1. Cosmological constraints from estimates of M gas -M tot -c in X-ray luminous clusters S. Ettori (INAF/OA Bologna) with F. Gastaldello, M. Meneghetti, I. Balestra, S. Borgani, S. Molendi, P. Tozzi et al. Potsdam, September 23, 2009: cosmological constraints from X-ray luminous clusters

2. Outline How good are the estimates of M gas, M tot, c: results from hydrodynamical simulations Clusters as cosmological probes: uncertainties are in the outskirts Concentration – M tot relation & f gas : a new approach to constrain σ 8 & Ω m

3. X-ray vs lensing mass: simulations Hydrodynamical simulations of 3 massive clusters (0.7-1.1e15 Msun). Analyzed after convolution with X-ray (XMAS) and lensing (SkyLens) exposures. Meneghetti et al. 09 subm

4. X-ray vs lensing mass: simulations Meneghetti et al. 09 subm XMASSkyLens

5. X-ray total & gas mass whatever the projection/method is M gas is recovered within few (~5) % M X vs M true : -12 (rms: 5) % M L vs M true : 2 (rms: 16) % M tot M gas

6. X-ray vs lensing mass: simulations Considering only the projection of g1 & g72: c from X-ray analysis: biased low by 10-20 (rms 13) % c from W only: +88 (rms 50) %, S only +12 (38) % c from W+S lensing: good agreement (rms 14) % Concentration from fitting a NFW profile

7. Gas mass fraction We combine a dynamical and a geometrical method (see also Allen et al, Blanchard et al., Ettori et al, Mohr et al) : 1. baryonic content of galaxy clusters is representative of the cosmic baryon fraction Ω b / Ω m (White et al. 93) 2. f gas is assumed constant in cosmic time in very massive systems (Sasaki 96, Pen 97) To constrain the cosmological model Ω m +Ω  +Ω k =1

8. X-ray total mass Total mass from X-ray is determined by assuming 1. spherical symmetry, 2. hydrostatic equilibrium  n~ -2/-2.4  T~ 0/-0.8

9. An example: RXJ1252, z=1.235

10. An example: RXJ1252, z=1.237 We fit a single absorbed MEKAL to measure T e (Rosati et al. 04). The deprojected Sb provides n e that is then fitted with a functional form. NOTE: 850 cts <35”, 1220 cts <59” (r c ~10”, 250 cts)

11. Systematics on Ω m - Ω  -w assuming T(r) as observed in local systems (e.g. Vikhlinin et al. 06) For details see Ettori et al. 09, arXiv:0904.2740 WMAP-5

12. Bkg: dominant in GCs outskirts Simulation for 3keV cluster @ R200 Gal foreground Ins. background Residual CXB Source

13. ICM at R 200 : Observed clusters A1795 with Suzaku by M.Bautz et al. : T ~ r -0.9, M 500 ~20-30% < expected XMM (Leccardi & Molendi 08) Study of S b at r >0.7 R 200 in a sample of high-z (z>0.3) objects with CXO (Ettori & Balestra 09) fit of the derivative of ln(Sb)/ln( r): at 0.7 R 200 : -3.9 ± 0.7, at R 200 : -4.3 ± 0.9

14. On the Temperature profile Chandra XMM EDGE 1Msec arXiv:0707.4103

15. On the Temperature profile Chandra XMM WFXT 50ksec

16. The c-M tot relation We ( Ettori et al. 09 in prep ) recover M gas & M tot from 44 X-ray luminous galaxy clusters observed with XMM-Newton in the z- range 0.1-0.3 ( from Leccardi & Molendi 2008 ) to constrain (σ 8, Ω m ). We use 2 independent methods & check several systematics on M tot

17. The c-M tot relation: σ 8 -Ω m Dotted lines: Eke et al. (01) for a given ΛCDM at z=0 (from top to bottom: σ 8 =0.9 and 0.7). Shaded regions: Maccio’ et al. (08, see Bullock et al. 01) for WMAP-1, 5 and 3 years (from the top to the bottom, respectively). Dashed lines (thin: z=0.1, thick: z=0.3) indicate the best-fit range at 1σ in a WMAP-5 yrs cosmology from Duffy et al. (08) z 0.25

18. The c-M tot relation: σ 8 -Ω m We constrain (σ 8, Ω m ) by comparing our estimates of (c 200, M 200 ) to the predictions tuned from CDM simulations (black contours) We consider both systematics (e.g. different T profiles; fitted n gas ; no-limits on r s ; two methods: ~10% ) in our measurements & scatter from numerical predictions ( ~20%, e.g. Neto et al. 07 ) We add constraints from f bar (red contours). Eke et al. 01 σ 8 = 0.94±0.25 Ω m =0.25 +0.2 -0.1 σ 8 = 0.86±0.06 Ω m =0.28±0.01

19. CONCLUSIONS on c–M tot -f gas X-ray techniques provide M gas & M tot with a good control of both statistical & systematic uncertainties A selection of relaxed, massive objects over a large z-range can constrain some cosmological parameters (σ 8, Ω m, Ω Λ ) through estimates in the c-M tot -f gas plane CAVEAT : N-body community ’d realize an adequate sets of cosmological simulations over a large box to properly predict the expected concentration associated to the massive (>10 14 Msun) DM halos as function of (σ 8, Ω m ; z)