Paper detail

Reconciling Planck cluster counts and cosmology? Chandra/XMM instrumental calibration and hydrostatic mass bias

The mass of galaxy clusters can be inferred from the temperature of their X-ray emitting gas, $T_{\mathrm{X}}$. Their masses may be underestimated if it is assumed that the gas is in hydrostatic equilibrium, by an amount $b^{\mathrm{hyd}}\sim(20\pm10)$ % suggested by simulations. We have previously found consistency between a sample of observed \textit{Chandra} X-ray masses and independent weak lensing measurements. Unfortunately, uncertainties in the instrumental calibration of {\em Chandra} and {\em XMM-Newton} observatories mean that they measure different temperatures for the same gas. In this paper, we translate that relative instrumental bias into mass bias, and infer that \textit{XMM-Newton} masses of $\sim 10^{14}\,\mbox{M}_{\odot}$ ($> 5\cdot 10^{14} \mbox{M}_{\odot}$) clusters are unbiased ($\sim 35$ % lower) compared to WL masses. For massive clusters, \textit{Chandra}'s calibration may thus be more accurate. The opposite appears to be true at the low mass end. We observe the mass bias to increase with cluster mass, but presence of Eddington bias precludes firm conclusions at this stage. Nevertheless, the systematic \textit{Chandra} -- \textit{XMM-Newton} difference is important because {\em Planck}'s detections of massive clusters via the Sunyaev-Zeldovich (SZ) effect are calibrated via {\em XMM-Newton} observations. The number of detected SZ clusters are inconsistent with {\em Planck}'s cosmological measurements of the primary Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB). Given the \textit{Planck} cluster masses, if an (unlikely) uncorrected $\sim 20$ % calibration bias existed, this tension would be eased, but not resolved.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.