Paper detail

Hydrostatic mass estimates of massive galaxy clusters: a study with varying hydrodynamics flavours and non-thermal pressure support

We use a set of 45 simulated clusters with a wide mass range ($8\times 10^{13} < M_{500}~[$M$_{\odot}]~< 2\times 10^{15}$) to investigate the effect of varying hydrodynamics flavours on cluster mass estimates. The cluster zooms were simulated using the same cosmological models as the BAHAMAS and C-EAGLE projects, leading to differences in both the hydrodynamic solvers and the subgrid physics but still producing clusters which broadly match observations. At the same mass resolution as BAHAMAS, for the most massive clusters ($M_{500} > 10^{15}$ M$_{\odot}$), we find changes in the SPH method produce the greatest differences in the final halo, while the subgrid models dominate at lower mass. By calculating the mass of all of the clusters using different permutations of the pressure, temperature and density profiles, created with either the true simulated data or mock spectroscopic data, we find that the spectroscopic temperature causes a bias in the hydrostatic mass estimates which increases with the mass of the cluster, regardless of the SPH flavour used. For the most massive clusters, the estimated mass of the cluster using spectroscopic density and temperature profiles is found to be as low as 50 per cent of the true mass compared to $\sim$ 90 per cent for low mass clusters. When including a correction for non-thermal pressure, the spectroscopic hydrostatic mass estimates are less biased on average and the mass dependence of the bias is reduced, although the scatter in the measurements does increase.

preprint2019arXivOpen 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.