Paper detail

Hydrostatic and Caustic Mass Profiles of Galaxy Clusters

We compare X-ray and caustic mass profiles for a sample of 16 massive galaxy clusters. We assume hydrostatic equilibrium in interpreting the X-ray data, and use large samples of cluster members with redshifts as a basis for applying the caustic technique. The hydrostatic and caustic masses agree to better than $\approx20\%$ on average across the radial range covered by both techniques $(\sim[0.2-1.25]R_{500})$. The mass profiles were measured independently and do not assume a common functional form. Previous studies suggest that, at $R_{500}$, the hydrostatic and caustic masses are biased low and high respectively. We find that the ratio of hydrostatic to caustic mass at $R_{500}$ is $1.20^{+0.13}_{-0.11}$; thus it is larger than 0.9 at $\approx3σ$ and the combination of under- and over-estimation of the mass by these two techniques is $\approx10\%$ at most. There is no indication of any dependence of the mass ratio on the X-ray morphology of the clusters, indicating that the hydrostatic masses are not strongly systematically affected by the dynamical state of the clusters. Overall, our results favour a small value of the so-called hydrostatic bias due to non-thermal pressure sources.

preprint2016arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.