CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 128Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations

FOCUSING COSMIC TELESCOPES: EXPLORING REDSHIFT z∼ 5-6 GALAXIES WITH THE BULLET CLUSTER 1E0657 – 56

Open access
Bradač, Maruša, Treu, Tommaso, Applegate, Douglas, Gonzalez, Anthony H., Clowe, Douglas, Forman, William, Jones, Christine, Marshall, Phil +2 more·2009·The Astrophysical Journal
DOI 10.1088/0004-637x/706/2/1201
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The gravitational potential of clusters of galaxies acts as a cosmic telescope allowing us to find and study galaxies at fainter limits than otherwise possible and thus probe closer to the epoch of formation of the first galaxies. We use the Bullet cluster 1E0657 − 56 ( z = 0.296) as a case study, because its high mass and merging configuration makes it one of the most efficient cosmic telescopes we know. We develop a new algorithm to reconstruct the gravitational potential of the Bullet cluster based on a non-uniform adaptive grid, combining strong and weak gravitational lensing data derived from deep Hubble Space Telescope /Advanced Camera for Surveys F606W−F775W−F850LP and ground-based imaging. We exploit this improved mass map to study z ∼ 5–6 Lyman break galaxies (LBGs), which we detect as dropouts. One of the LBGs is multiply imaged, providing a geometric confirmation of its high redshift, and is used to further improve our mass model. We quantify the uncertainties in the magnification map reconstruction in the intrinsic source luminosity, and in the volume surveyed, and show that they are negligible compared to sample variance when determining the luminosity function of high-redshift galaxies. With shallower and comparable magnitude limits to Hubble Ultra Deep Field (HUDF) and Great Observatories Origins Deep Survey (GOODS), the Bullet cluster observations, after correcting for magnification, probe deeper into the luminosity function of the high-redshift galaxies than GOODS and only slightly shallower than HUDF. We conclude that accurately focused cosmic telescopes are the most efficient way to sample the bright end of the luminosity function of high-redshift galaxies and—in case they are multiply imaged—confirm their redshifts.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/0004-637x/706/2/1201

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • All the cited lensing analyses of the Bullet Cluster are in good agreement, and none show a displacement between mass and galaxy light in either substructure.

    “We stress that regardless of the specific reconstruction technique, all the above-cited analyses are in good agreement, and none show a displacement between mass and galaxy light in either substructure.”

    From The Mismeasure of Mergers: Revised Limits on Self-interacting Dark Matter in Merging Galaxy Clusters (2018) · cites this paper as Bradač et al. (2009)

    Section 4 describes this paper’s Bullet Cluster mass reconstruction and its use of earlier lensing data, but does not compare all the cited analyses or assess whether mass is displaced from galaxy light in either substructure. Searches for mass–galaxy-light offsets and agreement among reconstructions found no passage addressing those claims; page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 68

  1. Bacon, D. J., Goldberg, D. M., Rowe, B. T. P., & Taylor, A. N. 2006, MNRAS, 365, 414 · DOI
  2. Barrena, R., Biviano, A., Ramella, M., Falco, E. E., & Seitz, S. 2002, A&A, 386, 816 · DOI
  3. Bartelmann, M., Narayan, R., Seitz, S., & Schneider, P. 1996, ApJ, 464, L115 · DOI
  4. Bartelmann, M., & Schneider, P. 2001, Phys. Rep., 340, 291 · DOI
  5. Beckwith, S. V. W., et al. 2006, AJ, 132, 1729 · DOI
  6. Bertin, E., & Arnouts, S. 1996, A&AS, 117, 393 · DOI
  7. Bouwens, R. J., & Illingworth, G. D. 2006, Nature, 443, 189 · DOI
  8. Bouwens, R. J., Illingworth, G. D., Franx, M., & Ford, H. 2007, ApJ, 670, 928 · DOI
  9. Bouwens, R. J., Illingworth, G. D., Franx, M., & Ford, H. 2008, ApJ, 686, 230 · DOI
  10. Bouwens, R. J., Illingworth, G. D., Thompson, R. I., & Franx, M. 2005, ApJ, 624, L5 · DOI
  11. Bouwens, R. J., et al. 2009a, ApJ, 690, 1764 · DOI
  12. Bouwens, R. J., et al. 2009b, ApJ, submitted (arXiv:0909.1803) · arXiv
  13. Bradač, M., Allen, S. W., Treu, T., Ebeling, H., Massey, R., Morris, R. G., von der Linden, A., & Applegate, D. 2008a, ApJ, 687, 959 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Bradač, M., Schneider, P., Lombardi, M., & Erben, T. 2005, A&A, 437, 39 · DOI
  15. Bradač, M., et al. 2006, ApJ, 652, 937 · DOI
  16. Bradač, M., et al. 2008b, ApJ, 681, 187 · DOI
  17. Bradley, L. D., et al. 2008, ApJ, 678, 647 · DOI
  18. Bruzual, A. G., & Charlot, S. 1993, ApJ, 405, 538 · DOI
  19. Bunker, A., et al. 2009, MNRAS, submitted (arXiv:0909.2255) · arXiv
  20. Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245 · DOI
  21. Clowe, D., Bradač, M., Gonzalez, A. H., Markevitch, M., Randall, S. W., Jones, C., & Zaritsky, D. 2006a, ApJ, 648, L109 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Clowe, D., et al. 2006b, A&A, 451, 395 · DOI
  23. Coe, D., Benítez, N., Sánchez, S. F., Jee, M., Bouwens, R., & Ford, H. 2006, AJ, 132, 926 · DOI
  24. Deb, S., Goldberg, D. M., & Ramdass, V. J. 2008, ApJ, 687, 39 · DOI
  25. Diego, J. M., Tegmark, M., Protopapas, P., & Sandvik, H. B. 2007, MNRAS, 375, 958 · DOI
  26. Ellis, R., Santos, M. R., Kneib, J., & Kuijken, K. 2001, ApJ, 560, L119 · DOI
  27. Giavalisco, M. 2002, ARA&A, 40, 579 · DOI
  28. Giavalisco, M., et al. 2004a, ApJ, 600, L103 · DOI
  29. Giavalisco, M., et al. 2004b, ApJ, 600, L93 · DOI
  30. Gonzalez, A. H., Clowe, D., Bradač, M., Zaritsky, D., Jones, C., & Markevitch, M. 2009, ApJ, 691, 525 · DOI
  31. Henry, A. L., Malkan, M. A., Colbert, J. W., Siana, B., Teplitz, H. I., & McCarthy, P. 2008, ApJ, 680, L97 · DOI
  32. Henry, A. L., et al. 2009, ApJ, 697, 1128 · DOI
  33. Hildebrandt, H., Pielorz, J., Erben, T., van Waerbeke, L., Simon, P., & Capak, P. 2009, A&A, 498, 725 · DOI
  34. Jullo, E., & Kneib, J.-P. 2009, MNRAS, 395, 1319 · DOI
  35. Keeton, C. R. 2003, ApJ, 582, 17 · DOI
  36. Kneib, J., Ellis, R. S., Santos, M. R., & Richard, J. 2004, ApJ, 607, 697 · DOI
  37. Koekemoer, A. M., Fruchter, A. S., Hook, R. N., & Hack, W. 2002, in The 2002 HST Calibration Workshop, ed. S. Arribas, A. M. Koekemoer, & B. Whitmore (Baltimore, MD: STScI), 339
  38. Limousin, M., Kneib, J.-P., & Natarajan, P. 2005, MNRAS, 356, 309 · DOI
  39. Limousin, M., et al. 2008, A&A, 489, 23 · DOI
  40. Lupton, R., Blanton, M. R., Fekete, G., Hogg, D. W., O'Mullane, W., Szalay, A., & Wherry, N. 2004, PASP, 116, 133 · DOI
  41. Markevitch, M., Gonzalez, A. H., David, L., Vikhlinin, A., Murray, S., Forman, W., Jones, C., & Tucker, W. 2002, ApJ, 567, L27 · DOI
  42. Marshall, P. 2006, MNRAS, 372, 1289 · DOI
  43. McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., Cirasuolo, M., Koekemoer, A. M., Sabbi, E., Stark, D. P., Targett, T. A., & Ellis, R. S. 2009, arXiv:0909.2437 · arXiv
  44. Mehlert, D., et al. 2001, A&A, 379, 96 · DOI
  45. Merten, J., Cacciato, M., Meneghetti, M., Mignone, C., & Bartelmann, M. 2009, A&A, 500, 681 · DOI
  46. Nagamine, K., Wolfe, A. M., Hernquist, L., & Springel, V. 2007, ApJ, 660, 945 · DOI
  47. Oesch, P. A., et al. 2009a, arXiv:0909.1806 · arXiv
  48. Oesch, P. A., et al. 2009b, ApJ, 690, 1350 · DOI
  49. Reddy, N. A., & Steidel, C. C. 2009, ApJ, 692, 778 · DOI
  50. Rex, M., et al. 2009, ApJ, 703, 348 · DOI
  51. Richard, J., Pelló, R., Schaerer, D., Le Borgne, J.-F., & Kneib, J.-P. 2006, A&A, 456, 861 · DOI
  52. Sand, D. J., Treu, T., Ellis, R. S., Smith, G. P., & Kneib, J.-P. 2008, ApJ, 674, 711 · DOI
  53. Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., & Davis, M. 1998, ApJ, 500, 525 · DOI · Paper page
  54. Schneider, P., & Er, X. 2008, A&A, 485, 363 · DOI
  55. Somerville, R. S., Lee, K., Ferguson, H. C., Gardner, J. P., Moustakas, L. A., & Giavalisco, M. 2004, ApJ, 600, L171 · DOI
  56. Soucail, G. 1990, Ap&SS, 170, 283 · DOI
  57. Stanway, E. R., Bunker, A. J., & McMahon, R. G. 2003, MNRAS, 342, 439 · DOI
  58. Stanway, E. R., McMahon, R. G., & Bunker, A. J. 2005, MNRAS, 359, 1184 · DOI
  59. Stark, D. P., Ellis, R. S., Bunker, A., Bundy, K., Targett, T., Benson, A., & Lacy, M. 2009, ApJ, 697, 1493 · DOI
  60. Steidel, C. C., Giavalisco, M., Pettini, M., Dickinson, M., & Adelberger, K. L. 1996, ApJ, 462, L17 · DOI
  61. Trenti, M., & Stiavelli, M. 2008, ApJ, 676, 767 · DOI
  62. Tucker, W. H., Tananbaum, H., & Remillard, R. A. 1995, ApJ, 444, 532 · DOI
  63. van den Bosch, F. C., Yang, X., & Mo, H. J. 2003, MNRAS, 340, 771 · DOI
  64. Vanzella, E., et al. 2009, ApJ, 695, 1163 · DOI
  65. Wilson, G. W., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 390, 1061 · DOI
  66. Yan, H., Windhorst, R., Hathi, N., Cohen, S., Ryan, R., O'Connell, R., & McCarthy, P. 2009, ApJ, submitted (arXiv:0910.0077) · arXiv
  67. Yoshida, M., et al. 2006, ApJ, 653, 988 · DOI
  68. Zheng, W., et al. 2009, ApJ, 697, 1907 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bradač, M., Treu, T., Applegate, D., Gonzalez, A. H., Clowe, D., Forman, W., Jones, C., Marshall, P., Schneider, P., & Zaritsky, D.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
  • Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology (US)
  • University of Florida (US)
  • Ohio University (US)
  • Center for Astrophysics Harvard & Smithsonian (US)
  • University of Bonn (DE)
  • University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
Bradač, Maruša
ORCID
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Publisher
American Astronomical Society
Published
2009-11-10
Volume
706
Issue
2
Pages
1201-1212
ISSN
  • 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4357
DOI
10.1088/0004-637x/706/2/1201
OpenAlex
W2952773931
Cited by
128
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Astrophysical Journal (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0642621, DE-AC02-76SF00515, CAREER, NAS 5-26555)
  • U.S. Department of Energy (76SF00515, DE–AC02–76SF00515, AC02‐76SF00515, NAS 5-26555, 11099, DE-AC02-)
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NAS 526555, NNX08AD79G, 526555)
  • Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  • Space Telescope Science Institute (NAS5- 26555, 5-26555, 26555)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Keywords
gravitational lensing, adaptive grid, Lyman break galaxies, high-redshift galaxies, galaxy luminosity function, magnification bias, multiply imaged galaxies, cluster mergers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review