HeCS-SZ: An MMT/Hectospec Survey of SZ-selected Clusters

Ken Rines (Western Washington University), Margaret Geller (SAO), Antonaldo Diaferio (Torino),

Ho Seong Hwang (KIAS)

5 November 2014

Hectospec Cluster Survey (HeCS)

Massive clusters Infall regions

(FoV is 3-6 Mpc at z=0.1-0.3) SDSS+RASS (BCS/REFLEX)

Selection sim. to LoCUSS Survey volume~108 Mpc3

(10x CIRS volume) 58 clusters Target red sequence 22,680 new redshifts 10,145 cluster members

Z

LX

CIRS: SDSS+RASS, z<0.1 (Rines & Diaferio 2006, see also Andreon 2010: mass-richness)

HeCS Science Goals Scaling relations

Mvir, sp, M★, YX, YSZ, Mlens

Mvir vs YSZ (Rines et al. 2010)

Mvir vs MWL (Geller et al. 2013)

Evolution of Cluster Galaxies to 5r200 Colors, D4000

Mass function (Wm,s8) BCG Dynamics Lensing: substructure, dilution

Mass profiles to 5r200 Ultimate halo masses

(Rines et al. 2013)

Hectospec: 300 fibers, 1° diameter

MMT 6.5m

HeCS: Infall Patterns

Clean Infall Regions High contrast Median 200 members p ~ 500-1200 km/s

Ordered by LX Scatter in LX-p

Cooling cores, AGN l.o.s. structure

Dv

Rp (Mpc/h)

HeCS: Infall Patterns

Dv

Rp (Mpc/h)

Clean Infall Regions High contrast Median 200 members p ~ 500-1200 km/s

Ordered by LX Scatter in LX-p

Cooling cores, AGN l.o.s. structure Double cluster:

MS0906/A750

HeCS: Infall Patterns

Dv

Rp (Mpc/h)

Clean Infall Regions High contrast Median 200 members p ~ 500-1200 km/s

Ordered by LX Scatter in LX-p

Cooling cores, AGN l.o.s. structure

HeCS: Infall Patterns

Dv

Rp (Mpc/h)

Clean Infall Regions High contrast Median 200 members p ~ 500-1200 km/s

Ordered by LX Scatter in LX-p

Cooling cores, AGN l.o.s. structure

HeCS: Infall Patterns

Dv

Rp (Mpc/h)

Clean Infall Regions High contrast Median 200 members p ~ 500-1200 km/s

Ordered by LX Scatter in LX-p

Cooling cores, AGN l.o.s. structure

HeCS: Mass Profiles

Caustic mass profiles Radii up to 6 Mpc/h p ~ 500-1200 km/s M ~ 1015 M/h Green: Mvirial(r) for r500-

r100

Virial/caustic masses agree (sanity check)

M(<

R)

Rp (Mpc/h)

HeCS: Caustics vs Lensing Neither requires

equilibrium Caustics should

overestimate at small radius (known systematic)

Lensing could overestimate at large radius (l.o.s. structure)

19 clusters (Okabe+10, others) MWL 15-25% low?

Geller et al 2013

HeCS: Stacked Clusters

Projection effects dominate systematics Quartiles by M200 and LX

(no caustics) Works in simulations

(Serra et al 2011) Clean Infall Regions

Caustic mass profiles Dv

Rp (Mpc/h)

HeCS: Stacked Clusters

Density profiles Larger-LX quartiles have

larger r Dynamic range of ~104

~r rcritical at max. radius Singular isothermal

sphere ruled out

r

Rp (Mpc/h)

HeCS: Stacked Clusters

Density profiles 4 orders of magnitude Singular isothermal

sphere ruled out Agrees well with NFW

(even outside r200) Incomplete at R>3 Mpc

Comparison to lensing X-ray-selected: NFW

c=2.9 (Okabe et al 2010) Lensing-selected: NFW

c=6.3 (Umetsu et al 2011)

r

Rp (Mpc/h)

HeCS: Density Profiles

Density profiles NFW at R<2 Mpc Steeper at R>2-3 Mpc? Range of >103

~r rcritical at max. radius Singular isothermal

sphere ruled out Cumulative Density

profiles Similar to NFW Incomplete at R>3 Mpc Max. bound radius: r5.6

r(<r)

Rp (Mpc/h)

r

M200 LX

Ultimate Halo Mass

LCDM cosmology predicts halos stop growing, become increasingly isolated

Cluster mass at a=100 is about 2.2 M200(a=1) (Busha et al 2005) Limit: r5.6 (enclosed

density = 9p2/16 rcritical

Prediction seconded (Dunner et al 2006)

a=1

a=100a=11

a=100 (comoving)

Busha et al 2003

Ultimate Halo Mass

LCDM cosmology predicts halos stop growing, become increasingly isolated

Cluster mass at a=100 is about 2.2 M200(a=1) (Busha et al 2005)

HeCS measurement 33 clusters have

caustics out to r5.6

M5.6/M200=1.99±0.11 Similar dispersion

M5.

6/M

200

M200 (M/h)

HeCS Science Goals Scaling relations

Mvir, sp, M★, YX, YSZ, Mlens

Mvir vs YSZ (Rines et al. 2010)

Mvir vs MWL (Geller et al. 2013)

Evolution of Cluster Galaxies to 5r200 Colors, D4000

Mass function (Wm,s8) BCG Dynamics Lensing: substructure, dilution

(Coe+2012, Geller+13, Hwang+14)

Mass profiles to 5r200 Ultimate halo masses

(Rines et al. 2013)Hectospec: 300 fibers, 1° diameter

MMT 6.5m

Planck: SZ vs CMB Planck CMB constraints

disagree with Planck SZ results Blue: SZ mass function

with MHS=0.8Mtrue

Red: Planck CMB Black: SZ mass function,

free normalization: MHS=0.59Mtrue

Alternate explanations: neutrino masses

s8

Wm

Planck Collaboration 2013 XX.

HeCS: SZ vs Dynamics

Scaling of Mvir-YSZ Published SZA data for 15

clusters (Bonamente+08; Marrone+09)

Strong correlation (99.8%) Significant scatter Connection to s8 debate?

Larger samples needed

Rines et al. 2010

Mvir sp

YSZ

SZ vs Dynamics: ACT, SPT Scaling of sp-YSZ

VLT/Gemini spectroscopic followup of ACT-detected clusters (Sifon et al 2013)

z=0.3-1.1 Cluster evolution? Cluster selection?

sp

YSZ

Gemini spectroscopic followup of SPT-detected clusters (Ruel et al 2014) z=0.3-1.5 Substantial scatter Velocity bias? (sgxy~1.1sDM

or Mvir~1.3Mtrue)

sp

MSZ

HeCS-SZ: Planck-selected sample

Massive clusters Planck clusters with SDSS

DR10 imaging Many in HeCS/CIRS 115 clusters (80 in SZ-

complete subsample) 8200 new redshifts in 24

clusters (z<0.2)

Z

MS

Z

Rines et al. in prep

HeCS-SZ: Infall Patterns

Dv

Rp (Mpc/h)

Clean Infall Regions High contrast Median 200 members p ~ 500-1200 km/s

Ordered by MSZ Scatter in MSZ-p

l.o.s. structure

HeCS-SZ: Infall Patterns

Dv

Rp (Mpc/h)

Clean Infall Regions High contrast Median 200 members p ~ 500-1200 km/s

Ordered by MSZ Scatter in MSZ-p

l.o.s. structure

HeCS-SZ: Infall Patterns

Dv

Rp (Mpc/h)

Clean Infall Regions High contrast Median 200 members p ~ 500-1200 km/s

Ordered by MSZ Scatter in MSZ-p

l.o.s. structure

HeCS-SZ: Infall Patterns

Dv

Rp (Mpc/h)

Clean Infall Regions High contrast Median 200 members p ~ 500-1200 km/s

Ordered by MSZ Scatter in MSZ-p

l.o.s. structure

HeCS-SZ: Scaling Relation Scaling of sp-YSZ

Published Planck data for 115 clusters (Planck 2013 XXIX)

Strong correlation Significant scatter Bayesian fit: sp at fixed YSZ

sp

YSZ

Rines et al. in prep.

HeCS-SZ: Scaling Relation Scaling of sp-YSZ

Published Planck data for 115 clusters (Planck 2013 XXIX)

Strong correlation Significant scatter Bayesian fit: sp at fixed YSZ

Dotted: Rines+10 ‘shallow’ Y-s no longer good fit

sp

YSZ

Rines et al. in prep.

HeCS-SZ: Scaling Relation Scaling of sp-YSZ

Published Planck data for 115 clusters (Planck 2013 XXIX)

Strong correlation Significant scatter Bayesian fit: sp at fixed YSZ

Dashed: Evrard+08 M-s plus Planck Y-M (2013 XX)

sp

YSZ

Rines et al. in prep.

HeCS-SZ: Scaling Relation Scaling of sp-YSZ

Published Planck data for 115 clusters (Planck 2013 XXIX)

Strong correlation Significant scatter Bayesian fit: sp at fixed YSZ

Dashed: Evrard+08 M-s plus Planck Y-M (2013 XX)

Large mass bias (67%) to reconcile w/Planck-CMB not favored

Requires sgxy~0.83sDM or Mvir~0.6Mtrue

sp

YSZ

Rines et al. in prep.

HeCS-SZ: Scaling Relation Scaling of sp-YSZ

Published Planck data for 115 clusters (Planck 2013 XXIX)

Strong correlation Significant scatter Bayesian fit: sp at fixed YSZ

Dashed: Evrard+08 M-s plus Planck Y-M (20113 XX

Dashed: Are galaxies biased tracers? Munari+13 sp

YSZ

Rines et al. in prep.

HeCS-SZ: Scaling Relation Best-fit parameters vs Planck Y-M

Green: MHS=Mtrue; red: MHS=0.59Mtrue

Scatter of 0.115 in sp (30%)

sp

YSZ

Slope Slope

Nor

mal

izat

ion

Sca

tter

Future Observations HectoMap

50 deg2, r~21 z=0.1-0.5 10x denser than BOSS

HeCS-red redMapper (optically

selected) clusters BigBOSS Subaru-PFS SPIDERS, 4MOST DESpec Euclid, WFIRST

Science with Wide-Field Cluster Surveys

Scaling relations Mvir, sp, M★, YX, YSZ, Mlens

Mvir vs YSZ (Rines et al. 2010)

Mvir vs MWL (Geller et al. 2013)

Evolution of Cluster Galaxies to 5r200

Mass function (Wm,s8) BCG Dynamics Lensing: alignment, dilution

Mass profiles to 5r200 Ultimate halo masses

Tests of modified gravity?(Lam et al. 2012)

Hectospec: 300 fibers, 1° diameter

MMT 6.5m

HeCS: Comparison to X-ray

A1835 X-ray HS M(r) Caustic M(r) (blue) Departures from

HSE at r>r500

Estimate Pnon-th(r)?

(M r)

Rp (Mpc/h)

HeCS-SZ: Planck-selected sample

Massive clusters Planck clusters with SDSS

DR10 imaging Infall regions

(FoV is 3-6 Mpc at z=0.1-0.3) 115 clusters (80 in SZ-

complete subsample) Target red sequence 8200 new redshifts in 24

clusters (z<0.2) Probes smaller LX at z>0.1

Z

L X

CIRS: SDSS+RASS, z<0.1 (Rines & Diaferio 2006, see also Andreon 2010: mass-richness)

HeCS: Color selection

Are red-sequence velocity dispersions biased?

Few blue members Small differences

Quartiles by M200 and LX (no caustics)

Works in simulations (Serra et al 2011)

Clean Infall Regions Caustic mass profiles

g-r

Mr +5 log h

HeCS: Color selection

Are red-sequence velocity dispersions biased?

Few blue members Small differences

Quartiles by M200 and LX (no caustics)

Works in simulations (Serra et al 2011)

Clean Infall Regions Caustic mass profiles

z

Mr +

5 lo

g h

HeCS: Color selection

Are red-sequence velocity dispersions biased?

Few blue members Small differences

Quartiles by M200 and LX (no caustics)

Works in simulations (Serra et al 2011)

Clean Infall Regions Caustic mass profiles

Dv

Rp (Mpc/h)