1: %\documentclass{emulateapj} \usepackage{apjfonts}
2: %\documentclass{aastex}
3: \documentclass[12pt, preprint]{aastex}
4: %
5: %===============================================================
6:
7: \newcommand\BV{\omega_{\rm BV}}
8: \newcommand\orb{\omega_{\rm orb}}
9: \newcommand\Porb{P_{\rm orb}}
10: \newcommand\Edot{{\dot E}_k}
11: \newcommand\Ekc{E_{k,\rm crit}}
12: \newcommand\Mg{{M_{11}}}
13: \newcommand\Msun{{\rm\,M_\odot}}
14: \newcommand\Lsun{{\;\rm\,L_\odot}}
15: \newcommand\ergs{{\;\rm erg\; s^{-1}}}
16: \newcommand\erg{{\;\rm erg}}
17: \newcommand\kms{{\;\rm km\; s^{-1}}}
18: \newcommand\pc{{\;\rm\,pc}}
19: \newcommand\kpc{{\;\rm kpc}}
20: \newcommand\Gyr{{\;\rm Gyr}}
21: \newcommand\simgt{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$}}
22: \newcommand\simlt{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}}
23:
24: %===============================================================
25: \shorttitle{ICM HEATING AND TURBULENCE BY GALAXIES}
26: \shortauthors{KIM}
27: %===============================================================
28: \begin{document}
29:
30: \title{Heating and Turbulence Driving by
31: Galaxy Motions in Galaxy Clusters}
32:
33: \author{Woong-Tae Kim}
34: \affil{Department of Physics \& Astronomy, FPRD,
35: Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742, Republic of Korea}
36: \email{wkim@astro.snu.ac.kr}
37:
38:
39: \begin{abstract}
40: Using three-dimensional hydrodynamic simulations,
41: we investigate heating and turbulence driving in an intracluster
42: medium (ICM) by orbital motions of galaxies in a galaxy cluster.
43: We consider $N_g$ member galaxies on isothermal and isotropic
44: orbits through an ICM typical of rich clusters.
45: An introduction of the galaxies immediately produces
46: gravitational wakes, providing perturbations that
47: can potentially grow via resonant interaction with the background gas.
48: When $N_g^{1/2}M_{11} \simlt 100$,
49: where $\Mg$ is each galaxy mass in units of $10^{11}\Msun$,
50: the perturbations are in the
51: linear regime and the resonant excitation of gravity waves is efficient to
52: generate kinetic energy in the ICM, resulting in
53: the velocity dispersion $\sigma_v \sim 2.2 N_g^{1/2}\Mg\kms$.
54: When $N_g^{1/2}M_{11} \simgt 100$, on the other hand,
55: nonlinear fluctuations of the background ICM destroy galaxy wakes
56: and thus render resonant excitation weak or absent. In this case,
57: the kinetic energy saturates at the level
58: corresponding to $\sigma_v \sim220\kms$.
59: The angle-averaged velocity power spectra
60: of turbulence driven in our models have slopes in the range of
61: $-3.7$ to $-4.3$.
62: With the nonlinear saturation of resonant excitation,
63: none of the cooling models considered are able to halt cooling catastrophe,
64: suggesting that the galaxy motions {\it alone} are
65: unlikely to solve the cooling flow problem.
66: \end{abstract}
67: \keywords{cooling flows --- galaxies: clusters : general ---
68: turbulence --- waves --- X-rays: galaxies}
69:
70: \section{INTRODUCTION}
71:
72: A lack of cold gas in the central parts of
73: rich galaxy clusters, as revealed by high-resolution X-ray observations,
74: has posed a ``cooling flow'' problem,
75: requiring sources of heat to balance radiative cooling
76: of an intracluster medium (ICM).
77: Among the proposed heating mechanisms (see \citealt{pet06} for review),
78: energy injection from active galactic nuclei appears to be the most
79: favorable, although it requires a central black hole to be more massive than
80: observed \citep{fuj04} and is unable to maintain a long term energy
81: balance if jets are narrow \citep{ver06}.
82: Diffusive heating via thermal conduction and/or turbulent mixing
83: may also be effective if the relevant diffusion coefficient
84: is quite large and fine tuned (e.g., \citealt{kim03,voi04,den05}).
85:
86: Less well recognized is the ICM heating by cluster galaxies that
87: possess a lot of available energy in their motions
88: (e.g., \citealt{mil86,bre89}).
89: \citet[hereafter BS]{bal90} showed that resonant excitations of internal
90: waves driven by orbiting galaxies produce heat at cluster centers
91: comparable to radiative loss, provided the galaxy mass is large enough.
92: Using Monte-Carlo approaches, \citet{elz04} showed
93: that dynamical friction of galaxies can be a distributed source of
94: heat if the mass-to-light ratio of galaxies exceeds 10.
95: \citet{kim05} found that heating by dynamical friction
96: reduces the growth rates of thermal instability.
97: All these works suggest that the effects of galaxy motions on
98: thermodynamic evolution of ICM are by no means negligible.
99:
100: Most of the studies cited above are based on the assumption that the energy
101: lost by galaxies is all transferred to {\it thermal} energy of the ICM
102: {\it locally} near the galaxies. This is apparently not
103: the case because galaxy wakes are spatially extended, overlap with
104: each other, and induce
105: kinetic as well as thermal energies \citep{dei96,ost99}.
106: The possibility of the ICM stirring by galaxy motions is
107: interesting because turbulence appears to be pervasive in
108: the ICM (e.g., \citealt{sch04}) and perhaps determines
109: the characteristic strengths and scales of
110: cluster magnetic fields (e.g., \citealt{cla01,sub06}).
111: Although BS allowed for the spatial propagation of internal waves,
112: they focused on linear gaseous responses in the WKB limit.
113: \citet[hereafter LBH]{luf95} explored nonlinear
114: evolution of gravity waves, but their models considered a single galaxy
115: on a radial orbit. In this Letter, we extend LHB by
116: considering a number of cluster galaxies on isotropic orbits.
117: By varying the mass and number of galaxies, we quantify the
118: thermal and kinetic energies induced by galaxy motions and explore
119: the level and shape of such driven ICM turbulence.
120:
121: \section{Model and Method}
122:
123: We consider a galaxy cluster in which the ICM is initially in
124: hydrostatic equilibrium under a dark matter potential $\Phi_{\rm DM}$.
125: For the initial temperature of the ICM, we adopt a simple form
126: $T(r) = 7 [1 - 0.6 e^{-(r/r_c)^2}]$ keV with the cooling radius
127: $r_c=125$ kpc. We represent a rigid dark halo using an
128: NFW profile with the characteristic mass $M_0=6 \times 10^{14} \Msun$ and
129: scale radius $r_s=460$ kpc \citep{nav97}. Although we do not allow for
130: the presence of a central dominant galaxy considered in LBH,
131: the cooling core inside $r_c$ in our model still satisfies
132: the condition for resonant excitation of gravity waves (see \S\ref{reso}).
133:
134: To study the responses of the ICM to member galaxies, we solve
135: the ideal hydrodynamic equations:
136: \begin{equation}
137: (\partial/\partial t + \mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla ) \rho + \rho\nabla\cdot
138: \mathbf{v}=0,
139: \end{equation}
140: \begin{equation}
141: \rho(\partial/\partial t + \mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla ) \mathbf{v}
142: = -\nabla P -\rho\nabla(\Phi_{\rm DM} + \Phi_g),
143: \end{equation}
144: \begin{equation}
145: \rho(\partial/\partial t + \mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla ) (e/\rho)
146: =-P \nabla\cdot \mathbf{v} - \Lambda,
147: \end{equation}
148: where $\Phi_g$ is the time-varying gravitational potential due to
149: the galaxies and $\Lambda$ is the volumetric cooling rate.
150: The other symbols have their usual meanings.
151: The effects of gaseous self-gravity and magnetic fields are ignored.
152: We adopt an ideal gas law $P=(\gamma-1)e$ with $\gamma=5/3$.
153: We run both adiabatic (with $\Lambda=0$) and cooling
154: (with $\Lambda \neq0$) models by taking
155: the cooling function $\Lambda$ used in \citet{rus02}.
156:
157: We consider a total of $N_g$ member galaxies distributed within 1 Mpc.
158: We assume that they follow isotropic and isothermal orbits
159: with velocity dispersion $\sigma_r=800$ km s$^{-1}$,
160: in which case the equilibrium galaxy number density is
161: $\propto (1+r/r_s)^{\eta r_s/r}$, where $\eta\equiv
162: 2GM_0/(r_s\sigma_r^2)\approx17.5$ \citep{kim05}.
163: Under this distribution, about 13\% of the galaxies are located within
164: $r_c$ at any given time.
165: We ignore back reaction of the ICM to the galaxies since the energy lost
166: due to dynamical friction is small (LBH).
167: We represent each galaxy using
168: a Plummer potential $\Phi_p(r)=-GM_g (r^2 + a^2)^{-1/2} $
169: with mass $M_g$ and scale radius $a=7$ kpc; the total perturbing
170: potential is constructed as
171: $\Phi_g (\mathbf r,t) = \sum_{i=1}^{N_g} \Phi_p (|\mathbf r - \mathbf r_i(t)|)$,
172: where $\mathbf r_i$ is the position vector of the $i$-th galaxy
173: at time $t$.
174: To simulate diverse cluster conditions, we vary the number and mass
175: of the galaxies in the ranges of $N_g\sim 10^2-10^3$ and
176: $M_g \sim 10^{11}-10^{12} \Msun$. We report in this work the
177: results only for models where all the galaxies have equal
178: masses\footnote{By running a few models in which galaxy masses
179: vary according to the Schechter function with
180: a mass-to-light ratio $M/L\sim L^{0.3}$ \citep{ger01}, we have
181: confirmed that results are almost unchanged if the breaking
182: mass $M_*$ in the mass distribution is equal to $M_g$ in the
183: corresponding fixed mass case.}.
184:
185:
186:
187: We follow the nonlinear evolution of the hot ICM using a modified
188: version of the ZEUS code \citep{sto92}, parallelized on a distributed-memory
189: platform. Our simulation domain is a cubic box with each side of 2 Mpc;
190: the center of the box is located at the cluster center.
191: We construct a logarithmically spaced Cartesian grid with 256$^3$ zones,
192: with outflow conditions at all boundaries\footnote{We have also run models
193: with 128$^3$ zones, and checked that the results are within less than 10\%
194: of those from 256$^3$ runs. This suggests
195: the energy dissipation caused by numerical diffusion is tolerable.
196: See \S\ref{heat}.}.
197: The grid spacing is
198: 0.3, 4, and 33 kpc at the center, the cooling radius, and the edge
199: of the box, respectively.
200: We have confirmed the accuracy of the code by comparing the test results
201: for wakes produced by linear-trajectory perturbers with the analytic
202: formula of \citet{ost99}.
203:
204:
205: \section{Nonlinear Simulations}
206:
207: \subsection{Resonant Excitation by a Single Galaxy}\label{reso}
208:
209: We first explore the responses of the adiabatic gas to a single galaxy
210: moving either on a radial or a circular trajectory.
211: BS showed that gravity waves excited by
212: a galaxy with orbital frequency $\orb$ become trapped and amplify in
213: the region where the local Brunt-V\"ais\"al\"a frequency $\BV$ exceeds $\orb$.
214: This finding was subsequently confirmed by LBH who ran numerical
215: simulations for a radial-orbit galaxy. Our aim here
216: is to find the dependency of energy injection rate
217: on the galaxy mass as well as on the shape of its orbit.
218:
219: Figure \ref{fig_lbh}a shows the radial distributions of
220: the radial orbit, circular orbit, and Brunt-V\"ais\"al\"a frequencies
221: in our ICM model.
222: Even without a central massive galaxy, $\BV$ remains almost flat inside
223: $80$ kpc, allowing resonant excitation of gravity waves there.
224: For models with a radial orbit,
225: the galaxy initially set to move with velocity $v=1740\kms$ from
226: the origin has an average speed of $820\kms$ until it reaches a
227: turning point at $r=150\kpc$ (black dot in Fig.\ \ref{fig_lbh}a).
228: For circular-orbit models, the orbital speed is $v=1060\kms$
229: at $r=130$ kpc (blue dot).
230: In both cases, the orbital
231: period of the galaxy is $0.73\Gyr$, which is chosen to
232: ensure $\BV > \orb$ inside $r_c$.
233:
234: As the galaxy starts to move, it generates density and velocity
235: perturbations, forming a gravitational wake and imparting some of its
236: gravitational energy to thermal and kinetic energies of the ICM.
237: In general, the perturbations are a superposition
238: of $p$- and $g$-waves. While high-frequency $p$-waves propagate
239: out through a stratified background,
240: outgoing $g$-waves reflected at, and remain trapped within, the
241: resonance radius ($\sim r_c$ in our models).
242: The gas near the center receives periodic kicks from the galaxy,
243: enhancing the levels of density and velocity fluctuations.
244: Overall evolution of the models with a galaxy on the radial
245: orbit is similar to that presented in LBH.
246:
247: Figure \ref{fig_lbh}b shows a
248: snapshot of the perturbed density in the orbital plane at $t=6\Gyr$
249: for a model where a galaxy with mass $\Mg\equiv M_g/(10^{11}\Msun)=5$
250: orbits circularly at a near transonic speed (Mach number = 0.97)
251: in the clockwise direction.
252: It is apparent that perturbations periodically provided by
253: the orbiting galaxy is focused to the central part.
254: The associated vorticity is also well contained inside the resonance
255: marked by a dotted circle, indicative of
256: resonant excitation (LHB). The density perturbations near the
257: galaxy in a weak trailing shape are a characteristic feature of a
258: wake for a circular-orbit perturber \citep{kim07}.
259:
260: As the galaxy orbits the cluster center and resonantly interacts with
261: the background gas, the kinetic energy absorbed in the ICM secularly
262: increases (approximately linearly) with time, while showing some
263: temporal fluctuations.
264: We run a number of models with varying $M_g$, and measure the
265: rate $\Edot$ at which kinetic energy increases inside $r_c$.
266: Figure \ref{fig_lbh}c plots the resulting $\Edot$, which are
267: fairly well fitted by $\Edot=1.2\times10^{40}M_{11}^2\ergs$
268: and $\Edot=3.5\times10^{39}M_{11}^2\ergs$
269: for the radial- and circular-orbit cases, respectively.
270: For the model parameters we adopt, therefore, a galaxy on a radial orbit
271: is about three times more efficient in driving kinetic energy into the
272: ICM than the circular-orbit counterpart, since it in the former orbit
273: can traverse the central region directly (BS).
274: The dependency of $\Edot$ on $M_g^2$ indicates that
275: perturbations in all the models with a single galaxy
276: are in the linear regime.
277:
278: \subsection{Heating by Cluster Galaxies}\label{heat}
279:
280:
281:
282: We now consider more realistic cluster models in which the ICM is
283: continuously stirred by many member galaxies. We run nine adiabatic
284: models as well as nine cooling counterparts.
285: Figure \ref{fig_ekdot} plots time evolution of the kinetic energy $E_k$ of
286: the ICM inside $r_c$ for some of the adiabatic models.
287: A sudden introduction of the galaxies causes the ICM to respond abruptly,
288: initiating an rapid increase of $E_k$ for $t<0.1\Gyr$.
289: For models D ($N_g=10^2$, $\Mg=5$) and E ($N_g=10^2$, $\Mg=1$), the
290: perturbations are initially in the linear regime and soon begin to
291: interact resonantly with the background gas.
292: As gravity waves concentrate toward the center and amplify, $E_k$
293: grows secularly with time.
294: For $t>2\Gyr$, $E_k$ in models D and E
295: (and other models with $N_g^{1/2}M_{11} \simlt 100$) increases
296: almost linearly at a rate ${\dot E}_k=2.6\times 10^{41}(N_g/10^2)M_{11}^{2}
297: \ergs$. Compared to the results of \S\ref{reso}, this corresponds to
298: about 20 radial-orbit galaxies taking part in resonant excitation
299: of the ICM inside $r_c$. On the other hand,
300: in model A ($N_g=10^3$, $\Mg=10$) where initial perturbations
301: are very strong, $E_k$ stays almost
302: constant at $\sim10^{60.5}\erg$ during its entire evolution,
303: indicating weak or no resonant excitation.
304: Models B ($N_g=10^3, \Mg=5$) and C ($N_g=500, \Mg=5$) that
305: have weaker initial perturbations than model A
306: enhance $E_k$ to the saturation level $\sim 10^{60.5}\erg$
307: for $t\simlt 1\Gyr$, after which $E_k$ again remains constant.
308: At saturation, the amplitudes of density fluctuations
309: are about 40\% relative to the mean value, easily disrupting galaxy
310: wakes that would otherwise supply fresh perturbations for resonant
311: excitation.
312: Consequently, resonant excitation becomes weak or even absent
313: in a highly nonlinear background.
314:
315: Unlike kinetic energy that grows with time when $N_gM_g^2$ is sufficiently
316: small, we find that thermal energy of the ICM does not show a clear
317: indication of resonant excitation.
318: The total amount of thermal energy within $r_c$
319: driven by a mere introduction of the galaxies is
320: $\Delta E_t = 10^{58}N_g\Mg\erg$, which is already large and stays
321: more or less constant with time for all the models. This may be because
322: kinetic energy is more prone to resonant excitation, or because
323: the amount of heat supplied (presumably at a rate similar to $\Edot$)
324: by resonant excitation is much smaller than $\Delta E_t$, so that
325: it does not readily manifest in the energy curves over time.
326: The ratio of kinetic to thermal energies in a wake produced by a
327: single galaxy with size $a$ and velocity $\sigma_v$
328: is roughly $\sim(GM_g/\sigma_v a)^2/(3c_s^2)$, where $c_s$ is the
329: adiabatic sound speed of the ICM \citep{jus90}.
330: Since this ratio is
331: less than $10^{-2}$ when $\Mg\leq1$ for typical parameters we adopt,
332: kinetic energy is certainly a much better tracer
333: of resonant excitation.
334:
335: To check if galaxy motions and the associated heating can solve the
336: cooling flow problem, we repeat the simulations by
337: including the radiative cooling explicitly.
338: Our models lose thermal energy at a rate $L_X\sim10^{44}\ergs$
339: from the cooling core.
340: Without any heat source, they would experience
341: a cooling catastrophe within $0.6\Gyr$.
342: It turned out that none of the models we considered were able to
343: prevent, albeit considerably delay, the runaway cooling.
344: For instance, the cooling model with
345: $N_g=10^2$ and $\Mg=5$ (corresponding to model D)
346: undergoes a catastrophic event at $2.5\Gyr$,
347: while the model $N_g=10^3$ and $\Mg=10$
348: (corresponding to model A) develops a cooling flow in $1.7\Gyr$ near the
349: center. The heating rate due to
350: resonant excitation is probably lower in the latter model,
351: for which the perturbed kinetic energy saturates immediately.
352:
353: \subsection{Properties of ICM Turbulence}
354:
355: We have seen that motions of the member galaxies generate
356: a large amount of kinetic energy in the ICM.
357: The kinetic energy is in the form of fluctuating isotropic velocity
358: fields with vanishingly small mean values.
359: We regard these spatially-uncorrelated, random gas motions as
360: ICM turbulence. To quantify the turbulence level,
361: for each run we measure the velocity dispersions of the gas inside $r_c$.
362: Figure \ref{fig_turb}a plots as open circles the resulting
363: density-weighted 3D velocity dispersion $\sigma_v\equiv
364: (2E_k/M_c)^{1/2}$ averaged over $3-6\Gyr$ as a function of $N_gM_{11}^2$,
365: where $M_c$ is the ICM mass inside $r_c$.
366: Filled circles give non-weighed velocity dispersions,
367: which is larger than the density-weighted values by about a factor of 1.5.
368: Consistent with the results of the previous subsection, $\sigma_v$
369: increases linearly with $N_g^{1/2}M_{11}$
370: until $N_g^{1/2}M_{11}\approx 100$, beyond
371: which $\sigma_v$ is approximately constant at $\sim210-230\kms$.
372:
373: To characterize the turbulence driven by galaxy motions, we calculate
374: Fourier power spectra of the compressive and shear
375: components of ICM velocities defined by
376: $v_{c}^2 = |\hat{\mathbf k}\cdot {\mathbf v}_k |^2$ and
377: $v_{s}^2 = |\hat{\mathbf k}\times {\mathbf v}_k |^2$,
378: respectively. Here, ${\mathbf v}_k$ is the Fourier transformed velocity
379: and $\hat{\mathbf k}$ is the wavenumber. We then
380: bin them spherically in the $\hat{\mathbf k}$-space and
381: calculate the angle-averaged power spectra $P_{c}(k_r)$
382: and $P_{s}(k_r)$
383: as functions of the radial wavenumber $k_r$.
384: Figure \ref{fig_turb}b shows $P_{c}$ and
385: $P_{s}$ for models C and E at $t=6\Gyr$.
386: The ratio of total power in the compressive to
387: shearing parts is about 2.5 for both models, indicative of
388: fairly subsonic turbulence (e.g., \citealt{ves03}).
389: The power index of the shearing part is $-3.7$ in the inertial
390: range for model E, which becomes steeper with increasing $\sigma_v$,
391: yielding $-4.3$ for model C\footnote{Caution should be made
392: in interpreting the power indices in comparison with Kolmogorov power
393: spectra, since in our models the background density is not uniform and
394: the velocity field is not periodic.}.
395: The compressive parts have similar slopes, although
396: they have excess power at $\sim 50-100$ kpc scales,
397: which appear to be associated with the mean galaxy
398: separations\footnote{The galaxies are concentrated more strongly
399: toward the center and have a mean
400: distance of 82 kpc inside the cooling radius.}.
401:
402:
403: \section{Discussion}
404:
405: Galaxies in a cluster contain a plentiful amount of energy
406: in their orbital motions that can be transferred to turbulent kinetic
407: and thermal energies of the ICM
408: (e.g., BS; \citealt{dei96}).
409: In this Letter, we have shown that resonant excitation of gravity
410: waves driven by galaxy motions is efficient only when density
411: and velocity fluctuations in the
412: background are in the linear regime,
413: while becoming inefficient when the background medium exhibits
414: large amplitude fluctuations.
415: Although it is uncertain at what rate resonant excitation heats the ICM,
416: our numerical results suggest that heating by galaxy motions is
417: insufficient to quench the cooling catastrophe. If the heating
418: rate is similar to the kinetic energy injection rate $\Edot$ we found, the
419: energy balance between the heating and X-ray cooling
420: requires $N_g^{1/2}M_{11} \sim 200$.
421: Although rich clusters may
422: contain enough number and mass of galaxies to satisfy this condition,
423: resonant excitation will switch off when this condition is met.
424: We thus conclude that heating by galaxy motions {\it alone}
425: cannot be the main solution to
426: the cooling flow problem, although it can delay
427: the catastrophic event significantly
428: (e.g., BS; \citealt{kim05}).
429:
430: The two key parameters that control the rate of energy injection
431: and the level of turbulence are the mass and number of galaxies.
432: Many uncertainties surround the observational determinations of
433: the average galaxy mass, but a recent analysis using strong-lensing models
434: shows that a cluster galaxy can have mass as large as
435: $5\times 10^{11}\Msun$
436: including a dark halo \citep{hal07}. For rich clusters with
437: $N_g>10^3$ inside 1 Mpc, therefore, our numerical results suggest
438: that ICM turbulence driven solely by galaxy motions is
439: probably in a saturated state with $\sigma_v \sim 220\kms$.
440: Given the many arbitrary choices for the cluster parameters,
441: this value is in rough agreement with an analytic estimate of $\sim300\kms$
442: by \citet{sub06} who used scaling laws of hydrodynamic wakes
443: without considering nonlinear saturation.
444: Note that the saturated $\sigma_v$ is similar to those required
445: to explain the observed magnetic field strength ($\sim 1\mu$G) in terms
446: of energy equipartition (e.g., \citealt{gol91}).
447:
448: The angle-averaged velocity power spectra of turbulence driven in our models
449: are characterized by inertial-range slopes ranging from
450: $-3.7$ to $-4.3$. It is interesting to note that these
451: are comparable to the values between $-11/3$ and
452: $-13/3$ inferred from the observed pressure maps of
453: the ICM in the Coma cluster \citep{sch04}, although
454: density inhomogeneities created by recent infall/mergers
455: (e.g., \citealt{ada05})
456: are likely to influence the pressure maps
457: of the Coma cluster that is dynamically young.
458: Obviously, there are other potential driving sources including AGN and
459: subcluster mergers, ram pressure stripping, etc.
460: It will be interesting to see how turbulence driven
461: by each process adds together when nonlinear effects
462: as well as magnetic fields are considered.
463:
464: \acknowledgments
465:
466: The author is grateful to an anonymous referee for a helpful report.
467: This work was supported by Korea Science and Engineering
468: Foundation (KOSEF) grant R01-2004-000-10490-0.
469: The numerical computations presented in this work were performed on the
470: Linux cluster at KASI
471: built with funding from KASI and ARCSEC.
472:
473: \begin{thebibliography}{}
474: \bibitem[Adami et al(2005)]{ada05}
475: Adami, C., Biviano, A., Durret, F., \& Mazure, A.\ 2005, \aap, 443, 17
476: \bibitem[Balbus \& Soker(1990)]{bal90}
477: Balbus S.\ A., Soker N., 1990, \apj, 357, 353 (BS)
478: \bibitem[Bregman \& David(1989)]{bre89}
479: Bregman, J.\ N., \& David, L.\ P.\ 1989, \apj, 341, 49
480: \bibitem[Clarke et al(2001)]{cla01}
481: Clarke, T.\ E., Kronberg, P.\ P., \& B\"ohringer, H.\ 2001, \apj, 547, L111
482: \bibitem[Deiss \& Just(1996)]{dei96}
483: Deiss, B.\ M., \& Just, A.\ 1996, \mnras, 305, 407
484: \bibitem[Dennis \& Chandran(2005)]{den05}
485: Dennis, J.\ T., \& Chandran, B.\ D.\ G.\ 2005, \apj, 622, 205
486: \bibitem[El-Zant et al(2004)]{elz04}
487: El-Zant, A., Kim, W.-T., \& Kamionkowski, M.\ 2004, \mnras, 354, 169
488: \bibitem[Fujita \& Reiprich(2004)]{fuj04}
489: Fujita, Y., \& Reiprich, T.\ H.\ 2004, \apj, 612, 9
490: \bibitem[Gerhard et al.(2001)]{ger01}
491: Gerhard, O., Kronawitter, A., Saglia, R.\ P., \& Bender, R.\ 2001,
492: \aj, 121, 1936
493: \bibitem[Goldman \& Rephaeli(1991)]{gol91}
494: Goldman, I., \& Rephaeli, Y.\ 1991, \apj, 380, 344
495: \bibitem[Halkola et al.(2007)]{hal07}
496: Halkola, A., Seitz, S., \& Pannella, M.\ 2007, \apj, 656, 739
497: \apj, 656, 739
498: \bibitem[Just \& Kegel(1990)]{jus90}
499: Just, A., \& Kegel, W.\ H.\ 1990, \aap, 232, 447
500: \bibitem[Kim \& Narayan(2003)]{kim03}
501: Kim, W.-T., \& Narayan R.\ 2003, \apj, 596, L139
502: \bibitem[Kim et al(2005)]{kim05}
503: Kim, W.-T., El-Zant, A.\ A., Kamionkowski, M.\ 2005, \apj, 632, 157
504: \bibitem[Kim \& Kim (2007)]{kim07}
505: Kim, H., \& Kim, W.-T.\ 2007, \apj, in press; astro-ph/0705.0084
506: \bibitem[Lufkin et al(1995)]{luf95}
507: Lufkin, E. A., Balbus, S.\ A., \& Hawley, J.\ F.\ 1995, \apj, 446, 529 (LBH)
508: \bibitem[Miller(1986)]{mil86}
509: Miller, L.\ 1986, \mnras, 220, 713
510: \bibitem[Navarro et al.(1997)]{nav97}
511: Navarro, J.~F., Frenk, C.~S., \& White, S.~D.~M.\ 1997, \apj, 490, 493
512: \bibitem[Ostriker(1999)]{ost99}
513: Ostriker, E.\ C.\ 1999, \apj, 513, 252
514: \bibitem[Peterson \& Fabian(2006)]{pet06}
515: Peterson, J.\ R., \& Fabian, A.\ C.\ 2006, Physics Reports, 427, 1
516: \bibitem[Ruszkowski \& Begelman(2002)]{rus02}
517: Ruszkowski, M., \& Begelman, M.\ C.\ 2002, \apj, 581, 223
518: \bibitem[Schuecker et al.(2004)]{sch04}
519: Schuecker, P., Finoguenov, A., Miniati, F., B\"ohringer, H.,
520: \& Briel, U.\ G.\ 2004, \aap, 426, 387
521: \bibitem[Stone \& Norman(1992)]{sto92}
522: Stone, J.\ M., \& Norman, M.\ L.\ 1992, \apjs, 80, 753
523: \bibitem[Subramanian et al(2006)]{sub06}
524: Subramanian, K., Shukurov, A., \& Haugen, N.\ E.\ L.\ 2006,
525: \mnras, 366, 1437
526: \bibitem[Vernaleo \& Reynolds(2006)]{ver06}
527: Vernaleo, J.\ C., Reynolds, C.\ S.\ 2006, \apj, 645, 83
528: \bibitem[Vestuto \& Ostriker(2003)]{ves03}
529: Vestuto, J.\ G., \& Ostriker, E.\ C.\ 2003, \apj, 590, 858
530: \bibitem[Voigt \& Fabian(2004)]{voi04}
531: Voigt, L., \& Fabian, A.\ \mnras, 347, 1130
532:
533: \end{thebibliography}
534:
535: \clearpage
536:
537: %16dd
538: %fig1
539: \begin{figure}
540: \plotone{f1.ps}
541: \caption{(a) Profiles of the radial orbit ($\omega_{\rm orb,r}$),
542: circular orbit ($\omega_{\rm orb,c}$), and Brunt-V\"ais\"al\"a
543: ($\BV$) frequencies in our cluster model.
544: (b) $X$-$y$ plane snapshot at $t=6\Gyr$ of the perturbed density
545: relative to the initial value in logarithmic scale
546: for a circular-orbit galaxy.
547: (c) Averaged input rates of the kinetic energy due to a single galaxy
548: as functions of its mass.
549: \label{fig_lbh}}
550: \end{figure}
551:
552:
553: \clearpage
554:
555: %14dd
556: %fig2
557: \begin{figure}
558: \plotone{f2.ps}
559: \caption{Temporal evolution of the kinetic energy $E_k$ inside the cooling
560: radius for adiabatic models that differ in the number and mass of
561: the galaxies. Solid curves show the results from runs with $256^3$ zones.
562: Dotted lines (for models D and E) from $128^3$-zone runs are
563: within 8\% of the corrresponding solid curves.
564: Dashed and dot-dashed lines draw
565: $E_k = 8.2\times 10^{57}M_{11}^{2}(t/\Gyr)\erg$ for $\Mg=1$ and 5,
566: respectively.
567: \label{fig_ekdot}}
568: \end{figure}
569:
570: \clearpage
571:
572: %18dd
573: %fig3
574: \begin{figure}
575: \plotone{f3.ps}
576: \vspace{-0.2cm}
577: \caption{(a) Three-dimensional velocity dispersions $\sigma_v$
578: of the ICM turbulence driven by
579: galaxy motions as functions of $N_gM_{11}^2$. Open circles, with errorbars
580: representing the standard deviations in the temporal fluctuations
581: of $\sigma_v$, denote the density-weighted values, while the non-weighted
582: ones are given by filled circles.
583: The solid line corresponds to $\sigma_v = 2.2 \kms N_g^{1/2}\Mg$.
584: (b) Spherically binned power spectra of (solid line) compressive and
585: (dotted line) shearing parts of the ICM velocity in models C and E
586: at $t=6\Gyr$.
587: \label{fig_turb}}
588: \end{figure}
589:
590:
591: \end{document}
592: