A&A 486, L31-L34 (2008)
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810179
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
R. Cassano1 - M. Gitti2 - G. Brunetti1
1 - INAF - Istituto di Radioastronomia, via P. Gobetti 101, 40129 Bologna, Italy
2 -
INAF - Osservatorio Astronomico di Bologna, via Ranzani 1, 40127 Bologna, Italy
Received 12 May 2008 / Accepted 9 June 2008
Abstract
In this letter we present a morphological comparison
between giant radio halos and radio mini-halos in galaxy
clusters based on radio-X-ray luminosity,
,
and
radio luminosity-size,
,
correlations.
We report evidence that
and
trends may also exist for mini-halos:
mini-halo clusters share the same region of giant halo clusters in the
plane, whereas they are clearly separated in the
plane.
The synchrotron emissivity of mini-halos is found to be more than 50 times larger than that of giant halos, implying a very efficient process for their origins.
By assuming a scenario of sporadical turbulent particle re-acceleration for both
giant and mini halos, we discuss basic physical differences between these sources. Regardless of the origin of the turbulence, a more efficient source of injection of particles, which eventually takes part in the re-acceleration process, is required in mini-halos, and this may result from the central radio galaxy or from proton-proton collisions in the dense cool core regions.
Key words: radiation mechanism: non-thermal - galaxies: clusters: general - radio continuum: general - X-rays: general
The intra-cluster medium (ICM) consists not only
of hot gas emitting in X-rays but also of non-thermal components.
The major evidence for this comes from observations in the radio band
where Mpc-scale diffuse synchrotron emission from the ICM is detected in a number
of clusters (e.g. Feretti 2005; Ferrari et al. 2008),
indicating the presence of relativistic electrons and
magnetic fields. These radio sources are generally referred to as
giant radio halos when located at the cluster center and radio relics
when located at the cluster periphery. There are also some examples
of diffuse radio emission on smaller scales (200-500 kpc),
referred to as mini radio halos, extending around powerful radio
galaxies at the center of some cool core clusters, i.e., clusters characterized by a very peaked surface brightness profile and short central cooling time formerly known as
``cooling flow'' clusters (e.g. Peterson & Fabian 2006).
Galaxy clusters hosting giant halos are found to
always be characterized by a peculiar dynamical status indicative of very
recent or ongoing merger events (e.g., Buote 2001; Schuecker et al. 2001),
whereas clusters hosting mini halos are characterized by a cool
core, with or without signs of moderate dynamical activity.
Several statistical studies reveal that radio halos are not common in clusters
(Giovannini et al. 1999; Kempner & Sarazin 2001; Venturi et al. 2008;
Brunetti et al. 2007; Cassano et al. 2008); instead, the statistics
for mini halos is much poorer.
The main difficulty in understanding the origin of the synchrotron
emitting electrons in both giant halos and mini halos is
related to the fact that the diffusion length of the relativistic
electrons is much shorter than the typical scale of the radio
emission (e.g., Brunetti 2003). Therefore both giant halos and mini
halos cannot be explained in terms of simple diffusion of the
relativistic electrons from one or more cluster radio galaxies.
Two main possibilities have been proposed so far to explain the origin
of both giant radio halos and mini radio halos: i) re-acceleration models, whereby
relativistic electrons injected in the ICM are re-energized in situ by turbulence. Turbulence in radio halos is supposed to be generated by massive merger events (e.g., Brunetti et al. 2001; Petrosian et al. 2001). In mini radio halos, a seed large-scale turbulence frozen into the flow
could be amplified by the compression of the ICM in the cool core
(Gitti et al. 2002, 2004); ii) secondary electron models, whereby the
relativistic electrons are secondary products of the hadronic
interactions of cosmic rays (CR) with the ICM (e.g.,
Blasi & Colafrancesco 1999, for giant halos;
Pfrommer & Enßlin 2004; Fujita et al. 2007, for mini-halos).
Although the properties of giant halos and mini halos are clearly different (different size, different dynamical state of the hosting clusters), it is not
clear whether they are different astrophysical
phenomena or if they might share similar physics.
In this letter we carry out a morphological comparison between giant
radio halos and mini radio halos aimed at studying the differences between their
physical properties. We also consider the case of diffuse cluster
sources with intermediate properties between giant halos and mini halos.
To do this we investigate the presence of
scaling relations between the main properties of these sources.
A CDM cosmology (
,
,
)
is adopted.
We collect from the literature all clusters with well-studied giant radio halos and mini radio halos, as defined in the following.
There are several observed correlations for GHs that relate
thermal and non-thermal properties of the ICM: those between the radio
power at 1.4 GHz, P1.4, and the X-ray luminosity, ,
temperature, T, and cluster mass, M (e.g., Liang et al. 2000;
Feretti 2000; Govoni et al. 2001; Cassano et al. 2006).
Additional correlations were also explored between P1.4
and the size of GHs,
,
the total cluster mass within
,
and the cluster velocity dispersion (C07).
C07 find a trend between
and the cluster
virial radius,
,
and show that all the other correlations
explored so far can be derived by combining the
-
and P1.4-
scalings. This suggests that there are essentially two main scaling
relations that carry the leading information on the physics of
non-thermal components. The statistical properties of MHs are less explored, indeed few
objects are known to possess a MH and only a trend between P1.4and the maximum power of the cooling flow (estimated as
,
Gitti et al. 2004) has been found so far for this class of sources.
In Fig. 1 we show the distribution of GHs in the (
)
plane together with the correlation from Cassano et al. (2006).
The MHs are also reported in Fig. 1, where we find that they share the same region of GHs and that a possible P1.4-
correlation also exists for MHs and is barely consistent with that of GHs. In Fig. 1 we also report upper limits to the radio power of CCCs without detected MHs taken from the statistical sample of X-ray luminous clusters with deep radio follow up of Venturi et al. (2008).
These CCCs without MHs are all relaxed clusters with a central active radio galaxy.
Limits were obtained following the approach given in Brunetti et al. (2007, hereafter B07) and lie one order of magnitude below the radio power of MHs. Despite the poor statistics, this suggest that MHs may not be common in CCCs.
In Fig. 2 we show the distribution of GHs in the
(
) plane, where
is the radius of
the emitting region (as in C07). Following the procedure in C07,
we also derived
for MHs from the radio images of these sources.
We also find a trend between P1.4 and
for MH (Fig. 2) with P1.4 rapidly increasing in larger MHs.
This trend, however, is not consistent with what is found for GH.
The clear separation demonstrates the importance of exploring the
distributions of these radio sources in different planes
to distinguish between different radio sources
and to investigate their physics and origins.
In Figs. 1 and 2 we also report on A 2218, A 2142, and RXC J1314.
They are less luminous than GH (Bacchi et al. 2003) and MH
in clusters with similar ,
and are located between GH and MH
in the (
) plane. They are in merging clusters and are smaller (smaller emitting volumes and thus radio powers) than GH, suggesting that they might be
GH at an early evolutionary stage.
Table 1: Sample of galaxy clusters hosting mini radio halos.
In the case of GHs B07 found that 70% of clusters in the Venturi et al. (2008) sample are radio quiet, not showing Mpc scale synchrotron radio emission, and that the limits on their radio powers lie one order of magnitude below the correlation followed by clusters with GHs. They discussed that the bi-modality between radio quiet clusters and GH clusters is in line with the re-acceleration scenario, in which turbulence powers up GHs only for a limited period during cluster mergers, and disfavors secondary models that would instead predict GHs that are much more common in galaxy clusters. Despite the poor statistics, MHs in Fig. 1 show a behavior similar to that of GHs in B07. Furthermore, these MHs are characterized by non-relaxed cores, whereas the CCCs without MHs are all relaxed clusters. This might suggest that turbulence connected with merger activity could also play a role in the acceleration of electrons in MHs. More generally, turbulence necessary to trigger MHs could result from the amplification in the cool core of a seed turbulence present in the ICM (Gitti et al. 2002, 2004), could be connected with the gas-sloshing mechanism in CCCs (Mazzotta & Giacintucci 2007), or could be driven by minor mergers (see also Gitti et al. 2007a) that are common in CCCs with MHs (Sect. 2). Another possibility is that turbulence takes a small fraction of the energy released by the ``bubbles'' rising from the central AGN,and this can offset the cooling in most clusters (e.g., McNamara & Nulsen 2007). All 6 MH clusters indeed have an active radio galaxy at their center and 5 have cavities in the X-ray ICM.
![]() |
Figure 1: Radio power at 1.4 GHz versus X-ray luminosity in the [0.1-2.4] keV band of clusters with GHs (black circles), MHs (red asterisks), and small-scale radio emissions (magenta open circles). Arrows are upper limits to the radio power of CCCs without MHs (see text). The black solid line is the best-fit correlation for GHs (from Cassano et al. 2006). |
Open with DEXTER |
A detailed physical modeling of MHs in CCCs is beyond the scope of this letter, but we can derive some basic constraints here on their physical parameters.
We find that, although emitting a similar radio power,
the radius of MHs is typically a factor 4 smaller than
that of GHs (see Fig. 2). This implies a synchrotron emissivity
for MHs
50 times larger than that of GHs
.
Regardless of the origin of the emitting electrons, the ratio
between the synchrotron emissivity of MHs (
)
and of GH (
)
can be written as
![]() |
Figure 2:
Radio power at 1.4 GHz versus radio size of GHs (black circles)
and MHs (red asterisks), and small-scale radio emissions (magenta open circles).
The black solid line and the red dashed line are
the best-fit correlations for GHs (
![]() ![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
A suitable assumption for the ratio
in Eq. (1) (with
)
allows us to reproduce the observed ratio between the emissivities.
However, the difference in terms of B cannot be the only cause of the large
synchrotron emissivity in MHs. Indeed a large B in CCCs produces a fast cooling of relativistic electrons due to synchrotron losses (that make
smaller), and this implies the important point that a very efficient mechanism of injection and/or
acceleration of relativistic electrons should also be active in MHs.
To quantify this point in a relevant case, we assume that electrons are re-accelerated
sporadically by turbulence injected in the emitting region by some process.
Electrons are accelerated up to the energy where acceleration
is balanced by losses,
,
where
is the acceleration efficiency and
accounts for the synchrotron and inverse Compton losses
,
and a corresponding break forms in the emitted synchrotron
spectrum at
.
Magnetosonic waves are proposed as possible sources of particle acceleration in the
ICM (Cassano & Brunetti 2005; Brunetti & Lazarian 2007);
and in this case, following C07, the synchrotron emissivity
(if the damping of turbulence is dominated by thermal electrons, for
1) is
By combining the expression for
with Eq. (2) one finds the ratio between the synchrotron emissivities in GH and MH:
![]() |
Figure 3:
Ratio between turbulence energy densities of MHs and GHs normalized
to the thermal ones as a function of
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
In this letter we have compared the observed properties of mini radio halos
(MHs) and giant radio halos (GHs) in clusters of galaxies. GHs are
the most prominent evidence of non-thermal components in the ICM
and several correlations between thermal and non-thermal properties have been
explored for these sources, including those relating
P1.4 to
and to
(e.g., Cassano et al. 2006, 2007; Brunetti et al. 2007).
On the other hand, an extensive investigation of the statistical properties of MHs is
presently not possible since only a few clusters host well-studied MHs.
We collected a sample of MH and compared their behavior
with that of GHs in the (
)
and (
) planes.
We find that
and
trends may also exists for MHs.
While in the (
) plane MHs and GHs share the same region,
in the (
) plane MHs do not follow the same correlation of GHs
at smaller radii, but are clearly separated. We find that the typical synchrotron emissivity of
MHs is at least 50 times larger than that of GHs.
This implies a very efficient mechanism at the origin of the emitting electrons
in MHs. For completeness we also consider the few cases of smaller scale emission in
non-CC (and without central radio galaxy) merging clusters. These sources are
morphologically intermediate between GH and MH and may be GH at some early evolutionary stage.
The distribution in the (
)
plane of a small sample of CCCs with available radio
observations suggests that MHs are not ubiquitous in CCCs,
with upper limits for CCCs without diffuse radio emission
well below the radio power of MHs in clusters with similar
.
Those CCCs without MHs also appear to be more relaxed than that
with MHs. All these findings, if confirmed, would point in favor
of sporadic turbulent re-acceleration as the origin of the emitting particles.
In addition to the possibilities already
explored in the literature (Gitti et al. 2002; Mazzotta & Giacintucci
2007), minor mergers (see also Gitti et al. 2007a) and/or the central AGN outbursts
may contribute to the injection of turbulence in the ICM of CCCs.
By adopting this scenario, under the assumption that magnetosonic waves drive the particle acceleration process, we find that
the larger synchrotron emissivity of MHs can be explained by assuming that the energy density of the relativistic particles that interact with turbulence is
about one order of magnitude higher than in GHs, and that this does not necessarily
imply a larger amount of turbulence in MHs.
The extra amount of relativistic particles in these sources may be provided by the central cluster galaxy or by secondary electrons injected in the dense cool core region.
Acknowledgements
We thank G. Setti, S. Giacintucci, T. Venturi, and the anonymous referee for useful comments. This work is partially supported by grants PRIN-INAF2005, and ASI-INAF I/088/06/0.