text:
# A study of the core of the Shapley Concentration: V. The A3528 complex: a young merger event? based on observations collected at the European Southern Observatory, La Silla, Chile.

## 1 Introduction

Clusters of galaxies are thought to form by accretion of subunits in a hierarchical bottom-up scenario (see f.i. Colberg et al. 1998): the fact that substructures are observed in a high fraction of clusters (see f.i. Bird 1994) indicates that this accretion phenomenon is still active.
Cluster mergings are among the most energetic phenomena in the Universe, leading to a release of $`10^{5060}`$ ergs in a time scale of the order of Gyrs. The astrophysical consequences of this energy output are expected to be both thermal (shocks, changes in the temperature and gas distribution profiles of the Intra Cluster Medium) and non–thermal (appearance of radio sources like Halos or Relics, hard X-ray tails). Such effects are visible at different wavelengths, but while the merging event is rather well studied in the X-ray band, the studies of the velocity distribution and morphological modification of the galaxy population suffered until recently by the limited number of available spectra per cluster. A significant improvement in this field will be achieved by the new generation of multi-fiber spectrographs, which allow to obtain hundreds of spectra simultaneously. However, even with the “old” multi-fiber spectrographs like OPTOPUS and MEFOS it has been possible to map major merger events like the A3558 complex in the core of the Shapley Concentration (Bardelli et al. 1994, 1998a, 1998b, 2000), as part of a large, multiwavelength project.

The Shapley Concentration is a unique laboratory where to study the cluster merging because, given the high local overdensity (of the order of $`10`$ on scales of $`10`$ h-1 Mpc , Bardelli et al. 2000), the induced peculiar velocities increase the “cross section” for cluster-cluster collisions. In particular, two clusters complexes are found at the center of the supercluster (Zucca et al. 1994), dominated by A3558 and A3528 respectively: these structures, whose spatial scales are of the order of $`5`$ h-1 Mpc (Bardelli et al. 2000), are formed by strongly interacting clusters. The complex dominated by A3558 has been extensively studied in optical (Bardelli et al. 1994, 1998a, 1998b), radio (Venturi et al. 1997, 1998a, 2000) and X-ray (Bardelli et al. 1996, Ettori et al. 2000) bands, revealing its complex dynamical activity. We suggested that this structure could be the remnant of a cluster-cluster collision seen just after the first core-core encounter.

We are carrying on an analogous multiwavelength study on the complex formed by the ACO (Abell, Corwin & Olowin, 1989) clusters A3528, A3530, A3532 and A3535, which appears very similar to the A3558 complex. These two complexes are separated by $`19`$ h-1 Mpc and are connected by a bridge of galaxies (Bardelli et al. 2000). In this paper we present the results of a dynamical and substructure analysis of the clusters in this complex, based on $`600`$ new velocity determinations.

The plan of the paper is the following: in Sect. 2 we present the characteristics of the A3528 complex and in Sect. 3 we describe our galaxy sample. In Sect. 4 we derive the dynamical parameters of the clusters and in Sect. 5 we analyze their substructures. Finally the results are discussed in Sect. 6.

## 2 The A3528 cluster complex

Fig. 1 shows the galaxy isodensity contours in the sky region covering the A3528 complex. This figure shows two interesting features: a) the distance between the centers of A3530 and A3532 is smaller than their Abell radii, an indication of the existence at least of tidal interactions; b) the contours of galaxies in A3528 appear to be elongated in the North–South direction, pointing towards the A3530–A3532 pair. The complex extends for $`2.8`$ degrees in the North–South and $`1.7`$ degrees in the East–West directions, corresponding to linear sizes of $`8`$ h-1 Mpc and $`5`$ h-1 Mpc , respectively, at the mean redshift of the structure (see below).

The cluster A3528 ($`\alpha _{2000}=12^h54^m34^s`$, $`\delta _{2000}=29^o08^{}30^{\prime \prime }`$) is of richness class 1: all the other clusters of the complex are of richness class 0. Quintana et al. (1995) found a mean velocity of $`<v>=15631\pm 148`$ km/s and a velocity dispersion of $`\sigma =864_{85}^{+119}`$ km/s determined with 39 galaxies. The ENACS project estimated for this cluster $`<v>=15780`$ km/s and $`\sigma =969`$ km/s, using 28 galaxies (Mazure et al. 1996).
From a ROSAT PSPC observation, Schindler (1996) found that this cluster is actually double, formed by two subcomponents (dubbed A3528N and A3528S) showing an indication of interaction. In fact, the gas seems to be hotter in the region between the two subclusters. Henricksen & Jones (1996) estimated an hot gas temperature of $`2.7\pm 0.8`$ and $`2.9\pm 0.9`$ keV for A3528N and A3528S, respectively. The core radii are $`88\pm 10`$ and $`58\pm 5`$ h-1 kpc, while the total masses are $`3.1`$ and $`3.9\times 10^{13}`$ h-1 M. Radio observations of this cluster (Schindler 1996; Reid, Hunstead & Pierre 1998; Venturi et al. 1998b) show that in this cluster and in its proximities a large number of extended radio galaxies is located, sign of dynamical activity.

The cluster A3530 ($`\alpha _{2000}=12^h55^m31^s`$, $`\delta _{2000}=30^o19^{}53^{\prime \prime }`$) has an estimated mean velocity of $`<v>=15850\pm 165`$ km/s and a velocity dispersion of $`\sigma =643_{88}^{+146}`$ km/s, based on 18 galaxies (Quintana et al. 1995). White, Jones & Forman (1997) reported for this cluster a temperature for the hot gas of $`3.2`$ keV and Ettori, Fabian & White (1997) estimated a total mass of $`1.13\times 10^{14}`$ h-1 M.

The estimated mean velocity and dispersion of the cluster A3532 ($`\alpha _{2000}=12^h57^m22^s`$, $`\delta _{2000}=30^o22^{}03^{\prime \prime }`$) are $`<v>=16085\pm 102`$ km/s and $`\sigma =594_{58}^{+82}`$ km/s, respectively, based on 39 galaxies (Quintana et al. 1995). White et al. (1997) reported a temperature of $`4.4\pm 1.5`$ keV and Ettori et al. (1997) a total mass of $`1.7\times 10^{14}`$ h-1 M.

The cluster A3535 ($`\alpha _{2000}=12^h57^m48^s`$, $`\delta _{2000}=28^o29^{}18^{\prime \prime }`$), is the least studied of the complex. The only data available in the literature concern its redshift: on the basis of 4 radial velocities Vettolani et al. (1990) estimated a mean velocity of 19770 km/s.

## 3 The galaxy sample

Fig. 1 shows the isodensity contours for the objects in the magnitude bin $`17b_J19.5`$ from the COSMOS/UKSTJ galaxy catalogue (Yentis et al. 1992), in a region of $`2^o.7\times 3^o.8`$, corresponding to $`12^h51^m<\alpha _{2000}<13^h15^m`$ and $`31^o36^{}<\delta _{2000}<28^o00^{}`$. This region is part of the plate 443, nearby the border with the plate 442, which is located on the West. The data have been binned in cells of $`2\times 2`$ arcmin2 and then smoothed with a Gaussian with 6 arcmin of FWHM. In the left panel, circles of one Abell radius have been drawn on the four Abell clusters. In the right panel, the positions of the observed OPTOPUS fields are shown. In Table 1 the coordinates and the observation dates of the fields are reported.

### 3.1 Observations and data reduction

The spectroscopic observations were performed at the 3.6m ESO telescope at La Silla, equipped with the OPTOPUS multifiber spectrograph (Lund 1986), on the nights of 8 and 9 March 1991 (for the field # 10) and from 23 to 27 February 1993. Fields # 10, # 11, # 13 and # 34 have been observed twice given the high density of galaxies and/or lack of velocity determination in the literature.

The OPTOPUS multifiber spectrograph uses bundles of 50 optical fibers, which can be set within the field of the Cassegrain focal plane of the telescope; this field has a diameter of $`32`$ arcmin, and each fiber has a projected size on the sky of $`2.5`$ arcsec. We used the ESO grating $`\mathrm{\#}15`$ ($`300`$ lines/mm and blaze angle of $`4^o18^{}`$) allowing a dispersion of $`174`$ Å/mm (corresponding to a resolution of $`12`$ Å) in the wavelength range from $`3700`$ to $`6024`$ Å. The detectors were Tektronic $`512\times 512`$ CB CCDs (ESO $`\mathrm{\#}16`$ for 1991 run; ESO $`\mathrm{\#}32`$ for 1993 run) with a pixel size of $`27\mu `$m, corresponding to $`4.5`$ Å, i.e. a velocity bin of $`270`$ km/s at $`5000`$ Å. Detector $`\mathrm{\#}32`$ has a particularly good responsive quantum function in the blue ($`70\%`$ at $`4000`$ Å), where there are the calcium and \[OII\] lines.

Following Wyse & Gilmore (1992), we dedicated 5 fibers to sky measurements, remaining with 45 fibers available for the objects. The observing time for each field was one hour, split into two half–hour exposures in order to minimize the effects due to the “cosmic” hits. The observing sequence was: a 30 seconds exposure of a quartz–halogen white lamp, a 180 seconds exposure of the Phillips Helium and Neon arcs, then the first and the second field exposures, and again the arcs and the white lamp.

The reduction steps are described in Bardelli et al. (1994). However, it could be important to stress that we normalized the fiber transmission dividing each spectrum by the continuum–subtracted flux of the sky emission line \[OI\]$`\lambda `$ 5577. This procedure assumes that the sky emission does not change significantly on angular scales of the order of $`30`$ arcmin (Wyse & Gilmore 1992).

We obtained estimates of the radial velocity of galaxies using the cross–correlation method as implemented in the IRAF 111IRAF is distributed by KPNO, NOAO, operated by the AURA, Inc., for the National Science Foundation. task RVSAO (XCSAO, Kurtz et al. 1992). The galaxy spectra were cross–correlated with those of $`8`$ stellar templates observed with the same instrumental set up. The adopted velocity for each galaxy is the value given by the template which gives the minimum cross–correlation error. For spectra with strong emission lines we measured an “emission velocity” using the EMSAO program in the same IRAF task RVSAO.

### 3.2 The new redshift data

From the total number of spectra ($`692`$), it was possible to obtain $`662`$ velocity estimates: $`81`$ objects turned out to be stars ($`12\%`$ of the reliable spectra), leaving us with $`581`$ new galaxy redshifts.

In Table 2 we list the objects with velocity determination. Columns (2), (3) and (4) give the right ascension (2000), the declination (2000) and the $`b_J`$ apparent magnitude, respectively, as reported in the COSMOS catalogue. Columns (4) and (5) give the heliocentric velocity ($`v=cz`$) and the internal error (in km/s). The external error can be derived by multiplying the error in column (5) by a factor of the order of $`1.61.9`$: the lower value is obtained by comparing repeated observations of the same galaxies (Malumuth et al. 1992), while the higher one takes into account also the different reduction techniques (see the discussion in Bardelli et al. 1994). Finally, the code “emiss” in column (6) denotes the velocities determined from emission lines.

The galaxies whose spectrum presents detectable emission lines (mainly \[OII\]$`\lambda `$ 3727, H$`\beta `$ $`\lambda `$ 4860, \[OIII\]$`\lambda `$ 4959 and \[OIII\]$`\lambda `$ 5007) are $`133`$, corresponding to a percentage of $`22\%`$, significantly higher than the average value of $`16\%`$ reported by Biviano et al. (1997) for the cluster galaxy population.

From the literature data, we added 30 galaxies from the ENACS survey (Katgert et al. 1998), 17 from Quintana et al. (1995) and 43 from the compilation of Fairall & Jones (1991): in case of multiple values for the same galaxy, we adopted the most recent estimate. The final sample contains a total of 671 velocities.

In Fig. 2 we plot the redshift completeness within the OPTOPUS fields as a function of magnitude. The first bin includes all galaxies with $`b_J<16.5`$. The differential completeness is higher that $`70\%`$ for objects with $`b_J<18.5`$: at this limit the integrated completeness is $`83\%`$.

In Fig. 3, the wedge diagram of the galaxies of our sample in the velocity range $`1100024000`$ km/s is reported. In this plot the right ascension coordinate has been compressed and the plotted coordinate is declination, in order to better visualize the structure, which is elongated in the North–South direction. Note that, in this representation, A3530 and A3532 appear compressed together. From this figure it is clear the presence of the “finger-of-God” of the clusters and the physical connection between them. Note also the region without galaxies in the foreground of the structure.

In Fig. 4 the velocity histogram of our sample is shown: the main peak at $`16000`$ km/s corresponds to A3528, A3530 and A3532, while the peak at $`20000`$ km/s corresponds to A3535.

These data were used in Bardelli et al. (2000) to estimate the density excess of the A3528 complex with respect to a uniform distribution. We found $`{\displaystyle \frac{N}{\overline{N}}}=21.4\pm 1.2`$ on a scale of 5.3 h-1 Mpc , which corresponds to a mass of $`3.6\times 10^{15}`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_o`$ h-1 M, under the hypothesis that light traces mass. Analyzing the galaxy density profile, we found a significant void in the foreground (at $`10000`$ km/s); in the background of the structure we detected a void at a mean velocity of $`35000`$ km/s and a significant overdensity at $`30000`$ km/s which is part of a larger structure (see the discussion in Bardelli et al. 2000).

## 4 Dynamical parameters of the clusters

The basic parameters which describe the dynamics of a cluster are the mean velocity $`<v>`$ and the velocity dispersion $`\sigma `$. In order to estimate these quantities we used the biweight location and scale estimators (Beers et al. 1990). The velocity range, in which the cluster members lie, is found by assuming that the velocity distribution is Gaussian and the procedure used for rejecting interlopers is described in Bardelli et al. (1994).

The parameters obtained for the clusters in the complex are reported in Table 3: column (1) and (2) give the cluster name and the number of galaxies used to estimate the dynamical parameters, column (4) and (5) show the mean velocity and the velocity dispersion (with their $`1\sigma `$ errors). For A3528 and A3535 we considered galaxies inside one Abell radius from the cluster center (i.e. $`31^{}`$ and $`25^{}`$ respectively); for A3530 and A3532, given the fact that their Abell circles overlap each other, we restricted our analysis to galaxies inside a circle of 13 arcmin radius. In Fig. 5 the velocity histograms for each cluster are shown, with superimposed a Gaussian with mean value $`<v>`$ and dispersion $`\sigma `$; the shaded histograms correspond to galaxies with $`b_J<18`$.

Comparing our parameters reported in Table 3 with the literature values (see Sect. 2), we find significant differences. The velocity distribution of galaxies in A3528, although globally consistent with a single Gaussian, appears characterized by several peaks. In particular, considering the distribution of bright galaxies ($`b_J<18`$, shadowed histogram in Fig. 5a) the presence of a bump at lower velocity ($`14500`$ km/s) is clear. Given the fact that the ENACS and the Quintana et al. (1995) estimates are based on galaxies brighter than $`18`$, this tail can explain their lower values for $`<v>`$. An analogous justification can explain the differences for A3530 and A3532, in addition to the fact that for these two clusters we restricted the analysis to the very central regions. Finally, for A3535 the difference with the literature value is justified by the fact that the Vettolani et al. (1990) estimate was based only on 4 galaxies.

Another interesting characteristics of this complex is that all clusters appear dominated by a pair of bright ellipticals, instead of a single dominant galaxy. In particular, A3530 and A3532 are both dominated by a dumb-bell system (Gregorini et al. 1994), i.e. two galaxies of roughly equal brightness inside a common halo. Moreover, the major axes of these systems are both roughly aligned in the East–West direction, along the main axis of the cluster pair. In Fig. 5b and 5c, the black dots show the radial velocity of each components of these dumb-bell systems. It is interesting to note that these components are in correspondence of two separated peaks in the velocity distributions; however, it is not possible to assess at a high confidence level the significance of this bimodality (see below).

Also in the center of A3528 there are two bright galaxies, which are located near the positions of the two X-ray blobs observed by Schindler (1996), already discussed in Sect. 2. In Fig. 5a the radial velocities of these two galaxies are indicated by black dots: also in this case, there is a correspondence with two peaks in the velocity distribution.

For what concerns A3535, there is not a clear dominant galaxy near the center, although Gregorini et al. (1994) report the presence of a dumb-bell system.

In order to assess the statistical significance of the peaks in the velocity distribution, we applied the KMM test (Ashman, Bird & Zepf, 1994) which checks whether the distribution is better represented by a single or by a multiple Gaussian. Given the limited number of objects, the bimodality hypothesis is not significantly better than that of a single Gaussian for all clusters, even in the case of $`b_J<18`$. However, the presence of these peaks leads to a marginal deviation from Gaussianity in A3528 (skewness test) and in A3530 (kurtosis test).

## 5 Substructure analysis

The presence of substructures and their relevance in term of mass with respect to the main clusters are useful tools for understanding if a structure is relaxed. In order to detect subcomponents, we have used the DEDICA method (Algorithm driven by the density estimate for the identification of clusters, Pisani 1993, 1996), already applied by Bardelli et al. (1998b) to the A3558 cluster complex. The basic idea of this algorithm is to determine the density field $`f(\stackrel{}{x})`$ (where $`\stackrel{}{x}`$ is the $`n`$-dimensional position vector) by smoothing the distribution of galaxy with a Gaussian adaptive kernel: the $`f(\stackrel{}{x})`$ is then represented as a sum of Gaussians, whose widths are dependent on the local density. Groups are found as local maxima of $`f(\stackrel{}{x})`$ , while a likelihood function is constructed to estimate the confidence of the existence of the substructures (see for details Pisani 1993, 1996). As done in Bardelli et al. (1998b), we performed the analysis both in the bi–dimensional and three–dimensional samples: the first case, having more objects, does not suffer by small numbers statistic but could be biased by projection effects; the second case, although using a much smaller sample, is able to separate in velocity the clumps along the line of sight.

### 5.1 The bi–dimensional sample

The bi–dimensional sample is obtained by using the rectangular region described in Sect. 2, which contains 3048 galaxies brighter than $`b_J=19.5`$. As done in Bardelli et al. (1998b), we estimated the background density by plotting the histogram of the widths $`\sigma `$ of the Gaussians, which is a symmetric distribution with a tail at high $`\sigma `$. We define the value of the width of the background ($`\sigma _{bck}`$) as the value at the beginning of the tail, resulting in $`\sigma _{bck}=3.85`$, corresponding to a density of $`0.024`$ gal arcmin-2. The whole range of densities in our sample is $`0.0151.587`$ gal arcmin-2. The adopted $`\chi ^2`$ threshold is 14.0, corresponding to a significance of $`99.99\%`$.

The 13 significant groups found in our bi–dimensional sample are reported in Table 4, where column (1) is the identification number and columns (2) and (3) give the $`\alpha `$ and $`\delta `$ coordinates of the group center. These coordinates are identified as the common $`\stackrel{}{x}_{lim}`$ positions of the members and they do not necessarily coincide with the geometrical center. Column (4) reports the number of the substructure members and column (5) indicates the main component to which the substructure belongs. Note that this association has been made on the basis of a simple coincidence on the plane of the sky.

In Fig. 6 the positions of the substructure members are shown, superimposed on the isodensity contours of galaxies. Note that in these figures the isodensity contours are obtained directly by binning the data (see details in Sect. 3) and not from the $`\widehat{f}_k`$: however the two methods give similar contours. Note that the objects displayed in Fig. 6 are the galaxies which resulted significantly assigned to the subclumps by our algorithm, but it is possible that the effective number of members of each group is higher.

The bi–dimensional analysis revealed that the A3528 complex is significantly substructured, with the presence of two or more clumps in the inner part of the single clusters (with the exception of A3530). In particular, it is interesting to note the series of clumps around A3528, aligned along the direction pointing toward A3530-A3532. The two X-ray blobs A3528N and A3528S are identified with B944 and B1107, respectively, at a separation of $`2.5`$ arcmin and $`3.9`$ arcmin. The two dominant galaxies of A3528 (see Sect. 4) are located one in B944 and the other in B1107.

### 5.2 The three–dimensional sample

In this case we used the velocity sample described in Sect. 2: from the 671 galaxies with measured redshift we selected the 498 objects in the velocity range $`[1000022500]`$ km/s.

Our formalism uses symmetric three–dimensional Gaussian kernels, with $`\sigma _x=\sigma _y=\sigma _v`$, and therefore it is necessary to scale the velocity interval in order to have a numerical range comparable to the other two variables: we have chosen to compress the velocity by a factor 100 (see Bardelli et al. 1998b for details about this point).

The adopted value of the background is $`\sigma _{bck}=10.0`$ arcmin, corresponding to $`3.6\times 10^4`$ gal arcmin-2 (km/s/100)-1 and a significance threshold of $`\chi ^2=15.8`$. The significant 3-D clusters are 8, out of a total of 19, and are reported in Table 5. Column (1) is the subcluster identification number, columns (2), (3) and (4) report the coordinates ($`\alpha `$, $`\delta `$ and $`v_o`$) of the group center, while the number of members is reported in column (5). The estimated dynamical parameters are reported in columns (6) and (7) and in column (8) the association to the clusters of the structure is given. Also in this case, the association has been made on the basis of a simple coincidence on the plane of the sky. Note that $`v_o`$ is the projection of $`\stackrel{}{x}_{lim}`$ on the velocity axis, and therefore it does not necessarily coincide with $`<v>`$.

In Fig. 7 the members of these groups are plotted: solid lines connect the position of each galaxy to the common limiting position $`\stackrel{}{x}_{lim}`$ of the group. In the upper panel, the groups are projected on the plane of the sky, while in the lower panel they are shown in the velocity–Y plane in order to clarify the separation in velocity.

In this case, the sparse sampling introduced by the redshift survey with respect to the bi–dimensional sample leads to the loss of some substructures. In particular, only the A3528 cluster remains bimodal, with the main component at 16313 km/s (T362) and a secondary clump at 21336 km/s (T352).

## 6 Discussion

The A3528 cluster complex is located in a region of enhanced dynamical activity, where clusters are accreting matter in a series of spectacular mergings, as seen in the nearby system dominated by A3558 (see Bardelli et al. 1998b). However, these two cluster complexes show some relevant differences.

In the A3558 complex, the members of the chain appeared to be fragmented in a large number of components, both in optical and in X-ray band. In fact, from the optical substructure analysis we found 21 significant three-dimensional subclumps; in the X-ray band, in addition to the three ACO clusters A3558, A3562 and A3556, also two poor groups (SC1329-313 and SC1327-312) were detected. All these components are embedded in a hot gas filament (Bardelli et al. 1996; Kull & Böhringer 1999). Moreover, Venturi et al. (2000) found a deficiency of radiogalaxies in the A3558 complex with respect to the radio–optical luminosity function of normal clusters and Bardelli et al. (1998b) found an excess of blue galaxies in the expected position of the shock.
These facts could suggest that the dynamical processes acting on this complex are in a rather advanced stage and that the merging events were already able to induce modifications in the galaxy population. Our conclusion is that the A3558 complex is a cluster-cluster collision (otherwise called “major merging”) seen just after the first core-core encounter, where an intervening cluster impacted onto the richer object A3558. Indeed the clumpiness found eastward of A3558 could be due to the galaxies of this intervening cluster, which is now emerging from the main component. This scenario is also confirmed by numerical simulations of merging clusters (see f.i. lower panels in Fig.2 of Burns et al. 1994, which show the structure after the core-core encounter).

The A3528 complex is characterized in the X-ray band (ROSAT pointed observations) by two pairs of roughly similar interacting clumps: one pair has been resolved as two optical clusters (A3530 and A3532), while the two components of the other pair are both associated to A3528. The radio–optical luminosity function of the radiogalaxies in this complex does not appear significantly different from that of normal clusters (Venturi et al., in preparation).
From the analysis of optical data, we find that the velocity histograms of cluster galaxies are not significantly different from a Gaussian distribution, meaning that the inner parts of the clusters are not far from the virial equilibrium. However, from our substructure analysis the A3528 complex appears characterized by a number of subclumps. In particular, it is interesting to note in the bi–dimensional sample the series of clumps around A3528, aligned along the direction pointing toward A3530-A3532. Moreover, two of them appear associated with A3528N and A3528S (B944 and B1107, respectively). The association is based not only on the $`\alpha \delta `$ positional coincidence, but also on the mean velocity concordance: in fact, for each group the mode of the velocity distribution of members with redshift is in agreement with the velocity of the dominant galaxy of the corresponding X-ray blob. Also in the three–dimensional sample A3528 appears formed by two groups, T362 and T352, but while the first is located at $`<v>=16313`$ km/s, the second has $`<v>=21336`$ km/s, i.e. it is placed in the background of the cluster. In fact, it results that most members of B944 and B1107 are part of the same three–dimensional clump (T352). This link of some bi–dimensional groups into a single three–dimensional clump happens also for other substructures and is due to the sparse sampling introduced by the redshift survey, which in some cases does not allow a statistically significant separation of the subcomponents.
For what concerns the A3530-A3532 pair, the most puzzling feature is the presence of two dumb-bell galaxies at their centers, elongated along the axis joining the two clusters (see Sect. 4). Moreover, it is interesting to note the presence of two subclumps (T443 and T342) at the intersection of the Abell radii of the clusters, with mean velocity in agreement with the main components.
However, the A3528 complex is less fragmented than the A3558 structure: in fact, even if these two complexes have similar sizes, in the A3528 complex we detect only 8 significant three-dimensional subclumps against the 21 detected in the A3558 complex (see above).

All these characteristics of the A3528 complex seem to indicate that this is a “young” structure: the two interacting cluster pairs (A3528N-A3528S and A3530-A3532) resemble the simulations of Burns et al. (1994) for the pre-merger case (see upper panels of their Fig.2). This scenario is consistent with the suggestions of Reid et al. (1998), based on the analysis of extended radiosources in this region and with the fact that the merging effects on the galaxy population and on the cluster dynamics are not yet evident.
Given the overall overdensity of this region, at the end these two main components will merge together in a major merging event, forming a structure similar to the A3558 complex. The “age” difference of the two complexes is mainly due to their overdensities, which lead to different collapse times (see Table 5 in Bardelli et al. 2000). This fact confirms that the Shapley Concentration is a “laboratory” where it is possible to study the formation of clusters at different stages.

A better understanding of the status of the merging process in the A3528 complex will be reached using XMM observations of all clusters in the complex (AO1 approved observations), which will allow us to derive the distribution of the diffuse hot gas and its temperature map, leading to estimate the cluster masses and to individuate the position of the shock fronts.

Finally, a more detailed analysis of the galaxy population properties will be possible through the spectral classification of galaxies in the two cluster complexes and in the underlying supercluster “field” (Baldi et al., in preparation). This study will help to understand the effects of the cluster large–scale dynamics on the galaxy morphology.

## Acknowledgements

We warmly thank T.C.Beers, C.M.Bird and A.Pisani for having distributed public versions of their programmes (ROSTAT, KMM and DEDICA). We also thank the referee (M.Drinkwater) for useful comments which improved the presentation of the results.


format: text

text:
# Morphological Number Counts and Redshift Distributions to I = 25 from the Hubble Deep Fields: Constraints on Cosmological Models from Early Type Galaxies

## 1 Introduction

Galaxy number counts have long been used as potential tests of cosmological models (Hubble 1934). However, as demonstrated by Tinsley (1972), they are also - indeed more strongly - dependent on galaxy evolution. Once redshift surveys at faint magnitudes became feasible (e.g., Broadhurst et al. 1988), further constraints could be placed on the models, breaking to some extent the degeneracy in terms of cosmological parameters versus evolution (see, e.g., the review by Ellis 1997). More recently, very high resolution imaging with the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) has added a further ingredient, in that we can now identify the morphological types of the individual very faint, distant galaxies (e.g., Driver et al. 1995a; Glazebrook et al. 1995). This has enabled counts to be made for the separate morphological types (e.g., Driver et al. 1995b; Odewahn et al. 1996; Abraham et al. 1996), removing some of the complications inherent in modelling the (varying) mix of types in the overall counts as a function of magnitude.

In a previous paper (Driver et al. 1996, hereafter DWPB), we used number counts of galaxies morphologically identified as ellipticals (or S0s) in HST Medium Deep Survey data to examine models with a wide range of the cosmological parameters $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ and $`\lambda _0`$ (the density parameter and normalised cosmological constant, respectively). As noted above, the restriction to a single type markedly reduces the complexity of the problem since (in principle) we have only one luminosity function and one set of k- and evolutionary corrections to deal with. Nevertheless there remained in DWPB a range of acceptable models, depending primarily on the amount of evolution, both stellar and dynamical, which was allowed.

Since DWPB, numerous studies have used the yet deeper (northern) Hubble Deep Field (HDF) data of Williams et al. (1996) to study the faint galaxy population (again see Ellis 1997 for a review). In the present paper we once more utilise morphological number counts, this time of HDF galaxies in both the northern and southern fields, but combine them with their photometric redshifts. The joint data on the galaxies classified as early types (E/S0) are then compared with the corresponding distributions predicted by simulations based on various cosmologies and evolutionary schemes, in an attempt to distinguish between the competing models. The simulations used, both here and in DWPB, were described in detail in Bristow (1996; see also Bristow & Phillipps 1997). 111In brief, a volume of space is populated Monte Carlo fashion with galaxies following an input luminosity function. Here, as in DWPB, we use that of Marzke et al. (1994). In the case of the E/SOs relevant here, they are then ascribed an intrinsic (zero redshift) surface brightness and a corresponding scale size. (They are all taken to have de Vaucouleurs’ (1948) $`r^{1/4}`$ intensity profiles). The corresponding observational parameters are calculated from the selected redshift, the given cosmology, an input spectrum, the required bandpass and the specified evolutionary model. (Evolution is assumed to alter only the surface brightness, not the size, of a galaxy). Finally, an image of the galaxy can be created and added, along with noise etc., to a simulated data frame with the characteristics of the actual observations used.

## 2 The HDF Early Type Galaxy Sample

The basic HDF imaging data set consists of long exposures with the replacement Wide Field Camera (WFPC2) through the four main broad band filters, F300W, F450W, F606W and F814W. The detection of galaxies and their magnitude measurement were done automatically using the SExtractor image analysis package (Bertin & Arnouts 1996). Details of the SExtractor parameters used and the zero-pointing of the ‘total’ magnitudes that were measured in the analyis of the Hubble Deep Field North (HDF-N) data are given in Driver et al. (1998, hereafter D98); the analysis of the Hubble Deep Field South (HDF-S) images was done in an identical manner, with photometric zero-points taken from the appropriate STScI web-site.

In this paper, we concentrate on the data taken through the F814W filter (which we will subsequently refer to as ‘$`I`$’), since it was this image that was used for object detection (and thus the construction of our galaxy catalogue) and morphological classification. The latter was done for all galaxies in the catalogue brighter than $`I=25`$, primarily using the “automatic neural network” (ANN) software of Odewahn et al. (1996), but supplemented with visual classifications conducted by one of us (WJC) – see D98 for details. Photometric redshifts, based on the galaxies’ broad-band colours, were determined by the Stoney Brook group in identical fashion for each sub-sample, and are taken from Fernandez-Soto et al. (1999) and Chen et al. (1998) for the HDF-N and HDF-S fields, respectively. (The photometric redshifts are superceded by spectroscopic ones where available). Further details of the combination of morphological, magnitude and photometric redshift data are given in D98; the galaxies classified as either E or S0 in the HDF-N are illustrated in the upper panel of their Plate L7. Note that the HDF-N observations were somewhat deeper than those for HDF-S, hence the slightly brighter sample limit here than in D98.

## 3 E/S0 Number Counts

HST number counts separated by morphological type have been presented by several groups: Casertano et al. (1995), Driver et al. (1995a, 1995b), Glazebrook et al. (1995), Odewahn et al. (1996), Abraham et al. (1996) and, for the HDF-N, D98. The counts from these various authors show good agreement for the early types (E/S0s), though we should note that Marleau & Simard (1998) have suggested that there has been a general overestimation of their numbers due to the inclusion of round but disc dominated systems. Our careful morphological examination of our sample would argue against this latter point, and in favour of the earlier count analyses.

We showed in DWPB that the early–type number counts could be fitted well by (at least) three distinct models, differing in their cosmological parameters and assumed evolutionary schemes (basically allowing different amounts of dynamical evolution). Each of these still fits the extended data set including the HDF-N and HDF-S galaxies, as can be seen from Figure 1. Note that all these models are predicated on the assumption that the number of elliptical galaxies is conserved. We consider the consequences of the breakdown of this assumption in Section 4.

The first successful model (number 2 in DWPB; henceforth Model 1 here) had a standard $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ Einstein - de Sitter cosmology and simple passive luminosity evolution approximated by $`L(z)=L(0)\times (1+z)`$, which is in fact a good approximation to the detailed predictions of population synthesis models (e.g., those of Bruzual & Charlot 1993, as used by Aragon-Salamanca et al. 1998 or Roche et al. 1998) for evolution at red and near-infra-red wavelengths, assuming a fairly early formation epoch $`z_f>3`$. (An $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ model with no evolution underpredicts the counts). Of course, it is possible that the real situation is more complex than such an evolutionary model allows; Abraham et al. (1999), for instance, have found evidence both for passively evolving old ellipticals at $`z1`$ and for ellipticals with recent star formation at $`z0.5`$ in the HDF-N.

An open model, (cf. number 3 in DWPB) with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.1`$ and no net evolution, i.e. with stellar population fading counteracted by mass evolution through merging, matches the counts equally well (our Model 2). Indeed, the two model predictions for the counts (suitably normalised) are the same to within 0.1 dex over the magnitude range $`18I25`$, illustrating the difficulty in distinguishing between models with number counts alone (though the open model prediction is slightly steeper at the faintest magnitudes). McCracken et al. (2000) have similarly shown that the faint K-band galaxy counts (expected to be domimated by early type galaxies) are also well fitted by either a non-evolving low $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ model or a modestly evolving $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$ model.

DWPB also investigated various ‘flat’ models with a non-zero cosmological constant, i.e. models with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0+\lambda _0=1`$. A model with $`\lambda _00.7`$, for example, is favoured by large scale structure arguments (e.g., Cole et al. 1997), and by the comparison of cosmic microwave background and SNIa data (Lineweaver 1998). For a given evolutionary scheme, increasing $`\lambda _0`$ at the expense of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ significantly steepens the predicted counts, so in order to make such a model (with conserved numbers) fit the data it is necessary to adopt extreme negative evolution, i.e. high–$`z`$ ellipticals were so much smaller (less massive) than today’s as to overwhelm the effect of their stellar population brightening. This may not be too unreasonable at high $`z12`$ (cf. D98). Our Model 3 thus has $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.2`$, $`\lambda _0=0.8`$ and $`L(z)=L(0)(1+z)^1`$, which again matches the counts and is essentially indistinguishable from the other two models across our observed magnitude range, again emphasising the need for a ‘tie-breaker’.

## 4 E/S0 redshift distribution

As the additional constraint which allows us to discriminate between the different models, we take the combined redshift distribution of E/S0 galaxies in the two Hubble Deep Fields. By combining the HDF-N and HDF-S data sets, we improve the statistics and reduce the effects of clustering along any one line of sight. Furthermore, comparisons with spectroscopic redshifts have shown that photometric redshifts are generally accurate to 0.1 or better (Fernandez-Soto et al. 1999), which is certainly more than adequate for our purpose.

First consider the brighter galaxies in our sample (for which there is least ambiguity in morphology). Figure 2 shows the E/S0 redshift distribution observed in the range $`22I24`$, along with the predictions of the three models, all normalised to the observed number of galaxies. Compared to the open model, luminosity distance $`D_L`$ is smaller at given $`z`$ for the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ model, so conversely $`z`$ is larger at given $`D_L`$ and hence at any given distance modulus or apparent magnitude. Since the model fit to the counts requires net positive luminosity evolution (galaxies brighter at larger $`z`$) in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ model (but not in the open model), this further increases the mean $`z`$ at any magnitude. The greater difference between the models at larger $`z`$ also tends to spread out the expected $`z`$ distribution for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$, leading to a significant high–$`z`$ tail.

The general distribution of redshifts seen in Figure 2 is, in fact, in remarkably good agreement with that predicted for the Einstein - de Sitter plus passive evolution model (left hand panel). We do not have sufficient numbers to test the shape of the distributions in any detailed way, but we can see that at $`22<I<24`$, the mean redshift $`<`$$`z`$$`>`$ $`0.75`$ compared to the model prediction of 0.76. Furthermore, 6 galaxies ($`15\pm 5`$%) have redshifts in the range $`1.0z1.5`$ compared to a predicted 21%. The non-evolving $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.1`$ model (centre panel) has a predicted $`<`$$`z`$$`>`$ = 0.65, i.e. lower, but probably not significantly so. However, only 4% of objects (i.e. 1–2) should be at $`z>1`$, in substantial conflict with the data here and in D98. If this model were correct we would expect to see many more of the galaxies at $`0.4<z<0.8`$.

In the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$–dominated models, distances are even larger at given $`z`$ than for the open model, so basically we do not expect to see to very large $`z`$. This is compounded by the fact that we need negative evolution to fit the counts in this model. The predicted maximum $`z`$ is therefore lower at each apparent magnitude. In addition we expect the distribution to be narrowed on the other side because of the relatively smaller volume at low $`z`$. Thus, although $`<`$$`z`$$`>`$ is similar to that in the other models (0.71), there should be essentially no galaxies seen at $`z>1`$ or $`z<0.4`$. Both these aspects make the high $`\lambda _0`$ model (right hand panel of Figure 2) a very poor fit to our observed $`n(z)`$.

At fainter magnitudes, the predicted mean $`z`$ continues to grow substantially for the E-deS model (less so for the open and lambda models) and tracks the observed mean $`z`$ really rather well; $`<`$$`z`$$`>`$ = 1.01 predicted at $`24<I<25`$ compared to $`<`$$`z`$$`>`$ $`1.05`$ observed in the present sample and 1.25 predicted, $`1.3`$ observed at $`25<I<26`$ for the HDF-N (see D98: this excludes the handful of objects apparently at $`z>3`$ in D98). The general wide spread of redshifts in each magnitude slice (D98) is clearly more characteristic of the evolving $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ model, too.

## 5 Discussion and Summary

From a theoretical galaxy formation point of view, one might nowadays perhaps favour the non-evolving, open universe fit to the counts, since dynamical evolution via mergers (e.g., Kauffmann & White 1993) is expected to counteract quite closely the fading of stellar populations with time (see DWPB). Indeed, in the context of brightest cluster galaxies, Aragon-Salamanca et al. (1998) have found that their empirical result of no net evolution in luminosity of BCGs for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0`$ requires an amount of growth by mergers which is matched almost exactly by current semi-analytic models in open CDM universes (in particular, those of Baugh et al. 1996 and Kauffmann & Charlot 1998). Thus, in this model, both the BCG and general E/S0 galaxy dynamical evolution are the same and matched by theory. (Further, Le Fevre et al. (2000) have found a variation of galaxy close pair fraction with $`z`$ which would be consistent with mergers occuring at the correct rate to more or less cancel the stellar evolution).

In order to make this model fit our redshift data, we would have to explain away the high–$`z`$ tail of the distribution. (The apparent lack of a high–$`z`$ tail in other data, for instance moderately deep K-band selected samples, has sometimes been used as evidence for the model where mergers induce zero net evolution, see, e.g., Kauffmann & Charlot 1998). Accordingly, we have checked the credentials of objects that populate the high–redshift tail of Figure 2 to eliminate the possibility that they are in any way spurious. Firstly, we conducted a visual inspection of each object to make sure that this subset of the population is not contaminated by misclassified early–type spirals nor any other type of object. In all cases the classification of these objects as E, E/S0, S0 or S0/a types was categorical. A second possibility is that the redshifts of these objects have been overestimated. However, 5 of the 6 galaxies have now had their redshifts measured spectroscopically and are thus quite secure. Hence we see no reason to doubt that the population of E/S0s at $`z>1`$ is both real and significant in number.

For $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ universes, as favoured by our redshift results, Aragon-Salamanca et al. (1998) find that the BCGs must have undergone negative net evolution, i.e. stronger merging, as indeed is appropriate to the semi-analytic models for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ CDM. This is the opposite of what we would require for the counts in this case. In other words, for the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ model to fit both the BCG luminosities and the general E/S0 galaxy counts we need strong merger evolution of the BCGs but essentially none (i.e. passive evolution only) for early type galaxies as a whole. Interestingly, Mobasher & Trentham (1998) have recently shown, on the basis of $`K`$-band luminosity functions of galaxy clusters, that the latter, at least, does appear to be the case. They find no evidence for an increase in the stellar mass of ordinary early type galaxies since $`z=0.9`$, the data being consistent with purely passive evolution. Kodama, Bower & Bell (1999) have also found that the colour – magnitude relation for early type galaxies at $`z0.9`$ (specifically HDF galaxies as studied here) is consistent with passive evolution from that epoch until the present (though the shallow slope of the C–M relation makes it a weak discriminant of mass evolution). (See also Moles et al. 1998 for other arguments against significant dynamical evolution at recent epochs). Blain et al. (1999) also tentatively support an $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$, rather than an open or lambda–dominated model to explain the sub-mm counts and infra-red background data. This would be in line with our current result. Note that a prediction of this model, assuming the BCG result to be correct, is that $`K_{}K_{BCG}`$ should be smaller at higher $`z`$. Of course, it is possible that the true situation

In a lambda–dominated model, distances to a given $`z`$ are much higher than in the conventional models, so the Aragon-Salamanca et al. BCGs would have to have strong positive evolution, i.e. a net brightening in the past. The difference between the required evolution of BCGs and ordinary ellipticals noted above for the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ model would then be reversed, little or none for BCGs and large amounts for ellipticals in general. This might well be considered a much less palatable option. Note that the conflicting requirements for the counts and the BCG Hubble diagram, here (and in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ case), arise because while distances are greater than in the open model, making galaxies look fainter, there is more volume, thus steepening the counts (the opposite ocurring for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$). Avoiding the requirement for large negative evolution would imply a very significant undercounting of ellipticals in the HDF data. (The opposite of the effect claimed in the one non-concordant analysis (Marleau & Simard 1998).) Even a model with no evolution predicts twice as many galaxies at $`I=25`$ as the successful models (cf. DWPD).

In addition to any problem with the evolution, making the lambda model which fits the counts also fit our $`n(z)`$ requires us to have mistakenly included non-ellipticals at both high and low $`z`$. This would clearly make the real counts lower, making it even harder for the lambda–dominated model to fit them. (Alternatively we might have missed a number of medium $`z`$ ellipticals, so that the real counts should be higher and the $`z`$ distribution more peaked, but it is hard to see how this might occur). These problems are in apparent conflict with the recent arguments (e.g., Lineweaver 1998) in favour of models with a significant cosmological constant. We discuss this further below.

The three models from DWPB which fit the counts also represent the three generic types of model currently favoured by large scale structure arguments (e.g. Lin et al. 1996; Cole et al. 1997). The three most studied ways out of the problems faced by the standard cold dark matter picture (SCDM) are to keep $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ but change the initial fluctuation spectrum (tilted CDM), move to a low $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ universe (open CDM), or invoke a non-zero cosmological constant (lambda CDM). 222Note that this is only a restricted identification of our empirical models with the CDM models; it does not (necessarily) imply the whole structure formation picture based on the CDM variants, only the use of the same values of the cosmological parameters. Thus the attempt to break the degeneracy of these models in the galaxy counts also has relevance to the large scale structure problem. If $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ really is unity, as suggested by the counts and redshifts, this might indicate that it is the primordial spectrum which needs to be adjusted. A high $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ is consistent with data on Cosmic Microwave Background fluctuations (Turner 1999), which primarily constrain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0+\lambda _0`$ to be near unity (de Bernardis et al. 2000), and with supernova observations at moderate redshift (Perlmutter et al. 1997). However, it is incompatible with the Hubble diagram for high–redshift supernovae (Perlmutter et al. 1998, Reiss et al. 1998). The $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ model also has problems with, for instance, the observed high baryon fraction in clusters, and generally scores poorly in Peebles’ (1999) summary of current tests of viable world models.

To summarise, then, following up the work of DWPB, who found a range of possible cosmological models which could fit the number counts of early type galaxies observed by HST, we have addded a further constraint in the distribution of (photometric) redshifts for very faint (northern and southern) HDF E/S0 galaxies. We find remarkably good agreement in the case of a standard Einstein - de Sitter universe with passively evolving early type galaxies. If the preference for a high density model is confirmed (and see above for arguments against it), then it appears that we require significantly different evolution for ellipticals as a whole (i.e. negligible merging at recent epochs) compared to first ranked cluster galaxies used in the Hubble diagram (which are consistent with the theoretically expected amount of merging more or less cancelling the stellar population evolution).

The perhaps initially preferred open model with no net evolution (i.e. stellar fading cancelled by growth through mergers) proves to be somewhat less successful, primarily because it does not predict sufficient galaxies in the high–redshift tail. Further confirmation that these objects really are genuine ellipticals at $`z>1`$ would obviously be of great value here. Even larger problems face the currently favoured models dominated by a cosmological constant (Lineweaver 1998, Turner 1999, Peebles 1999). Those which can match the number counts predict a narrow range of redshifts ($`0.51`$), quite unlike the fairly flat distribution out to high–$`z`$ actually seen. They also appear to require the unlikely circumstance of no merger evolution for BCGs but large amounts (very small precursors at moderate $`z`$) for ellipticals in general.

We have already considered conceivable problems with the data which might allow consistency with the low $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ models. On the modelling side, the faint end of the E/S0 luminosity remains problematic (see DWPB). Possibly more importantly, our models all conserve the number of large (i.e. potentially visible) systems, i.e. there is no number evolution (see He & Zhang 1999). Even though we allow merger evolution, we do not specifically increase the normalization of the LF with $`z`$ (unlike, say, Rocca-Volmerange & Guiderdoni (1990) who increase their Schechter function normalisation in step with the decrease in characteristic luminosity). This means that we are essentially allowing largish ellipticals to grow further by accreting small neighbours, rather than by equal mass mergers. At the opposite extreme, we can simply double the numbers of visible galaxies at $`z1`$ for the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ model, or multiply by 4 for the lambda model (consistent with the required changes in $`L`$ via mergers, in each case). Even this predicts only 8% or 1% of galaxies in the high–$`z`$ tail, still far fewer than actually seen. Finally, none of our models allow for the wholesale transmutation between galaxy types. If there were fewer early type galaxies at higher $`z`$, that is they continue to form (as opposed to grow) recently via mergers, fading or harrassment (Moore et al. 1998 and references therein), this would not change our conclusions since an even smaller high–$`z`$ tail would be predicted in models which already underpredict the numbers seen at large $`z`$. On the other hand, the existence, temporarily, of additional spheroidal merger remnants which then grow new discs (Windhorst et al. 1998a,b; Scoville et al. 1997; Pascarelle et al. 1996) might perhaps allow a better fit for the low $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ models, the observed high–$`z`$ objects then being from effectively a separate population. We will consider whether any possible mechanisms of this sort might allow consistency of the counts and redshift data with the currently popular lambda–dominated models in a subsequent paper. For now, we conclude that if large scale transmutation of types does not occur, then the lambda–dominated models are a very poor fit to the current data.

## Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Richard Bower, Malcolm Bremer, Matthew Colless, Roberto de Propris, Carlos Frenk, Bryn Jones, Charlie Lineweaver, Henry McCracken, Brian Schmidt and Tom Shanks for useful comments. SP was supported by the Royal Society via a University Research Fellowship during the course of this work. WJC, SPD and AFS acknowledge the financial support of the Australian Research Council and the Department of Industry, Science and Technology at various stages of this project.


text:
# Reply to the Comment on Low energy magnetic excitations of the Mn12-acetate spin cluster observed by neutron scattering

\[

## Abstract

Original paper from Mirebeau et al, PRL 83, 628, 1999.

Comment from W. Bao et al. (cond-mat/0008042, 2Aug 2000, submitted to PRL, updated on 1 sep 2000)

\]

The authors of the Comment present new data and contest the value previously found for the coefficient of the transverse fourth order term,B$`{}_{}{}^{4}{}_{4}{}^{}`$= $`\pm `$ 3.0(5) 10-5 cm-1. They argue that the value B$`{}_{}{}^{4}{}_{4}{}^{}`$ = 0 could explain their data. A precise determination of this term is important to understand the origin of the tunneling effect in Mn12-ac.

The new neutron data shown by Bao et al are incomplete. They do not show the raw data and do not specify which background was subtracted and how it was measured. A careful background correction is essential to determine the shapes and intensities of the low energy peaks accurately, and therefore to statute about the transverse term. Moreover, the authors show only half of the spectrum, corresponding to the negative energy transfer. A correct analysis should be based on the whole energy range.

The data and calculations shown in Fig 1 of the comment cannot correspond to the temperature of 20.7 K mentioned in the text. We have checked by two independent calculations that at 20.7 K the peak 1 (at -1.24 meV) should have a lower intensity than the peak 2 (at -1.06 meV), due to a depopulation of the lowest energy sublevel. Putting the right temperature is crucial. We have reanalyzed the data of Bao et al. By inserting a temperature of 18 K in the calculations we correctly reproduce the first seven energy peaks, which is not the case in Fig 1 of the comment. Note that in Fig 1 of the comment, the calculated curve is systematically below the experimental points for the peaks 4, 5, and 6 and 7. This misfits hinders the effect of the transverse parameter B$`{}_{}{}^{4}{}_{4}{}^{}`$, namely the step-like decrease of the low energy peaks 8 and 9 with respect to the others. In the new Fig.1 shown below, we show calculations with several B$`{}_{}{}^{4}{}_{4}{}^{}`$ values from zero to 3 10-5 cm-1, at the temperature of 18 K. We take the energy dependence of the peak linewidth into account, which was likely not done in the comment. We compare our calculations with the data of Bao et al. The influence of the transverse term is seen on the peaks 8 and 9, in the energy range -0.1, -0.3 meV. The calculation with B$`{}_{}{}^{4}{}_{4}{}^{}`$ = 0 clearly overestimates the peaks, as quoted in the original paper. The large statistical error and the uncertainty about the background correction do not allow one to choose between the values 2 10-5 cm-1 and 3 10-5 cm-1.

Finally the new data do not contradict the previous ones. In spite of the better experimental resolution, they do not improve the accuracy in the determination of the transverse fourth order term.


text:
# References

0n the Fluctuation Law(s)
for Hamiltonian systems (with equilibrium steady state):
A Comment on cond–mat/0008421

Boris Chirikov and Oleg Zhirov

Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics
630090 Novosibirsk, Russia
chirikov @ inp.nsk.su

zhirov @ inp.nsk.su

A generalization of the fluctuation law (FL) (”theorem”), formulated in 1993 by Evans, Cohen and Morriss for a nonequilibrium steady state, on the chaotic Hamiltonian systems with equilibrium steady state in recent publication by Evans, Searles and Mittag (cond–mat/0008421) is briefly discussed. We argue that the physical meaning of this law, as presented in the latter publication, is qualitatively different from the original one. Namely, the original FL concerns the local (in time) fluctuations with an intriguing result: a high probability for the ”violation” of the Second Law. Instead, the new law describes the global fluctuations for which this remarkable unexpected phenomenon is absent or hidden. We compare both types of fluctuations in both classes of Hamiltonian systems, and discuss remarkable similarities as well as the interesting distinctions.

The ”Fluctuation Theorem” has been first obtained by Evans, Cohen and Morriss  for a particular example of the nonequilibrium steady state, using both the theory as well as numerics. For our purposes it can be represented in the form:

$$\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{p(\mathrm{\Delta }S)}{p(\mathrm{\Delta }S)}\right)=F\mathrm{\Delta }S,F=\frac{2\mathrm{\Delta }S}{\sigma ^2}$$
$`(1)`$
Here $`p(\mathrm{\Delta }S)`$ is the probability of entropy (or entropy–like quantity as in ) change $`\mathrm{\Delta }S`$ in the ensemble of trajectory segments of a fixed (appropriately scaled) duration $`\tau `$ for the mean change $`\mathrm{\Delta }S>0`$ and variance $`\sigma ^2`$, and $`F`$ the fluctuation parameter usually taken to be unity ($`F=1`$). We call this type of fluctuations the local fluctuations.

By itself, the relation (1) is but a specific reduced representation of the normal probabilistic law, the Gaussian distribution, in a suitable random variable ($`\mathrm{\Delta }S`$):

$$p(\mathrm{\Delta }S)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi \sigma ^2}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{(\mathrm{\Delta }S\mathrm{\Delta }S)^2}{2\sigma ^2}\right)$$
$`(2)`$
shifted with respect to $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=0`$ due to the permanent entropy production at a constant rate in the nonequilibrium steady state. The FL (1) immediately follows from the normal law (2) but not vice versa. Notice also that this distribution is not universal, yet it is rather typical indeed. However, the surprise (to many) was in that the probability of negative (”abnormal”) entropy change $`\mathrm{\Delta }S<0`$ (without time reversal!) is generally not small at all reaching 50% for sufficiently short $`\tau `$. That is every second change may be abnormal !?

Implicitly, all that is contained in the well developed statistical theory (see, e.g., , Section 20, and ). Nevertheless, the first direct observation of this phenomenon in a nonequilibrium steady state  has so much impressed the authors that they even entitled the paper ”Probability of Second Law violations in shearing steady state”. In fact, this is simply a sort of peculiar fluctuations discussed in .

In our opinion, the main lesson one should learn from the FL is that the entropy evolution is generally nonmonotonic contrary to a common belief, still now. The origin of this confusion is, perhaps, in traditional conception of the fluctuations as a charcteristic on the microscopic scale well separated from a much larger macroscopic scale with its averaged quantities like the entropy production rate, for example.

In equilibrium steady state the macroscopic scale with the mean rate $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=0`$ traditionally seems to be irrelevant with the entropy trivially conserved. However, in nonequilibrium steady state the macroscopic scale is represented by a finite rate $`\mathrm{\Delta }S>0`$, yet the ”microscopic” scale of the fluctuations may be well comparable with, and even exceed, the former.

The border of nonmonotonic behavior is at $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=0`$ (no entropy rise at all) which corresponds to the probability of ”abnormal” entropy changes $`\mathrm{\Delta }S<0`$

$$P_{ab}=_{\mathrm{}}^0p(s)𝑑s,C=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }S}{\sigma }$$
$`(3)`$
Here $`C`$ is a new parameter for the normal/abnormal crossover in the entropy variation sign at $`|C|=C_{cro}1`$ when the probability $`P_{ab}`$ is large.

If a finite–dimensional Hamiltonian system admits the (stable) statistical equilibrium (as is the case in ) the overall ($`t\mathrm{}`$) average entropy rate $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=0`$ for any $`\tau `$. However, on a finite time scale $`t_R`$ of a nonequilibrium relaxation to the equilibrium the local $`\mathrm{\Delta }S>0`$ as in the nonequilibrium steady state, but temporally. On this time scale the local fluctuations are expected  to obey the law similar to the nonequilibrium FL provided $`\tau \tau _R`$. However, the properties of fluctuations in such a system, studied in , turned out to be qualitatively different. Particularly, the celebrated phenomenon of the abnormal fluctuations completely disappeared (?). In our understanding, this crucial change is caused by a different type of the fluctuations studied in : instead to fix $`\tau \tau _R`$ the fluctuations as a function of time $`S(t)=A(t)`$ (in ) were considered. Such global fluctuations were also studied in a nonequilibrium steady state , and found to be rather different, indeed. Particularly, the crossover parameter

$$C(t)=\frac{S(t)}{\sigma }$$
$`(4)`$
depends now on the motion time, which is a dynamical variable, rather then on the trajectory segment length $`\tau `$, which is a parameter of the problem.

It is useful to compare both types of fluctuations for both classes of dynamical systems in nonequilibrium (far–from–equilibrium) states. For the sake of brevity, let us call the new class  the stable equilibrium class (SEQ) while the original class (like in ) the equilibriumfree, or no–equilibrium one (NEQ). Indeed, the systems with and without the equilibrium steady state have rather different statistical properties of the motion . Notice that, from the physical point of view, both classes are Hamiltonian. In our opinion, the simple models of NEQ with a reversible ”friction”, being formally dissipative, are physically interesting as far as they simulate the real Hamiltonian infinite–dimensional thermostat.

The local fluctuations in the nonequilibrium steady state of NEQ can be determined for any segment length $`\tau `$, and do not depend on the motion time $`t`$. Same fluctuations in SEQ for a transient, finite–time nonequilibrium relaxation require the additional condition $`\tau \tau _R`$ to be measured, and they do depend on the motion time. For $`tt_R`$ the fluctuations as well as other statistical properties become equilibrium ones. In this case the crossover parameter $`C(t)0`$ together with the average $`\mathrm{\Delta }S0`$, and hence half of changes $`\mathrm{\Delta }S`$ become ”abnormal” as it should be in the statistical equilibrium.

Unlike this, the global fluctuations in NEQ do always depend on time $`t`$, and parameter
$`C(t)\mathrm{}`$ due to $`S(t)\mathrm{}`$. In the limit $`t\mathrm{}`$ this implies zero probability of abnormal $`S(t)<S(0)`$ (see ). Same fluctuations in SEQ are not exactly the same, and have an interesting peculiarity found in : the finite asymptotic probability of abnormal fluctuations. Moreover, this asymptotic value is of the order of the probability for a spontaneous fluctuation of the size comparable with the initial nonequilibrium state of the system which would subsequently relax back to the equilibrium, and so forth ad infinitum. This is not a completely new phenomenon but, apparently, less known one (for discussion see  and references therein).

In conclusion, let us mention that we would expect the rise of big spontaneous fluctuations, implicitly observed in , to obey the law called in  ”Anti–Fluctuation Theorem” but without time reversal.