On the formation of cold fronts in massive mergers
Open accessAbstract
Using adiabatic hydrodynamical simulations, we follow the evolution of two symmetric cold fronts forming in the remnant of a violent z= 0.3 massive cluster merger. Because the fronts develop after the first passage of the two gas cores of the merging subclusters, and because they soon move ahead of their associated dark matter cores, both the structure and the location of our simulated cold fronts may correspond to a stage that is later than that of most cold fronts observed so far. The cold fronts are preceded by a roughly spherical shock that originates in the centre of the cluster and disappears in the outer regions after 1.6 Gyr. The cold fronts last longer, until z∼ 0. We follow the spatial evolution of the gas of the subcluster cores, and find that a fraction of this gas is liberated in the intracluster medium after core passage, but mainly at apocentre, and that it does not fall back onto the cluster centre. Conversely, we trace back the low-temperature gas constituting the fronts and find that it is initially associated with the two dense cores of the merging clusters. In addition, we find some evidence for discontinuity of the gas velocity field across the edge of the forming cold fronts, suggesting the presence of a contact discontinuity there. In the light of other recent work, we then speculate on the physical mechanism resulting in the cold fronts. We suggest that sloshing induced by strongly varying ram pressure along the subcluster's orbit and/or spatial segregation between the dark matter and gas components of the cores of the subclusters Results in strong tidal forces on the gas, and that these forces could be responsible for the deposition of part of the cold dense gas in the surrounding hot intracluster medium. This deposited gas then expands, cools down further, and constitutes the cold fronts.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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?
After ram pressure pulls the gas back from the center of the subcluster potential, gravity slings it forward (the ram pressure slingshot).
“after ram pressure pulls the gas back from the center of the subcluster potential, gravity slings it forward (Hallman & Markevitch 2004;Mathis et al. 2005;Markevitch & Vikhlinin 2007;Ng et al. 2015).”
From The Mismeasure of Mergers: Revised Limits on Self-interacting Dark Matter in Merging Galaxy Clusters (2018) · cites this paper as Mathis et al. 2005
The Conclusion (p. 17) says ram-pressure stripping is minimal in the simulated cold fronts. It attributes the gas’s outward motion to an effective pressure force that acts opposite to gravity, not to gravity slinging gas forward after ram pressure pulls it back. Section 6.3 (p. 17) describes ram-pressure displacement in a different model by Heinz et al., but does not describe the claimed slingshot mechanism. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
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: 3
- Heinz S., Churazov E., Forman W., Jones C., Briel U. G., 2003, preprint, astro-ph/0308131 · arXiv
- Markevitch M., Vikhlinin A., Forman W. R., 2002b, in Matter and energy in clusters of galaxies, edited by S. Bowyer, C.-Y. Hwang, vol. X of ASP conference series
- Voit G. M., Balogh M. L., Bower R. G., Lacey C. G., Bryan G. L., 2003, preprint, astro-ph/0304447 · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Mismeasure of Mergers: Revised Limits on Self-interacting Dark Matter in Merging Galaxy Clusters
Wittman, D., Golovich, N., & Dawson, W. A. (2018) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaee77 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mathis, H., Lavaux, G., Diego, J. M., & Silk, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- École Normale Supérieure Paris-Saclay (FR)
- Venue
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-03
- Volume
- 357
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 801-818
- ISSN
- 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2966
- OpenAlex
- W1997459440
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 2.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- 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
- cold fronts, cluster mergers, intracluster medium, gas sloshing, ram pressure stripping, contact discontinuity, tidal forces
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