Using AGN as Probes of the ICM Minnesota Institute of Astrophysics Using AGN as Probes of the ICM Peter Mendygral1,2 Tom Jones1, Klaus Dolag3 1University of Minnesota – Minnesota Supercomputing Institute 2 Cray Inc. 3Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics Simulations run on Itasca at MSI, Harvard ITC cluster (thanks to Paul Edmon) and Kraken 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation Basic Questions What effect does ICM weather have on the AGN outflow – ICM interaction? Looking at “relaxed” cluster How do those effects change with different AGN plasma β? How do synthetic observations of these models compare with real observations? 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

Simulation Description Similar to Morsony et al. (2010) prescription Simulations initialized with output from MHD Gadget3 cosmological simulation AGN simulations performed with WOMBAT code (Mendygral et al. in prep) 10083 kpc3 box with Δx = 1 kpc Static potential with total energy conserving method No radiative cooling Passive CR electrons from γ = 10 – 1.6x105 with CGMV method (Jones & Kang 2005) 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation Cluster Description 1.53x1014 M Rvirial = 1.4 Mpc 7 Gyr since last major merger “Relaxed” with an X-ray concentration parameter c = 0.66 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation Cluster Winds ICM wind across jet axis ~400 km s-1 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation Bidirectional Jets Jets launched from cluster center Toroidal magnetic field <ρICM>/ρjet ~ 200 Pjet ~ <PICM> βjet = 100, 10, 1 (corresponding to 8 μG, 25 μG, 80 μ) vjet/cs,ICM ~ Mach 18 (internal Mach 1.2) ~ 0.04c Ljets = 6x1044 erg s-1 Duty cycle corresponding to 26 Myr period (6 cycles + 50 Myr off) 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation Morphologies β = 10 β = 1 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

Field Lines on Edges of Lobes β = 100 137.8 Myr 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

Average Field Strength in Lobes β = 10 β = 1 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation β = 100 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation 209 Myr β = 10 β = 1 178 MHz 178 MHz 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation 209 Myr β = 10 β = 1 300 MHz 300 MHz 1.4 GHz 1.4 GHz 100 kpc 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation WAT / Double-double β = 100 at 178 MHz 1159+583 in Abell 1446 at 4.86 GHz J1548-3216 at 334 MHz Image Credit: Machalski et al. 2010, A&A, 510, A84 Image Credit: Jetha et al. 2006, MNRAS, 368, 609 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation Resolution Study 144 Myr 20003 box with Δx = 0.5 kpc 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation Conclusions “Relaxed” cluster may still contain significant weather. In these simulations these flows were enough to deflect jets. Deflections are consistent with a simple calculation of ICM wind accelerating the cocoon. Independent on AGN plasma β. Intermittency in the presence of ICM wind results in mixing in the lobes. It also produces rounder X-ray cavities when compared to steady jets (e.g., O’Neill & Jones 2010). Intermittency of jets produces radio morphology resembling double-doubles Lobe deflections resemble WATs 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation

ICM Theory and Computation RM Analysis See Andrew Johnson’s poster on an analysis of the RM structures from these simulations To get to the poster go by the food. 9/14/2018 ICM Theory and Computation