What is a cool-core cluster? a detailed analysis of the cores of the X-ray flux-limited HIFLUGCS cluster sample
By D. Hudson, R. Mittal, T. Reiprich, P. Nulsen, Heinz Andernach, C. Sarazin. 2009
317 citations recorded by the source corpus.
We use the largest complete sample of 64 galaxy clusters (HIghest X-ray FLUx Galaxy Cluster Sample) with available high-quality X-ray data from Chandra, and apply 16 cool-core diagnostics to them, some of them new. In order to identify the best parameter for characterizing cool-core clusters and quantify its relation to other parameters, we mainly use very high spatial resolution profiles of central gas density and temperature, and quantities derived from them. We also correlate optical properties of brightest cluster galaxies (BCGs) with X-ray properties. To segregate cool core and non-cool-core clusters, we find that central cooling time, t cool , is the best parameter for low redshift clusters with high quality data, and that cuspiness is the best parameter for high redshift clusters. 72% of clusters in our sample have a cool core (t cool 50 h ―1 71 kpc) projected separation between their BCG and X-ray peak. In contrast, only two of the 56 clusters with a small separation between the BCG and X-ray peak (<50 h ―1 71 kpc) show large-scale radio emission. Based on this result, we argue that a large projected separation between the BCG and the X-ray peak is a good indicator of a major merger. The properties of weak cool-core clusters as an intermediate class of objects are discussed. Finally we describe individual properties of all 64 clusters in the sample.
Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b45febac3c1c241909b2419cff1d0809c0e9200c
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
In Instrumentation
Citations in the corpus
- Scaling Properties of a Complete X-ray Selected Galaxy Group Sample (2014, methodology): “Except for the temperature values taken from Hudson et al. (2010), all the other HIFLUGCS parameters were taken from Reiprich & Böhringer (2002).”
- The cool-core bias in X-ray galaxy cluster samples - I. Method and application to HIFLUGCS (2010, methodology): “More recently, studies have been carried out using Chandra data (Mittal et al. 2009; Hudson et al. 2010), which clearly demonstrate the existence of a class of intermediate objects.”
- Probing cosmic isotropy with a new X-ray galaxy cluster sample through the LX–T scaling relation (2020, unknown): “T relation (e.g., Hudson et al. 2010).”
- Planck2013 results. XXIX. ThePlanckcatalogue of Sunyaev-Zeldovich sources (2013, unknown): “8-0833 (Hudson et al. 2010), ZwCl2701 (Rawle et al. 2012), Abell 1361 (Rafferty et al. 2008), and RBS 0540 (Eckert et al. 2011; Belsole et al. 2005).”
- SEARCH FOR COSMIC-RAY-INDUCED GAMMA-RAY EMISSION IN GALAXY CLUSTERS (2013, methodology): “For this purpose we use the classification presented in Hudson et al. (2010) or follow recommendations by Cavagnolo et al. (2009).”
- Mechanical feedback from active galactic nuclei in galaxies, groups and clusters (2012, background): “For example, 44% of the HIFLUGCS sample have central cooling times shorter than 1 Gy (Hudson et al 2010).”
- Weighing the Giants - I. Weak-lensing masses for 51 massive galaxy clusters: project overview, data analysis methods and cluster images (2012, result): “We therefore confirm previous studies that noted the correlation between BCG – X-ray offset and dynamical state of the cluster (e.g. Allen 1998; Smith et al. 2005; Bildfell et al. 2008; Sanderson et al. 2009; Hudson et al. 2010; Mann & Ebeling 2012).”
- X-ray–optical classification of cluster mergers and the evolution of the cluster merger fraction (2011, background): “Hudson et al. (2010) investigate the usefulness and efficiency of several diagnostics for the identification of cool-core clusters, considered dynamically fully relaxed systems.”