1: %\documentstyle[11pt,aasms4,psfig]{article}
2: %\documentstyle[11pt,aaspp4,psfig]{article}
3:
4: \documentstyle[aas2pp4,psfig]{article}
5: %\documentstyle[aaspptwo,psfig]{article}
6: \newcommand{\etal}{{{ et al.}}~}
7: \newcommand{\eg}{{{e.g.,}}~}
8: \newcommand{\ie}{{{i.e.,}}~}
9: \newcommand{\kms}{{{km s$^{-1}$}}~}
10: \newcommand{\kmsc}{{{km s$^{-1},$}}~}
11: \newcommand{\kmsp}{{{km s$^{-1}.$}}~}
12: \newcommand{\Ho}{{{H$_\circ$}}~}
13: \newcommand{\amin}{{{$^\prime$}}~}
14: \newcommand{\asec}{{$^{\prime\prime}$}~}
15:
16: \begin{document}
17:
18: \title{\bf A PREDICTION OF OBSERVABLE ROTATION \\IN THE ICM OF ABELL 3266}
19:
20: \vspace{1.in}
21: \author{KURT ROETTIGER}
22: \affil{Department of Physics and Astronomy\\University of
23: Missouri-Columbia\\Columbia, MO 65211\\E-mail:
24: kroett@hades.physics.missouri.edu}
25: \author{RICARDO FLORES}
26: \affil{ Dept. of Physics and Astronomy\\University of Missouri-St. Louis\\St.
27: Louis, MO 63121-4499\\E-mail: Ricardo.Flores@umsl.edu}
28:
29: \vspace{.5in}
30:
31: \begin{center}{Accepted for publication in the Astrophysical Journal}
32: \end{center}
33:
34: % Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
35: % are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. The actual alternate
36: % affiliation information is typeset in footnotes at the bottom of the
37: % first page, and the text itself is specified in \altaffiltext commands.
38: % There is a separate \altaffiltext for each alternate affiliation
39: % indicated above.
40:
41: %\altaffiltext{1}{NAS/NRC Associate}
42: %Visiting Astronomer, Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory.
43: %CTIO is operated by AURA, Inc.\ under contract to the National Science
44: %Foundation.}
45: %\altaffiltext{2}{Society of Fellows, Harvard University.}
46: %\altaffiltext{3}{present address: Center for Astrophysics,
47: % 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138}
48: %\altaffiltext{4}{Visiting Programmer, Space Telescope Science Institute}
49: %\altaffiltext{5}{Patron, Alonso's Bar and Grill}
50:
51:
52: % The abstract environment prints out the receipt and acceptance dates
53: % if they are relevant for the journal style. For the aasms style, they
54: % will print out as horizontal rules for the editorial staff to type
55: % on, so long as the author does not include \received and \accepted
56: % commands. This should not be done, since \received and \accepted dates
57: % are not known to the author.
58:
59:
60: \begin{abstract}
61: We present a numerical Hydro+N-body model of A3266
62: whose X-ray surface brightness, temperature distribution,
63: and galaxy spatial and velocity distribution data
64: are consistent with the A3266 data. The model is
65: an old ($\sim$3 Gyr),
66: off-axis merger having a mass ratio of $\sim$2.5:1.
67: The less massive subcluster in the model
68: is moving on a trajectory from
69: southwest to northeast passing on the western side of the dominant
70: cluster while moving into the plane of the sky at $\sim$45 degrees.
71: Off-axis mergers such as this one
72: are an effective mechanism for transferring angular momentum
73: to the intracluster medium (ICM),
74: making possible a large scale rotation
75: of the ICM. We demonstrate here that the ICM rotation predicted by our
76: fully 3-dimensional model of A3266 is observable with current technology.
77: As an example, we present simulated observations assuming the
78: capabilities of the high resolution X-ray spectrometer (XRS) which
79: was to have flown on {\it Astro-E}.
80:
81:
82: \end{abstract}
83:
84: \keywords{Hydrodynamics--- methods: numerical--- galaxies: intergalactic medium
85: --- galaxies: clusters: individual (Abell 3266)---X-rays: Techniques:
86: Spectroscopy}
87:
88:
89: \section{Introduction}
90:
91: A3266 is a nearby (z=0.059; Quintana, Ramirez \& Way 1996),
92: X-ray luminous cluster which exhibits
93: optical and X-ray substructure. Two models have recently been proposed to
94: explain the substructure in this cluster. Flores, Quintana, \& Way (1999)
95: have proposed that A3266 experienced a major merger {\it into} the plane of the sky while Henriksen, Donnelly, \& Davis (1999) have proposed a minor
96: merger parallel to the plane of the sky.
97: Using a large sample of galaxy redshifts (387 galaxies), Quintana \etal (1996)
98: suggested that A3266
99: might have
100: experienced a merger 1-2 Gyr ago. Flores et al. (1999) found support for
101: this interpretation using a simple N-body model.
102: They noted an enhancement of galaxies north of the X-ray core
103: similar, both visually and statistically, to
104: the N-body particle spray found in their numerical simulations.
105: They also noted
106: a similar enhancement of emission-line galaxies in the same region.
107: It has long been suggested that galaxies passing through cluster cores
108: could be spectroscopically altered (Dressler \& Gunn 1983), although it now
109: appears that this would be mostly due to the tidal force rather than ram
110: pressure by the ICM (\eg Moore \etal 1996; Bekki 1999; Fujita \etal 1999). Burns
111: \etal (1994) have suggested that the Coma cluster E+A galaxies distributed in
112: the core and SW toward the NGC 4839 group
113: are the result of a burst of star formation induced by a merger about 2 Gyr ago,
114: which appears consistent with their starburst age (Caldwell \etal 1996). Similarly, the emission-line galaxies in A3266 could be the tail end of the disrupted less
115: massive cluster in this model.
116:
117: %RF -- Changes to reflect what's in the ref2response.2.txt file...
118: Evidence of recent dynamical evolution is also
119: apparent in the X-ray surface brightness (XSB; Fig. \ref{a3266})
120: and temperature distributions. For example, the XSB was shown to exhibit a
121: systematic centroid shift by Mohr, Fabricant \& Geller (1993). Also, the
122: XSB exhibits changing ellipticity and isophotal twisting between 4\amin and
123: 8\amin (Mohr \etal 1993) as well as a large ($\sim$500 kpc) core radius
124: (Mohr, Mathiesen \& Evrard 1999), as would be expected in the case of a recent
125: merger (Roettiger \etal 1996).
126: %RF -- end
127: Peres \etal (1998) find no evidence of
128: a cooling flow. Several researchers (\eg McGlynn \& Fabian 1984) have
129: suggested
130: that mergers will disrupt cooling flows. G\'omez \etal (1999) have
131: demonstrated using numerical simulations
132: that the time scale for re-establishment of the disrupted cooling flow
133: in the post-merger environment can be greater than several billion years,
134: depending on the initial cooling flow and merger parameters. Markevitch \etal
135: (1998; hereafter MFSV98)
136: and Henriksen \etal (1999; hereafter HDD99) have produced
137: temperature
138: maps based on {\it ASCA} data that show significant temperature variations across
139: the cluster. MFSV98 shows a radially decreasing temperature profile
140: ranging from 12 keV in the central 3\amin to $\sim$6 keV at radii greater than
141: 8\amin. De Grandi \& Molendi (1999) find a similar radial temperature gradient using {\it BeppoSAX} data. The HDD99 temperature map exhibits
142: a comparable range in ICM temperatures with a gradient increasing from NE to SW
143: across the cluster.
144:
145: In this paper, we extend the N-body model of Flores \etal (1999) by including the
146: hydrodynamics of the ICM. We then demonstrate using a fully 3-dimensional numerical
147: model that the current A3266 data are consistent with an old off-axis merger
148: occurring largely {\it into} the plane
149: of the sky. Off-axis mergers are
150: a natural consequence of large-scale tidal
151: torques, the latter being
152: a generic feature of hierarchical clustering
153: (Peebles 1969).
154: The model of Flores et al. (1999) resulted in an off-axis merger as a result
155: of the global angular momentum imposed at the protocluster stage, which in
156: terms of the standard dimensionless angular momentum $\lambda$ (Peebles 1969)
157: corresponded to $\lambda = 0.07$. This amount is consistent with tidal torquing
158: and is expected to be largely independent of mass (Barnes \& Efstathiou 1987).
159: Therefore the characteristics of the merger are not sensitively dependent on
160: extending the region that was simulated around the cluster.
161: In sufficient
162: quantity, angular momentum can significantly alter the internal structure
163: of clusters, which can then influence our interpretation of other cluster
164: observations. As an example, numerical simulations (Inagaki \etal 1995;
165: Roettiger \etal 1997) have
166: shown that the
167: shape of clusters (\eg oblateness being a consequence of rotation) can have
168: significant systematic effects on determinations of H$_\circ$ based
169: on the Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect (see Birkinshaw (1999) for a review).
170:
171: We describe our model and make direct comparisons to the data in
172: \S\ref{model}.
173: In \S\ref{strategy}, we present detailed models of proposed
174: {\it Astro-E} observations based on the line-of-sight (LOS) ICM density,
175: temperature
176: and velocity structure provided by the numerical model. Section \ref{summary}
177: is
178: a summary of our results. We assume \Ho=70 \kms Mpc$^{-1}$ when scaling the
179: simulation to physical dimensions.
180:
181:
182:
183:
184: \section{A Numerical Model of A3266.}
185: \label{model}
186: We have created a numerical model of A3266 using
187: the same technique that we have employed in several previous models
188: of specific Abell clusters
189: (\eg A2256 Roettiger \etal 1995; A754, Roettiger \etal 1998;
190: A3667, Roettiger, Burns \& Stone 1999). Within the framework of idealized initial
191: conditions, we survey merger parameter space (mass ratios, impact parameters,
192: gas content, etc.) using a fully 3-dimensional Hydro/N-body
193: code based on the Piecewise-Parabolic Method (PPM; Colella \& Woodward 1984)
194: and
195: a Particle-Mesh (PM) N-body code.
196: We then attempt to maximize
197: agreement between synthetic observations of the simulation and various cluster
198: observables (X-ray surface brightness, X-ray temperature distribution,
199: galaxy spatial and velocity distributions etc.) in order to constrain
200: not only the merger parameters, but also the epoch and
201: viewing geometry of the merger. Here, we have modeled A3266
202: as an off-axis merger between a primary cluster
203: of $\sim$1.1$\times$10$^{15}$M$_\odot$
204: and a secondary of $\sim$5$\times$10$^{14}$M$_\odot$ in which
205: closest approach occurred approximately 3 Gyr ago. The secondary cluster, moving
206: southwest to northeast, passed to the west of the primary cluster's core at a
207: distance
208: of $\sim$230 kpc with a velocity of $\sim$2500 \kmsp The trajectory is believed
209: to be into the plane of the sky at an angle of $\sim$45$^\circ$.
210:
211: Figure \ref{a3266sim} shows the synthetic XSB image
212: generated from the model. Like the {\it ROSAT} PSPC image (Fig. \ref{a3266}), the simulated image
213: shows a generally spherical distribution at large radii with significant
214: isophotal twisting near the X-ray core which is elongated NE to
215: SW. The orientation of the X-ray cores (both simulated and observed)
216: are not well-aligned
217: with the projected mass distribution derived from gravitational
218: lensing (Joffre \etal 1999) further indicating that the cluster is not
219: fully relaxed. It should be noted that the resolution of the numerical
220: simulations ($\sim$75 kpc or $\sim$4 zones core radius) is significantly less
221: than the resolution of the {\it ROSAT} image (15\asec/pixel or
222: $\sim$20$h^{-1}_{70}$ kpc).
223:
224: Also included in Fig. \ref{a3266sim} is a sampling of $\sim$300 N-body
225: particles ($<$1\% of total) from both the primary ($\diamond$) and secondary (+) clusters.
226: The excess of secondary cluster particles to the north of the X-ray core
227: accounts for the galaxy excess as well as the distribution of emission-line
228: galaxies
229: noted by Flores \etal (1999). The observed galaxy
230: velocity distribution is indistinguishable from Gaussian within
231: the central region.
232: The observed skewness and kurtosis within the central 1$^\circ \times 1^\circ$
233: field are 0.024 and 0.14, respectively, while the N-body particle
234: values are 0.051$\pm$0.15 and 0.13$\pm$0.26. On a larger scale ($\sim$2$^\circ$), Flores \etal
235: (1999)
236: find the observed skewness and kurtosis to be 0.106 and 0.341, respectively. The global N-body
237: velocity dispersion is 905$\pm$40 \kmsc while Quintana \etal (1996)
238: observe a global galaxy velocity dispersion of 1085$\pm$51 \kmsp The
239: discrepancy
240: here is possibly due to choosing too low a value for the initial cluster
241: $\beta$-parameter.
242:
243:
244: A3266 contains a central dumb-bell galaxy with a velocity separation of $\sim$400 \kmsp
245: Quintana \etal (1996) suggest that this is consistent with the merger geometry proposed here.
246: Although consistent with a younger merger that is nearly in the plane of
247: the sky, it is also consistent with an older merger at any projection since the time scales for dynamical friction
248: to act on the dominant galaxy are long (Kravtsov \& Klypin 1998). The velocity
249: separation noted here should be contrasted with the 2635\kms separation observed
250: between dominant galaxies in the proposed young merger A2255 (Burns \etal 1995).
251:
252: It has been suggested that radio source morphology may give clues to
253: the ICM dynamics. The radio emitting plasma is believed to be 10 to 100 times less
254: dense than the surrounding thermal gas making it susceptible to pressure gradients
255: and flows within the ICM (\eg Burns 1998). HDD99 used the morphology of two radio sources
256: to support their model, and depending on the exact location of these sources
257: within the cluster, they are also consistent with the model presented here. We should
258: comment however that considerable caution must be used when
259: interpreting radio source morphology in this context.
260: Both sources in question
261: are located SW of the cluster core (see Jones \& McAdam 1992). One
262: appears to be a head-tail source while the other is identified as a possible
263: Wide-Angle Tailed radio source (WAT). WATs have been used as indicators of
264: bulk flows
265: in clusters, because they have traditionally been associated with central
266: dominant
267: galaxies which are presumed to be at rest in the cluster's gravitational
268: potential minimum making knowable its exact location (and relative velocity) within the cluster.
269: Consequently, any bending
270: of the WAT tails is the result of ICM dynamics rather than motion of the host
271: galaxy.
272: However, both of these radio sources are associated with galaxies having
273: velocities
274: significantly different ($\Delta$V$\sim$800 \kms) from the mean cluster velocity
275: indicating
276: that they may have considerable velocities of their own and may even be
277: foreground or background objects.
278:
279:
280: Figure \ref{a3266simt} shows the projected, emission-weighted temperature
281: map overlaid with the XSB contours.
282: Often the X-ray temperature distribution provides the strongest constraints
283: on the merger parameters. Two X-ray temperature maps have been published
284: recently
285: based on {\it ASCA} data (MFSV98; HDD99). Although
286: largely consistent, they do differ systematically. Both maps show a similar
287: degree of temperature variation ($\sim$6-12 kev) within the cluster. However,
288: the MFSV98 map shows a hot core with a radially decreasing temperature
289: profile while the HDD99 map shows more of a temperature gradient
290: across the cluster. The core is not the hottest region in the HDD99 map.
291: For this reason,
292: we have performed a region-by-region comparison of our model with both
293: published temperature maps. Figure \ref{tcomp}a is a comparison between
294: our model and the corresponding
295: regions in the MFSV98 map. Figure \ref{tcomp}b compares the model
296: temperatures within regions defined by HDD99 (see Fig. \ref{a3266simt} for region definition).
297: Our model agrees within the 90\% confidence intervals of all but one region defined
298: by MFSV98. In an absolute sense, the agreement with the HDD99 map is just as
299: good
300: although their quoted uncertainties are significantly smaller than those
301: quoted
302: by MFSV98. The most significant discrepancy between our model and HDD99 is
303: in region 5 which includes the cluster core. Although our model agrees
304: quite well with MFSV98 in this region (Region 1; Fig. \ref{tcomp}a), the HDD99
305: map
306: indicates a cooler core. If correct, this could be an indication that
307: %RF -- Changes to reflect what's in the ref2response.2.txt file...
308: cooling may have started to influence the core (where cooling
309: times are the shortest) because the merger is relatively old.
310: %RF -- end
311: Our current model does not include the effects of radiative cooling.
312:
313: A3266 has recently been observed in the hard X-ray band (15-50 keV)
314: by {\it BeppoSAX} (De Grandi \& Molendi 1999). They found no evidence of a hard
315: X-ray component nor is there currently any evidence of diffuse radio emission. This
316: result is consistent with an old merger interpretation since shocks present
317: in young mergers might be expected to accelerate relativistic particles
318: which may produce observable
319: diffuse radio emission via synchrotron and hard X-rays via inverse Compton scattering (see Sarazin 1999
320: for a recent review).
321:
322: Given the model presented here, what can we say about the gas dynamics
323: in A3266? First, A3266 appears to be an old off-axis merger in which
324: the angular momentum of the initial clusters is due to tidal torquing
325: (Flores \etal 1999).
326: Previous off-axis merger simulations (Roettiger \etal 1998; Ricker 1998) have
327: shown that
328: mergers can transfer significant angular momentum to the ICM and that this
329: angular momentum can be long-lived. In fact, because of the time and distance scales
330: involved,
331: it takes a considerable period (several billion years) for full rotation to develop.
332: To understand this, consider a mean rotational velocity, $v_{rot}$=1000 \kmsc
333: at a radius, $r=$500 kpc. The time required to complete circulation about the core
334: is then simply $t=2\pi r/v_{rot}$ or $\sim$3 Gyr. In this model, full rotation
335: occurs between 2.5 and 3 Gyr after core passage and persists beyond 4 Gyr. Of
336: course this is in the absence of a second significant merger event which could
337: potentially disrupt the circulation.
338:
339: Figure \ref{simrot} shows the gas velocities within an east-west plane taken
340: along
341: the observer's LOS and through the cluster core. Note that even at
342: this late stage of the merger, there are still significant gas velocities
343: ($>$500 \kms)
344: and that full rotation has been established. Further note, that shocks
345: generated early in the merger have now dissipated while extremes in the
346: temperature distribution have not. As we
347: have pointed out previously (Roettiger \etal 1996), substructure of this
348: type can persist well beyond the
349: canonical sound crossing time. Thus, it
350: may significantly influence estimates
351: of cosmological parameters based on
352: the frequency of substructure in clusters (\eg Richstone,
353: Loeb, \& Turner 1992).
354: As we will see in \S\ref{strategy}, our model not only predicts
355: fully developed rotation in A3266, but also predicts a viewing geometry that
356: places a significant component of the opposing bulk flows along the observer's
357: LOS, thus enhancing the prospect of detecting it spectroscopically.
358:
359: \section{Observing the ICM Rotation with {\it Astro-E}}
360: \label{strategy}
361:
362: The {\it Astro-E} XRS (Audley \etal 1999) is a high resolution X-ray
363: spectrometer scheduled for
364: launch in early 2000. With $\sim$10 eV energy resolution and a quantum efficiency near
365: unity
366: across the 0.4 to 10 keV energy band, it represents the first opportunity to
367: directly
368: observe gas dynamics in the ICM. Of course, these observations will be limited
369: to
370: LOS gas velocities, and will be confused by multiple temperature, velocity,
371: and
372: possibly metal abundance components along the LOS. For this reason, it is extremely
373: useful
374: to have a 3-dimensional model of the gas density, temperature, and dynamical
375: structure
376: both when planning observations and interpreting the data.
377:
378: Figure \ref{simvmap} represents a simple LOS emission-weighted mean velocity
379: map
380: based on the numerical model. Analogous to the temperature map (Fig.
381: \ref{a3266simt}),
382: velocities within a given computational zone along the LOS are simply weighted
383: by the
384: X-ray volume emissivity ($\propto n^2 T^\frac {1} {2}$). The range in
385: velocities across the
386: cluster is greater than 800 \kmsp The opposing bulk motions evident on either
387: side of
388: the X-ray core constitute a strong signature of ICM rotation. West of the core,
389: gas
390: is moving away from the observer at greater than 500 \kms while east of the
391: core, gas
392: is moving toward the observer at greater than 300 \kmsp Of course, this
393: velocity
394: map is only indicative of the observable LOS gas motions in the cluster.
395: Below,
396: we discuss detailed simulations of {\it Astro-E} observations.
397:
398: Based on the model, we propose two pointings selected to optimize their expected
399: velocity separation and XSB.
400: We suggest one pointing on each side of of the X-ray core,
401: separated by $\sim$8\amin ($\sim600$$h_{70}^{-1}$) on an east-west line
402: running 2\amin north of the X-ray maximum. The pointing location is
403: chosen in part to avoid the point source located $\sim$4\amin due east of the
404: core.
405: The expected mean emissivity-weighted velocities at these two
406: locations are -195 \kms (east) and +533 \kms (west) for a $\Delta$V=728 \kmsp
407:
408: In order to test the feasibility of this observation, we have used our
409: numerical model and
410: XSPEC (Arnaud 1996) to generate synthetic X-ray spectra for each of the two
411: pointings described above.
412: Each spectrum is a composite of 50 spectra
413: (Raymond-Smith+absorption) characterized
414: by the local ICM temperature, density, velocity, and chemical abundance within
415: a computational zone
416: along the observer's LOS. We have assumed a uniform abundance of 0.2 solar (De
417: Grandi \& Molendi 1999).
418: The total flux of the simulated cluster is scaled to
419: 2.84$\times$10$^{-11}$ erg s$^{-1}$
420: cm$^{-2}$ (0.5-2.0 keV; David \etal 1999) while the absorption is characterized by
421: N$_h$=3.0$\times$10$^{20}$
422: cm$^{-2}$ (White \etal 1999). De Grandi \& Molendi (1999) quote a somewhat lower absorption
423: of
424: N$_h$=1.6$\times$10$^{20}$cm$^{-2}$. Using the {\it ROSAT} PSPC image as a flux
425: distribution
426: template, a list of photon events is generated using MKPHLIST\footnote
427: {http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/astroe/}. Optimum
428: exposures are determined
429: to be 50 ksec (east) and 60 ksec (west). The resulting events were then input
430: to XRSSIM$^1$.
431: After excluding photons not in the XRS FOV, the
432: count rates for the east and west pointings are 0.20 and 0.17 cts s$^{-1}$,
433: respectively, or approximately 10$^4$ counts per spectrum. After rebinning of
434: the
435: photons to improve the statistics,
436: we produce the spectra
437: shown in Fig. \ref{simspec}. An isothermal fit
438: to the
439: Fe K-line complex (6.2-6.7 keV) yields a velocity centroid shift of -219$\pm$85 \kms east
440: of the core and +544$\pm$80 \kms west of the core for a velocity separation of 763$\pm$117 \kms
441: between the two pointings. These values are consistent with those expected
442: from a direct examination of the numerical model (see above), thus demonstrating that the ICM rotation
443: present in
444: the model when scaled to the XSB of A3266 is in fact
445: observable at a high level of significance with the {\it Astro-E} XRS.
446:
447:
448:
449: \section{Summary}
450: \label{summary}
451:
452: We have presented a 3-dimensional numerical Hydro +N-body model of A3266 which
453: is consistent with a wide range of observed properties. We believe A3266
454: represents
455: an old ($\sim$3 Gyr), off-axis merger that is occurring into the plane
456: of the sky at a 45$^\circ$ angle. The model is consistent, within resolution limits, with
457: the {\it ROSAT} PSPC
458: image, current {\it ASCA} temperature maps, {\it BeppoSAX} hard X-ray flux limits,
459: the galaxy spatial and velocity
460: distributions, and the existing radio data. We have also checked that
461: the projected mass distribution
462: agrees with gravitational lensing data.
463:
464: In this model, the off-axis merger
465: has imparted significant angular momentum on the ICM of the merger
466: remnant which we predict should be observable with the XRS on {\it Astro-E}.
467: The signature of rotation will appear as two opposing bulk flows ($\Delta$V$\sim$800\kms) located
468: on either side of the cluster's X-ray core along a line of constant declination.
469: The degree of circulation present in the core of our model is
470: consistent with high resolution Hydro+N-body simulations of galaxy cluster formation
471: from cosmological initial conditions (Norman \& Bryan 1998).
472: Neither the galaxy redshift data nor the N-body particle distribution
473: show similar evidence of rotation. Unlike the ICM interaction which
474: can be characterized as `collisional', the interaction between the subcluster
475: galaxy components is `collisionless'. Therefore, while the transfer
476: of angular momentum between ICM components is very efficient, angular
477: momentum is not transferred between the galaxy components.
478:
479: It is difficult to assess the overall uniqueness of our model at the present time.
480: Individually, no
481: single
482: observation
483: places a strong constraint on the model. Even taken together, there is
484: considerable flexibility in the merger parameters and viewing geometry, and we
485: cannot rule out the possibility
486: that
487: recent mergers with significantly less massive subclusters
488: have played some role (HDD99). Although
489: limitations in the current data set certainly contribute to this problem, it
490: is also indicative of an older merger that no distinctive features currently
491: exist. In the event ICM rotation is not detected, the
492: observations described here will nonetheless provide important
493: new constraints on the model and on ICM dynamics in general.
494: In addition, these data will result in highly accurate
495: temperature and metalicity measurements for two widely separated
496: regions within a single cluster thus giving clues to the degree
497: of spatial variation in both quantities. Inhomogeneities in the
498: distribution of metals may help quantify the rate of mixing between
499: gas components within the merger.
500:
501: \acknowledgements
502: We would like to thank all the people who supported the {\it Astro-E}
503: mission which inspired this work. We would also like to express our deep regret at the loss of the instrument during launch.
504: We thank the Earth and Space Data Computing Division of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) for use of
505: the MasPar2 on which these simulations were performed. We also thank the Laboratory
506: of High Energy Astrophysics at GSFC for making
507: available the {\it ROSAT} archival data through the W3Browse facility and
508: for making available the {\it Astro-E} simulation software. This
509: work has made use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System (ADS) Abstract Service
510: and the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED). We thank
511: J. P. Henry and J. O. Burns for their useful comments and discussions.
512: The work of RF has been supported by a University of Missouri Research
513: Board Award. KR dedicates this work to the memory of George O. Minot
514: (1906-2000).
515:
516:
517: %\newpage
518: %\section*{References}
519: %\bigskip
520: % \everypar=
521: % {\hangafter=1 \hangindent=.5in}
522:
523: \begin{references}
524:
525: \reference{} Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in ASP Conf. Ser. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis
526: Software and Systems, eds. G. H.
527: Jacoby \& J. Barnes (San Francisco:ASP), 17
528:
529: \reference{} Audley \etal 1999, After the Dark Ages: When Galaxies were Young (the Universe
530: at 2$<$z$<$5), eds. S. Holt
531: \& E. Smith. AIP, 428
532:
533: \reference{}Barnes, J. E., \& Efstathiou, G. 1987, ApJ, 319, 575
534:
535: \reference{}Bekki, K. 1999, ApJ, 510, L15
536:
537: \reference{}Birkinshaw, M. 1999, Physics Reports, 310, 97
538:
539: \reference{}Burns, J. O., 1998, Science, 280, 345
540:
541: \reference{}Burns, J. O., Roettiger, K., Ledlow, M., \& Klypin, A. 1994, ApJ, 427, L87
542:
543: \reference{}Colella, P. \& Woodward, P. 1984, J. Comp. Phys., 54, 174
544:
545: \reference{}David, L. P., Forman, W., \& Jones, C. 1999, ApJ, 519, 1999
546:
547: \reference{}De Grandi, S. \& Molendi, S. 1999, ApJ Letters, in press. (astro-ph/9910413)
548:
549: \reference{}Dressler, A. \& Gunn, J. E. 1983, ApJ, 270, 7
550:
551: \reference{}Flores, R., Quintana, H., \& Way, M. J. 1999, ApJ, in press.
552: (astro-ph/9903292)
553:
554: \reference{}Fujita, Y, Takizawa, M., Nagashima, M., \& Enoki, M. 1999, PASJ, 51, L1
555:
556: \reference{}Gomez, P., Loken, C., Roettiger, K., \& Burns, J. O. 1999, ApJ submitted.
557:
558: \reference{}Henriksen, M., Donnelly, R. H., \& Davis, D. S. 1999, ApJ, in press
559: (astro-ph/9909243) (HDD99)
560:
561: \reference{}Inagaki, Y., Suginohara, T., \& Suto, Y. 1995, PASJ, 47, 411
562:
563: \reference{}Joffre, M. \etal 1999, submitted to ASP Conf. Ser., Gravitational Lensing:
564: Recent Progress and Future Goals, eds T. Brainerd
565: and C. Kochanek (astro-ph/9909029)
566:
567: \reference{}Jones, P. A. \& McAdam, W. B. 1992, ApJS, 80, 137
568:
569: \reference{}Kravtsov, A. V., \& Klypin, A. A. 1998, in the Proceedings ofthe 12th Potsdam Cosmology Workshop,
570: Large Scale Structure: Tracks and Traces. Eds. V. Mueller, S. Gottloeber, J. P. Muecket, J. Wambsganss.
571: World Scientific, 31
572:
573: \reference{}Markevitch, M., Forman, W. R., Sarazin, C. L. \& Vikhlinin, A. 1998, ApJ, 503,
574: 77 (MFSV98)
575:
576: \reference{}McGlynn, T. A. \& Fabian, A. C. 1984, MNRAS, ApJ, 208, 709
577:
578: \reference{}Mohr, J. J., Fabricant, D. G., \& Geller, M. J. 1993, ApJ, 413, 492
579:
580: \reference{}Mohr, J. J., Mathiesen, B. \& Evrard, A. 1999, ApJ, 517, 627
581:
582: \reference{}Moore, B., Katz, N., Lake, G., Dressler, A., \& Oemler, A. Jr. 1996, Nature, 379, 613
583:
584: \reference{}Norman, M. L. \& Bryan, G. L. 1998, in Ringberg Workshop on M87, eds. K. Meisenheimer
585: \& H.-J. R\"oser, Springer Lecture Notes in Physics (astro-ph/9802335)
586:
587: \reference{}Peebles, P. J. E. 1969, ApJ, 155, 393
588:
589: \reference{}Peres, C. B. \etal 1998, MNRAS, 298, 416
590:
591: \reference{}Quintana, H., Ramirez, A., \& Way, M. J. 1996, AJ, 112, 36
592:
593: \reference{}Richstone, D., Loeb, A. \& Turner, E. L. 1992, ApJ, 393, 477
594:
595: \reference{}Ricker, P. M., 1998, ApJ, 496, 670
596:
597: \reference{}Roettiger, K., Burns, J. O., \& Loken, C. 1996, ApJ, 473, 651
598:
599: \reference{}Roettiger, K., Stone, J. M., \& Mushotzky, R. 1997, ApJ, 482, 588
600:
601:
602: \reference{}Roettiger, K., Stone, J. M., \& Mushotzky, R. 1998, ApJ, 493, 62
603:
604:
605: \reference{}Roettiger, K., Burns, J. O., \& Stone, J. M. 1999, ApJ, 518, 603
606:
607:
608: \reference{}Sarazin, C. 1999, ApJ, 520, 529
609:
610: \reference{}White, D. A., Jones, C., \& Forman, W. 1999, MNRAS, 292, 419
611:
612: \end{references}
613:
614:
615: \clearpage
616:
617: \figcaption[fig1.ps]{The {\it ROSAT} PSPC archival image of Abell 3266. The image
618: is background subtracted. Contour levels are 0.02, 0.04, 0.07,
619: 0.14, 0.25, 0.45, 0.55, 0.65, 0.75, 0.85, 0.95 of peak. \label{a3266}}
620:
621: \figcaption[fig2.ps]{ A synthetic X-ray surface brightness image
622: generated from the numerical model of A3266. Contours and linear
623: dimensions (assuming \Ho=70 \kms Mpc$^{-1}$) are the same as in
624: Fig. \ref{a3266}. The $\diamond$'s and $+$'s represent primary and secondary cluster particles,
625: respectively. \label{a3266sim}}
626:
627: \figcaption[fig3.ps]{ The projected emission-weighted temperature
628: map of the A3266 model (color) overlaid with the X-ray surface brightness
629: (contours). The numbered boxes are the temperature regions defined by HDD99.
630: \label{a3266simt}}
631:
632: \figcaption[fig4.ps]{Region-by-Region comparisons between the model
633: temperature distribution and that observed by a) MFSV99 and b) HDD99
634: using {\it ASCA}. The regions defined by HDD99 are shown in Fig. \ref{a3266simt}.\label{tcomp}}
635:
636: \figcaption[fig5.ps]{ Velocity vectors
637: overlaid with X-ray emissivity (contours)
638: within a 2-dimensional east-west (left to right) slice taken through the
639: cluster core and
640: along the observer's LOS (bottom to top).
641: Note the large-scale counterclockwise rotation near the cluster core.
642: Panel dimensions are 3.3 $\times$ 3.3 Mpc. The longest vector is $\sim$900 \kmsp
643: \label{simrot}}
644:
645:
646: \figcaption[fig6.ps]{Emission-weighted LOS ICM velocities
647: (color) overlaid with X-ray surface brightness (contours). Velocities
648: on the eastern half of the cluster (blue) are moving toward the observer
649: while velocities on the western half of the cluster (red) are moving
650: away from the observer. The background color (light blue) corresponds
651: to 0 \kmsp \label{simvmap}}
652:
653: \figcaption[fig7.ps]{ Simulated {\it Astro-E} spectra taken
654: 4\amin on either side the X-ray core along an East-West line 2\amin
655: north of the core.
656: Each represents a 50-component model ($\rho$,T,$v$ from 50 zones within the
657: numerical simulation) normalized to the flux at the corresponding
658: location in A3266. The vertical solid lines indicate the location of the fit
659: to the line centroid. Integration times are 50 ksec East and 60 ksec West.
660: \label{simspec}}
661:
662: \end{document}
663:
664: