1: \documentclass[preprint,11pt]{aastex}
2: \usepackage{rotating}
3:
4: \begin{document}
5: \title{Diffuse Cluster-Like Radio Emission in Poor Environments}
6: \author{Shea Brown \& Lawrence Rudnick}
7: \affil{Department of Astronomy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455}
8:
9: \begin{abstract} We present a study of the spectral, polarimetric,
10: morphological and environmental properties of the diffuse radio source
11: 0809+39 using observations taken with the Westerbork Synthesis Radio
12: Telescope, the Very Large Array, and archival optical and X-ray data. The
13: source has two distinct diffuse, steep-spectrum components, one in the
14: north that is highly polarized, and a linear southern component undetected
15: in polarization. We discuss several plausible origins for each component,
16: and conclude that the northern bright polarized component is most likely a
17: radio relic associated with a poor z$\sim$0.2 cluster of galaxies, with a
18: radio/X-ray luminosity ratio two orders of magnitude above typical values.
19: The southern component is aligned with a more extended filament of
20: galaxies $\sim$5~Mpc long at z$\sim$0.04. Deep optical and X-ray
21: follow-ups are still needed in order to confirm and understand the
22: physical origins of the synchrotron emission. Whatever the details of
23: these origins, 0809+39 highlights the utility of synchrotron radiation for
24: illuminating the diffuse components of low density environments unrelated
25: to rich clusters. \end{abstract}
26:
27: \keywords{galaxies: clusters: general-large scale structure of universe-radiation mechanisms: non-thermal-radio continuum: general-techniques: polarimetric}
28:
29: \clearpage
30:
31: \section{Introduction} In recent years, large-scale diffuse radio sources
32: have been discovered to be associated with the intracluster medium (ICM)
33: of over 50 clusters of galaxies. These features are unique probes of the
34: non-thermal particle populations and magnetic fields within the cluster,
35: and are believed to be important tracers of merger/formation dynamics. The
36: majority of these sources were found by searching the environs of rich
37: galaxy clusters for diffuse radio emission unassociated with active AGN
38: \citep{giov99,kemp04}. But is there also a magnetized, relativistic plasma
39: associated with lower density regions of the cosmic web, such as groups
40: and filaments of galaxies? Cosmological simulations predict complicated
41: networks of accretion/merger shocks in these low density regions, which
42: could accelerate particles, compress magnetic fields, and illuminate
43: magnetized plasma if it exists \citep[e.g.,][]{mini01,ryu03,pfro08}.
44: Unbiased searches for synchrotron signatures of these shocks are needed to
45: confirm these predictions.
46:
47: One such diffuse source, of ambiguous origin, is 0809+39 \citep{dela06},
48: discovered through a blind search for diffuse radio emission in the WENSS
49: survey \citep{rudn06}. The system showed no obvious associations with an
50: active radio galaxy. Several poor clusters were found in the vicinity,
51: which suggests a similar origin to radio relic and halo sources. However,
52: lacking any evidence for cluster X-ray emission, its radio luminosity far
53: exceeded the standard radio/x-ray ratios for these classes of sources
54: \citep[e.g.,][]{giov04,rudn08}.
55:
56: We present a systematic study of the spectral, polarimetric, morphological
57: and environmental properties of 0809+39 using observations taken with the
58: Westerbork Synthesis Radio Telescope (WSRT) and the Very Large Array
59: (VLA). We explore the origin of the diffuse radio emission and evaluate
60: where 0809+39 falls in the parameter space of known extragalactic radio
61: sources. We discuss observations and data reduction in $\S$2, and in $\S$3
62: we outline image production and analysis, including our application of
63: Rotation Measure Synthesis \citep{bren05}. In $\S$4 we present archival
64: optical and x-ray data, and in $\S$5 we discuss the implications of our
65: findings, followed by a summary of our key messages.
66:
67: For calculations in this paper, we assume $H_{o}=70$,
68: $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.7$, $\Omega_{M}=0.3$. We define the optically thin
69: synchrotron spectrum as $F_{\nu} \propto \nu^{\alpha}$ throughout.
70:
71: \section{Observations \& Data Reduction}
72:
73: \subsection{Observations} The diffuse source 0809+39 was observed for 13
74: hours over two nights in P-band (350~MHz) with the Westerbork Synthesis
75: Radio Telescope (WSRT) in January of 2006. The array was in the maxi-short
76: configuration with the shortest baseline being 36~m. One primary flux and
77: one polarized calibrator (as a pair) were observed at the beginning and
78: end of each night. For the primary flux calibrators we observed 3C147 and
79: 3C295, and for the polarized calibrators we observed DA240 and 3C303. We
80: used the WSRT wide band correlator to cover a frequency range from
81: 310-390~MHz with eight 10~MHz wide bands, each with 64 channels and full
82: Stokes parameters. We applied a Hanning taper to the spectral data, and
83: every other channel was selected for analysis yielding an effective
84: spectral resolution of about 0.31~MHz. After removing the end channels in
85: each band and editing for strong RFI, 197 channels remained in the final
86: analysis, for a total bandwidth of 61~MHz.
87:
88: The VLA observations were taken for 2.8 hours in December of 2005 in the D
89: configuration, and the flux calibrators 3C48 and 3C286 were used. The data
90: were taken using the spectrometer with no cross-had polarizations. We
91: analyzed only the pseudo-continuum data for this analysis, with a
92: frequency of 1.4649~GHz, a bandwidth of 12.5~MHz, and no polarization
93: information.
94:
95: \subsection{Total Intensity Calibration} The calibration and reduction of
96: the WSRT and VLA data was performed using the NRAO's Astronomical Image
97: Processing System (AIPS). For the WSRT data, the total intensity in each
98: of the 8 bands was calibrated independently using standard procedures and
99: the fluxes in the VLA calibrator manual for 3C147 and 3C295. The VLA
100: pseudo-continuum data set was calibrated using standard procedures. We did
101: several iterations of amplitude and phase self-calibration on each data
102: set.
103:
104: \subsection{Polarization Calibration} Due to the fact that WSRT observes
105: with orthogonal linear feeds (X and Y), the polarization calibration in
106: classic AIPS involved several non-standard steps. WSRT polarization
107: leakage terms are highly frequency dependent, so after the total intensity
108: calibration, each channel was split into an independent uv-data set and
109: the leakage terms were then solved for using the AIPS task LPCAL. Stokes Q
110: values were calculated from (YY-XX)/2, while the Stokes U values are
111: -(XY+YX)/2. An additional correction is needed for Stokes U, to remove the
112: instrumental phase offset between the X and Y receivers using the
113: polarized calibrators. Faraday rotation causes the Stokes Q and U
114: amplitudes of the polarized calibrators to oscillate across the band. The
115: X-Y phase offset was found for each channel by forcing the vector averaged
116: Stokes $U=U\left(\lambda^{2}\right)$ visibilities for the polarized
117: calibrators to match (offset by a quarter wavelength) the
118: $Q\left(\lambda^{2}\right)$ sine wave formed by Faraday rotation. The
119: observed sign of the Faraday rotation for 3C303 (+13~rad~m$^{-2}$,
120: \citealt{kron77}) forced Stokes U values to be a quarter wavelength
121: \emph{after} the Stokes Q values with increasing wavelength, breaking the
122: final sign ambiguity and finishing the polarization calibration. However,
123: we note that the intrinsic position angle of the polarization is still
124: highly uncertain due to errors in the rotation measure, as discussed in
125: $\S$3.3.
126:
127: \section{Image Production \& Analysis}
128:
129: \subsection{Initial Spectral Cube} After calibration, we created I, Q, and
130: U images for each of the 197 WSRT channels. All images and
131: self-calibrations were done in AIPS with the tasks IMAGR and CALIB
132: respectively. Each channel image was cleaned with IMAGR with 70,000 clean
133: components and a gain of 0.1. The synthesized beam varied from
134: $89\arcsec$$\times$$52\arcsec$ to $108\arcsec$$\times$$60\arcsec$ across
135: the band, so all of the images were uv-tapered and restored to a common
136: resolution of $108\arcsec$$\times$$60\arcsec$. Typical rms noise levels
137: for the single-channel \{I,Q,U\} maps were \{1.0,0.5,0.5\}~mJy/beam,
138: respectively.
139:
140: \subsection{Total Intensity}
141:
142: \subsubsection{WSRT I-Map} The final WSRT I map is shown in Figure
143: \ref{wsrti}. This map is the simple average of all the individual channel
144: I maps ($108\arcsec$$\times$$60\arcsec$ beam). The average frequency is
145: 351 MHz and the observed noise is $\sigma\sim$188~$\mu$Jy/beam. The
146: diffuse emission is seen to have two distinct components which we have
147: labeled N$_{Diff}$ and S$_{Diff}$. At this resolution, N$_{Diff}$
148: partially blends into the compact sources $S_{1}$ and $S_{2}$. As shown
149: in $\S$3.2.2, some of these ``compact" sources also have substructure.
150: Flux and size properties for both diffuse sources are summarized in Table
151: 1. We describe all the discrete radio sources in the next subsection.
152:
153: \subsubsection{VLA I-Map} Figure \ref{vlai} shows our VLA I map, which has
154: a noise level of 90~$\mu$Jy/beam and a 40$\arcsec \times$40$\arcsec$
155: restoring beam. We have labeled the discrete radio sources, and have shown
156: VLA FIRST \citep{beck95} images of some of the more interesting ones.
157: The sources F1-F7 are adjacent to or embedded in the diffuse emission. F2
158: is a 66 mJy wide-angle tailed (WAT: \citealt{owen76}) radio galaxy at
159: z=0.196 (from SDSS:\footnote{http://www.sdss.org/}
160: \citealt{york00,stou02}), and F3 and F5 are identified with SDSS galaxies
161: with photometric redshifts of z=0.249 and z=0.255, respectively. In
162: S$_{Diff}$, the source F6 is marginally detected in FIRST (not shown), and
163: is coincident with a z=0.04 galaxy in SDSS. F7 is a FIRST radio point
164: source (not shown) with no optical identification in SDSS. The apparent
165: bridge of emission between N$_{Diff}$ and $S_{1}$ peaks on a spiral galaxy
166: at z=0.041 (see Figure \ref{sdssgray}) and is most likely diffuse disk
167: emission from that galaxy.
168:
169: \subsubsection{Spectral Index} For the spectral analysis we matched the
170: uv-range of the VLA and WSRT data before comparison. The spectral index
171: ($\alpha$) map (Figure \ref{alpha}) was created in AIPS using the task
172: COMB. Any pixel that was not at least 10$\sigma$ above the noise in either
173: map was blanked. Both sources are steep spectrum, and Table 1 lists the
174: integrated $\alpha$ obtained from fitting the total flux of each component
175: at 1.4~GHz and 351~MHz to a power law.
176:
177: \subsection{Polarization}
178:
179: \subsubsection{Rotation Measure Synthesis} With the 197 channels and $\sim
180: 61$~MHz total bandwidth of our WSRT P-band data, it is possible to
181: simultaneously determine the rotation measure distribution within each
182: beam and remove the effects of bandwidth depolarization. When searching
183: for polarized synchrotron emission, which is often at very low surface
184: brightness levels, one would like to observe over a large bandwidth
185: ($\Delta \nu$) to maximize the signal/noise ratio. However, this normally
186: results in depolarization from the vectoral cancellation of the Stokes Q
187: and U signals that have been Faraday rotated from one side of the band to
188: the other. Some radio telescopes allow for a large observing bandwidth to
189: be split into many narrow channels (Westerbork being one of them), so an
190: obvious solution would be to make an image of the polarized amplitude in
191: each channel and average them together. Unfortunately, polarized galactic
192: foreground emission is ubiquitous (e.g., \citealt{reic06}). This is
193: actually above the surface brightness of some diffuse extragalactic
194: regions of interest, so adding the scalar polarization intensity of each
195: channel will cause the galactic emission to add coherently as well. This
196: increases the background and drowns out the desired diffuse extragalactic
197: source.
198:
199: \cite{bren05} presented a new technique to eliminate the confounding
200: effects of intervening Faraday rotation (bandwidth depolarization and
201: galactic foreground contamination) by searching ``rotation measure space"
202: for polarized emission. The technique proceeds as follows: assume a
203: rotation measure for the source, then derotate the polarization vector in
204: each individual channel (to a reference wavelength $\lambda_{o}$) to
205: correct for this and make a polarization map from the average of the
206: derotated channels. If the source in fact had the assumed rotation
207: measure, the channels would add coherently, allowing for the full
208: sensitivity of the entire bandwidth. The resulting map at a given Faraday
209: depth, $\phi$, is approximately given by
210:
211: \begin{equation}
212: F\left(\phi\right)=\frac{1}{N}\displaystyle\sum_{j=1}^{N}P_{j}e^{-2i\phi\left(\lambda^{2}_{j}-\lambda^{2}_{o}\right)}
213: \end{equation}
214:
215: \noindent where N is the number of maps (channels) used and
216: $P_{j}=Q_{j}+iU_{j}$ is the complex polarization at channel j. The units
217: of $F\left(\phi\right)$ are Jy/beam/rmtf, where rmtf stand for the
218: Rotation Measure Transfer Function. The RMTF is the response of a source
219: with emission at a single Faraday depth. If one were able to sample an
220: infinite range of $\lambda^{2}$, the RMTF would be a delta function in RM
221: space, but incomplete sampling induces side-lobe structures in a manner
222: similar to side-lobes in the beam pattern of an interferometer due to
223: incomplete sampling of the uv-plane.
224:
225: The key step is to apply Eq. (1) for a wide range of rotation measures,
226: creating a rotation measure cube (RM-Cube), and search for coherent
227: structures within this cube. We processed the 197 Q and U maps in IDL
228: utilizing Eq. (1) to create the final RM-Cube, with Faraday depths running
229: from -200~rad~m$^{-2}$ to +200~rad~m$^{-2}$ in steps of 1~rad~m$^{-2}$.
230: This method has been successfully used to detect very diffuse polarized
231: emission in the region of the Perseus cluster \citep{debr05}.
232:
233: Near values of $\phi = 0$, polarized emission from our own galaxy fills
234: the field of view. This emission has a typical surface brightness of
235: $\sim$1~mJy/beam/rtmf, and in the vicinity of 0809+39 it peaks at
236: $\phi_{Gal} \sim$+6~rad~m$^{-2}$. The polarized emission in N$_{Diff}$
237: peaks near +12~rad~m$^{-2}$, though there is still a significant amount of
238: galactic emission present at this Faraday depth. At values of $|\phi| >
239: 30~$rad~m$^{-2}$, very little of the galactic emission remains. As a
240: result, the rms noise of the images decreases with increasing $|\phi|$, to
241: $\sim$30~$\mu$Jy/beam/rmtf for $|\phi| >$100~rad~m$^{-2}$.
242:
243: Some of the emission that \cite{debr05} detected in the field of the
244: Perseus cluster with RM-Synthesis was later found to likely be Galactic in
245: origin \citep{bren07}. In the case of 0809+39, N$_{Diff}$, while not
246: segregated significantly from the Galactic emission in Faraday depth, is
247: an order of magnitude stronger in surface brightness, making a Galactic
248: origin unlikely.
249:
250: We can also use this RM-Cube to find Faraday spectra, which is just
251: $F\left(\phi\right)$ from Equation 1 for a single pixel or region in the
252: sky. Figure \ref{fspec} shows the average spectrum of a
253: $1.8\arcmin$$\times$$1.8\arcmin$ region centered on N$_{Diff}$, along with
254: the RMTF for our frequency sampling. The Faraday spectrum of N$_{Diff}$ is
255: very close to a ``point source" in Faraday space, especially when compared
256: to a typical Galactic spectrum also shown in Figure \ref{fspec}. The
257: diffuse galactic radiation along the line of sight to 0809+39 has emission
258: at multiple Faraday depths. This galactic signal must also be present in
259: our spectrum of N$_{Diff}$, but is lower than the side-lobe level of
260: N$_{Diff}$ itself.
261:
262: \subsubsection{Position Angle} We used the NRAO VLA Sky Survey (NVSS:
263: \citealt{cond98}) polarization image of 0809+39, along with our measured
264: RM, to find the absolute position angle $\chi$ of N$_{Diff}$. Figure
265: \ref{nvsspol} shows NVSS total intensity contours and magnetic field
266: orientation (which is $\chi \pm 90^{o}$), corrected for the average $\phi$
267: of N$_{Diff}$. Due to the difference in resolution between the RM-Cube and
268: the NVSS, and the fact that the gradient in $\phi$ across the source
269: translates into only a $\delta \chi \sim 7^{o}$, we did not do a
270: pixel-by-pixel de-rotation. The magnetic field runs along the long axis of
271: N$_{Diff}$, and shows evidence of following the curvature in the southern
272: end.
273:
274: Our Faraday corrected WSRT magnetic field vectors are plotted in Figure
275: \ref{wsrtpol}. We obtained the polarization from the complex RM-Cube at
276: $\phi=+12$~rad~m$^{-2}$, where N$_{Diff}$ peaks. Given the uncertainties
277: in absolute position angle when derotating from $\lambda$=90~cm to
278: $\lambda$=0 (e.g., $\sigma_{\chi} \approx 140^{o}$ when
279: $\sigma_{\phi}=3$~rad~m$^{-2}$), we globally rotated the vectors so that
280: the magnetic field orientation of N$_{Diff}$ matches that seen in Figure
281: \ref{nvsspol}. We placed the polarized intensity cut-off such that some of
282: the diffuse Galactic emission can be seen. One can see the discontinuity
283: in angle between the galactic polarization and the brighter N$_{Diff}$
284: emission.
285:
286: \subsubsection{Fractional Polarization} The detection of N$_{Diff}$ in the
287: NVSS survey allows for examination of the degree of de-polarization. The
288: fractional polarization, m, decreases from $m \sim 45-55$\% at 21cm
289: (matched to the WSRT resolution) to $m \sim 20$\% at 92~cm. Assuming for a
290: moment that this depolarization is due only to internal Faraday
291: de-polarization \citep{burn66,ciof80}, we calculate the necessary internal
292: Faraday rotation to be $\phi_{in} \approx 2$~rad~m$^{-2}$. The upper limit
293: intrinsic width of N$_{Diff}$ is $\approx 7-9$~rad~m$^{-2}$, so the
294: depolarization could be due to internal Faraday de-polarization. At
295: 351~MHz, S$_{Diff}$ is not polarized at a 3$\sigma$ level of 9\%.
296:
297: \section{X-ray \& Optical Identification} We now turn our attention to the
298: optical and X-ray environment of 0809+39. Since all radio halo and relic
299: sources found thus far exist in or adjacent to the hot gas of galaxy
300: clusters, we searched for thermal emission from X-ray clusters in the
301: vicinity of 0809+39 and investigated the surrounding optical field.
302:
303: \subsection{X-Ray} Figure \ref{rosat} shows the ROSAT broad (0.1-2.4 keV)
304: continuum emission in the region of 0809+39 with VLA L-band radio contours
305: overlayed. To put the low observed brightness of the X-ray field of
306: 0809+39 in context, we have also plotted three X-ray selected clusters at
307: three different redshifts. The clusters are \{RXCJ2324.3+1439,
308: RXCJ1353.0+0509, RXCJ2155.6+1231\} with redshifts of \{0.042, 0.079, 0.192
309: \} and X-ray luminosities of L$_{X}$=\{0.97, 1.97, 5.51\}$\times
310: 10^{44}~h^{-2}_{70}$~erg~s$^{-1}$, respectively \citep{pope04}. The
311: cluster redshifts were selected to mimic the relevant systems we have
312: identified in $\S$4.2. It is clear that no diffuse X-ray emission like
313: that present in the X-ray selected clusters is present in the ROSAT
314: 0809+39 field.
315:
316: Figure \ref{xmmsmall} shows VLA contours over XMM EPIC grayscale as well
317: as XMM contours over SDSS R grayscale from an XMM observation of the
318: nearby galaxy UGC 4229 (P.I. Matteo Guainazzi) where 0809+39 was toward
319: the edge of the field. There is clear emission from the WAT, but there are
320: also several peaks in the region of N$_{Diff}$. Peak 2 is located on the
321: WAT. Peak 1 is coincident with an SDSS photometric object at $z=0.313\pm
322: 0.1$, and peak 4 is coincident with an SDSS photometric object at
323: $z=0.272\pm 0.06$. Peak 3 is offset $\sim 10''$ from a 2MASS galaxy at
324: $z=0.02$, which is also the FIRST source F1 in Figure \ref{vlai}.
325:
326: After subtracting out the four point sources, we found no evidence of
327: excess diffuse emission. Using
328: webPIMMS\footnote{http://heasarc.nasa.gov/Tools/w3pimms.html} we calculate
329: a 3$\sigma$ upper limit X-ray luminosity of L$_{X}$(0.1-2.4~keV)=1$\times
330: 10^{43}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ at an assumed redshift of z=0.2.
331:
332: \subsection{Optical} As one would expect from a region that spans more
333: than $400\arcsec$ on the sky, the optical field of 0809+39 contains
334: multiple, overlapping redshift systems. This is illustrated by Figure
335: \ref{sdssgray}, which shows an SDSS mosaic R image with VLA contours. To
336: set the scale, the large spiral galaxies in this image are at a redshift
337: of roughly z~=~0.04. We begin by outlining the known and cataloged optical
338: systems in this region, then focus our attention on the systems we believe
339: are most likely associated with N$_{Diff}$ and S$_{Diff}$.
340:
341: \cite{dela06} suggested an association of both N$_{Diff}$ and S$_{Diff}$
342: with a grouping of galaxies at z$\sim$0.04. A $z=0.04063$ group (16
343: members) is reported by \cite{mill05} from the SDSS cluster catalog C4,
344: and \cite{merc05} find a group at z=0.040346 (19 members) from DR3.
345: \cite{gal03} also detected z$\sim$0.073 and z$\sim$0.11 clusters in this
346: region. These are plotted in Figure \ref{knownclust}. From Figures
347: \ref{rosat} and \ref{xmmsmall} one can see that none of these have
348: associated X-ray emission.
349:
350: Due to the presence of the WAT at z=0.2, we consider this redshift system
351: as likely associated with N$_{Diff}$ (see arguments in $\S$5.1). To
352: assess the significance of the clustering at this redshift, we used the
353: SDSS photometric galaxy database \citep{adel07} and made a histogram in
354: redshift of all the galaxies within a radius of 6$^{\prime}$ ($\sim$1~Mpc
355: at z=0.2) from the WAT. We then subtracted a histogram (normalized to the
356: same number of total counts) of a roughly 2$\times$2 degree field around
357: the WAT, in order to subtract out any systematics in SDSS's photometric
358: redshifts. The results are displayed in Figure \ref{histo0809}. Figure
359: \ref{sdss0809} shows the spatial distribution of galaxies (number of
360: galaxies/pixel at the redshift of the WAT z=0.2$\pm$0.05) from the SDSS
361: photometric data. A weak clustering of galaxies is seen around the WAT. We
362: also show in Figures \ref{histo0809} and \ref{sdss0809}, for comparison,
363: the results from two X-ray selected clusters at similar redshifts
364: (discussed in $\S$5.1). To assess the relative richness of this
365: group/cluster, we followed the analysis used in \cite{gal03} for
366: estimating the richness of clusters found in the POSS-II survey. We took
367: the number of galaxies (above a background value determined from the
368: surrounding 2x2 degree field) within $\sim$1~Mpc with an absolute R
369: magnitude of -22.53 $<$ M$_{R}$ $<$ -19.53 taken from the SDSS photometric
370: data. The grouping of galaxies associated with the WAT has a richness of
371: 16, which is on the poorer end of the overall distribution of richnesses
372: in DPOSS \citep{gal03}. We should note that the cluster at z=0.073
373: detected by \cite{gal03} is also very close to N$_{Diff}$, and is just as
374: likely to be associated with the diffuse emission as the WAT grouping of
375: galaxies, but the issues discussed in $\S$5 apply to either case. The
376: cluster at z=0.073 had a richness of 24.9, also significantly poor, and
377: roughly corresponding to an Abell richness class of R$<$0
378: \citep{abel89,gal03}.
379:
380: If we allow for the proximity of S$_{Diff}$ with N$_{Diff}$ to be
381: coincidental, then identifying the optical system that is physically
382: connected with S$_{Diff}$ is not straightforward. The three likely
383: possibilities are the z$\sim$0.04, 0.073, and 0.2 groupings of galaxies.
384: We visually searched the spatial distribution of galaxies from the SDSS
385: photometric catalog to find a redshift where there was significant
386: clumping in or near S$_{Diff}$, without success. The spectroscopic
387: database of galaxies in SDSS, while much sparser, does reveal a
388: $\sim$5~Mpc filament of galaxies surrounding S$_{Diff}$ at redshifts of
389: 0.0352 $<$ z $<$ 0.0441 (Figure \ref{spec_z_0809}). Many of these galaxies
390: are those that make up the two groups previously detected in this region
391: \citep{mill05,merc05}, but looking at a wider field reveals the larger
392: filament. We performed the same richness analysis on the filament
393: (centered on RA=122.224, DEC=38.883, 1~Mpc radius) as we did with the WAT
394: group, and found a richness of 13. Figure \ref{spec_dist} shows a wedge
395: diagram of redshift vs. RA for SDSS galaxies with spectra in a roughly
396: 4$\times$4 degree field around 0809+39. We have indicated the range of
397: galaxy redshifts that are plotted in Figure \ref{spec_z_0809}. Groupings
398: of galaxies at higher redshift were not correlated spatially with
399: S$_{Diff}$.
400:
401: \section{Physical Origin of the Radio Emission} We now turn our attention
402: to the physical origin of the diffuse emission. Though we cannot strictly
403: rule out a Galactic origin for either source, the emission is not
404: morphologically similar and is far brighter than typical diffuse galactic
405: emission in this region. We hereafter assume that both components are of
406: extragalactic origin. There are many different types of extragalactic
407: large-scale diffuse radio emission \citep[e.g.,][]{kemp04}, but they in
408: general fall within one of two basic classes: 1) Those directly powered by
409: current AGN activity; 2) Those associated with processes in the
410: intracluster medium (ICM). We include in the second class emission related
411: to processes in the intergalactic plasma of galaxy filaments
412: \citep{kim89,giov90,bagc02,kron07}. In the vast majority of cases,
413: determining the identification is straightforward. Either the diffuse
414: region is directly connected (via jets or filamentary bridges) to an
415: active radio galaxy, or there is a rich cluster of galaxies nearby whose
416: potential well (highlighted by $\sim$10$^{8}$~K, X-ray emitting gas)
417: provides an obvious energy source for particle acceleration (via
418: gravitational collapse/accretion --$>$ shocks/turbulence etc).
419:
420: Both sources in 0809+39 are unique in that neither of these conditions apply
421: (see \citealt{dela06} for two similar sources). There are no cataloged X-ray
422: emitting clusters nearby, only groups and poor clusters of galaxies. An AGN
423: origin for these sources is also not obvious. In this paper we narrow our
424: analysis to the two most likely (or least improbable) sources for the radio
425: emission.
426:
427: \subsection{Northern Component} In this section, we: 1) Rule out
428: N$_{Diff}$ being an extended radio lobe directly powered by the WAT; 2)
429: Give evidence that N$_{Diff}$ is a classical ``radio relic"; 3) Compare
430: N$_{Diff}$ with other relics and conclude that it has an anomalously high
431: radio/X-ray luminosity ratio; 4) Determine that the X-ray luminosity is
432: appropriate for this optical richness, and is thus not to blame for the
433: abnormal luminosity ratio; 5) Examine possible sources of the relativistic
434: electrons such as direct acceleration from the thermal plasma, adiabatic
435: compression (only) of fossil WAT plasma, and reacceleration of fossil WAT
436: plasma. We conclude that the most likely source is reacceleration of
437: fossil plasma from past WAT activity.
438:
439: We first consider whether N$_{Diff}$ could be lobe emission from an AGN.
440: The nearby WAT (F2) is the only reasonable candidate as an AGN source.
441: However, they are spatially well separated, with a peak to peak distance
442: $>$500~kpc at z=0.2. While the FWHM of the long axis of N$_{Diff}$ is
443: 200$\arcsec$, there are faint wings that extend out to 600$\arcsec$. This
444: corresponds to $\sim$2 Mpc at z=0.2, which is a size comparable to that of
445: a giant radio galaxy (GRG). However, its morphology is unlike any other
446: GRG known \citep[e.g.,][]{mach01}. We can also consider the lifetime of
447: particles emitting at 1.4~GHz. The minimum energy magnetic field for
448: N$_{Diff}$ is B$_{min} \sim$ 0.6~$\mu$G, which fixes the Lorentz factor at
449: $\gamma \sim 2\times10^{4}$ and results in inverse Compton losses
450: dominating the lifetime. From \cite{sara99}
451:
452: \begin{equation}
453: t_{IC}=2.3\times 10^{12}\gamma^{-1}\left(1+z\right)^{-4}~yr,
454: \end{equation}
455:
456: \noindent which for N$_{Diff}$ is $t_{IC}\sim 10^{7.7}$~yr. Relaxing the
457: minimum energy requirement for magnetic field strength, we can calculate
458: the maximum lifetime for any electron radiating at 1.4~GHz following the
459: prescription of \cite{sara99}. Assuming a redshift of z=0.2 yields a
460: maximum lifetime of t$_{max} \sim 10^{8}$~yr, similar to that calculated
461: above using B$_{min}$.
462:
463: If we assume a 1~keV gas temperature and only hydrogen gas the sound crossing
464: time is t$_{sc} \sim 10^{9.1}$~yr. Therefore the timescale for 1.4~GHz IC
465: losses will be much shorter than the diffusion/sound-crossing time (from the
466: WAT to N$_{Diff}$). If the WAT was the original source for the N$_{Diff}$
467: plasma, e.g. from an earlier outburst, then there must have been some
468: re-acceleration or adiabatic enhancement. This is no surprise because this has
469: been a longstanding result for radio halos and relics.
470:
471: There are several lines of evidence that point toward N$_{Diff}$ being a
472: radio ``relic" source associated with a poor cluster at z$\sim$0.2: 1)
473: Both the clumping in redshift and the existence of the WAT \citep{owen76}
474: indicate the presence of a cluster; 2) WATs are also known to be
475: associated with merger dynamics
476: \citep{pink93,gome97,roet96,loke95,pink00,blan03}. Additional supporting
477: evidence for merger activity near N$_{Diff}$ comes from the multiple X-ray
478: peaks seen in Figure \ref{xmmsmall}, one of which is coincident with a
479: z=0.27 SDSS galaxy. Currently all known radio relic or halo sources have
480: been found in/near clusters in a disturbed dynamical state \citep{fere06};
481: 3) The long axis of the diffuse emission is perpendicular to the line
482: connecting N$_{Diff}$ and the WAT, typical of relic sources; 4) The
483: diffuse emission is highly polarized, also typical of radio relic sources
484: (e.g. \citealt{giov04}); 5) The magnetic fields are parallel to the long
485: axis of the emission, suggesting shock compression.
486:
487: All of these point toward N$_{Diff}$ being either a Radio Phoenix or
488: Radio Gischt \citep{kemp04}, depending on whether the ``seed" plasma came
489: from an extinct radio galaxy lobe or was initially accelerated at a
490: cluster accretion shock, respectively. The curvature of the WAT (from
491: Figure \ref{vlai}) is toward the North, suggesting infall from the South.
492: With a longest linear extent of $\sim$2 Mpc, N$_{Diff}$ is comparable to
493: larger relic sources around rich clusters of galaxies \citep{giov99}. For
494: radio relics where the spectral index distribution is known, the edge
495: farthest from the cluster is always sharper and has a flatter spectrum
496: \citep{giov04}. Though N$_{Diff}$ does not exhibit this behavior (see
497: Figure \ref{alpha}), we should note that the source is only a little more
498: than a single WSRT beam thick in the transverse direction. Therefore a
499: higher resolution spectral index map is needed to confirm this.
500:
501: We can now ask how N$_{Diff}$ compares to other observed radio relics.
502: Radio halos, diffuse radio emission centered on some clusters of galaxies,
503: are known to exhibit a good correlation between their radio luminosity and
504: the X-ray luminosity of their associated cluster
505: \citep[e.g.,][]{fere03,fere06}. A similar but weaker correlation for radio
506: relics has been claimed by \cite{giov04}, who quoted $P_{1.4GHz} \propto
507: 10^{K} L_{x}$, where K ranged from 0.8 to 2.2. We have compiled a
508: relatively complete list of known relics with available 1.4~GHz flux
509: measurements and plotted their radio luminosities vs. X-ray luminosities
510: in Figure \ref{lrvslx} \citep[compiled
511: from][]{giov91,giov99,kemp01,govo01,slee01,govo05}. N$_{Diff}$ is at least
512: an order of magnitude too luminous (under-luminous) in the radio (X-ray).
513: We examine several possible explanations as to why the radio or X-ray
514: emission from the relic source N$_{Diff}$ is not what we would expect from
515: the radio/X-ray luminosity relation for rich galaxy clusters. From the
516: observed correlation, N$_{Diff}$ should have an $L_{x} \sim
517: 10^{44-45}~erg~s^{-1}$ from 0.1-2.4~keV, but from XMM observations we
518: measure a 3$\sigma$ upper limit of $L_{x} \approx 1\times
519: 10^{43}$~erg~s$^{-1}$. We examine the two quantities in this relation
520: separately, starting with the X-ray luminosity.
521:
522: It is possible that the grouping of galaxies that N$_{Diff}$ is associated
523: with is massive enough to emit the expected amount of X-rays (i.e. $\sim
524: 10^{44-45}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ at 0.1-2.4~keV), but for some reason they are not
525: observed. Perhaps the grouping will have the ``correct" X-ray luminosity
526: eventually, but we have caught it in a very early evolutionary state where
527: the thermal gas has not reached the needed density or temperature to emit
528: sufficiently in the X-rays. The optical properties of the WAT group
529: ($\S$4.2), however, are not representative of massive X-ray emitting
530: clusters (see, e.g., \citealt{ledl03} for optical vs. X-ray properties of
531: Abell clusters). To further show this, we examined the optical properties
532: of the X-ray selected\footnote{We used X-ray selected clusters to avoid
533: pre-selecting optically rich clusters.} clusters RXCJ1327.0+0211 and
534: RXCJ2155.6+1231, both of which have a similar redshift \{0.259, 0.192\} to
535: the WAT and a L$_{x}$ =\{1.67, 1.12\}$\times10^{45}$~erg~s$^{-1}$,
536: respectively \citep{pope04}. For the optical data we again used the SDSS
537: photometric galaxy database and performed the same analysis as with
538: the WAT system ($\S$4.2). Figure \ref{histo0809} shows the histograms and
539: Figure \ref{sdss0809} the distribution of galaxies with the same contour
540: levels as the WAT system. The X-ray clusters show much stronger clustering
541: than the WAT system, both spatially and in redshift. Using the same
542: richness analysis that we used for the WAT group, RXCJ2155.6+1231 and
543: RXCJ1327.0+0211 have richnesses of 42 and 53, respectively, consistent
544: with large X-ray luminous clusters (e.g. \citealt{ledl03}). The lack of
545: X-ray emission in the WAT group, therefore, is consistent with its poor
546: optical properties, and cannot explain the discrepant radio/X-ray
547: luminosity ratio seen in Figure \ref{lrvslx}.
548:
549: We now examine the radio luminosity, which is apparently two orders of
550: magnitude too luminous given the observed correlation for radio relics. We
551: proceed under the assumption that N$_{Diff}$ is related to the presence of
552: a shock, as we argued earlier, and attempt to understand the source of the
553: relativistic electrons that are causing the synchrotron emission. The two
554: likely possibilities are that the electrons were accelerated directly out
555: of the thermal plasma by diffusive shock acceleration (DSA), or the seed
556: electrons came from fossil plasma from past AGN activity and were
557: re-accelerated and/or adiabatically enhanced by the shock.
558:
559: \cite{mini01} performed a cosmological simulation that included only DSA
560: of cosmic rays from the thermal environment and did not include fossil AGN
561: plasma. They report a correlation between 1.4~GHz radio luminosity from
562: primary electrons (those accelerated at shocks) and cluster temperature
563: (see Figure 6 of that paper) that is roughly consistent with the observed
564: correlation for radio relics shown in Figure \ref{lrvslx}. The radio/X-ray
565: luminosity ratio of N$_{Diff}$ is therefore inconsistent with the results
566: of \cite{mini01}. We can examine the conditions under which their
567: simulations would have produce the observed P$_{\nu}$/L$_{X}$ ratio of
568: N$_{Diff}$. Using observed L$_{X}$ vs. T$_{cluster}$ relations
569: \citep{hart08} and theoretical expectations for low-density environments
570: \citep{ryu03}, we assume a T$_{cluster}$ $<$ 1 keV. \cite{mini01} would
571: then predict P$_{\nu}$(1.4~GHz) $\approx 1\times 10^{22}$~W~Hz$^{-1}$,
572: assuming an acceleration efficiency of 10$^{-4}$ and an electron to proton
573: injection ratio of R$_{e/p}$=0.01. Therefore, either the acceleration
574: efficiency needs to be $\sim 0.01$ or R$_{e/p} \sim$1 in order for
575: \cite{mini01} to reproduce the P$_{\nu}$/L$_{X}$ ratio of N$_{Diff}$. It
576: is thus physically possible to use DSA out of the thermal gas to create
577: N$_{Diff}$, but it is not clear why the efficiency or R$_{e/p}$ should be
578: so anomalous in this region.
579:
580: The other possible source of seed electrons is fossil or ``relic" plasma
581: from past AGN activity, presumably from the nearby WAT. There are two
582: possible mechanisms for reviving old plasma. The shock can either
583: adiabatically enhance the relativistic particles and magnetic fields of
584: the relic plasma \emph{only} \citep[e.g.,][]{enss01}, or the shock can
585: reaccelerate the particles as well.
586:
587: In the case of pure adiabatic compression, let us compare the energy
588: content of the current WAT radio lobes and N$_{Diff}$. From the FIRST
589: data, the eastern lobe of the WAT has a minimum energy magnetic field of
590: B$_{min} \approx$ 2.7~$\mu$G and a total energy of E $\approx 6 \times
591: 10^{57}$~erg. N$_{Diff}$ has B$_{min} \approx$ 0.6~$\mu$G and E $\approx
592: 3.4 \times 10^{59}$~erg. It appears that the energy contained in
593: N$_{Diff}$ cannot be explained by adiabatically compressing an extinct
594: radio lobe similar to the current lobes of the WAT. This does not rule
595: out this scenario however, since the current activity of the WAT may not
596: be indicative of past activity, and WATs in general are known to have
597: energies of the same order as N$_{Diff}$ \citep[e.g.,][]{deyo84}.
598:
599: The reacceleration of the fossil electrons can further increase the
600: emissivity of the relic plasma \citep{blan87,mico99,mark05}, potentially
601: by an order of magnitude, depending on the pre-shock spectral index and
602: the shock compression ratio R. From the spectral index of N$_{Diff}$,
603: $\alpha = -1.12$, we can find the shock compression ratio R =
604: $\frac{\alpha-1}{\alpha + 1/2}$ = 3.4 \citep{bell78,drur83} and Mach
605: number M $\approx$ 2.1. The Mach number is a reasonable one for this
606: environment \citep[e.g.,][]{ryu03}. In short, energetically it is not out
607: of the question that the radio emission N$_{Diff}$ was created by shock
608: compressed fossil plasma from the WAT, assuming that the WAT's past
609: activity was stronger than it is currently.
610:
611: Given that DSA of electrons from the thermal plasma reproduces the
612: observed radio vs. X-ray luminosity correlation for radio relics, from
613: which N$_{Diff}$ is a clear outlier, we conclude that reacceleration
614: and/or adiabatic compression of fossil plasma from the WAT source is a
615: more likely origin for the radio emission in N$_{Diff}$. Due to the fact
616: that current activity of the WAT is not energetically comparable to
617: N$_{Diff}$, we must invoke more powerful activity in the past in order to
618: make the adiabatic compression/reacceleration hypothesis work. Had we
619: associated N$_{Diff}$ with the z$\sim$0.07 group of galaxies ($\S$4.2,
620: Figure \ref{knownclust}), the P$_{\nu}$/L$_{X}$ ratio would still have
621: been two orders of magnitude too large for the observed correlation for
622: radio relics. Our arguments would have proceeded the same way, except we
623: would have needed to invoke past activity from an \emph{undetected} AGN to
624: explain the discrepant radio luminosity.
625:
626: \subsection{Southern Component}
627:
628: Many of the same issues that we found with N$_{Diff}$ arise when we
629: consider possible origins for S$_{Diff}$. If we consider an AGN origin,
630: the morphology of S$_{Diff}$ (Figure \ref{vlai}) is reminiscent of a WAT
631: source centered on the FIRST radio source F7. F7, however, does not have
632: an optical counterpart in SDSS. If it is an unidentified WAT, its redshift
633: is likely to be z $>$ 0.5 \citep{schm06}, making its total linear extent
634: $>$3~Mpc. Figure \ref{watpowersize} shows a plot of 1.4~GHz radio power
635: vs. linear extent for a sample of WAT sources from \cite{pink00}. If
636: S$_{Diff}$ were indeed at a redshift of z $>$ 0.5, it would have a linear
637: size that far exceeds typical WATs in this sample. It is also possible
638: that one of the z=0.04 galaxies that makes up the filament (Figure
639: \ref{spec_z_0809}) hosts an AGN that created the extended emission, but
640: none of the galaxies at this redshift (with spectra in SDSS) show signs of
641: AGN activity. However, the AGN could have been disrupted and disappeared
642: leaving the lobe emission behind \citep[e.g.,][]{parm07}, as long as this
643: happens on a timescale less than the 1.4 GHz electron maximum lifetime of
644: 10$^{8}$~yr (see discussion in $\S$5.1). Assuming S$_{Diff}$ is at a
645: redshift of z=0.04, its total energy would be E~$\approx 7.9\times
646: 10^{57}$ erg and the minimum energy magnetic field would be B$_{min}
647: \approx 0.6~\mu$G, not atypical for WAT lobe emission (see $\S$5.1).
648:
649: S$_{Diff}$ could be caused by ICM or IGM processes, similar to our claim
650: for N$_{Diff}$. From Figure \ref{rosat} we can see that, like N$_{Diff}$,
651: there is no cluster X-ray emission detected in either ROSAT or XMM. The
652: apparent filament in which S$_{Diff}$ is embedded offers an intriguing
653: origin for the diffuse emission. Unlike other diffuse radio sources that
654: have claimed to be part of filamentary large-scale structure
655: \citep{kim89,giov90,kron07}, S$_{Diff}$ is not near \emph{any} massive
656: clusters. At 390~kpc long, S$_{Diff}$ is smaller than the $\sim$1.5~Mpc
657: emission in the Coma-Abell 1367 supercluster \citep{kim89,giov90} or the
658: $4-5$~Mpc radio regions found by \cite{bagc02} and \cite{kron07}.
659: \cite{bagc02} detected radio emission coincident with a relatively
660: isolated filament of galaxies (in the region of the cluster
661: ZwCl2341.1+0000), similar to S$_{Diff}$. Unlike S$_{Diff}$, however, the
662: filament was also detected in X-rays with a L$_{X}$(0.1-2.4~keV)$\approx
663: 10^{44}$~erg~s$^{-1}$. Though the linear extent of S$_{Diff}$ is small
664: compared to the overall size of the filament, it is in the densest region.
665: The radio luminosity of S$_{Diff}$ (Table 2), assuming it is embedded in
666: the z$\sim$0.04 filament, is also several orders of magnitude above the
667: radio vs. X-ray luminosity correlation for known relics (Figure
668: \ref{lrvslx}). Therefore, if S$_{Diff}$ is indeed caused by processes in
669: the ICM or IGM, the lack of X-ray emission poses the same problem as it
670: does for N$_{Diff}$. We do not have an active radio galaxy nearby,
671: however, to offer an explanation for S$_{Diff}$'s increased radio
672: luminosity.
673:
674: \subsection{Implications} A consequence of attributing N$_{Diff}$'s
675: abnormally high radio luminosity to the presence of relic radio plasma is
676: that \emph{any} relic that forms in the presence of preexisting magnetized
677: plasma will show an increased luminosity. A signature of this scenario
678: might be in the scatter of the currently observed relics, which could be
679: correlated with the availability of relic plasma from current/past AGN
680: activity. However, the Coma relic 1253+275, which is a relic that is
681: seemingly being fed magnetized plasma from the NAT source NGC 4789
682: \citep{enss01}, is less radio luminous than other relics with similar
683: X-ray luminosity (Figure \ref{lrvslx}). This is contrary to our hypothesis
684: that fossil AGN plasma increases the radio luminosity of relic sources.
685: There are, however, many factors that contribute to the presence and
686: strength of synchrotron emission at a structure formation shock.
687: \cite{mini01} found scatter of the same order as Figure \ref{lrvslx} for
688: the 1.4~GHz emission of primary electrons in their simulations. This is
689: after integrating the radio luminosity over a spherical volume with a
690: radius of 1.3$~h^{-1}$~Mpc, and without including relic plasma from past
691: AGN activity. Since \cite{mini01} used a fixed radius for all the
692: clusters, the radio luminosities they found depend on the details of the
693: current dynamical state and the location of shocks within (or just
694: outside) each cluster. In practice, radio relics represent only a single
695: (perhaps partially) illuminated shock front associated with a cluster. It
696: is thus no surprise that there is such a large scatter in the
697: observational correlation.
698:
699: What then makes these two sources, N$_{Diff}$ and S$_{Diff}$, special? Why
700: have radio relics only been found around rich X-ray clusters up until now?
701: Part of the observational problem is most certainly selection and bias
702: effects. Thus far most searches for relics have focused on rich X-ray
703: emitting clusters, an exception being \cite{rudn06}, from which 0809+39
704: was found. Even \cite{dela06} found only a handful of new candidates, but
705: this could be the tip of a larger distribution that is currently below the
706: NVSS and WENSS surface-brightness limits. On the theoretical side, most
707: simulations that include synthetic radio observations, e.g., \cite{mini01}
708: and \cite{pfro08}, do not include pre-existing relativistic plasma from
709: past/current AGN. \cite{hoef04} simulated the merger of two M~$\approx
710: 1.6\times 10^{13}~M_{\sun}$ clusters of galaxies in order to track the
711: revival of relic radio plasma. They found that efficient re-acceleration
712: only occurred in regions where the ratio of magnetic pressure to gas
713: pressure is P$_{B}$/P$_{gas}$ $<$ 0.01, which explains why this process is
714: inefficient in the inner regions of clusters where P$_{B} \approx$
715: P$_{gas}$. One property that distinguishes N$_{Diff}$ and S$_{Diff}$ from
716: other known relics is that they reside in poor environments. Perhaps poor
717: clusters and groups do not confine relativistic plasma as well, so that
718: radio lobe plasma from AGN can be driven farther (and faster) into the low
719: density regions than they would in rich clusters (we are speaking here
720: about driven jets, not buoyant forces). For adiabatic compression to be
721: most effective, one wants ``younger" electrons, higher compression factors
722: (steeper shocks in cooler gas), and lower magnetic fields (i.e., less
723: radiative losses; \citealt{enss01}). The first two of these conditions can
724: be effectively achieved in the above scenario. Simulations focusing on the
725: evolution of relic AGN plasma in low-density environments are needed in
726: order to fully assess the plausibility of this idea.
727:
728: \section{Summary} We have presented detailed radio observations of the
729: diffuse source 0809+39 in an attempt to discover the origin of the
730: synchrotron emission. To summarize the key messages:\\
731: \noindent$\bullet$ Evidence points toward N$_{Diff}$ being a radio relic,
732: i.e. shock excited synchrotron emission, related to a poor z$\sim$0.2 group of galaxies.\\
733: \noindent$\bullet$ S$_{Diff}$'s origin is ambiguous, though its coincidence with
734: a filament of galaxies at z$\sim$0.04 makes it possible that it could be
735: synchrotron emission from filamentary large-scale structure or relic
736: emission from an extinct radio galaxy within the filament. \\
737: \noindent$\bullet$ Both N$_{Diff}$ and S$_{Diff}$ are more radio luminous than their X-ray properties would suggest, given the apparent P$_{\nu}$vs.L$_{X}$ correlation of known radio relics. \\
738: \noindent$\bullet$ Total energies in N$_{Diff}$ and S$_{Diff}$ are comparable
739: to luminous, diffuse radio galaxies, and could be the result of adiabatic
740: compression/reacceleration of past AGN activity. \\
741: \noindent $\bullet$ When analyzing diffuse radio emission beyond the
742: environments of rich galaxy clusters, determining the true physical origin of
743: these structures is non-trivial, especially at very low surface-brightness
744: levels where emission related to large-scale structure is expected.
745:
746: The issues presented here highlight the difficulty in finding a unified
747: physical model for radio relics. Detailed observations of the radio spectrum,
748: coupled with deep X-ray observations, are needed for a large sample of radio
749: relics in both poor and rich environments in order to determine such a model.
750:
751: \acknowledgments
752: We gratefully acknowledge help and advice from G. de Bruyn and M. Brentjens
753: during our RM-Synthesis analysis of the WSRT data. We thank K. Delain for help
754: in setting up the VLA and WSRT observations. Partial support for this work at
755: the University of Minnesota comes from the U.S. National Science Foundation
756: grants AST~0307600 and AST~0607674.
757:
758: The Very Large Array is a facility of the National Science Foundation, operated
759: by NRAO under contract with AUI, Inc. We also acknowledge the use of NASA's
760: SkyView facility\footnote{(http://skyview.gsfc.nasa.gov)} located at NASA
761: Goddard Space Flight Center. The Westerbork Synthesis Radio Telescope is
762: operated by the ASTRON (Netherlands Foundation for Research in Astronomy) with
763: support from the Netherlands Foundation for Scientific Research (NWO). The
764: Digitized Sky Surveys were produced at the Space Telescope Science Institute
765: under U.S. Government grant NAG W-2166. Archival observations obtained from
766: XMM-Newton, an ESA science mission with instruments and contributions directly
767: funded by ESA Member States and NASA, and ROSAT archives from HEASARC. Funding
768: for the SDSS and SDSS-II has been provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation,
769: the Participating Institutions, the National Science Foundation, the U.S.
770: Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the
771: Japanese Monbukagakusho, the Max Planck Society, and the Higher Education
772: Funding Council for England. The SDSS Web Site is http://www.sdss.org/. The
773: SDSS is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium for the Participating
774: Institutions.
775:
776: \begin{thebibliography}{}
777:
778: \bibitem[Abell et al.(1989)]{abel89} Abell, G.~O., Corwin,
779: H.~G., Jr., \& Olowin, R.~P.\ 1989, \apjs, 70, 1
780:
781: \bibitem[Adelman-McCarthy et al.(2007)]{adel07} Adelman-McCarthy,
782: J.~K., \& et al.\ 2007, VizieR Online Data Catalog, 2276, 0
783:
784: \bibitem[Bagchi et al.(2002)]{bagc02} Bagchi, J., En{\ss}lin,
785: T.~A., Miniati, F., Stalin, C.~S., Singh, M., Raychaudhury, S.,
786: \& Humeshkar, N.~B.\ 2002, New Astronomy, 7, 249
787:
788: \bibitem[Becker et al.(1995)]{beck95} Becker, R.~H., White,
789: R.~L., \& Helfand, D.~J.\ 1995, \apj, 450, 559
790:
791: \bibitem[Bell(1978)]{bell78} Bell, A.~R.\ 1978, \mnras, 182,
792: 147
793:
794: \bibitem[Blandford \& Eichler(1987)]{blan87} Blandford, R., \& Eichler,
795: D.\ 1987, \physrep, 154, 1
796:
797: \bibitem[Blanton et al.(2003)]{blan03} Blanton, E.~L., Gregg,
798: M.~D., Helfand, D.~J., Becker, R.~H., \& White, R.~L.\ 2003, \aj, 125,
799: 1635
800:
801: \bibitem[Brentjens \& de Bruyn(2005)]{bren05} Brentjens, M.~A., \& de
802: Bruyn, A.~G.\ 2005, \aap, 441, 1217
803:
804: \bibitem[Brentjens(2007)]{bren07}
805: Brentjens, M.A. 2007, PhD Thesis
806:
807: \bibitem[Burn(1966)]{burn66} Burn, B.~J.\ 1966, \mnras, 133,
808: 67
809:
810: \bibitem[Cioffi \& Jones(1980)]{ciof80} Cioffi, D.~F., \& Jones, T.~W.\
811: 1980, \aj, 85, 368
812:
813: \bibitem[Clarke \& Ensslin(2006)]{clar06} Clarke, T.~E., \& Ensslin,
814: T.~A.\ 2006, \aj, 131, 2900
815:
816: \bibitem[Condon et al.(1998)]{cond98} Condon, J.~J., Cotton,
817: W.~D., Greisen, E.~W., Yin, Q.~F., Perley, R.~A., Taylor, G.~B.,
818: \& Broderick, J.~J.\ 1998, \aj, 115, 1693
819:
820: \bibitem[Csabai et al.(2003)]{csab03} Csabai, I., et al.\
821: 2003, \aj, 125, 580
822:
823: \bibitem[de Bruyn \& Brentjens(2005)]{debr05} de Bruyn, A.~G., \&
824: Brentjens, M.~A.\ 2005, \aap, 441, 931
825:
826: \bibitem[Delain \& Rudnick(2006)]{dela06} Delain, K.~M., \& Rudnick, L.\
827: 2006, Astronomische Nachrichten, 327, 561
828:
829: \bibitem[De Young(1984)]{deyo84} De Young, D.~S.\ 1984, \physrep, 111, 373
830:
831: \bibitem[Drury(1983)]{drur83} Drury, L.\ 1983, Space Science
832: Reviews, 36, 57
833:
834: \bibitem[En{\ss}lin \& Gopal-Krishna(2001)]{enss01} En{\ss}lin, T.~A., \&
835: Gopal-Krishna 2001, \aap, 366, 26
836:
837: \bibitem[Feretti(2003)]{fere03} Feretti, L.\ 2003, ArXiv
838: Astrophysics e-prints, arXiv:astro-ph/0301576
839:
840: \bibitem[Feretti(2006)]{fere06} Feretti, L.\ 2006, ArXiv
841: Astrophysics e-prints, arXiv:astro-ph/0612185
842:
843: \bibitem[Gal et al.(2003)]{gal03} Gal, R.~R., de Carvalho,
844: R.~R., Lopes, P.~A.~A., Djorgovski, S.~G., Brunner, R.~J., Mahabal, A.,
845: \& Odewahn, S.~C.\ 2003, \aj, 125, 2064
846:
847: \bibitem[Giovannini et al.(1990)]{giov90} Giovannini, G., Kim,
848: K.~T., Kronberg, P.~P., \& Venturi, T.\ 1990, Galactic and Intergalactic
849: Magnetic Fields, 140, 492
850:
851: \bibitem[Giovannini et al.(1991)]{giov91} Giovannini, G., Feretti, L., \&
852: Stanghellini, C.\ 1991, \aap, 252, 528
853:
854: \bibitem[Giovannini \& Feretti(2000)]{giov00} Giovannini, G., \& Feretti,
855: L.\ 2000, New Astronomy, 5, 335
856:
857: \bibitem[Giovannini \& Feretti(2004)]{giov04} Giovannini, G., \& Feretti,
858: L.\ 2004, Journal of Korean Astronomical Society, 37, 323
859:
860: \bibitem[Giovannini et al.(1999)]{giov99} Giovannini, G.,
861: Tordi, M., \& Feretti, L.\ 1999, New Astronomy, 4, 141
862:
863: \bibitem[Gomez et al.(1997)]{gome97} Gomez, P.~L., Pinkney,
864: J., Burns, J.~O., Wang, Q., Owen, F.~N., \& Voges, W.\ 1997, \apj, 474,
865: 580
866:
867: \bibitem[Govoni et al.(2001)]{govo01} Govoni, F., Feretti, L., Giovannini,
868: G., B{\"o}hringer, H., Reiprich, T.~H., \& Murgia, M.\ 2001, \aap, 376,
869: 803
870:
871: \bibitem[Govoni et al.(2005)]{govo05} Govoni, F., Murgia, M., Feretti, L.,
872: Giovannini, G., Dallacasa, D., \& Taylor, G.~B.\ 2005, \aap, 430, L5
873:
874: \bibitem[Hartley et al.(2008)]{hart08} Hartley, W.~G.,
875: Gazzola, L., Pearce, F.~R., Kay, S.~T.,
876: \& Thomas, P.~A.\ 2008, \mnras, 386, 2015
877:
878: \bibitem[Hoeft et al.(2004)]{hoef04} Hoeft, M., Br{\"u}ggen,
879: M., \& Yepes, G.\ 2004, \mnras, 347, 389
880:
881: \bibitem[Kempner et al.(2004)]{kemp04} Kempner, J.~C.,
882: Blanton, E.~L., Clarke, T.~E., En{\ss}lin, T.~A., Johnston-Hollitt, M.,
883: \& Rudnick, L.\ 2004, The Riddle of Cooling Flows in Galaxies and Clusters
884: of galaxies, 335
885:
886: \bibitem[Kempner \& Sarazin(2001)]{kemp01} Kempner, J.~C., \& Sarazin,
887: C.~L.\ 2001, \apj, 548, 639
888:
889: \bibitem[Kim et al.(1989)]{kim89} Kim, K.-T., Kronberg,
890: P.~P., Giovannini, G., \& Venturi, T.\ 1989, \nat, 341, 720
891:
892: \bibitem[Kronberg et al.(1977)]{kron77} Kronberg, P.~P.,
893: Burbidge, E.~M., Smith, H.~E., \& Strom, R.~G.\ 1977, \apj, 218, 8
894:
895: \bibitem[Kronberg et al.(2007)]{kron07} Kronberg, P.~P.,
896: Kothes, R., Salter, C.~J., \& Perillat, P.\ 2007, \apj, 659, 267
897:
898: \bibitem[Ledlow et al.(2003)]{ledl03} Ledlow, M.~J., Voges,
899: W., Owen, F.~N., \& Burns, J.~O.\ 2003, \aj, 126, 2740
900:
901: \bibitem[Loken et al.(1995)]{loke95} Loken, C., Roettiger, K.,
902: Burns, J.~O., \& Norman, M.\ 1995, \apj, 445, 80
903:
904: \bibitem[Machalski et al.(2001)]{mach01} Machalski, J., Jamrozy, M., \&
905: Zola, S.\ 2001, \aap, 371, 445
906:
907: \bibitem[Markevitch et al.(2005)]{mark05} Markevitch, M.,
908: Govoni, F., Brunetti, G., \& Jerius, D.\ 2005, \apj, 627, 733
909:
910: \bibitem[Merch{\'a}n \& Zandivarez(2005)]{merc05} Merch{\'a}n, M.~E., \&
911: Zandivarez, A.\ 2005, \apj, 630, 759
912:
913: \bibitem[Micono et al.(1999)]{mico99} Micono, M., Zurlo, N., Massaglia,
914: S., Ferrari, A., \& Melrose, D.~B.\ 1999, \aap, 349, 323
915:
916: \bibitem[Miller et al.(2005)]{mill05} Miller, C.~J., et al.\
917: 2005, \aj, 130, 968
918:
919: \bibitem[Miniati et al.(2001)]{mini01}
920: Miniati, F., Jones, T. W., Kang, H., \& Ryu, D. 2001, ApJ 562, 233
921:
922: \bibitem[Owen \& Rudnick (1977)]{owen76}
923: Owen, F. N., \& Rudnick, L., 1976, ApJ 205, 1
924:
925: \bibitem[Parma et al.(2007)]{parm07} Parma, P., Murgia, M.,
926: de Ruiter, H.~R., Fanti, R., Mack, K.-H., \& Govoni, F.\ 2007, \aap, 470,
927: 875
928:
929:
930:
931: \bibitem[Pinkney(1993)]{pink93} Pinkney, J.\ 1993, \baas, 25,
932: 1437
933:
934: \bibitem[Pinkney et al.(2000)]{pink00} Pinkney, J., Burns, J.~O., Ledlow,
935: M.~J., G{\'o}mez, P.~L., \& Hill, J.~M.\ 2000, \aj, 120, 2269
936:
937:
938: \bibitem[Pfrommer, En$\ss$lin \& Springel (2008)]{pfro08}
939: Pfrommer, C., En{\ss}lin, T.~A., \& Springel, V.\ 2008, \mnras, 385, 1211
940:
941: \bibitem[Popesso et al.(2004)]{pope04} Popesso, P., B{\"o}hringer, H.,
942: Brinkmann, J., Voges, W., \& York, D.~G.\ 2004, \aap, 423, 449
943:
944: \bibitem[Reich (2006)]{reic06} Reich, W.\ 2006, ArXiv
945: Astrophysics e-prints, arXiv:astro-ph/0603465
946:
947: \bibitem[Roettiger et al.(1996)]{roet96} Roettiger, K., Burns,
948: J.~O., \& Loken, C.\ 1996, \apj, 473, 651
949:
950: \bibitem[Rudnick, Delain \& Lemmerman (2006)]{rudn06}
951: Rudnick, L., Delain, K. \& Lemmerman, J., 2006, AN 327, 549
952:
953: \bibitem[Rudnick \& Lemmerman (2008)]{rudn08}
954: Rudnick, L., \& Lemmerman, J., 2008, submitted to ApJ
955:
956: \bibitem[Ryu et al.(2003)]{ryu03} Ryu, D., Kang, H., Hallman,
957: E., \& Jones, T.~W.\ 2003, \apj, 593, 599
958:
959: \bibitem[Sadler et al.(2007)]{sadl07} Sadler, E.~M., et al.\
960: 2007, \mnras, 381, 211
961:
962: \bibitem[Sarazin(1999)]{sara99} Sarazin, C.~L.\ 1999, \apj,
963: 520, 529
964:
965: \bibitem[Schmidt et al.(2006)]{schm06} Schmidt, S.~J.,
966: Connolly, A.~J., \& Hopkins, A.~M.\ 2006, \apj, 649, 63
967:
968: \bibitem[Slee et al.(2001)]{slee01} Slee, O.~B., Roy, A.~L.,
969: Murgia, M., Andernach, H., \& Ehle, M.\ 2001, \aj, 122, 1172
970:
971: \bibitem[Stoughton et al.(2002)]{stou02} Stoughton, C., et
972: al.\ 2002, \aj, 123, 485
973:
974: \bibitem[York et al.(2000)]{york00} York, D.~G., et al.\ 2000,
975: \aj, 120, 1579
976:
977: \end{thebibliography}
978: \onecolumn
979: \appendix
980:
981: \clearpage
982:
983: \begin{figure}[]
984: \begin{center}
985: \includegraphics[width=12cm]{f1.eps}
986: \caption{\label{wsrti} WSRT 351 MHz total intensity image with
987: contour levels 8.254$\times 10^{-3}$(-0.4, 0.4, 0.5, 0.8, 1.2, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 16, 32, 64) Jy/(108$\arcsec$$\times$60$\arcsec$ beam). S1 and S2 are ``compact" sources at 351 MHz that show sub-structure at higher resolution (see Figure \ref{vlai}).}
988: \end{center}
989: \end{figure}
990:
991: \clearpage
992:
993: \begin{figure}[]
994: \begin{center}
995: \includegraphics[width=15cm]{f2.eps}
996: \caption{\label{vlai} VLA I image (left) with contours 2.0$\times 10^{-4}$(-1, 1, 2,
997: 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15) Jy/(40$\arcsec$$\times$40$\arcsec$ beam). At right are close-ups views of S1 and S2 from the FIRST survey. Contours 4.0$\times 10^{-4}$(1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 20, 50, 100) Jy/(5$\arcsec$$\times$5$\arcsec$ beam).}
998: \end{center}
999: \end{figure}
1000:
1001: \clearpage
1002:
1003: \begin{figure}[]
1004: \begin{center}
1005: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{f3.eps}
1006: \caption{\label{alpha} Spectral index map from 351 MHz to 1.4 GHz, with
1007: WSRT contours 8.25$\times 10^{-3}$(-0.5, 0.5, 0.8, 1, 2, 3, 6, 12,
1008: 24, 48) Jy/(108$\arcsec$$\times$60$\arcsec$ beam).}
1009: \end{center}
1010: \end{figure}
1011:
1012: \clearpage
1013:
1014: \begin{figure}[]
1015: \begin{center}
1016: \includegraphics[width=9cm]{f4a.eps}
1017: \includegraphics[width=9cm]{f4b.eps}
1018: \includegraphics[width=9cm]{f4c.eps}
1019: \caption{\label{fspec} Top: Our RMTF; Center: Faraday spectrum for N$_{Diff}$; Bottom: Faraday spectrum for a large area of the Galactic emission. Characteristic error bars are shown.}
1020: \end{center}
1021: \end{figure}
1022:
1023: \clearpage
1024:
1025: \begin{figure}[]
1026: \begin{center}
1027: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{f5.eps}
1028: \caption{\label{nvsspol} B field orientation obtained from derotating
1029: the NVSS to correct for a rotation measure of +12~rad~m$^{-2}$. Contours are NVSS I
1030: at 4.9$\times 10^{-3}$(-0.3, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.8, 1.2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8,
1031: 16, 32, 64)~Jy/(45$\arcsec$$\times$45$\arcsec$ beam),
1032: and the magnetic field lines are 1$\arcsec$=2.22$\times 10^{-5}$~Jy/(45$\arcsec$$\times$45$\arcsec$ beam).} \end{center}
1033: \end{figure}
1034:
1035: \clearpage
1036:
1037: \begin{figure}[]
1038: \begin{center}
1039: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{f6.eps}
1040:
1041: \caption{\label{wsrtpol} WSRT 351 MHz contour image of 0809+39 I (same
1042: contours and resolution as Figure \ref{wsrti}) with corrected magnetic
1043: field vectors for the RM-Cube at $\phi = +12~rad~m^{-2}$. 1$\arcsec$ = 1.85$\times
1044: 10^{-5}$~Jy/(108$\arcsec$$\times$60$\arcsec$ beam). The apparent ``noise"
1045: in the polarized emission is actually real emission from our own galaxy.}
1046:
1047: \end{center}
1048: \end{figure}
1049:
1050: \clearpage
1051:
1052: \begin{figure}[]
1053: \begin{center}
1054: \includegraphics[width=15cm]{f7.eps}
1055: \caption{\label{rosat} ROSAT broad (0.1-2.4 keV) continuum grayscale
1056: (convolved to 100$\arcsec$) with VLA L-band contours. To the right are ROSAT
1057: images of three X-ray selected clusters at the indicated redshifts, at the
1058: same grayscale and resolution as the 0809+39 ROSAT image.}
1059: \end{center}
1060: \end{figure}
1061:
1062: \clearpage
1063:
1064: \begin{figure}[]
1065: \begin{center}
1066: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{f8a.eps}
1067: \includegraphics[width=9cm]{f8b.eps}
1068: \caption{\label{xmmsmall} Left: XMM Epic observation in counts (convolved
1069: to 20$\arcsec$) with VLA radio contours 6.5$\times 10^{-3}$(0.05, 0.1,
1070: 0.2, 0.4, 8)~Jy/(49$\arcsec$$\times$42$\arcsec$ beam). Note that a faint
1071: X-ray source is coincident with F2 (the WAT seen in Figure \ref{vlai});
1072: Right: SDSS R image with XMM EPIC contours. Grayscale is in units of
1073: counts, and the contours are 4.08$\times$(3.5, 4, 5, 6, 8) counts. X-ray
1074: source 2 is the WAT (F2) and the galaxy near source 3 is coincident with
1075: compact radio source F1.}
1076: \end{center}
1077: \end{figure}
1078:
1079: \clearpage
1080:
1081: \begin{figure}[]
1082: \begin{center}
1083: \includegraphics[width=15cm]{f9.eps}
1084: \caption{\label{sdssgray} SDSS R mosaic grayscale (in counts) with VLA
1085: 1.4 GHz contours at 2.0$\times$10$^{-4}$~(-1, 1, 2,
1086: 3)~Jy/(40$\arcsec$$\times$40$\arcsec$ beam).}
1087: \end{center}
1088: \end{figure}
1089:
1090: \clearpage
1091:
1092: \begin{figure}[]
1093: \begin{center}
1094: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{f10.eps}
1095: \caption{\label{knownclust} Plot of known groups/clusters in the 0809+39
1096: region. Boxes are z$\approx$0.04 systems, triangles are z$\approx$0.07 systems,
1097: and the cross is a z$\approx$0.11 cluster.}
1098: \end{center}
1099: \end{figure}
1100:
1101: \clearpage
1102:
1103: \begin{figure}[]
1104: \begin{center}
1105: \includegraphics[width=11cm]{f11.eps}
1106: \caption{\label{histo0809} Histograms of galaxy photometric redshifts
1107: from SDSS for 6$^{\prime}$ around the WAT source F2 (Top, see Figure
1108: \ref{vlai}) and the X-ray selected clusters RXCJ1327.0+0211 (Center) and
1109: RXCJ2155.6+1231 (Bottom) (Popesso et al. 2004). Note that all the histograms have a narrow peak at z$\sim$0.35. This is an artifact of the template fitting method for calculating the photometric redshifts (\citealt{csab03}; see Figure 16 in that paper).}
1110: \end{center}
1111: \vspace{-.4in}
1112: \end{figure}
1113:
1114: \clearpage
1115:
1116: \begin{figure}[]
1117: \begin{center}
1118: \includegraphics[width=5cm]{f12a.eps}
1119: \includegraphics[width=5cm]{f12b.eps}
1120: \includegraphics[width=5cm]{f12c.eps}
1121: \caption{\label{sdss0809} Distribution of galaxies from the SDSS photometric
1122: database with redshifts between 0.15 $<$ z $<$ 0.25, smoothed to 6$^{\prime}$.
1123: Left: 0809+39; Using the same redshift limits we show two X-ray selected clusters for comparison: Middle: RXCJ1327.0+0211; Right: RXCJ2155.6+1231}
1124: \end{center}
1125: \vspace{-.4in}
1126: \end{figure}
1127:
1128: \clearpage
1129:
1130: \begin{figure}[]
1131: \begin{center}
1132: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{f13a.eps}
1133: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{f13b.eps}
1134: \caption{\label{spec_z_0809} Top: Distribution of 0.0366 $<$ z $<$ 0.0448
1135: galaxies with spectroscopic red-shifts in SDSS plotted as stars. Bottom:
1136: close-up view of the boxed region in the top panel. S$_{Diff}$ is
1137: embedded in the filament of galaxies.} \end{center}
1138: \vspace{-.4in}
1139: \end{figure}
1140:
1141: \clearpage
1142:
1143: \begin{figure}[]
1144: \begin{center}
1145: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{f14.eps}
1146: \caption{\label{spec_dist} Distribution of redshift vs. RA for galaxies
1147: with spectroscopic redshifts in SDSS in a roughly 4$\times$4 degree field
1148: around 0809+39. The dashed lines enclose the range in z used to create
1149: Figure \ref{spec_z_0809} (0.0366 $<$ z $<$ 0.0448), and show the
1150: clustering of the filament galaxies. There are other significant
1151: structures at higher redshifts, but the filament at z=0.04 was deemed
1152: significant based on its spatial correlation with S$_{Diff}$.}
1153: \end{center}
1154: \end{figure}
1155:
1156: \clearpage
1157:
1158: \begin{figure}[]
1159: \begin{center}
1160: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{f15.eps}
1161: \caption{\label{lrvslx} Plot of relic radio luminosity/Hz at 1.4 GHz vs. the 0.1-2.4 keV
1162: X-ray luminosity of the associated cluster. Compiled are 22 radio
1163: relics from Giovannini et al. (1991); Giovannini, Tordi, \& Feretti
1164: (1999); Kempner \& Sarazin (2001); Govoni et al. (2001); Slee et al.
1165: (2001); Govoni et al. (2005). They represent a complete list of radio
1166: relics that have reasonably reliable 1.4~GHz Flux density measurements.}
1167: \end{center}
1168: \vspace{-.4in}
1169: \end{figure}
1170:
1171: \clearpage
1172:
1173: \begin{figure}[]
1174: \begin{center}
1175: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{f16.eps}
1176: \caption{\label{watpowersize} 1.4 GHz power vs. linear extent in kpc for
1177: a sample of WAT sources (Pinkney et al. 2000). S$_{Diff}$, if at redshift
1178: of z$>$0.5, is an extremely large radio galaxy.}
1179: \end{center}
1180: \end{figure}
1181:
1182: \clearpage
1183:
1184: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccccc}
1185: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1186: \tablecaption{Properties of the Diffuse Components of 0809+39}
1187: \tablewidth{0pt}
1188: \tablehead{
1189: \colhead{Source} & \colhead{P-band flux}\tablenotemark{a} &
1190: \colhead{L-band flux}\tablenotemark{a} & \colhead{FWHM Size} &
1191: \colhead{Frac.
1192: Pol. 351 MHz} & \colhead{Mean $\alpha$} & \colhead{$\phi$} \\
1193: \colhead {} & \colhead{(mJy)} & \colhead{(mJy)} & \colhead{\arcsec} & \colhead{\%} & \colhead{} & \colhead{$rad~m^{-2}$} } \startdata
1194:
1195: N$_{Diff}$ & 178$\pm$0.7 & 37.8$\pm$0.7 & 200 & 19 & -1.12 & +12 \\
1196: S$_{Diff}$ & 136$\pm$1.1 & 24.8$\pm$1.0 & 490 & $<9$~(3$\sigma$) & -1.23 & $\sim$ +6\tablenotemark{b} \\
1197:
1198: \enddata
1199: \tablenotetext{a}{Errors taken from final maps $\sigma_{rms}$ and does not include the uncertainty in the total intensity calibration}
1200: \tablenotetext{b}{Typical local galactic value}
1201: \end{deluxetable}
1202:
1203:
1204: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccccc}
1205: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1206: \tablecaption{Distance Dependent Properties of 0809+39}
1207: \tablewidth{0pt}
1208: \tablehead{
1209: \colhead{Region} & \colhead{z} & \colhead{$P_{0.32}$} & \colhead{$P_{1.4}$} & \colhead{$L_{X}$~(0.1-2.4~keV)} &
1210: \colhead{Physical Size} & \colhead{$B_{min}$} \\
1211: \colhead{} &\colhead{} & \colhead{$10^{23}$~W~Hz$^{-1}$} & \colhead{$10^{23}$~W~Hz$^{-1}$} & \colhead{log(erg~s$^{-1}$)} &
1212: \colhead{Mpc} & \colhead{$\mu$G}
1213: }
1214: \startdata
1215: N$_{Diff}$ & 0.20 & 205 & 43.4 & $<$43.0~(3$\sigma$) & 0.66 & 0.64 \\
1216: S$_{Diff}$ & 0.04 & 5.07 & 0.99 & $<$41.5~(3$\sigma$) & 0.39 & 0.57 \\
1217: \enddata
1218: \end{deluxetable}
1219:
1220:
1221:
1222: \end{document}
1223:
1224:
1225:
1226:
1227:
1228:
1229:
1230:
1231:
1232:
1233:
1234:
1235:
1236:
1237: