Astron. Astrophys. 320, 365-377 (1997)
3. The and relations
3.1. The relation
We cannot directly relate the mass function to observations because
we have very little information on the actual virial mass of clusters.
Note that in the spherical top-hat model, the virial radius is
![[EQUATION]](img63.gif)
which extends out beyond the region of currently available mass
determinations. In order to obtain a fruitful comparison of the
theoretical mass function with the observations, it is therefore
necessary to construct trustworthy relations between X-ray properties
and cluster virial masses. This "virial" mass should be understood in
the sense in which it is employed in the mass function: it is the mass
contained within the region of mean contrast density
. Here we consider the
and relations. We shall see that the former is
more reliable.
Spectroscopic studies have demonstrated that the X-ray emission is
produced by thermal bremsstrahlung in an hot, optically thin
intracluster plasma with a temperature of approximately
. The detailed history of this gas is not well
known. The presence of the iron emission line
indicates that the intracluster medium (ICM) has been partially
processed through the stars of the cluster galaxies. However, the
large mass of the ICM, typically several times greater than the
cluster stellar mass, leads one to believe that the majority of the
gas is primordial in origin, since it seems difficult that the
galaxies lose through winds or ram pressure stripping more than 50% of
their initial mass. In addition, the measured metallicities close to
third can be accounted for by a bimodial star
formation model (Arnaud et al. 1992a).
We will work under the hypothesis that the cluster gas is in
hydrostatic equilibrium with an isothermal temperature profile.
Despite the lack of rigorous evidence, the latter point is at least
consistent with the majority of data. Under these conditions we may
write
![[EQUATION]](img68.gif)
where kT and are, respectively, the
temperature and the density of the gas, µ is the mean
molecular weight, is the proton mass and
is the binding mass of the cluster. The
observed X-ray surface brightness profile can be directly converted to
a three dimensional density profile:
![[EQUATION]](img72.gif)
This is just the deprojection of the isothermal
form known to fit the surface brightness
profiles of clusters. Best fit values for are
typically around 0.6 (Jones & Forman 1984). Using this value, the
relation between the temperature and the virial mass can be evaluated
as
![[EQUATION]](img75.gif)
This result is in reasonable agreement with the hydrodynamic
simulations of Evrard (1990a, 1990b), although he obtained a constant
of proportionality which is about 20 % lower. Taking this into
account, the relation between mass and temperature becomes
![[EQUATION]](img76.gif)
In this expression is the cluster virial
mass in units of . More recently, Evrard et al.
(1996) showed that in the CDM case, this relation between mass and
temperature holds with a very good accuray. This equation will allow
us to transform the mass function into a temperature function which we
can compare to observations.
The temperature can also be related to the initial, comoving radius
containing the mass:
![[EQUATION]](img79.gif)
This last relation illustrates an important point: as the
temperature is independent of the Hubble constant when scales are
expressed in Mpc, a model corresponding to a
given power spectrum and normalized to a scale also measured in
Mpc (such as ) will
produce the same cluster abundance per .
Therefore, the constraints on n and b inferred from the
observed abundances of clusters are independent of the value of the
Hubble constant.
3.2. The relation
The bolometric X-ray luminosity of a galaxy cluster due to thermal
bremsstrahlung depends strongly on the gas density profile:
![[EQUATION]](img82.gif)
Usually, one assumes that the ICM represents a constant fraction
of the cluster virial mass. Adopting this
hypothesis and assuming an identical radial distribution for both the
gas and the dynamical mass, Kaiser (1986) derived a scaling law for
the X-ray luminosity: . However, there are
reasons to suspect this scaling law. As emphasized by Blanchard et al.
(1992b), the total luminosity of a cluster is dominated by the mass of
the gas core and the self-similar scaling applies only if the mass of
the gas core scales as the virial mass. However, the formation of a
core in the gas distribution is not well understood and may result
from any of several physical processes, including cooling in the
center of the cluster or in the smaller structures from which the
cluster was built, preheating by a first generation of collapsed
objects, or gas ejection from galaxies. Thus, theoretical modeling of
the X-ray luminosity is dangerously uncertain. Indeed, if one combines
the self-similar relation with the highly
reliable theoretical relation, then one obtains
a correlation whose shape is in severe conflict
with local data. In addition, Blanchard & Silk (1991) and Evrard
& Henry (1991) have shown that self-similar scaling produces a
luminosity function which disagrees with observations for both the CDM
model and for a model with a power-law power spectrum with index
. An alternative to the self-similar scheme is
to parametrize the luminosity-mass relation as a power law of the
cluster mass and redshift, , and to consider
values of the free parameters that fit the observed luminosity
function. But as these authors have noted, there is an observational
degeneracy between the shape of the assumed initial power spectrum and
the chosen relation. Perhaps the best way to
deduce the true relation is through the
observed relation. This seems a more
trustworthy approach if one believes that the temperature reflects the
virial energy of the cluster. In the remainder of this paper, we
follow this procedure and use the local
relation. Edge & Stewart (1991) have found that
using EXOSAT data. This relation is very close
to that found by Henry & Arnaud (1991) using a compilation of data
from EXOSAT, HEAO/OSO and the Einstein satellite. Additionally, Edge
& Stewart (1991) have also given the correlation
resulting from a minimization of the residuals
in . Using the result of a double regression fit
in which the slope is defined as the square-root of the product of the
two individual regression slopes, we find . We
normalize this relation at , the temperature at
which the two regressions cross each other, to finally obtain
![[EQUATION]](img92.gif)
This expression represents the bolometric X-ray luminosity and we
must correct for the fraction
![[EQUATION]](img93.gif)
actually collected in the relevant energy band [
- ].
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1997
Online publication: June 30, 1998
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |