A blind detection of a large, complex, Sunyaev--Zel'dovich structure
Authors:
AMI Consortium,
:,
T. W. Shimwell,
R. W. Barker,
P. Biddulph,
D. Bly,
R. C. Boysen,
A. R. Brown,
M. L. Brown,
C. Clementson,
M. Crofts,
T. L. Culverhouse,
J. Czeres,
R. J. Dace,
M. L. Davies,
R. D'Alessandro,
P. Doherty,
K. Duggan,
J. A. Ely,
M. Felvus,
F. Feroz,
W. Flynn,
T. M. O. Franzen,
J. Geisbusch,
R. Genova-Santos
, et al. (36 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
We present an interesting Sunyaev-Zel'dovich (SZ) detection in the first of the Arcminute Microkelvin Imager (AMI) 'blind', degree-square fields to have been observed down to our target sensitivity of 100μJy/beam. In follow-up deep pointed observations the SZ effect is detected with a maximum peak decrement greater than 8 \times the thermal noise. No corresponding emission is visible in the ROSAT…
▽ More
We present an interesting Sunyaev-Zel'dovich (SZ) detection in the first of the Arcminute Microkelvin Imager (AMI) 'blind', degree-square fields to have been observed down to our target sensitivity of 100μJy/beam. In follow-up deep pointed observations the SZ effect is detected with a maximum peak decrement greater than 8 \times the thermal noise. No corresponding emission is visible in the ROSAT all-sky X-ray survey and no cluster is evident in the Palomar all-sky optical survey. Compared with existing SZ images of distant clusters, the extent is large (\approx 10') and complex; our analysis favours a model containing two clusters rather than a single cluster. Our Bayesian analysis is currently limited to modelling each cluster with an ellipsoidal or spherical beta-model, which do not do justice to this decrement. Fitting an ellipsoid to the deeper candidate we find the following. (a) Assuming that the Evrard et al. (2002) approximation to Press & Schechter (1974) correctly gives the number density of clusters as a function of mass and redshift, then, in the search area, the formal Bayesian probability ratio of the AMI detection of this cluster is 7.9 \times 10^4:1; alternatively assuming Jenkins et al. (2001) as the true prior, the formal Bayesian probability ratio of detection is 2.1 \times 10^5:1. (b) The cluster mass is MT,200 = 5.5+1.2\times 10^14h-1M\odot. (c) Abandoning a physical model with num- -1.3 70 ber density prior and instead simply modelling the SZ decrement using a phenomenological β-model of temperature decrement as a function of angular distance, we find a central SZ temperature decrement of -295+36 μK - this allows for CMB primary anisotropies, receiver -15 noise and radio sources. We are unsure if the cluster system we observe is a merging system or two separate clusters.
△ Less
Submitted 22 March, 2012; v1 submitted 20 December, 2010;
originally announced December 2010.
Large Instrument Development for Radio Astronomy
Authors:
J. R. Fisher,
R. F. Bradley,
W. F. Brisken,
W. D. Cotton,
D. T. Emerson,
A. R. Kerr,
R. J. Lacasse,
M. A. Morgan,
P. J. Napier,
R. D. Norrod,
J. M. Payne,
M. W. Pospieszalski,
A. Symmes,
A. R. Thompson,
J. C. Webber
Abstract:
This white paper offers cautionary observations about the planning and development of new, large radio astronomy instruments. Complexity is a strong cost driver so every effort should be made to assign differing science requirements to different instruments and probably different sites. The appeal of shared resources is generally not realized in practice and can often be counterproductive. Instr…
▽ More
This white paper offers cautionary observations about the planning and development of new, large radio astronomy instruments. Complexity is a strong cost driver so every effort should be made to assign differing science requirements to different instruments and probably different sites. The appeal of shared resources is generally not realized in practice and can often be counterproductive. Instrument optimization is much more difficult with longer lists of requirements, and the development process is longer and less efficient. More complex instruments are necessarily further behind the technology state of the art because of longer development times. Including technology R&D in the construction phase of projects is a growing trend that leads to higher risks, cost overruns, schedule delays, and project de-scoping. There are no technology breakthroughs just over the horizon that will suddenly bring down the cost of collecting area. Advances come largely through careful attention to detail in the adoption of new technology provided by industry and the commercial market. Radio astronomy instrumentation has a very bright future, but a vigorous long-term R&D program not tied directly to specific projects needs to be restored, fostered, and preserved.
△ Less
Submitted 26 August, 2009;
originally announced August 2009.
