., Ohashi, T., Fabian, A. C., Canizares, C. R., Ikebe, Y., Makishima, K.,
777:
778: \reference{}
779: Gibson, B. K., Loewenstein, M. \& Mushotzky, R. F. 1997, \mnras, 290, 623
780:
781: \reference{}
782: Grant, C. 2001, ACIS MEMO 195 space.mit.edu/ACIS/ps\_files/ps195.ps.gz
783:
784: \reference{}
785: Hayashi, E. \& White, S. D. M., 2006, \mnras, in Press, astro-ph/0604443
786:
787: \reference{}
788: Holzapfel, W. L., Wilbanks, T. M., Ade, P. A. R., Church, S. E., Fischer, M. L., Mauskopf, P. D.,
789: Osgood, D. E. \& Lange, A. E. 1997, \apj 479, 17
790:
791: \reference{}
792: Inogamov, N. A., \& Sunyaev, R. A. 2003, Astron. Lett., 29, 791
793:
794: \reference{}
795: Katz, N., \& White, S. D. M. 1993, \apj, 412, 455;
796:
797: \reference{}
798: Kay, S. T., Thomas, P. A., Jenkins, A., \& Pearce, F. R., 2004, \mnras, 355, 1091
799:
800: \reference{}
801: Kempner, J., \& David, L. 2004, \apj, 607, 220 (KD04)
802:
803: \reference{}
804: Landau, L, \& Lifshitz, E. 1986, Hydrodynamics, in Theoretical Physics vol 6, page 489, Nauka, Moscow.
805:
806: \reference{}
807: Liedahl, D. A., Osterheld, A. L., \& Goldstein, W. H. 1995, \apjl, 438, L115
808:
809: \reference{}
810: Loewenstein, M. \& Mushotzky, R. F. 1996, \apj, 466, 695
811:
812: \reference{}
813: Lucey, J. R., Currie, M. J., \& Dickens, R. J. 1986a, MNRAS, 221, 453
814:
815: \reference{}
816: Lucey, J. R., Currie, M. J., \& Dickens, R. J. 1986b, MNRAS, 222, 427
817:
818: \reference{}
819: Markevitch, M.\ et al.~2002, \apjl, 567, 27
820:
821: \reference{}
822: Mushotzky, R. F., \& Yamashita, K. 1994, PASJ, 46, 55
823:
824: \reference{}
825: Mohr, J. J., Geller, M. J., Fabricant, D. G., Wegner, G., Thorstensen, J., \& Richstone, D. O. 1996, \apj, 470, 724
826:
827: \reference{}
828: Morrison, R., \& McCammon, D. 1983, \apj, 270, 119
829:
830: \reference{}
831: Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S., \& White, S. D. M. 1995 \mnras, 275, 720
832:
833: \reference{}
834: Nomoto, K., Iwamoto, K., Nakasato, N., Thielemann, F.-K., Brachwitz, F.,
835: Tsujimoto, T., Kubo, Y. \& Kishimoto, N., 1997a, Nuclear Physics A, Vol. A621, 467c
836:
837: \reference{}
838: Nomoto, K., Hashimoto, M., Tsujimoto, T., Thielemann, F.-K., Kishimoto, N., \& Kubo,
839: Y. 1997b, Nuclear Physics A, Vol. A616, 79
840:
841: \reference{}
842: Ota, N. et al. 2007, PASJ, 59, 351
843:
844: \reference{}
845: Pawl, A., Evrard, A. \& Dupke, R. 2005, \apj, 631, 773
846:
847: \reference{}
848: Pearce, F. R., Thomas, P. A., \& Couchman, H. M. P. 1994, \mnras, 268,953;
849:
850: \reference{}
851: Peres, C. B., Fabian, A. C., Edge, S. W., Johnstone, R. M., \& White, D. A. 1998, \mnras, 298, 416
852:
853: \reference{}
854: Rasia, E., Tormen, G., \& Moscardini, L., 2004, \mnras, 351, 237
855:
856: \reference{}
857: Rasia, E., Ettori, S., Moscardini, L., Mazzotta, P., Borgani, S., Dolag, K., Tormen, G., Cheng, L.M., \& Diaferio, A. 2006, \mnras, Submitted, astro-ph/0602434
858:
859: \reference{}
860: Ricker, P. M. 1998, \apj, 496, 670
861:
862: \reference{}
863: Ricker, P. M. \& Sarazin, C., 2001, \apj, 561, 621
864:
865: \reference{}
866: Rines, K., Geller, M. J., Diaferio, A., Mohr, J. J., \& Wegner, G. A. 2000, \aj, 120, 2338
867:
868: \reference{}
869: Rines, K., Geller, M. J., Kurtz,M., \& Diaferio, A., 2003, \aj, 126, 2152
870:
871: \reference{}
872: Rines, K., \& Diaferio, 2006, \aj, 132, 1275
873:
874: \reference{}
875: Roettiger, K., Burns, J. O., \& Loken, C. 1993, \apjl, 407, 53;
876:
877: \reference{}
878: Roettiger, K., Burns, J. O., \& Loken, C. 1996, \apj, 473, 651
879:
880: \reference{}
881: Roettiger, K., Loken, C., \& Burns, J. O. 1997, \apjs, 109, 307
882:
883: \reference{}
884: Rothenflug, R., Vigroux, L., Mushotzky, R. F., \& Holt, S. S., \apj, 279, 53
885:
886: \reference{}
887: Runyan, M. C., Ade, P. A. R., Bhatia, R. S., Bock, J. J., Daub, M. D., Goldstein, J. H., Haynes, C. V.,
888: Holzapfel, W. L., Kuo, C. L., Lange, A. E., Leong, J., Lueker, M., Newcomb, M., Peterson, J. B.,
889: Reichardt, C., Ruhl, J., Sirbi, G., Torbet, E., Tucker, C., Turner, A. D., \& Woolsey, D. 2003, \apjs 149, 265
890:
891: \reference{}
892: Smith, R. J., Lucey, J. R., Hudson, M. J., Schlegel, D. J. \& Davies, R. L. 2000, \mnras 313, 469
893:
894: \reference{}
895: Sanders, J. S. \& Fabian, A. 2002, \mnras, 331, 273
896:
897: \reference{}
898: Stein, P., Jerjen, H., \& Federspiel, M. 1997, \aap, 327, 952
899:
900: \reference{}
901: Sunyaev, R. A., \& Zel'dovich, Ya. B. 1970, Astrophys. Space Sci., 7, 3
902:
903: \reference{}
904: Sunyaev, R. A., \& Zel'dovich, Ya. B. 1972, Comments Astrophys. Space Phys., 4, 173
905:
906: \reference{}
907: Sunyaev, R. A., \& Zeldovich, Ya. B. 1980, \mnras, 190, 413
908:
909: \reference{}
910: Takizawa, M., \& Mineshige, S. 1998, \apj, 499, 82;
911:
912: \reference{}
913: Takizawa, M. 1999, \apj, 520,514
914:
915: \reference{}
916: Takizawa, M. 2000, \apj, 532, 183
917:
918: \reference{}
919: Wojtak, R., \& Lokas, E. L. 2007, \mnras, in press.
920:
921: \end{references}
922: %===============================================================================
923: \clearpage
924: \begin{figure}
925: \title{
926: Figure Captions
927: }
928: \caption{
929: (a) Raw {\sl Chandra} X-ray image of Abell 576. The X-ray contours shown here are used throughout the work.
930: North is up. The lowest contour is centered at RA=110.3762 deg, Dec=+55.7653 deg. The most external contour show the CCD borders
931: and is limited by 110.5$<$RA$<$110.25 from left to right and 55.828$<$Dec$<$55.686 from top to bottom. The same contours
932: are applied in Figures 2, 5b and 6a but with the scale slightly smaller.
933: (b) Extraction regions used for spectral fittings for detailed analysis of radial velocities ({\b SOUTH} and {\b EAST}),
934: Si/Fe ratio (CW, C0, CE) analyzed in this work. We also indicate the regions found to have high radial velocities
935: (0$^{\circ}$--100$^{\circ}$) and low radial velocities (170$^{\circ}$--250$^{\circ}$) in a previous {\sl ASCA} analysis
936: (Dupke \& Bregman 2005a).
937: }
938: \caption{
939: Results from an adaptive smoothing algorithm with a minimum of 5000 counts per extraction
940: circular region and fitted with an absorbed VAPEC spectral model. The gridding method used
941: is a correlation method that calculates a new value for each cell in the regular matrix from
942: the values of the points in the adjoining cells that are included within the
943: search radius. With the minimum count constraints the matrix
944: size was 50 $\times$ 50 cells. We also overlay the X-ray contours shown in Figure 1a on top of the
945: contour plot).
946: North is up. The lowest contour is centered at RA=110.3762 deg, Dec=+55.7653 deg. The units are pixels and 1 pixel=0.5 arcsec.
947: The arrow indicates 1 arcminute.
948: The parameters mapped are (a) Temperature (b) Redshift (c) Smoothed redshift error of each cell used in the adaptive binning
949: (d) Deviation significance, i.e., redshift value found in
950: (b) minus the average for the whole CCD divided by the error of each measurement. The dashed ellipses shown
951: in the Temperature plots indicate approximately the direction of the Mach cone in the scenario of
952: near line of sight merger. The two stars near the center of the
953: redshift map indicate the position of two bright E galaxies near the cluster's X-ray center,
954: with relative line of sight velocity difference of 900 km/s (Smith et al. 2000). The average redshift error for
955: each cell used in the adaptive binning code is
956: is 0.01. The errors for the cells near the bottom left (SE) regions reach 0.02.
957: }
958: \caption{
959: (a)Best fit values for temperature, Fe abundance and redshift for the {\b SOUTH} and {\b EAST} regions shown in
960: Figure 1b with different instruments. The left data point for instrument shows the value for {\b SOUTH} and the right
961: data point the value for {\b EAST}. MOS 1\& 2 represent
962: the results from simultaneous spectral fittings of the two MOS spectrometers.
963: We also indicate the optically determined redshift for the cluster.
964: (b)TOP - Spectral fittings for regions SOUTH (white) and EAST (red) using Chandra ACIS-S3 data.
965: BOTTOM - A blow-up of the more prominent lines in the FeL and FeK complexes with the continuum subtracted.
966: (c)Same as (b) but for the MOS 1 data.
967: (d)Same as (b) but for the MOS 2 data.
968: }
969: \caption{
970: (a)Probability of detecting a velocity difference greater than $\Delta$V for {\b SOUTH} and {\b EAST}
971: regions. Solid line is without gain fluctuations.
972: The other lines plots assume a 1$\sigma$, 2$\sigma$, 3$\sigma$, 4$\sigma$ and 5$\sigma$
973: gain fluctuation (500km s$^{-1}$ for individual velocity differences). Results are obtained from spectral
974: fittings of 500 simulated spectra for each region for {\sl Chandra} and {\sl XMM}. (b) Smoothed map
975: of the scatter (standard deviation) of the best fit redshifts over three time cuts (epochs)
976: each one having 9.5 ksec
977: duration. Darker regions indicate lowest scatter and therefore higher gain stability.
978: We also overlay the X-ray contours shown in Figure 1a on top of the
979: contour plot).
980: North is up. The lowest contour is centered at RA=110.3762 deg, Dec=+55.7653 deg. The units are pixels and 1 pixel=0.5 arcsec.
981: The arrow indicates 1 arcminute.
982: }
983: \caption{
984: (a)Results from an adaptive smoothing algorithm described in Figures 2 for the Si/Fe abundance
985: ratio found with {\sl Chandra} data. We also overlay the X-ray contours shown in Figure 1a on top of the
986: contour plot).
987: North is up.The lowest contour is centered at RA=110.3762 deg, Dec=+55.7653 deg. The units are pixels and 1 pixel=0.5 arcsec.
988: The arrow indicates 1 arcminute.
989: (b) Si/Fe abundance ratio measurements (by number normalized to solar) of Regions CW, C0 and CE using
990: {\sl Chandra} and {\sl XMM} MOS 1, 2 and 1\& combined.
991: We also shown the theoretical predictions for pure SN II enrichment (top horizontal line) and different models of pure SN Ia
992: enrichment (standard W7 and Delayed Detonation models 1,2 \& 3 of Nomoto et al. (1997a, b)).
993: }
994: \caption{
995: (a) Histogram of galaxy velocities within a projected distance of 1 r$_200$ from the X-ray center.
996: Data is from NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/).
997: (b) Galaxy positions separated by redshift in the histogram shown in (a). Galaxies
998: with redhifts 0.03$<$z$<$0.0387 are denoted by blue circles. Red circles denote galaxies with
999: redshifts 0.0387$<$z$<$0.05 and magenta circles correspond to 0.057$<$z$<$0.07.
1000: X-ray contours are also shown inthe center of the figure in white and the SOUTH and EAST
1001: boxy regions are shown in green. The large circle in black corresponds to $\sim$ 1 r$_200$.
1002: (c) Blow-up of Figure 6b. Notation is the same as (b). It is also shown the velocity centroids for
1003: different redshift groups with ``X''. Blue corresponds to 0.03$<$z$<$0.0387, red to 0.0387$<$z$<$0.05,
1004: magenta to 0.057$<$z$<$0.07 and yellow to 0.0387$<$z$<$0.07.
1005: }
1006: \caption{
1007: (a) $\chi^2$ variation of the best-fit double {\tt APEC} model to a large elliptical region encompassing the
1008: central regions of A576 as a function of the ratio of normalizations of the hot to cold components. Intermediate values of the
1009: best-fit high temperatures are shown for normalizations ratios of 10\%, 24\% (lowest $\chi^2$) \& 70\%. The
1010: temperature of the cold component was fixed at 3.5 keV.
1011: The fit uses {\sl XMM} MOS 1 \& 2 data from the two off-center pointings and
1012: ACIS-S3 data simultaneously. The dotted lines show the results for a single APEC with a
1013: best-fit temperature of 4.1 keV, for comparison.
1014: The number of degrees of freedom in the two models is the same given the constrains imposed to the
1015: double temperature component.
1016: (b) ACIS-I image of 1E0657-56 from a deep (100 ksec) observation of the cluster. We also show the rectangular
1017: slice used to extract the surface brightness profile. North is up.
1018: (c) Surface Brightness profile of the bullet cluster (1E0657-56) along the rectangular slice shown in Figure 7b.
1019: The X-axis is shown in arcseconds and the Y-axis in arbitrary surface brightness units.
1020: }
1021: \end{figure}
1022:
1023: %=== Table 1 ====================================================================
1024: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccc}
1025: \small
1026: \tablewidth{0pt}
1027: \tablecaption{Spectral Fittings for {\it SOUTH} \& {\it East} Regions\tablenotemark{a,b}}
1028: \tablehead{
1029: \colhead{Region/} &
1030: %\colhead{ } &
1031: \colhead{Temperature} &
1032: \colhead{Abund } &
1033: \colhead{Redshift } &
1034: \colhead{$\chi^{2}$/dof} & \\
1035: \colhead{/Instrument} &
1036: %\colhead{($\times$10$^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$)} &
1037: \colhead{(keV)} &
1038: \colhead{(Solar)\tablenotemark{c}} &
1039: \colhead{(10$^{-2}$)} &
1040: \colhead{} &
1041: }
1042: \startdata
1043: {\it SOUTH}/{\sl Chandra}& 3.75$^{+0.18}_{-0.18}$ & 0.47$^{+0.08}_{-0.08}$ & 3.71$^{+0.24}_{-0.60}$ & 578/398 \\
1044: {\it SOUTH}/{\sl MOS 1} & 4.05$^{+0.20}_{-0.28}$ & 0.60$^{+0.11}_{-0.16}$ & 3.72$^{+0.56}_{-0.52}$ & 728/429 \\
1045: {\it SOUTH}/{\sl MOS 2} & 3.70$^{+0.32}_{-0.32}$ & 0.71$^{+0.26}_{-0.16}$ & 4.76$^{+0.24}_{-0.66}$ & 728/429 \\
1046: {\it SOUTH}/{\sl MOS 1\&2}& 3.95$^{+0.20}_{-0.20}$ & 0.62$^{+0.13}_{-0.13}$ & 4.18$^{+0.30}_{-0.30}$ & 728/429 \\
1047: {\it EAST}/{\sl Chandra} & 3.89$^{+0.25}_{-0.25}$ & 0.40$^{+0.09}_{-0.09}$ & 1.11$^{+0.48}_{-1.08}$ & 341/314 \\
1048: {\it EAST}/{\sl MOS 1} & 3.98$^{+0.22}_{-0.22}$ & 0.60$^{+0.13}_{-0.13}$ & 2.40$^{+0.56}_{-0.53}$ & 541/362 \\
1049: {\it EAST}/{\sl MOS 2} & 4.09$^{+0.20}_{-0.25}$ & 0.56$^{+0.07}_{-0.12}$ & 1.19$^{+2.73}_{-0.54}$ & 541/362 \\
1050: {\it EAST}/{\sl MOS 1\&2} & 4.03$^{+0.18}_{-0.18}$ & 0.58$^{+0.10}_{-0.10}$ & 1.87$^{+0.57}_{-0.20}$ & 541/362 \\
1051: \enddata
1052: \tablenotetext{a}{Errors are 1$\sigma$ confidence}
1053: \tablenotetext{b}{Full energy range (0.5 keV--9.5 keV)}
1054: \tablenotetext{c}{Photospheric}
1055: \end{deluxetable}
1056:
1057: %=== Table 2 ====================================================================
1058: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccc}
1059: \small
1060: \tablewidth{0pt}
1061: \tablecaption{Individual Elemental Abundances \tablenotemark{a} }
1062: \tablehead{
1063: \colhead{Region/} &
1064: \colhead{Silicon} &
1065: \colhead{Iron} &
1066: \colhead{Si/Fe} & \\
1067: \colhead{/Instrument} &
1068: \colhead{(solar)} &
1069: \colhead{(solar)} &
1070: \colhead{} &
1071: }
1072: \startdata
1073: {\it CW}/{\sl Chandra}& 0.26$\pm$0.26 & 0.80$\pm$0.12 & 0.33$\pm$0.33 \\
1074: {\it CW}/{\sl MOS 1} & 0.59$\pm$0.46 & 0.52$\pm$0.11 & 1.13$\pm$0.91 \\
1075: {\it CW}/{\sl MOS 2} & 0.32$\pm$0.32 & 0.61$\pm$0.09 & 0.53$\pm$0.53 \\
1076: {\it CW}/{\sl MOS 1\&2} & 0.44$\pm$0.33 & 0.58$\pm$0.9 & 0.77$\pm$0.59 \\
1077: {\it C0}/{\sl Chandra}& 0.89$\pm$0.23 & 0.73$\pm$0.07 & 1.23$\pm$0.33 \\
1078: {\it C0}/{\sl MOS 1} & 0.66$\pm$0.32 & 0.55$\pm$0.08 & 1.19$\pm$0.60 \\
1079: {\it C0}/{\sl MOS 2} & 1.07$\pm$0.32 & 0.71$\pm$0.08 & 1.50$\pm$0.48 \\
1080: {\it C0}/{\sl MOS 1\&2}& 0.85$\pm$0.22 & 0.62$\pm$0.5 & 1.37$\pm$0.38 \\
1081: {\it CE}/{\sl Chandra} & 1.38$\pm$0.38 & 0.43$\pm$0.12 & 3.20$\pm$1.25 \\
1082: {\it CE}/{\sl MOS 1} & 1.01$\pm$0.47 & 0.42$\pm$0.11 & 2.39$\pm$1.25 \\
1083: {\it CE}/{\sl MOS 2} & 0.90$\pm$0.45 & 0.44$\pm$0.10 & 2.05$\pm$1.13 \\
1084: {\it CE}/{\sl MOS 1\&2}& 0.95$\pm$0.33 & 0.43$\pm$0.07 & 2.22$\pm$0.85 \\
1085: \enddata
1086: \tablenotetext{a}{Errors are 1$\sigma$ confidence}
1087: \end{deluxetable}
1088:
1089:
1090:
1091:
1092: \end{document}
1093: