Artículos de revistas
Mass profile and dynamical status of the z ~ 0.8 galaxy cluster LCDCS 0504
Fecha
2014Registro en:
Astronomy & Astrophysics, Les Ulis, v. 566, p. A149/1-A149/13, 2014
0004-6361
10.1051/0004-6361/201322447
Autor
Guennou, L.
Biviano, A.
Adami, C.
Limousin, M.
Neto, Gastao Cesar Bierrenbach Lima
Mamon, G. A.
Ulmer, M. P.
Gavazzi, R.
Cypriano, Eduardo Serra
Durret, F.
Clowe, D.
LeBrun, V.
Allam, S.
Basa, S.
Benoist, C.
Cappi, A.
Halliday, C.
Ilbert, O.
Johnston, D.
Jullo, E.
Just, D.
Kubo, J. M.
Márquez, I.
Marshall, P.
Martinet, N.
Maurogordato, S.
Mazure, A.
Murphy, K. J.
Plana, H.
Rostagni, F.
Russeil, D.
Schirmer, M.
Schrabback, T.
Slezak, E.
Tucker, D.
Zaritsky, D.
Ziegler, B.
Institución
Resumen
Constraints on the mass distribution in high-redshift clusters of galaxies are currently not very strong.
Aims. We aim to constrain the mass profile, M(r), and dynamical status of the z ∼ 0.8 LCDCS 0504 cluster of galaxies that is characterized
by prominent giant gravitational arcs near its center.
Methods. Our analysis is based on deep X-ray, optical, and infrared imaging as well as optical spectroscopy, collected with various
instruments, which we complemented with archival data. We modeled the mass distribution of the cluster with three different mass
density profiles, whose parameters were constrained by the strong lensing features of the inner cluster region, by the X-ray emission
from the intracluster medium, and by the kinematics of 71 cluster members.
Results. We obtain consistent M(r) determinations from three methods based on kinematics (dispersion-kurtosis, caustics, and
MAMPOSSt), out to the cluster virial radius, 1.3 Mpc and beyond. The mass profile inferred by the strong lensing analysis in
the central cluster region is slightly higher than, but still consistent with, the kinematics estimate. On the other hand, the X-ray
based M(r) is significantly lower than the kinematics and strong lensing estimates. Theoretical predictions from ΛCDM cosmology
for the concentration–mass relation agree with our observational results, when taking into account the uncertainties in the observational
and theoretical estimates. There appears to be a central deficit in the intracluster gas mass fraction compared with nearby
clusters.
Conclusions. Despite the relaxed appearance of this cluster, the determinations of its mass profile by different probes show substantial
discrepancies, the origin of which remains to be determined. The extension of a dynamical analysis similar to that of other clusters
of the DAFT/FADA survey with multiwavelength data of sufficient quality will allow shedding light on the possible systematics that
affect the determination of mass profiles of high-z clusters, which is possibly related to our incomplete understanding of intracluster
baryon physics