English   español  
Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/109394
Compartir / Impacto:
Estadísticas
Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE
Citado 15 veces en Web of Knowledge®  |  Ver citas en Google académico
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Exportar otros formatos: Exportar EndNote (RIS)Exportar EndNote (RIS)Exportar EndNote (RIS)
Título

Planck intermediate results: II. Comparison of Sunyaev-Zeldovich measurements from Planck and from the arcminute microkelvin imager for 11 galaxy clusters

Autor Brown, M. L.; Barreiro, R. Belén ; Diego, José María ; González-Nuevo, J. ; Herranz, D. ; López-Caniego, M. ; Martínez-González, Enrique ; Toffolatti, L. ; Vielva, P. ; Fosalba, Pablo ; Rebolo López, Rafael; Planck Collaboration
Palabras clave Cosmology: observations
Galaxies: clusters: general
Galaxies: clusters: intracluster medium
Cosmic background radiation
X-rays: galaxies: clusters
Fecha de publicación 2013
EditorEDP Sciences
Citación Astronomy and Astrophysics 550: A128 (2013)
ResumenA comparison is presented of Sunyaev-Zeldovich measurements for 11 galaxy clusters as obtained by Planck and by the ground-based interferometer, the Arcminute Microkelvin Imager. Assuming a universal spherically-symmetric Generalised Navarro, Frenk and White (GNFW) model for the cluster gas pressure profile, we jointly constrain the integrated Compton-Y parameter (Y 500) and the scale radius (θ500) of each cluster. Our resulting constraints in the Y500-θ500 2D parameter space derived from the two instruments overlap significantly for eight of the clusters, although, overall, there is a tendency for AMI to find the Sunyaev-Zeldovich signal to be smaller in angular size and fainter than Planck. Significant discrepancies exist for the three remaining clusters in the sample, namely A1413, A1914, and the newly-discovered Planck cluster PLCKESZ G139.59+24.18. The robustness of the analysis of both the Planck and AMI data is demonstrated through the use of detailed simulations, which also discount confusion from residual point (radio) sources and from diffuse astrophysical foregrounds as possible explanations for the discrepancies found. For a subset of our cluster sample, we have investigated the dependence of our results on the assumed pressure profile by repeating the analysis adopting the best-fitting GNFW profile shape which best matches X-ray observations. Adopting the best-fitting profile shape from the X-ray data does not, in general, resolve the discrepancies found in this subset of five clusters. Though based on a small sample, our results suggest that the adopted GNFW model may not be sufficiently flexible to describe clusters universally. © ESO, 2013.
Versión del editorhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201219361
URI http://hdl.handle.net/10261/109394
DOI10.1051/0004-6361/201219361
Identificadoresdoi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219361
issn: 0004-6361
e-issn: 1432-0746
Aparece en las colecciones: (ICE) Artículos
(IFCA) Artículos
Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato  
II. Comparison of Sunyaev-Zeldovich.pdf3,51 MBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir
Mostrar el registro completo
 



NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.