1: %\documentclass[11pt,preprint]{/usr/local/teTeX/share/texmf/tex/latex/aastex502/aastex}
2: \documentclass[11pt,preprint]{aastex}
3:
4: \pagestyle{plain}
5: \def\wisk#1{\ifmmode{#1}\else{$#1$}\fi}
6: \def\lt {\wisk{<}}
7: \def\gt {\wisk{>}}
8: \def\le {\wisk{_<\atop^=}}
9: \def\ge {\wisk{_>\atop^=}}
10: \def\lsim {\wisk{_<\atop^{\sim}}}
11: \def\gsim {\wisk{_>\atop^{\sim}}}
12: \def\kms {\wisk{{\rm ~km~s^{-1}}}}
13: \def\Lsun {\wisk{{\rm L_\odot}}}
14: \def\Zsun {\wisk{{\rm Z_\odot}}}
15: \def\Msun {\wisk{{\rm M_\odot}}}
16: \def\um {$\mu$m}
17: \def\sig {\wisk{\sigma}}
18: \def\etal {{\sl et~al.\ }}
19: \def\eg {{\it e.g.\ }}
20: \def\ie {{\it i.e.\ }}
21: \def\bsl {\wisk{\backslash}}
22: \def\by {\wisk{\times}}
23: \def\half {\wisk{\frac{1}{2}}}
24: \def\third {\wisk{\frac{1}{3}}}
25: \def\nwm2sr {\wisk{\rm nW/m^2/sr\ }}
26: \def\nw2m4sr{\wisk{\rm nW^2/m^4/sr\ }}
27: \shorttitle{Measuring the Mach number of the Universe.}
28:
29:
30: \received{2003 November 10}
31: \begin{document}
32: \title{Measuring the Mach number of the Universe via the Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect.}
33:
34: \author{F. Atrio--Barandela
35: \footnote{F{\'\i }sica Te\'orica. Universidad de Salamanca. 37008 Salamanca Spain.
36: (atrio@usal.es)}}
37:
38: \author{A. Kashlinsky \footnote{SSAI, Code 685, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt MD 20771
39: (kashlinsky@stars.gsfc.nasa.gov)}}
40:
41: \author{J.P. M\"ucket
42: \footnote{Astrophysikalisches Institut Potsdam. D-14482 Potsdam.
43: (jpmuecket@aip.de)}}
44:
45: \begin{abstract}
46: We introduce a new statistic to measure more accurately the
47: cosmic sound speed of clusters of galaxies at different redshifts.
48: This statistic is evaluated by cross-correlating cosmic microwave
49: background (CMB) fluctuations caused by the Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect
50: from observed clusters of galaxies with their redshifts. When clusters are
51: distributed in redshift bins of narrow width, one could
52: measure the mean squared cluster peculiar velocity with an error
53: $\sigma_{C_S^2}\lsim (300{\rm km/s})^2$. This can be done around $z>0.3$ with clusters
54: of flux above 200 mJy which will be detected by PLANCK,
55: coupled with high resolution microwave images to eliminate the cosmological part of the CMB fluctuations. The
56: latter can be achieved with observations by the planned ALMA
57: array or the NSF South Pole telescope and other surveys.
58: By measuring the cosmic sound speed
59: and the bulk flow in, e.g., 4 spheres of $\sim 100h^{-1}$Mpc at $z=0.3$,
60: we could have a direct measurement of the matter density $0.21<\Omega_m<0.47$ at 95\% confidence level.
61: \end{abstract}
62:
63: \keywords{Cosmic Microwave Background. Cosmology: theory. Cosmology: observations.}
64:
65:
66: \section{Introduction}
67:
68: The Mach number ${\cal M}$ characterizes the coldness of the velocity
69: field. It was originally introduced by Ostriker \& Suto (1990) as a test of
70: cosmological models. The cosmic Mach number
71: is independent of the normalization of the mass density power spectrum and
72: is insensitive to redshift and bias in linear theory. It effectively measures
73: the {\it slope} of the power spectrum up to the scales corresponding to the size of
74: the region and can be used to constrain cosmological models for structure formation (Suto \& Fujita 1990).
75: Strauss et al. (1993) made a direct comparison of observations and models.
76: They analyzed two samples of spiral and one of elliptical galaxies and
77: obtained ${\cal M}\simeq$0.5-1, with results differing with galactic type.
78: Nagamine et al. (2001) studied the dependence of the
79: cosmic Mach number on overdensity, galaxy mass and age
80: and concluded that either the Local Group was in a relatively
81: low density region or the true mass density was $\Omega_m \sim$0.2.
82:
83: Measurements of the velocity field using galaxies as distance indicators
84: are affected by systematic errors (Strauss \& Willick, 1998) making
85: difficult the determination of the Mach number on scales beyond $10^4$km/s. This can be avoided
86: by analyzing measurements of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) as proposed in this {\it Letter}.
87: Hot gas in moving clusters produces redshift independent cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropies
88: (Sunyaev \& Zel'dovich, 1972 hereafter SZ). The
89: thermal component (TSZ) is usually larger than the kinetic term (KSZ), but
90: has a distinct spectral signature and can be removed using multifrequency
91: observations, allowing the determination of the cluster peculiar velocities
92: (Holzapfel et al. 1997; Mauskopf et al. 2000; LaRoque et al. 2002). At present,
93: the systematic errors are still 3 to 5 times larger than the measured velocities.
94: Recently, Benson et al. (2003), used SuZIE-II measurements of 6 clusters
95: at $z>$0.2 to constrain the amplitude of their bulk motion,
96: leading to the first such determination at intermediate redshifts.
97:
98: The Mach number is the ratio of the bulk flow component, which can be measured directly from the KSZ data alone
99: (Haehnelt \& Tegmark 1996, Kashlinsky \& Atrio-Barandela 2000,
100: Aghanim et al. 2001), to the cosmic sound speed. We show that the cosmic sound speed
101: can be reliably measured by cross-correlating the CMB temperature field at cluster locations
102: {\it with their redshifts}. CMB temperature anisotropies and cluster redshifts
103: encode information on peculiar velocities, but have different systematic
104: errors. Combining the two quantities allows to measure the average sound speed of clusters.
105:
106: \section{The Cosmic Mach Number and Cosmic Sound Speed.}
107:
108: The cosmic Mach number is defined to be ${\cal M}(r,R) = \frac{V_{\rm bulk}(r)}{C_{S,flow}}$.
109: The bulk flow component is the mean squared velocity over a region of characteristic
110: scale $r$ and $C_{S,flow}$ is the sound speed in the reference frame of the mean flow.
111: They are: $V^2_{\rm bulk}(r)= H_0^2 f^2(\Omega_m,\Omega_\Lambda)
112: \frac{1}{2\pi^2}\int_0^\infty P(k) W^2(kr) dk$, and $C_S^2 =
113: H_0^2 f^2(\Omega_m,\Omega_\Lambda) \frac{1}{2\pi^2}\int_0^\infty P(k) W^2(kR) dk $,
114: with $C^2_{S,{\rm flow}} = C_S^2 - V^2_{\rm bulk}$.
115: Here $f(\Omega_m,\Omega_\Lambda)\simeq \Omega_m^{0.6}+ \Omega_\Lambda
116: (1+\Omega_m/2)/70$ (Lahav et al. 1991), $P(k)$ is peculiar mass power spectrum and $W(x)$
117: is the window function of the survey.
118: $C_S$ depends mainly on the co-moving scales $R$ of the collapsed moving objects.
119: Clusters are regions of high density and their $C_S$ may differ from the average.
120: In the linear regime, Bardeen et al. (1986) showed that the rms peculiar
121: velocity of peaks is smaller than that of field points, but the difference
122: is less than 3\% for $R\leq 3h^{-1}$Mpc.
123: Hereafter, we compute the rms peculiar velocity of clusters using linear theory
124: with a Gaussian kernel and $R=1.5h^{-1}$Mpc. Borgani et al. (2000)
125: verified that this window and scale give a good fit to
126: the measured peculiar velocities of 18 clusters from
127: the ENEAR catalog of peculiar velocities of elliptical galaxies.
128:
129: At present the error bars on peculiar velocities from KSZ
130: ($\sigma_{v_P}$) are much larger than the estimated velocities
131: $v_P$, preventing reliable measurement of the Mach number using CMB data alone.
132: We show that measurements
133: of the CMB temperature of clusters and \underline{of their redshift} can be
134: combined to determine ${\cal M}$ in some specific configurations.
135: The temperature field at a cluster location includes (Carlstrom et al. 2002):
136: the intrinsic CMB signal, foreground residuals, noise and TSZ ($\delta T_{Th}=
137: \tau k_B T_X/m_ec^2$) and KSZ ($\delta T_{Kin}= \tau v_P/c$) components. In these
138: expressions $\tau$ the cluster optical depth to electron scattering,
139: $k_BT_X$ the intracluster electron temperature in eV,
140: and $v_P$ the radial component of the peculiar velocity.
141: All components have different amplitude depending on the beam
142: of each experiment and, except the kinetic and intrinsic CMB temperature
143: anisotropies, all have different frequency dependence.
144: The TSZ component is the dominant contribution to the CMB signal
145: at $l\lsim$3000 ($\lsim 4'$) (Atrio-Barandela \& M\"ucket 1999,
146: Molnar \& Birkinshaw 2000). Multifrequency measurements at cluster locations remove
147: the temperature anisotropy down to the KSZ signal plus some residual
148: $\delta T = T_0 \tau (v_P/c) + r$; the latter is defined having
149: zero mean and variance $ <r^2> = \sigma_{\Delta T}^2$.
150: The uncertainty on the measured peculiar velocity of any individual cluster
151: would be $\sigma_{v_P} = c(\sigma_{\Delta T}/T_o\tau)$.
152: Presently, the measurements of the KSZ (clusters with $\tau\simeq 3-5\times 10^{-3}$), have uncertainty
153: $\sigma_{v_P} \simeq 1000$km/s (Benson et al. 2003, Carlstrom et al. 2002).
154:
155: The bulk flow velocity can be evaluated directly from the KSZ signal by adding the velocity of
156: all clusters in the sample (Benson et al. 2003) with uncertainty:
157: \begin{equation}
158: \sigma_{V_{\rm bulk}} \simeq {\sigma_{v_P}\over \sqrt{N_{cl}}} \sim 100
159: \Big(\frac{\sigma_{v_P}}{1000 {\rm km/s}}\Big) \Big(\frac{N_{cl}}{100}\Big)^{-1/2} {\rm km/sec}
160: \label{sigma_bulk}
161: \end{equation}
162: {\it However, $\sigma_{v_P} \gg C_S$, so the error on the sound speed is
163: $\sigma_{C_S^2}\propto \sigma_{v_P}^2$ and does not scale as $N_{cl}^{-1/2}$.}
164:
165: The rms peculiar velocity along the line of
166: sight of clusters located on a thin shell in redshift space can be reliably measured
167: by cross-correlating the temperature field at cluster locations
168: with their measured redshifts.
169: For this purpose we chose bins of width $\Delta z$ and for each cluster
170: we define $\delta z = z -\bar{z}$, where $\bar{z}$ is the average redshift of the
171: clusters in the bin.
172: Cluster redshifts can be determined by photometric/spectroscopic measurements of
173: redshift of member galaxies or using SZ morphology (Diego et al. 2002).
174: The latter would require only SZ observations but
175: provide an accuracy of $\sigma_z\simeq 0.04(1+z)$ for one object, while multiobject
176: spectroscopic measurements of galaxies provide redshifts with
177: uncertainties $\sigma_z \leq 5\times 10^{-4}$ (Yee, Ellingson \& Carlberg 1996). Thus
178: redshifts of clusters in the prospective samples can be assumed to have no
179: uncertainties. We also assume that clusters are homogeneously
180: distributed within bins. Thus the cross-correlation gives:
181: \begin{equation}
182: \langle {\delta T\over T_o}\cdot \delta z\rangle=
183: \langle\tau\rangle {C^2_{S, flow}\over c^2} \pm
184: \langle\tau{v_{P}\over c}\cdot \delta z\rangle \pm
185: \langle r\cdot \delta z\rangle .
186: \label{cc}
187: \end{equation}
188: Hereafter, $V_{\rm bulk}$ and $C_S$ will be the radial components
189: of the earlier quantities.
190:
191: Peculiar velocities of clusters and their distances are not independent variables.
192: Clusters are chosen to be in shells of width $\Delta z$ in redshift space; this
193: selection criteria introduces a correlation between $d$ and $v_P$:
194: clusters that are most separated will have larger peculiar velocity if they
195: are to be in the sample. If cluster velocities are typically $v_P\simeq C_S$,
196: on average one would expect the spread of clusters on real space to be:
197: $H_o\Delta d \simeq c\Delta z+2C_S$. Hence:
198: \begin{equation}
199: \frac{\langle c\delta T\cdot c\delta z\rangle}{T_o\langle\tau\rangle} =
200: C^2_{S, flow} \pm
201: {\bar\sigma_{v_P}}{c\Delta z\over\sqrt{12N_{cl}}} \pm
202: \langle v_p\rangle {(c\Delta z+2C_S)\over \sqrt{12}} .
203: \label{signal}
204: \end{equation}
205: In this expression, $\bar\sigma_{v_P}$ is the average error on the
206: measured velocity of members of the
207: cluster sample and $\langle v_p\rangle = V_{\rm bulk}$ if the region
208: is smaller than the coherence length of the velocity field; otherwise
209: $\langle v_p\rangle = C_S/\sqrt{N_{cl}}$.
210:
211: To test eq.~(\ref{signal})
212: we analyzed a numerical simulation based on a P$^3$M code with 256$^3$ particles (Faltenbacher et al. 2002)
213: of a $\Lambda$CDM model with $\Omega_\Lambda=0.7, \sigma_8=0.87$ and Hubble constant $H_o=70$ km s$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-1}$.
214: We used a ``friends-of-friends" algorithm identifying clusters with $(1.4-23)\times 10^{14}h^{-1}$M$_\odot$.
215: We randomly selected 100 shells of width $\Delta z = 0.01$ containing $\sim$100
216: clusters each and found that, on average, less than 10\% of the clusters were outside
217: the distance interval $cH_o^{-1}$. In 80\% of the cases
218: $|\langle\tau v_{P}\cdot c\delta z\rangle| \leq\langle\tau\rangle
219: \langle v_p\rangle {(c\Delta z+2C_S)\over\sqrt{12}}$; for the remaining 20\%, the spread was a few percent larger.
220: In all cases, the second noise term in eq.~(\ref{signal}) was negligible.
221:
222: The error bar of $C_S$ depends linearly on $\Delta z$.
223: To reduce it we compute $C_{S, flow}$ in shells with a small spread in redshift.
224: For this geometry, the dominant contribution is
225: \begin{equation}
226: \sigma_{C_S^2,flow}=
227: (300 km/s)^2 \Big({\bar\sigma_{v_P}\over 1000 km/s}\Big)
228: \Big({\Delta z\over 0.01}\Big)
229: \Big({100\over N_{cl}}\Big)^{1/2}
230: \label{sigma_sound}
231: \end{equation}
232: Since bulk flows in shells are small, the sound speed in the shell and the matter reference frames are
233: very similar: $C_{S,flow}^2\simeq C_S^2$.
234: Compared with a direct estimation of $C_S^2$ from KSZ data alone, the cross correlation
235: with redshift represents an improvement of more than one order of magnitude.
236:
237: \section{Observational Prospects.}
238:
239: For small errors (Barlow, 1989): $(\sigma_{\cal M}/{\cal M})^2 =
240: (\sigma_{V_{\rm bulk}}/V_{\rm bulk})^2
241: + (\sigma_{C_S^2}/2 C_S^2)^2$.
242: In order to obtain an accurate determination, bulk flow velocities
243: have to be measured in regions much smaller than the sound speed.
244: We propose to compute the Mach number by estimating the sound speed in a shell
245: of width $\Delta z$ located at $z_{shell}$ and to measure bulk flows
246: in spheres of radius $R$ centered at the same redshift.
247: Observations of clusters to measure their SZ amplitude are already (almost) routinely
248: carried out by several telescopes (e.g. Carlstrom et al. 2002)
249: and exponential progress is expected with the construction of the ALMA
250: array \footnote{http://www.alma.nrao.edu/} and the NSF-funded South Pole microwave
251: telescope \footnote{http://astro.uchicago.edu/spt/}.
252: For the purpose of this project, high resolution observations
253: of large samples of clusters with well measured
254: redshifts are required. Blind surveys searching for clusters in large areas
255: of the sky, like the cluster catalog expected to be obtained from
256: the full sky CMB observations of the upcoming
257: PLANCK \footnote{http://astro.estec.esa.nl/SA-general/Projects/Planck/}
258: mission or by the South Pole telescope, which will effectively observe
259: $\simeq 10000$ deg$^2$, will be most relevant.
260: Clusters that produce a change in flux of about 200 mJy relative
261: to the mean flux of the CMB will be detected by Planck. For the WMAP
262: $\Lambda$CDM concordance model this limit translates into
263: $\simeq 9000$ clusters in $4/5$ of the sky (Diego et al. 2003).
264: Cluster redshifts could be coarsely determined using SZ data (Diego et al. 2002).
265: Optical follow-up of those clusters without optical counterpart
266: will be necessary to measure their redshifts.
267: The current technologies have the capacity to measure $\sim$2000 redshifts per night with
268: an average uncertainty smaller than $130$ km/s\footnote{http://www.sdss.org/, http://msowww.anu.edu.au/2dFGRS/}.
269: If 10 galaxies per cluster are used to define the cluster redshift,
270: this procedure would require a reasonable amount of observing time.
271:
272: Most clusters detected by PLANCK will be unresolved.
273: Those needed for computing the Mach number will have to be re-observed at
274: high resolution with ALMA, where its high frequency
275: coverage and its small projected noise of $\sim 2\mu$K rms after
276: one hour of integration time for a beam of $1^\prime$, could
277: be very useful to subtract foreground and CMB contribution to its minimum.
278: The flux limit can be related to the cluster mass (Kay et al. 2001):
279: $S_\nu (353 {\rm GHz}) = 75{\rm mJy}
280: \Big({M_{200}\over 10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot}\Big)^{5/3}
281: \Big({500 h^{-1} {\rm Mpc}\over D_A}\Big)^2 (1+z)$.
282: This detection threshold is quoted for the 353 {\rm GHz} Planck channel, the one with
283: the highest resolution and lowest noise. In this relation, $M_{200}$ corresponds
284: to the mass within a region where the over-density is $200\rho_c$.
285: Using the mass-luminosity relation (Reiprich \& B\"ohringer, 2002)
286: $L_{X,bol} = 1.15\times 10^{45}(M_{200}/10^{15}h^{-1}M_\odot)^{1.8}
287: h^{-2}$ ergs s$^{-1}$ we can estimate the luminosity of clusters detected
288: by Planck at any given redshift.
289:
290: Fig.~\ref{error} shows the relative errors on $C_S^2$ and ${\cal M}$ vs $z$. The number of clusters were
291: modeled with the X-ray Luminosity Function (XLF) as an evolving Schechter function:
292: $\phi(L,z)$=$\phi_o(1+z)^AL^{-\alpha}\exp(L/L_*)$, with $L_*$=$L_{*,0}(1+z)^B$,
293: where $A$, $B$ are two evolutionary parameters,
294: and $L_*, \alpha$ are the local XLF values. We took $L_*$=$9.3\times
295: 10^{44} h^{-2}$ ergs s$^{-1}$ and
296: $\phi_o$=$2.44\times 10^{-7}h^{-3}$Mpc$^{-3}$ (Ebeling et al. 1997).
297: In (a) and (b), solid lines corresponding to no redshift evolution $(A,B)$=(0,0),
298: dashed to (-3,0) and dot-dashed to (-1,-2), obtained from the analysis of the
299: ROSAT Deep Cluster Survey and the Extended Medium Sensitivity Survey (EMSS),
300: respectively. At present, the evolution of
301: the bright end of the XLF is not well determined and the degree of
302: negative evolution deduced from the EMSS survey is most likely an overestimation,
303: that does not extend to clusters with $L_X< 10^{44}h^{-2}$ ergs s$^{-1}$
304: (Rosati et al. 2002). For the 200 mJy limit (Fig. \ref{error}a)
305: the RDCS evolution parameters predict about 14000 clusters out to $z$=1,
306: and for the 400 mJy, about 6000.
307: Those numbers were 12000 and 4000 for the EMSS evolution parameters,
308: respectively, the largest difference being in the number of clusters at $z>$0.3.
309: The number density of the RDCS parameters was very similar to that of Kay et al. (2002).
310: We took $\bar\sigma_{v_P} $=1000 km/s, independent of $z$, even though
311: foreground and CMB residuals and source confusion may depend on the cluster redshift. Any $z$ dependence
312: can be easily accounted for since both $\sigma_{C_S^2}$ and $\sigma_{\cal M}$
313: vary linearly with $\bar\sigma_{v_P}$, the average error on the velocity of
314: individual clusters in the sample.
315:
316: Spheres of radius $\simeq$100$h^{-1}$Mpc
317: will contain very few clusters in blind all-sky surveys such as Planck
318: cluster catalog, and another type of survey is required.
319: Romer et al. (2001) argue that an XMM serendipitous cluster
320: survey of about $\simeq$800 deg$^2$
321: will detect more than 8000 clusters ranging from poor to
322: very rich systems. Their effective flux limit would be $\simeq 1.5\times
323: 10^{-14}$ergs s$^{-1}$cm$^{-2}$, and all clusters above $kT_X>4$KeV
324: (or luminosities $L_X> 10^{44}h^{-2}$ ergs s$^{-1}$) will be detected.
325: Adopting the $\tau$-$L_X$ relation from Cooray (1999)
326: and Kashlinsky \& Atrio-Barandela (2000),
327: rescaled to the bolometric band, the number cluster
328: density ($n_c$) verifies that $\tau (n_cR_H^3)^{1/2}\simeq$1 is
329: almost independent of luminosity, so that $\sim$100 clusters
330: per sphere of radius $100 h^{-1}$Mpc with
331: $\tau \gsim 2\times 10^{-2}$ will be detected, independent
332: of $z$. Also, they will have, on average, a similar error $\sigma_{v_P}$.
333: In Fig. \ref{error}c and
334: \ref{error}d we plot the error on the Mach number assuming that the
335: sound speed was computed in shells of Planck detected clusters
336: and the bulk velocity is computed using a top hat window on spheres of
337: 100 (thick) and 150 $h^{-1}$Mpc (thin lines) radii.
338: Solid, dashed and dotted-dashed lines represent the same XLF evolution
339: models as in Figs.~\ref{error}a,b.
340: Fig.~\ref{error}c corresponds to Planck detecting all clusters
341: with flux above 200 mJy and (d) to 400 mJy.
342: We also considered $\bar\sigma_{v_P}$=1000 km s$^{-1}$, although now
343: the bulk velocity and sound speed are computed over different samples. Folding
344: any redshift dependence of $\bar\sigma_{v_P}$ into our results is
345: straightforward, but would require detailed knowledge of the (unknown)
346: cluster selection function for Planck and XMM.
347:
348: To see the capacity of our method to determine cosmological parameters, we
349: assume that at redshift $z\simeq $0.3 we have identified all PLANCK clusters
350: with fluxes above 200 mJy in a shell of $\Delta z$=0.01, have their $z$
351: measured with uncertainty smaller than 150 km/s and have them
352: re-observed with ALMA at $1^\prime$ resolution. For the expected number of
353: 100 clusters, this would require $\sim$100 observing hours. The sample is used
354: to compute $C_S$ at that $z$. We also assume that the clusters
355: identified by XMM in a sphere of radius $100h^{-1}$Mpc centered at
356: $z$ have data of similar quality. The Mach number would be the ratio of the
357: bulk velocity in the sphere to the sound speed in the shell.
358: Fig. \ref{limits} plots ${\cal M}$ vs matter density for flat models with cosmological
359: constant, $\Omega_\Lambda+\Omega_m$=1, and for three different values for the primordial spectral index
360: $n$ = 0.95, 1, 1.3 shown as dashed, solid and dot-dashed lines
361: (all other cosmological parameters were chosen from the WMAP measurements, Bennett et al. 2003, Spergel et al. 2003).
362: The matter power spectrum was taken as $P(k)\propto k^nT^2(k)$ with the
363: analytical approximation of Sugiyama (1995) for the CDM transfer function, $T(k)$, and normalized to $\sigma_8$=0.8.
364: The upper set of lines corresponds to bulk flows on spheres of 100$h^{-1}$Mpc
365: and the lower set to 150 $h^{-1}$Mpc radius.
366: For $\Omega_m$=0.3 the triangle shows the expected Mach number
367: and its 1-$\sigma$ error bars. We assumed that the cluster XLF evolves with RDCS parameters.
368: The error bar on $\cal M$ translates into a confidence interval
369: for $\Omega_m$. If the bulk flow is measured
370: for 4 independent spheres of 100$h^{-1}$Mpc radius, we can
371: estimate $0.25 (0.21) \leq\Omega_m\leq 0.37 (0.47)$ and at the 68 (95) \% confidence level.
372: Our method is insensitive to a running spectral index, quintessence or
373: tilt: variations on these cosmological parameters lead to differences
374: in the Mach number much smaller than $\sigma_{\cal M}$. In this
375: respect, our measurement of the matter density would be robust.
376:
377: \section{Conclusions.}
378:
379: We presented a new method to measure the cosmic sound speed of clusters of galaxies.
380: Assuming that all clusters with SZ flux larger than
381: 200 mJy will be identified by the Planck mission, and that the XRLF evolution
382: in the Rosat Deep Cluster Survey is representative of the overall cluster
383: evolution, the relative error would be $\sigma_{C_S^2}/C_S^2 \sim 0.3$.
384: If the XMM Serendipitous Cluster Survey detects all clusters above
385: $kT_X=4$KeV, by combining measurements of bulk flows in spheres
386: of different sizes with the cosmic sound speed measured in
387: shells at the same redshift, we can estimate the Cosmic Mach number with
388: relative accuracy $\sigma_{\cal M}/{\cal M}\geq 0.2$.
389: This accuracy can be achieved with high resolution
390: microwave images in order to reduce the intrinsic CMB anisotropy with respect
391: to the Kinematic SZ signal, and is within the reach of the currently planned
392: South Pole and ALMA telescopes.
393: The Cosmic Mach number we can determine by our method is directly related to
394: the matter density, and it can determine $0.21\leq\Omega_m\leq 0.47$
395: at the 95\% confidence level.
396: This result, being independent of other mass density measurements,
397: would provide an important self consistency check.
398:
399:
400:
401: FAB and JPM thank the financial support of the Spanish-German Acciones Integradas
402: program HA2002-0084. FAB also thanks the Junta de Castilla y Le\'on research project SA002/03
403: and Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnolog{\'\i}a projects BFM2000-1322 and
404: AYA2000-2465-E.
405:
406:
407:
408: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
409: \bibitem[]{515} Atrio-Barandela, F., M\"ucket, J. 1999, ApJ, 515, 465
410: \bibitem[]{516} Aghanim, N., Gorski, K.M. \& Puget, J.L., 2001, A\& A, 374, 1
411: \bibitem[]{517} Bardeen, J.M. et al. 1986, ApJ, 304, 15
412: \bibitem[]{518} Barlow, R.J. (1988) ''Statistics'', John Wiley (West Sussex, England)
413: \bibitem[]{wmap1}Bennett, C.L. et.al., 2003, ApJS, 148, 1
414: \bibitem[]{519} Benson, B.A. et al. 2003, astro-ph/0303510
415: \bibitem[]{520} Borgani, S. et al. 2000, ApJ, 537, L1
416: \bibitem[]{521} Carlstrom, J. E., Holder, G.P. \& Reese, E.D. 2002, ARA\&A, 40, 643
417: \bibitem[]{522} Cooray, A.R. 1999, MNRAS, 307, 841
418: \bibitem[]{524} Diego, J.M. et al. 2002, MNRAS, 336, 1351
419: \bibitem[]{525} Diego, J.M. et al. 2003, MNRAS, 341, 599
420: \bibitem[]{526} Ebeling, H. et al. 1997, ApJ, 479, L101
421: \bibitem[]{527} Faltenbacher, A., Gottl\"ober, S., Kerscher, M. \& M\"uller, V. 2002, A\& A, 395, 1
422: \bibitem[]{528} Haehnelt, M.G. \& Tegmark, M. 1996, MNRAS, 279, 545
423: \bibitem[]{529} Holzapfel, W.L. et al. 1997, ApJ, 481, 35
424: \bibitem[]{530} Kashlinsky, A. \& Atrio-Barandela, F. 2000, ApJ, 536, L67
425: \bibitem[]{531} Kay, S.T., Liddle, R.A. \& Thomas, P.A. 2001, 325, 835
426: \bibitem[]{532} Lahav, O., Lilje, P.B., Primack, J.R. \& Rees, M.J. 1991, MNRAS, 251, 128
427: \bibitem[]{533} LaRoque, S.L. et al. 2002, astro-ph/0204134
428: \bibitem[]{534} Mauskopf, P.D. et al. 2000, ApJ, 538, 505
429: \bibitem[]{535} Molnar, S.M., Birkinshaw, M. 2000, ApJ, 537, 542
430: \bibitem[]{536} Nagamine, K., Ostriker, J.P. \& Cen, R. 2001, ApJ, 553, 513
431: \bibitem[]{537} Ostriker, J.P. \& Suto, Y. 1990, ApJ, 348, 378
432: \bibitem[]{538} Rosati, P., Borgani, S. \& Norman, C. 2002, ARA\&A, 40, 539
433: \bibitem[]{539} Reiprich, T.H. \& B\"ohringer, H. 2002, ApJ, 567, 716
434: \bibitem[]{540} Romer, A.K. et al. 2001, ApJ, 547, 594
435: \bibitem[]{wmap2} Spergel, D.N. et.al., 2003, ApJS, 148, 175
436: \bibitem[]{542} Strauss, M.A., Cen, R. \& Ostriker, J.P. 1993, ApJ, 408, 389
437: \bibitem[]{543} Strauss, M.A. \& Willick, J.A., 1995, Physics Reports, 261, 271
438: \bibitem[]{544} Sugiyama, N. 1995, ApJS, 100, 281
439: \bibitem[]{545} Sunyaev, R.A. \& Zel'dovich, Ya. B. 1972, Comments Astrophys. Space Phys., 4, 173
440: \bibitem[]{547} Suto, Y. \& Fujita, M. 1990, ApJ, 360, 7
441: \bibitem[]{548} Yee, H.C.K., Ellingson, E. \& Carlberg, R.G. 1996, ApJSS, 102, 269
442: \end{thebibliography}
443:
444: \clearpage
445:
446: \begin{figure}[ht]
447: \plotone{f1.eps}
448: \caption[]{
449: (a) Relative error of the sound speed for three different
450: evolutions of the luminosity function: no evolution (solid line),
451: dashed to $(A,B)=(-3,0)$ and dot-dashed to $(-1,-2)$ -see text-.
452: The detection limit is 200 mJy. (b) Same as before, but the threshold
453: limit is 400 mJy. (c) Relative error on the Mach number, for the
454: same evolution histories as before. In every pair, the upper line
455: corresponds to bulk flows on a sphere of $100 h^{-1}$Mpc, and
456: the lower line to a sphere of $150 h^{-1}$Mpc. The flux
457: limit is 200 mJy. (d) The same
458: as in (c) but the clusters detected have fluxes above 400 mJy.
459: }
460: \label{error}
461: \end{figure}
462:
463: \clearpage
464:
465: \begin{figure}[ht]
466: \plotone{f2.eps}
467: \caption[]{Mach number estimated by measuring bulk flows on spheres of 100 (upper set)
468: or 150 $h^{-1}$Mpc (lower set). Dashed, solid and dot-dashed lines correspond to
469: a spectral index $n=0.95, 1.0$ and $1.03$, in agreement with WMAP results.
470: The triangles show the prediction for the WMAP concordance model.
471: The 1$\sigma$ error was computed
472: assuming that there were $4$ independent measurements of the
473: bulk flow at that redshift.
474: They are slightly shifted for a better display.
475: }
476: \label{limits}
477: \end{figure}
478:
479: \end{document}
480:
481:
482: