ON THE CLUSTER PHYSICS OF SUNYAEV–ZEL'DOVICH AND X-RAY SURVEYS. I. THE INFLUENCE OF FEEDBACK, NON-THERMAL PRESSURE, AND CLUSTER SHAPES ON Y–M SCALING RELATIONS

By Nicholas Battaglia, J. Richard Bond, C. Pfrommer, Jonathan Sievers. 2011

170 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The utility of large Sunyaev–Zel'dovich (SZ) surveys for determining cosmological parameters from cluster abundances is limited by the theoretical uncertainties in the integrated SZ–flux-to-mass relation, Y–M. We explore how non-thermal pressure and the anisotropic shape of the gas distribution of the intracluster medium (ICM) impacts Y–M scaling using a suite of smoothed particle hydrodynamic simulations of the cosmic web. We contrast results for models with different treatments of entropy injection and transport, varying radiative cooling, star formation and accompanying supernova feedback, cosmic rays, and energetic feedback from active galactic nuclei (AGNs). We find that the gas kinetic-to-thermal pressure ratio, Pkin/Pth, from internal bulk motions depends on the cluster mass, and increases in the outer-cluster due to enhanced substructure, as does the asphericity of the ICM gas. With only a ∼5%–10% correction to projected (observable) ellipticities, we can infer the three-dimensional ellipticities. Our simulated Y–M slope roughly follows the self-similar prediction, except for a steepening due to a deficit of gas in lower mass clusters at low redshift in our AGN feedback simulations. AGN feedback enhances the overall Y–M scatter, from ∼11% to ∼13% (z = 0) and to ∼15% (z = 1), a reflection of the accretion history variations due to cluster merging. If we split the cluster system into lower, middle, and upper bands of both Pkin/Pth and long-to-short axis ratio, we find a ∼10% effect on Y–M. Identifying observable second parameters related to internal bulk flows and anisotropy for cluster selection to minimize Y–M scatter in a “fundamental plane” would allow tighter cosmological parameter constraints.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/124ec7b34d569733af3a27ce9e9e94ce3352d61b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

Citations in the corpus

A MEASUREMENT OF SECONDARY COSMIC MICROWAVE BACKGROUND ANISOTROPIES FROM THE 2500 SQUARE-DEGREE SPT-SZ SURVEY (2014, background): “…comparison of not just the amplitude but also the shape of the tSZ power spectrum as a function of cluster mass cut could potentially provide interesting constraints on the pressure profiles of galaxy clusters (Battaglia et al. 2012b), however, such an analysis is outside the scope of this work.”
The MassiveBlack-II simulation: The evolution of haloes and galaxies to z ~ 0 (2014, background): “…of smaller volumes inside a representative one (Katz & White 1993; Scannapieco et al. 2012), simulations that stop at high redshifts before large-scale modes become non-linear (e.g. Di Matteo et al. 2012), or by tackling problems which require lower mass resolution (e.g. Battaglia et al. 2012).”
Towards a realistic population of simulated galaxy groups and clusters (2013, result): “…from the sample of Arnaud, Pointecouteau & Pratt (2007) and the remaining 12 are relaxed REXCESS clusters with mass profiles measured at least out to R550. the observations by Planck of low-redshift massive clusters, in agreement with the results of Battaglia et al. (2012) and Kay et al. (2012).”
JOINT ANALYSIS OF CLUSTER OBSERVATIONS. II. CHANDRA/XMM-NEWTON X-RAY AND WEAK LENSING SCALING RELATIONS FOR A SAMPLE OF 50 RICH CLUSTERS OF GALAXIES (2012, background): “…first discussed by Evrard (1990) and continues to be important in grid-based simulations (e.g., Lau et al. 2009; Nelson et al. 2012), SPH simulations (e.g., Rasia et al. 2006; Battaglia et al. 2012; Rasia et al. 2012), and observations of distant clusters (Andersson et al. 2011; Jee et al. 2011).”
The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: Sunyaev-Zel'dovich selected galaxy clusters at 148 GHz from three seasons of data (2013, background): “Both B12 and the similar treatment of Shaw et al. (2010) make use of hydrodynamic simulations (Nagai et al. 2007; Lau et al. 2009; Battaglia et al. 2012) to understand these non-thermal contributions.”
NINE-YEAR WILKINSON MICROWAVE ANISOTROPY PROBE (WMAP) OBSERVATIONS: COSMOLOGICAL PARAMETER RESULTS (2012, methodology): “The 2-point function is a potentially-powerful probe of σ8 (Komatsu & Seljak 2002); however, it is sensitive to the low-mass end of the Y (M) scaling relation for clusters, which is subject to astrophysical corrections (Shaw et al. 2010; Battaglia et al. 2010, 2012a).”
Planck 2013 results. XX. Cosmology from Sunyaev-Zeldovich cluster counts (2013, unknown): “Comparison of simulated Y500–M500 relations and data We first compared the Y500–M500 relations from 14 different analyses done by seven groups (Nagai 2006; Yang et al. 2010; Sehgal et al. 2010; Krause et al. 2012; Battaglia et al. 2012; Kay et al. 2012; Sembolini et al. 2013).”
Observational probes of cosmic acceleration (2012, background): “…that are expected to be robust to these details, and through careful exploration of the sensitivity of the observable–mass relation to the physics that goes into the simulations (e.g., Nagai et al., 2007; Rudd and Nagai, 2009; Stanek et al., 2010; Fabjan et al., 2011; Battaglia et al., 2012).”
COSMOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS FROM GALAXY CLUSTERS IN THE 2500 SQUARE-DEGREE SPT-SZ SURVEY (2016, result): “Using a fixed SZscaling relation based on the simulations from Battaglia et al. (2012) i.e., without including any uncertainty in the cluster mass calibration, the ACTCL+H0+BBN dataset was used to constrain σ8 (Ωm/0.27) 0.3 = 0.848 ± 0.032 and σ8 = 0.872 ± 0.065, consistent with the constraints…”