1: \NeedsTeXFormat{LaTeX2e}[1996/06/01]
2:
3: \def\aa{{A\&A}}
4: \def\aas{{A\&AS}}
5: \def\aj{{AJ}}
6: \def\annrev{{ARA\&A}}
7: \def\apj{{ApJ}}
8: \def\apjs{{ApJS}}
9: \def\baas{{BAAS}}
10: \def\mnras{{MNRAS}}
11: \def\nat{{Nature}}
12: \def\pasp{{PASP}}
13: \def\Msol{\hbox{$\thinspace M_{\odot}$}~}
14: \def\etal{et al.~\rm}
15: \def\keV{keV}
16: \def\Mpc{Mpc}
17:
18:
19: \documentclass[cup5b]{caps}
20: \usepackage{graphicx}
21: \usepackage{amssymb}
22: %\usepackage{ociwsymp3} %Use this for invited papers.
23: \usepackage{ociwsymp3e} %Use this for contributed papers.
24:
25: \HeadText{L. R. Jones et al} %Enter author name; if three authors, list all three;
26: %otherwise, list first author followed by et al.
27:
28: \def\plotone#1{\centering \leavevmode
29: \includegraphics[width=.95\columnwidth]{#1}}
30:
31: \def\plottwo#1#2{\centering \leavevmode
32: \includegraphics[width=.45\columnwidth]{#1} \hfil
33: \includegraphics[width=.45\columnwidth]{#2}}
34:
35:
36: \def\plotone#1{\centering \leavevmode
37: \includegraphics[width=.95\columnwidth]{#1}}
38:
39: \def\plottwo#1#2{\centering \leavevmode
40: \includegraphics[width=.45\columnwidth]{#1} \hfil
41: \includegraphics[width=.45\columnwidth]{#2}}
42:
43: \begin{document}
44:
45: \pagenumbering{arabic}
46:
47: \author[]{L. R. JONES$^{1}$, B. J. MAUGHAN$^{1}$, H. EBELING$^{2}$, C. SCHARF$^{3}$,
48: E. PERLMAN$^{4}$ \and D. LUMB$^{5}$, P. GONDOIN$^{5}$,
49: K.O. MASON$^{6}$, F. CORDOVA$^{7}$ and W. C. PRIEDHORSKY$^{8}$
50: \\
51: (1) University of Birmingham, UK~
52: (2) Institute for Astronomy, Hawaii, USA\\
53: (3) Columbia University, NY, USA~
54: (4) University of Maryland, MD, USA\\
55: (5) ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands~
56: (6) MSSL, University College London, UK\\
57: (7) University of California, CA, USA~
58: (8) Los Alamos National Laboratory, NM, USA }
59:
60:
61:
62: \chapter{AN XMM and Chandra view of massive clusters of galaxies to z=1}
63:
64: \begin{abstract}
65:
66: The X-ray properties of a sample of high redshift (z$>$0.6), massive
67: clusters observed with $XMM-Newton$ and $Chandra$ are described,
68: including two exceptional systems. One, at z=0.89, has an X-ray temperature of
69: T=11.5$^{+1.1}_{-0.9}$ keV (the highest temperature of any cluster known
70: at z$>$0.6), an estimated mass of
71: $\approx$(1.4$\pm$0.2)x10$^{15}$ \Msol,
72: and appears relaxed. The other,
73: at z=0.83, has at least three sub-clumps, probably in the process of
74: merging, and may also show signs of faint filamentary structure at large radii,
75: observed in X-rays.
76: In general there is a mix of X-ray morphologies, from those clusters which appear
77: relaxed and containing little
78: substructure to some highly
79: non-virialized and probably merging systems. The X-ray gas
80: metallicities and gas mass fractions of the relaxed systems are similar
81: to those of low redshift clusters of the same temperature, suggesting that
82: the gas was in place, and containing its metals, by z$\approx$0.8.
83: The evolution of the mass-temperature relation may be consistent with no evolution
84: or with the ``late formation'' assumption.
85: The effect of point source contamination in the $ROSAT$ survey from which these
86: clusters were selected is estimated, and the
87: implications for the $ROSAT$ X-ray luminosity function discussed.
88:
89: \end{abstract}
90:
91: \section{Introduction}
92:
93: Massive clusters of galaxies are rare objects, forming from the
94: high-sigma tail of the cosmological density distribution. Their properties
95: are powerful probes of cosmology, and give insight into the
96: process of structure formation
97: on large scales. For example, compared to z=0, and
98: in a $\Lambda$CDM Universe, the number density of virialized
99: halos of $M>5$x10$^{14}$ \Msol is predicted to be a factor of $\approx$10
100: lower at z=0.5, or a factor of $\approx$100 lower at z=1, from both simulations
101: and the Press-Schechter approximation (eg. Bode \etal 2001). Such a large
102: change in number density implies that a significant fraction of the progenitor
103: systems at high redshift should be unvirialized, perhaps containing
104: lower mass systems in the process of merging.
105:
106: The number of genuinely massive clusters known at high redshifts is very
107: small, and the number of relaxed high redshift massive clusters is even
108: smaller. Thus the fraction
109: which are relaxed, giving direct information
110: on the epoch and mode of assembly of massive clusters, is poorly known.
111: Relaxed, massive clusters at high redshifts
112: also offer the best opportunities for deriving
113: total masses and gas mass fractions from the X-ray data without
114: too many uncertainties due to hydrostatic equilibrium assumptions,
115: and also with reasonable signal-to-noise.
116:
117: Detailed analyses of 3 of the clusters presented here can be found in
118: Maughan \etal (2003a,b). We use $\Omega_m$=0.3, $\Omega_{\Lambda}$=0.7 and
119: H$_0$=70 km s$^{-1}$ unless otherwise stated.
120:
121: \section{The cluster sample}
122:
123: The clusters were discovered in a $ROSAT$ serendipitous X-ray survey
124: (WARPS - Scharf \etal 1997, Jones \etal 1998, Perlman \etal 2002).
125: Of 16 clusters at z$>$0.6 which form a complete, X-ray selected sample,
126: 10 have been observed with $XMM$ and/or $Chandra$. For 3 of these, the
127: $XMM$ observations were of low quality due to periods of high background.
128: The remaining observations, however, represent a major step forward
129: compared to previous results from $ROSAT$ (see also Rosati \etal, these
130: proceedings and references therein).
131:
132: \section{Analysis of the high redshift clusters}
133:
134: Standard analysis techniques were applied to the $XMM$ and $Chandra$ data,
135: taking into account the ACIS contamination affecting the low energy efficiency,
136: and using a local background subtraction method to obtain spectra.
137: Images were exposure corrected and adaptively smoothed so that all features are
138: significant at the 99\% confidence level.
139:
140: In general a single temperature was measured
141: (but see CLJ1226.9+3332 below for a temperature profile).
142: Two-dimensional $\beta$-profiles were fit to the images, including PSF blurring,
143: to obtain values for
144: the core radii and $\beta$. For the clusters which appeared relaxed, and assuming
145: spherical symmetry, the gas mass was derived from an integral of the
146: density profile given by the $\beta$-profile. The total gravitating mass
147: was derived by additionally assuming isothermality and hydrostatic equilibrium.
148: The total mass within a radius $r$ is then given by
149:
150: \begin{eqnarray}
151: \label{egn:hydroeqm}
152: M(<r) & = & 1.13\times10^{14}\beta\frac{T}{\keV}\frac{r}{\Mpc}\frac{(r/r_c)^2}{1+(r/r_c)^2}M_{\odot}.
153: \end{eqnarray}
154:
155: To measure the virial radius, we used eqn (1.1) to find the radius within which the total overdensity
156: was 200 times the critical density at the redshift of each cluster.
157: The quoted fluxes, luminosities and masses were measured via an extrapolation from the typical detection radius
158: of $\sim$0.3-0.45 $r_{vir}$ to the virial radius.
159:
160: \section{Descriptions of the clusters}
161:
162: \subsection{A massive, relaxed cluster at z=0.89}
163:
164: The discovery of CLJ1226.9+3332 is described by Ebeling \etal (2001).
165: The $XMM$ image of CLJ1226.9+3332 is shown in Fig \ref{f12}, overlaid on a deep I band image.
166: The X-ray morphology appears generally
167: relaxed, in contrast to cluster MS1054-0321, the other high temperature cluster known at z$>$0.8
168: (Jeltema \etal 2001). The $XMM$ temperature of 11.5$^{+1.1}_{-0.9}$ keV is consistent with the
169: velocity dispersion of $\approx$1100 km s$^{-1}$, based on 15 galaxy redshifts. The bolometric
170: X-ray luminosity is 5.4x10$^{45}$ erg s$^{-1}$. We derive a mass of (1.4$\pm$0.2)x10$^{15}$ \Msol
171: within the virial radius. Our analysis of a short $Chandra$ observation confirms the lack of significant
172: point-source contamination, and the temperature and luminosity, albeit with lower precision (see also
173: Cagnoni \etal 2001).
174:
175: A temperature profile (Fig \ref{f12}) is consistent with the cluster being isothermal out to 45\% of
176: the virial radius. The metal abundance of $Z$=0.33$^{+0.14}_{-0.10} Z_{\odot}$ and gas
177: mass fraction of 8.6$^{+1.1}_{-1.0}$\% are consistent with those of local clusters of the
178: same temperature (see below).
179:
180: This cluster is unique in being at high redshift, yet massive and generally relaxed. It must
181: have been assembled when the age of the Universe was significantly less than 6 Gyr.
182: Further details of the $XMM$ analysis and the cosmological implications are given in Maughan \etal
183: (2003b).
184:
185: \begin{figure}
186: \centering
187: \includegraphics[width=7cm,angle=0]{1226xmm.eps}
188: \includegraphics[width=6cm,angle=0]{1226Tprof.eps}
189: \caption{Top - $XMM$ contours (0.3-8 keV) overlayed on a Subaru I-band image of
190: cluster ClJ1226.9+3332 (z=0.89). The contours are logarithmically spaced.
191: Bottom - $XMM$ X-ray temperature profile of ClJ1226.9+3332. The solid line is at the best fitting
192: global temperature, with 1$\sigma$ errors shown by the dashed lines. }
193: \label{f12}
194: \end{figure}
195:
196:
197:
198: \subsection{A massive cluster in formation at z=0.83}
199:
200: In stark contrast is the highly unrelaxed, massive cluster ClJ0152.7-1357, described in Ebeling
201: \etal (2000), Della Ceca \etal (2000) and Maughan \etal (2003a). The $Chandra$ image and a recently
202: acquired deep $XMM$ image are shown in Fig \ref{f34}. Based on the $Chandra$ data, we find that
203: the cluster consists of two major sub-clumps at very similar redshifts
204: and of temperatures
205: 5.5$^{+0.9}_{-0.8}$ keV and 5.2$^{+1.1}_{-0.9}$ keV. The total mass of each subcluster is
206: $\approx$(5-6)x10$^{14}$ \Msol.
207: A dynamical analysis of the system shows that the subclusters are likely to be gravitationally
208: bound. When merged, the system mass will be similar to that of the Coma cluster.
209:
210: The deeper $XMM$ image shows lower surface brightness features. To the east is a low luminosity
211: system also at the cluster redshift (Demarco \etal 2003, in preparation). To the NW is a possible
212: filamentary structure with a point source and one or two low luminosity extended sources, probably
213: groups, embedded within it. This structure falls within a radius of 1.6 Mpc (the dashed circle), the estimated
214: virial radius of the final merged system, suggesting that it is part of the same formation
215: process. The faintest filamentary emission is significant at $>$5$\sigma$ in the soft 0.3-1 keV band
216: and has a hardness ratio consistent with a temperature of 1$\pm$0.7 keV. We may be observing
217: the warm baryons predicted to lie within filaments, based on simulations of structure formation.
218:
219: \begin{figure}
220: \centering
221: \includegraphics[width=7cm,angle=0]{0152.eps}
222: \includegraphics[width=7cm,angle=0]{0152xmm.eps}
223: \caption{
224: Top - $Chandra$ contours of ClJ0152.7-1357 (z=0.833).
225: Bottom - $XMM$ greyscale image of ClJ0152.7-1357. The circle denotes the estimated virial
226: radius of the final, merged, system. Note the group to the east (at the same redshift as the cluster)
227: and the filamentary structure, with embedded sources, to the NW.
228: }
229: \label{f34}
230: \end{figure}
231:
232:
233: \subsection{Other clusters at z$>$0.6}
234:
235: $Chandra$ and $XMM$ contours of the remaining 5 clusters are shown in Figs \ref{f56}, \ref{f78} and
236: \ref{f9} in order of
237: the most relaxed first. There is a wide range of morphologies, and
238: some (eg ClJ1559) clearly have bright point X-ray sources nearby.
239:
240: An additional cluster, ClJ1227.3+3333 (z=0.766) is shown in Fig \ref{f10}. This is an extremely unrelaxed
241: system. Although not in the original
242: $ROSAT$ sample (it fell below a window support shadow), it is detected in an $XMM$ image and
243: is a factor $\sim$12 less luminous than ClJ1226.9+3332.
244: There is no clear optical or X-ray core, but rather a system of $\approx$4 X-ray subclumps
245: separated by $\sim$0.5 Mpc which
246: are at a very similar redshift. There is a red sequence in the galaxy colours. This is probably
247: a highly non-virialized system seem in formation, yet it is detected in X-rays.
248:
249: \begin{figure}
250: \centering
251: \plottwo{j1113.eps}{0046.eps}
252: % \includegraphics[width=7cm,angle=0]{j1113.eps}
253: % \includegraphics[width=7cm,angle=0]{0046.eps}
254: \caption{Left - $Chandra$ contours of ClJ1113.1-2615.
255: Right - $XMM$ contours of ClJ0046.3+8531 }
256: \label{f56}
257: \end{figure}
258:
259: \begin{figure}
260: \centering
261: \plottwo{1008.eps}{1559.eps}
262: % \includegraphics[width=7cm,angle=0]{1008.eps}
263: % \includegraphics[width=7cm,angle=0]{1559.eps}
264: \caption{Left - $XMM$ contours of ClJ1008.7+5342
265: Right - $XMM$ contours of ClJ1559.1+6353.}
266: \label{f78}
267: \end{figure}
268:
269: \begin{figure}
270: \centering
271: \includegraphics[width=7cm,angle=0]{1342.eps}
272: \caption{$XMM$ contours of ClJ1342.8+4028.}
273: \label{f9}
274: \end{figure}
275:
276: \begin{figure}
277: \centering
278: \includegraphics[width=9cm,angle=270]{asmooa.ps}
279: \caption{$XMM$ contours of ClJ1227.3+3333 (z=0.766), which is adjacent to
280: ClJ1226.9+3332 on the sky, although at a different redshift. The contours are linearly
281: spaced and the underlying image is in the R band, from Subaru.}
282: \label{f10}
283: \end{figure}
284:
285:
286:
287:
288: \section{Metallicities and gas mass fractions}
289:
290: Most of the metals in a cluster are in the X-ray gas, and so the evolution of the metallicity of the gas
291: provides important information on the chemical history of the Universe. In Fig \ref{f11} we show that
292: our measurements, and those of others, of cluster metallicities up to z=0.9 are consistent with the canonical
293: value of 0.3 times the solar value found at lower redshifts by Mushotzky \& Loewenstein (1997).
294:
295: The gas mass fractions we measure, within a radius of 0.3$r_{vir}$ (where they are the most
296: reliable) are consistent with those
297: found by Sanderson \etal (2002) for local clusters of the same temperature. Thus the gas, and the metals
298: it contains, were in place by z$\approx$0.8 in at least some massive clusters.
299:
300: \begin{figure}
301: \centering
302: \includegraphics[width=9cm,angle=0]{metalsa.eps}
303: \caption{Cluster metallicity vs. redshift. Circles at low redshifts are from Mushotzky \& Loewenstein
304: (1997), with 90\% confidence error bars, filled (red) squares represent this work,
305: with 68\% confidence error bars, and the open square is from Jeltema \etal (2001). }
306: \label{f11}
307: \end{figure}
308:
309:
310: \section{The evolution of the mass-temperature relation}
311:
312: In Fig \ref{f12a} we show the mass-temperature relation for those high redshift clusters which appear
313: reasonably relaxed (shown as red squares). The circles are the low redshift data points of
314: Sanderson \etal (2002). In both cases the mass is that measured within the virial radius, $r_{200}$, and
315: in both studies $r_{200}$ is measured from the derived mass profile as the radius within which the density
316: is 200 times the critical density at the redshift of observation. The low and high redshift
317: samples have different treatments of the temperature profile, however. For the high redshift sample
318: we (necessarily) assume isothermality. For the low redshift sample, the temperature profile is measured
319: and thus a more accurate mass is derived.
320:
321: \begin{figure}
322: \centering
323: \includegraphics[width=9cm,angle=0]{mtcol.eps}
324: \caption{Total mass within $r_{200}$
325: vs. X-ray temperature. Squares (red) represent the relaxed clusters in this work
326: at high redshifts. Open circles are from Sanderson \etal (2002) at low redshifts. See text for details
327: of the measurement methods and the z=0.8 prediction (lower dashed line).
328: }
329: \label{f12a}
330: \end{figure}
331:
332:
333: The upper dashed line shows the best fit to the low redshift points. The lower (red) dashed line
334: shows the expected change in normalisation assuming clusters observed at z=0.8 were formed at z=0.8,
335: using the relation $E(z)M\propto T^{3/2}$, where
336: $E(z)=(1+z)\sqrt{(1+z\Omega_M+\Omega_\Lambda/(1+z)^2-\Omega_\Lambda)}$. It is interesting to note
337: that all the high redshift clusters except the most massive one are consistent with the low redshift
338: relation, rather than the z=0.8 prediction.
339: It is however the most massive cluster (ClJ1226) which has evidence of isothermality and the most
340: reliable mass. The masses of the other high redshift clusters
341: would need to be reduced by $\approx$40\% in order to be consistent with
342: the z=0.8 prediction. Sanderson \etal have shown that an incorrect assumption of
343: isothermality when clusters are not isothermal produces, on average,
344: masses which are too high by 30\% at $r_{200}$. This would explain most of the offset we find.
345: Further work is in progress, and will be reported in future papers, but
346: more accurate masses at high redshifts, based on temperature profiles, may be required before
347: firm conclusions can be reached.
348:
349:
350:
351: \section{Point source contamination of $ROSAT$ luminosities}
352:
353: The $ROSAT$ detections were obtained at $ROSAT$ off-axis angles of up to 15 arcmin, where the
354: PSF degrades to $\approx$50 arcsec (FWHM). Thus some point-source contamination is expected
355: in all the $ROSAT$ cluster surveys. The degree of contamination depends on the signal-to-noise ratio
356: of the detection and the algorithm used for source detection and characterisation.
357:
358: Based on a preliminary analysis, 2 or 3 out of 9 clusters at z$>$0.6 in the WARPS survey were
359: artificially boosted above the survey flux limit by significant point source contamination. Removing these
360: sources from the sample, and using the updated $XMM$ and $Chandra$ fluxes, we recomputed the
361: X-ray luminosity function at 0.6$<z<$1.1. The resultant shifts to lower space densities were
362: within the Poissonian error bars, suggesting that point source contamination can be an important
363: effect for individual $ROSAT$ measurements, but the previous broad conclusions regarding
364: cluster evolution are unaffected.
365:
366: %\section{Conclusions}
367:
368:
369: \section{References}
370:
371: \noindent
372: Bode, P., Bahcall, N.~A., Ford, E.~B., Ostriker, J.~P., 2001, \apj, 551, 15\\
373: Cagnoni, I., Elvis, M., Kim, D.-W., Mazzotta, P., Huang, J.-S., Celotti, A., 2001, ApJ, 560, 86\\
374: Della Ceca, R., Scaramella, R., Gioia, I.M., Rosati, P., Fiore, F., Squires, G., 2000, A\&A, 353, 498\\
375: Ebeling, H., Jones, L.~R., Perlman, E.~S., Scharf, C.~A., Horner, D.,
376: Wegner, G., Malkan, M., Mullis, C.R. 2000, ApJ, 534, 133.\\
377: Ebeling, H., Jones, L.~R., Fairley, B.~W., Perlman, E., Scharf, C.,
378: Horner, D. 2001, ApJ 548, L23.\\
379: Jeltema, T.~E., Canizares, C. R., Bautz, M. W., Malm, M. R., Donahue, M., Garmire, G. P., 2001,
380: ApJ, 562, 124\\
381: Jones, L.R., Scharf, C.A., Ebeling, H., Perlman, E., Wegner, G., Malkan, M., Horner, D.,
382: 1998, ApJ, 495, 100\\
383: Maughan, B.J., Jones, L.R., Ebeling, H., Perlman, E., Rosati, P., Frye, C., Mullis, C.R.,
384: 2003a, ApJ in press (astro-ph/0301218)\\
385: Maughan, B.J., Jones, L.R., Ebeling, H., Scharf C., 2003b, in preparation\\
386: Mushotzky, R. F., Loewenstein, M., 1997, ApJ, 481, L63\\
387: Perlman, E.S., Horner, D., Jones, L.R., Scharf, C., Ebeling, H., Wegner, G.,
388: Malkan, M., 2002, ApJS, 140, 265\\
389: Scharf, C., Jones, L.R., Ebeling, H., Perlman, E., Wegner, G., Malkan, M., 1997, ApJ, 477, 79\\
390:
391:
392:
393: \section{Acknowledgements}
394: We acknowledge useful discussions with Stefano Ettori, Gus Evrard, Monique Arnuad \& Trevor Ponman.
395:
396:
397: \end{document}
398: