| 1 : Preliminaries | 6 : Dynamics I | 11 : Star Formation | 16 : Cosmology |
| 2 : Morphology | 7 : Ellipticals | 12 : Interactions | 17 : Structure Growth |
| 3 : Surveys | 8 : Dynamics II | 13 : Groups & Clusters | 18 : Galaxy Formation |
| 4 : Lum. Functions | 9 : Gas & Dust | 14 : Nuclei & BHs | 19 : Reionization & IGM |
| 5 : Spirals | 10 : Populations | 15 : AGNs & Quasars | 20 : Dark Matter |
|
|
1 - 3 Mpc :
they are the largest virialized structures in
the Universe (ie
KE  
½
PE )
[movie 38Mb!]
108
yr <<< tHubble
109
yr << tHubble
1010.5
yr > tHubble
Note that clusters are not necessarily the largest bound structures
in the universe
superclusters may be bound, but
haven't yet turned around and virialized.
a cluster is probably a representative
sample of the Universe
So a measurement in clusters can be scaled up to derive
matter for the universe
Ongoing heirarchical assembly : small
things merge to make bigger things, on all scales.
Clusters continue to grow
(and form), even today
groups
clusters
superclusters
large scale
structure

/ <
>
103 :
102 large galaxies;
103 total galaxies [image - Coma]
103 km/s [image]
0.1% sky) diffuse light (distinct from
cD halo light)
10-50% total galaxy light (in rich
clusters; much less in poor clusters)
107-8K
X-ray emitter
10-3 cm-3
1043-46 erg/s
10-2 - 10-4 Lopt
5 × Mgals
0.3 Z
enriched : not all primordial
4 × Mgas + gals
"complete catalog"
(adding : 800 >
< 1200 km/s eliminates
10%
superpositions)
"incomplete catalog"
(1030 clusters, Richness class 0)
rarely used compared to Abell's lists
More recent: SDSS has generated many catalogs: e.g. o-link
These use groupings in both space and redshift (spectroscopic and/or photo-z).
X-ray emission is an effective way to find relaxed clusters
n2, we have
no forground X-ray emission (though smooth X-ray background)
problems of spurious identification
from superposition is greatly reduced compared to optical surveys.
X-ray surveys may be the best way to identify (rich) high-z clusters
0.05 - 0.55)
1)
statistically detectable
so concentrations of faint red objects should yield high-z clusters
| BM I | single central dominant cD galaxy | (eg A 2199) |
| BM II | several bright galaxies between cD and gE | (eg Coma) |
| BM III | no dominant galaxy | (eg Hercules) |
| | dominated by a single cD galaxy | (eg A 2029) |
| | dominated by a bright binary | (eg Coma) |
| | line of several bright galaxies | (eg Perseus) |
| | core of > 4 bright galaxies | (eg A 2065) |
| | flattened distribution | (eg A 1291) |
| | irregular with no center | (eg Hercules) |
II
III
B
L
C
F
I
Spiral
Poor
Spiral rich
Intermediate
Irregular
intermediate
low
Here is a more specific table (condensed from Bahcall's entry in Allen's AQ)
| Property/Class | Regular | Intermediate | Irregular |
| Zwicky type | Compact | Medium-Compact | Open |
| Bautz-Morgan type | I, I-II, II | (II), II-III | (II-III), III |
| Rood-Sastry type | cD,B, (L,C) | (L),(F),(C) | (F), I |
| Content | Elliptical-rich | Spiral-poor | Spiral-rich |
| E:S0:S ratio | 3:4:2 | 1:4:2 | 1:2:3 |
| Symmetry | Spherical | Intermediate | Irregular shape |
| Central concentration | High | Moderate | Very little |
| Central profile | Steep | Intermediate | Flat |
| Mass segregation ? | Marginal | Marginal | None |
| Radio detection ? | 50% | 50% | 20% |
| X-ray luminosity | High | Intermediate | Low |
| Examples | A2199, Coma | A194, A539 | Virgo, A1228 |
It is very likely that this sequence reflects, at least in part,
stages in cluster evolution :
most evolved
intermediate
least evolved
Stated slightly differently : given a few Gyr, Hercules will resemble Coma
of course, more clusters like Hercules will form out of yet lower density
regions.
R /
 
109 yr × RMpc /
1000
So, for clusters that formed at z
1, galaxies
might have experienced a few orbits
(don't forget, though, many (spiral) galaxies may be falling in for the
first time)
few (2-5)
× tcross
(2-5) × 109 yr × RMpc
1000-1
Given the observed range in cluster properties (R,
, and possibly age) :
we expect (and find) a significant range in relaxation :  
quite unrelaxed
well relaxed.
t2-body
tcross N / 6 ln N
where N is the total number of interacting bodies in the system.
This gives
3 × 109 yr (Table
in 8.9.b) which is quite short
However : lets not forget the Dark Matter --- how does this change things ?
When we have a background medium, the 2-body and dynamical friction
processes get entwined.
The timescale for significant energy loss becomes :
trelax
tcross N /
fg 6 ln N
where fg is the fraction of mass in galaxies (
0.1) and N is the total number of galaxies
For individual galaxies we get trelax
1011-12 yr while for subgroups (3-30 galaxies) this becomes
109-11 yr
So relaxation is generally not significant for most galaxies
However, for subgroups or galaxies near the center, some relaxation is
expected
Dont forget, this kind of relaxation leads to equipartition (in energy), so
massive galaxies will settle
Although massive galaxies are often found in cluster cores,
it is unclear if this is due to relaxation or merging.
intermediate (eg flat/linear)
 
circular/concentrated
clusters are prolate
or triaxial
richer clusters are less elongated
(R)
(R) :
(R) using :
(0)
From rich
sparse :
(0) decreases (by definition !)
outer spirals not yet crossed cluster
radial orbits, infalling for first time ?
cluster continues to be constructed
A more theoretical approach can be adopted :
Analytically :
(r) with :
flat core, core radius, & steep r-2 envelope
(r) =
(0) [1 + (r/rc)2]-3/2
(R)
R¼ deVaucouleurs law
exp(-v2 / 2
2 )
is an important parameter and measures the
potential depth (as it does in galaxies).
or velocity space,
there are often close pairs &/or small sub-groups with similar velocities
We conclude :
Clusters continue to be assembled (via
heirarchical merging)
Relaxation is not yet complete
in many/most clusters.
Lets look more closely at this topic.
(a) Early Work at Low Redshift
| Type: | cD | E+S0 | S+I |
| Rich clusters | 93 | 56 | 38 |
| Poor clusters | 6 | 20 | 14 |
| Field | < 6 | < 24 | 48 |
Recall : the cluster LF can be constructed by combining
the LFs for each galaxy type
Ellipticals : Gaussian skewed to high luminosities
Spirals and S0s : Gaussian
dE's : Schechter function with steep slope
dSp/dIrr : Schechter function with shallower slope
For increasing densities :
the contribution of Es, S0s and dEs increases
the contribution of Spirals and dIrr decreases.
10×L*  
which is unusually bright
cD galaxies have a qualitative different
formation history than other cluster galaxies
they lie at the cluster center of gravity
halo contains stars in the cluster potential
occurred earlier ??
emission from
hot hydrostatic gaseous "atmosphere" : (107-8K)
acceleration
EM radiation (photons)
flat
spectrum
Fourier Transform of
delta function)

=  
10-11 T-½ exp(-E/kT) ne nZ
Z2 g(E) erg/s/cm3/erg
g(E)
ln T/E for E << kT
g(E)
(E/kT)-0.4 for E
kT
for several ions, replace ne nZZ2 by
ne nZZ2
For cosmic abundances, integrate over energy to get :
= 2.4×10-27  
T½ ne2 erg/s/cm3
Ltot
10-23
erg/s ×
ne2dV  
for T
5×107K  
7 keV
Note : emissivity
ne2
weights dense regions strongly
strong cooling in core
Temperature
= 2 - 30 × 107K (ave : 7×:107K
7 keV)
ne =  
10-4 - 10-1 cm-3 (ave : 10-3 cm-3)
Mass =  
0.2 - 5 × 1014 M
(ave = 1014 M
)
Mgas
Mgals (groups)
increasing to Mgas
7 Mgals (rich clusters)
On average :
5 Mgals
ICM significantly outweighs
galaxies !
1/3
Mtot
however, dark matter
still dominates overall
mp
T
7×107 K
½ mpVgal2
 
T
7×107 K
Using abundances (see below) it seems that both contribute :
80%
primordial infall,
20% ejected from galaxies
tcool = 3 Ne k T /
= 1011 Ne-1 T½ sec
= 2.7×1010 Ne,3-1 T7½ yr
This is longer than tHubble except, possibly, at the center.
the gas remains hot, even with
no additional heating
 
103 km/s
Vgals
109 years << 1010 years
the atmosphere can adjust to the potential
and achieve equilibrium
we have a hydrostatic atmosphere
gas(r) and Tgas(r) ?
gas
and
Pgas = nkT =
gas kT /
mp
Which together give :
gas) d
gas(kT/µmp) / dr =
- GM(<r) / r2
Obviously, we can view this in two ways :
gas and Tgas we can
derive M(r)
ultimately very important (§11)
gas(r)
: the galaxies
collisionless
they obey an equivalent equation (T8.8.c.i eq 8.37b)
gal) d (
gal
r,gal2 ) / dr +  
2
r,gal / r
= - GM(<r) / r2
(Here,
referes to orbit anisotropy and
r,gal is the radial galaxy dispersion)
notice that in both these equations we do not assume that either
gal or
gas define the potential
(they dont, the dark matter does)
The gas and galaxies do, however, sample the same potential
= 0, so
r,gal
gal
gal
=
const
Notice that we do not assume Tgas = Tgals
Since Tgas
Tgals we expect
a different (but still isothermal) profile for the gas.
Combining the hydrostatic fluid and stellar equations, we get :
(13.1)
from which we see :
gas
gal
with
=
gal2 / (kT/µmp)
= Tgal / Tgas
Here
refers to Tgal / Tgas (and should not be confused with the anisotropy
parameter)
and test
the various assumptions.
gas(r) and
gal(r)
gal
not constant
gal
 
(1 + (r / rc)2 ) -3/2
gas
 
(1 + (r / rc)2 ) (-3/2)
 
it does not fit the isothermal r-2 profile at large radii, but
 
it does fit the general isothermal profile within a few core radii.
Fits yeild
0.7 (rich clusters)
0.4 (less rich clusters)
giving halo gas density gradients r-1 (rich clusters)
r-0.7 (less rich clusters)
-1
1.5 (rich)
2 (less rich)
 
It seems the gas is hotter than the galaxies,
 
the temperature difference is greater for shallower potentials.
These results are also supported by (spectroscopic)
measurements of Tgas
conclusion : There is a non-gravitational source of heating for the ICM.
What is it ?
not yet known
Possibilities include :
gas retained in deeper potentials
greater loss of primordial gas
K,L)
5 - 10) resolution elements
slope and absorbing column (confirms
Bremms)
gas is
collisionally ionized (& in LTE)
cooling flows (see below)
???
1/3 Z
origin of metals is galactic winds
MZ(gals)
which is quite remarkable, (MZ means total mass of metals)
the ICM gas has experienced as much
toal processing as all the galaxies.
galaxies lose a significant fraction of their
initial gas (
30% - 50%) in winds
 
3 - 5 × Mgals
early SN fraction higher than today
ie flatter IMF
more SN per M
SF
only part of the ICM originates as winds :
20% ejected
from galaxies
80% primordial
most metals come from Type II SN (massive
star core collapse)
lost some of their initial Type II
ejecta
ongoing input from Type Ia which is retained
2 & tcool
kT/µmp
we have
tcool
-1
) to have
shortest tcool 
2/3 clusters
have tcool
1010 yr at 100 kpc and
tcool
109 yr at 10 kpc
this is quite a small region : R
10% Abell Radius (2-3 × cD
radius)
if the density profile doesn't
rise steeply (eg affected by merger) then won't get rapid cooling
given rapid cooling, get
LX (cooling flow)
10% - 40% LX(total)
T decreases
increases
(P
× T )
1 keV ; Touter
5 keV  
gas(r), LX(r) &
TX(r) gives the deposition rate of cool gas M(dot)(<r)
one can show that M(dot)(<r)
r with M(dot)total
10 - 1000
M
yr-1
  this is comparable to star formation rates
in SB
LIG
ULIG starbursts ! (see Topic 11)
integrated over 5 Gyr
5 × 1010-12 M
could contribute significantly
to the central (gE or cD) galaxy !
106 / 103 yr  
T
3 - 30 K
low mass stars ?
dense clouds fall through the ICM
& merge  
high mass stars
H
filaments
are common (
50%)
>> recombinations from M(dot)
<v2> =
GMclus /
Rclus  
(
1 depending
on orbit geometry)
Zwicky (1933) was the first to apply this (to Coma) and recognised that Mclus >>
Mgals
at the time, interpretation was unclear since it was not known if clusters were
in gravitational equilibrium
The result was controversial until the 1970s when evidence for dark matter began
to build
Today, Zwicky's approach has been vindicated, though there are still some caveats :
is not well known;
cf Topic 13 measuring BH masses)
gas) d Pgas / dr
= - GM(<r) / r2
gas(r) from X-ray images
(eg ROSAT; XMM; Chandra)
This method also has some caveats :
 
projected, total mass density :
tot
=
tot dl
There are two rather different regimes :
they appear as
small arcs or arclets (figure)
In addition to being distorted, the galaxies are also slightly brighter.
the surface number density
at different magnitudes can yield similar information.
Naturally, there is a range of cluster masses found
Here is the cluster mass function :
Total masses range over 1014 - 1015
M
with fewer of higher mass
More important are mass ratios : Mtot is typically
 
4 × Mgas + gals
Comparing the mass to the galaxy light : (M / LB)
200 M
/
LB,
this is much larger than the optical part of
individual galaxies (1-10 depending on type)
This provides some of the strongest evidence for Dark Matter.
Oort (1958) first suggested that cluster M/L ratios were representative of
the Universe as a whole
Using a total galaxy luminosity density and a typical cluster M/L ratio we find
matter
0.2
If the gas and galaxies comprise all the baryonic matter
in the cluster, we then expect
baryons
 
0.06
which is nicely consistent with the value from cosmic nucleosynthesis.
As you probably know, a variety of methods have established that we are in
a flat universe, with :
total
1 which itself comprises  
vacuum
0.7;
matter
0.3 ;
baryons
0.04
Clusters have played an important role in establishing these cosmological numbers