text:
# A High Resolution Study of the Hydra A Cluster with Chandra: Comparison of the Core Mass Distribution with Theoretical Predictions and Evidence for Feedback in the Cooling Flow.

## 1. Introduction

The launch of the Chandra X-ray Observatory (Weisskopf $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 2000) provides astronomers with the first opportunity to view clusters of galaxies with the same spatial resolution as ground based optical telescopes. This improved resolution is especially beneficial in the study of cooling flow clusters in which most of the interesting astrophysics is confined to the central 100 kpc (Fabian & Nulsen 1977; Sarazin 1986; Fabian 1994). One of the great mysteries concerning cooling flows has always been the contrasting implications of the X-ray observations with observations at other wavelengths. While X-ray observations suggest that a substantial amount of hot gas (up to 1000 $`\mathrm{M}_{}`$ yr-1) should be condensing out of the ambient medium within an extended region of radius 100 kpc, activity at all other wavelengths is constrained to the central 10 kpc (e.g., Hu $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1985; Heckman $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1989; McNamara & O’Connell 1992; Donahue $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 2000). With Chandra’s subarcsecond resolution, even scales of 10 kpc can be resolved in clusters at all redshifts.

1Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden St. Cambridge, MA 02138

2Department of Engineering Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia

3Department of Physics and Astronomy, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701

4School of Physics & Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK

5University of Washington, Astronomy Department, Box 351580, Seattle WA 98195

6Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Space Research, 70 Vassar Street, Building 37, Cambridge, MA 02139

Some of the first results from Chandra show that the central regions of cooling flow clusters are not simple spherically symmetric systems, but are morphologically and spectroscopically very complex. Chandra has shown that radio emission from the central galaxy in cooling flows can have a significant impact on the X-ray morphology of the central regions. X-ray emission has been detected from the radio hotspots and the central point source in 3C295 (Harris $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 2000; Wilson, Young & Shopbell). Spectroscopic analysis of the Chandra data shows that the emission from the hotspots is probably due to synchrotron self-Compton and is not produced through an interaction between the relativistic plasma in the radio lobes and the thermal gas. The X-ray morphology of the central region of the Hydra A cluster (Abell 780) reveals the presence of cavities in the X-ray emitting gas coincident with the radio lobes (McNamara $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 2000). The Chandra A observation of Hydra A also shows the presence of a heavily absorbed point source at the core of the radio galaxy (McNamara $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 2000; Sambruna $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 2000). The column density of absorbing material derived from spectral analysis of the central point source agrees with that observed in HI absorption (Taylor 1996). The Chandra observation of the core of the Perseus cluster shows a very complex X-ray morphology produced by interactions between the hot gas and the radio emitting plasma and also low energy absorption produced by an infalling gas rich galaxy (Fabian $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 2000).

A massive cooling flow was reported in Hydra A based on Einstein (David $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1990), ROSAT (Peres $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1998), and ASCA (Ikebe $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1997) observations with estimated mass deposition rates ranging from $`60`$ to $`600\mathrm{M}_{}`$ yr-1. Einstein MPC and ASCA spectral analyses give an emission weighted temperature of $`4`$ keV (David $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1990; Peres $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1998). Temperature profiles have been derived from the ASCA data by Ikebe $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (1997), Markevitch $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (1998), and White (2000). The ASCA observation of Hydra A also reveals the presence of an Fe abundance gradient (Ikebe $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1997; Finoguenov, David, & Ponman 2000) with a radially increasing silicon-to-iron ratio indicating a predominance of Type II supernovae enriched material at large radii. From the Chandra observations we are able to spectroscopically determine the mass deposition rate, gas temperature, and abundance of heavy elements at a much greater spatial resolution than previously possible.

In the first paper on Hydra A, we concentrated on the interaction between the central FR Type I radio source (3C218) and the ambient cluster gas. In this paper we concentrate on the spectroscopic and morphological properties of the cooling flow region, derive high resolution temperature and abundance profiles of the gas within the central 250 kpc, and determine the total gravitating mass distribution in the core of the cluster. In addition, we compare the observed mass distribution in Hydra A with theoretical expectations from numerical simulations of dark matter halos (e.g., Navarro, Frenk, & White 1997; Moore $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1998).

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In $`\mathrm{\S }`$ 2 we discuss the large scale X-ray morphology of the Hydra A cluster, the surface brightness profile, and the gas density distribution. In $`\mathrm{\S }`$ 3 we present the spectroscopic results concerning the temperature and abundance profiles of the hot gas. The total gravitating mass and gas mass distributions are derived in $`\mathrm{\S }`$ 4 along with a comparison with theoretical predictions. The roles of weak and strong shock heating by the central radio source in producing a convectively unstable region within the cooling flow are discussed in $`\mathrm{\S }`$ 5 and the main results are summarized in $`\mathrm{\S }`$ 6. We assume $`\mathrm{H}_0`$=70 km s-1 Mpc-1, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$=0.3, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$=0.7 throughout the paper. At a redshift of 0.0538, the luminosity distance to Hydra A is 240 Mpc, and $`1^{\prime \prime }=1.05`$ kpc.

## 2. X-Ray Morphology and Surface Brightness

Hydra A was observed during the orbital activation and calibration phase of the Chandra mission with both ACIS-I (October 30, 1999) and ACIS-S (November 2, 1999). Due to flares in the background charged particle flux, the data were screened to exclude all time intervals when the background rate was more than than 20% higher than the quiescent rate. The resulting screened integration times are 24,100 s and 18,950 s for the ACIS-I and ACIS-S observations. Only the standard grade set (0,2,3,4,6) was used in our analysis. The gain was corrected using the CIAO task $`acis\mathrm{\_}process\mathrm{\_}events`$ with the most recent version of the gain table appropriate for observations taken at a focal plane temperature of $`110^{}`$ C (acisD1999-09-16gainN0004.fits). This task also corrects for charge transfer inefficiency (CTI) effects in the front illuminated (FI) chips.

In McNamara $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (2000), we showed a high resolution image of the combined ACIS-I and ACIS-S observations of Hydra A to illustrate the interaction between the radio lobes and the ambient cluster gas. To illustrate the large scale X-ray morphology of Hydra A we use only the ACIS-I observation due to the larger field of view and lower background. A background ACIS-I image was generated by co-adding observations taken at a focal plane temperature of $`110^{}`$ C in the Chandra public archive after removing point sources from the observations. The same gain corrections and background screening criteria were applied to the observations resulting in a total integration time of 73 ksec for the background image. The background image was then mapped onto the sky with the same aspect solution as in the Hydra A observation. The background subtracted image was corrected for detector and vignetting effects using an exposure map generated by convolving the aspect histogram with the mirror effective area and ACIS-I QE maps. Finally, the background-subtracted and exposure-corrected image was smoothed with a $`\sigma =4^{\prime \prime }`$ Gaussian. Contours of the smoothed ACIS-I image are shown in Figure 1 overlaid on the optical image of the cluster. The complex X-ray morphology within the central region discussed in McNamara $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (2000) is evident in Figure 1. Beyond the central region, the X-ray morphology of Hydra A is fairly smooth with slightly elliptical contours, indicating that the cluster has not experienced a major merger in the recent past. The X-ray isophotes are aligned in the same SE-NW direction and have the same ellipticity as the I-band isophotes shown in McNamara (1995). There is thus a remarkably strong alignment between the stellar and gaseous components in the Hydra A cluster from scales of a few kpc up to 300 kpc.

While the ACIS-I observation is useful for illustrating the large scale 2-D morphology of Hydra A, we use the ACIS-S observation to derive an X-ray surface brightness profile due to the better photon statistics on the back-illuminated (BI) S3 chip. The BI chips on ACIS have higher QEs than the FI chips for photon energies below 4 keV. A broad band (0.3-7.0keV) surface brightness profile derived from the S3 data is shown in Figure 2. A similar procedure was used to perform the background subtraction as discussed above for the the ACIS-I data by co-adding 106 ksec of ACIS-S3 data taken at a focal plane temperature of $`110^{}`$ C. The same reductions were applied to this background image as discussed above for the ACIS-I background image. Background count rates were then obtained from the same annuli as the total count rates. The origin in the surface brightness profile corresponds to the location of the central point source. The annuli were chosen to ensure approximately 2,000 net counts per annulus. Chandra’s high resolution shows that there are two inflection points in the surface brightness profile at approximately 100 kpc and 200 kpc. It is obvious from Figure 2 that neither a single nor a double $`\beta `$ model will provide a good fit to the data. The break in the surface brightness profile at 100 kpc is also evident in the ROSAT PSPC observation discussed by Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard (1999). Beyond the central 200 kpc, the surface brightness is approximately characterized by a power-law with a slope corresponding to $`\beta =0.7`$, in good agreement with the Einstein IPC results (David $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1990) and the ROSAT PSPC results (Mohr $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1999; Vikhlinin, Forman, & Jones 1999).

Due to the complexity of the surface brightness in the central region of Hydra A, we use a deprojection technique to determine the gas density profile rather than fitting a multivariate function. The deprojection technique first determines the density of the gas in the largest annulus using the observed count rate and an assumed emissivity and then determines the density at progressively smaller radii after removing the projected emission from gas at larger radii. The fraction of the cluster emission in the outermost annulus arising from gas at larger radii is corrected using the best fit $`\beta `$ model to the PSPC observation of Hydra A in Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard (1999). We perform the deprojection 100 times using a Monte Carlo technique, that randomizes the surface brightness profile based on the observed errors. The emissivity is assumed to be that of a 3.5 keV gas with a 40% solar abundance of heavy elements. In $`\mathrm{\S }4`$ below we show that the gas temperature varies between 3.0 and 4.0 keV in this region and that the abundance varies between 0.2 and 0.6 solar. The assumption of a spatially independent gas emissivity only introduces a 3% uncertainty in the gas density. The mean gas densities and rms deviations from the the 100 Monte Carlo simulations are shown in Figure 3. This figure shows that the density profile gradually steepens from $`\rho _{gas}r^{0.4}`$ at 30 kpc to $`\rho _{gas}r^{1.6}`$ at 100 kpc, and there is no obvious flat density core.

The isobaric cooling time, $`t_c`$, of the gas is shown in Figure 4. Note that $`t_c`$ is less than a Hubble time ($`10^{10}`$ yr) within the central 200 kpc, and less than 1 Gyr within the central 30 kpc. This inner radius is important for the discussion below and appears to be the outer boundary of an isentropic core of multiphase gas.

## 3. Spectral Analysis

The ACIS-S observation of Hydra A produced 160,000 source counts within the central 250 kpc on the S3 chip. Spectra were extracted in 8 concentric annuli centered on the point source with widths varying from $`10^{\prime \prime }`$ to $`30^{\prime \prime }`$ to ensure 20,000 source counts per spectrum. Spectra also were extracted with 40,000 net counts each, since better photon statistics are required to determine the Si distribution. We excised the emission from the central point source using a $`2^{\prime \prime }`$ radius circle. Background spectra were extracted from the same regions in the background fits event list and were normalized by exposure time. All spectra were extracted in PI space and rebinned to a minimum of 20 counts per bin. A single PI rmf file was generated using mkrmf and the FEF file appropriate for the aim point on S3, node 1, at a focal plane temperature of $`110^{}`$ C. Area files were generated for each spectrum based on the mean off-axis angle of the extracted photons in each spectrum. We fitted each spectrum to a variety of XSPEC models: an absorbed single temperature model, an absorbed single temperature plus cooling flow model, an absorbed single temperature plus intrinsically absorbed cooling flow model, and an absorbed two temperature model (see Tables 1-3). Only data between 0.5-8.0 keV were included in the analysis. Below 0.5 keV the detector gain is nonlinear which is not yet properly treated in the response matrices. Above 8.0 keV, the charged particle background dominates the source emission.

The ACIS-I data were extracted in a similar fashion, however, several modifications are required to account for the nonuniformity of the FI chips due to radiation induced CTI effects. Instead of a single rmf, a photon-weighted rmf was generated for each spectrum. In addition, the CTI damage to the ACIS-I chips produces a change in quantum efficiency at high energies (events far from the chip readout experienced significant grade migration, transforming acceptable grades to unacceptable grades) that we corrected using the ACIS-I QE maps at $`\mathrm{T}=110^{}`$ C.

The spectral fitting results for the inner three annuli of the ACIS-S data are shown in Tables 1-3 and Figures 5-7. The spectrum from the inner $`2^{\prime \prime }17^{\prime \prime }`$ is the most complex, and significant reduction in $`\chi ^2`$ can be obtained by adding multiple spectral components. Table 1 shows that including a cooling flow component in the inner spectrum improves the fit with a reduction in $`\chi ^2`$ of 5 to 8 depending on whether $`N_H`$ is fixed to the galactic value or allowed to vary. However, there is not an obvious improvement when simply examining the best-fit of the two models to the data (see Figure 5). The spectral analysis in the innermost annulus where the cooling time is $`10^8`$ yrs, shows that less than 24% (at the 90% confidence limit) of the total emission arises from gas condensing out of the flow. While the absorbed cooling flow model produces the minimum $`\chi ^2`$ and largest $`\dot{\mathrm{M}}`$, the best-fit galactic $`N_H`$ in this model is more than a factor of two below the Stark $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (1992) value. The intrinsic and galactic absorption are strongly correlated in the fitting process, and it is difficult to distinguish between them when fitting the spectrum of a low-redshift, low-$`\dot{\mathrm{M}}`$ cluster. Fixing $`N_H`$ to the galactic value significantly reduces $`\dot{\mathrm{M}}`$ and limits the intrinsic absorption to $`<3.2\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2 (see Table 1). Adding a cooling flow component to the second annulus only provides a slight improvement to the fit (see Table 2), while adding a cooling flow component to the third annulus does not produce any improvement (see Table 3). Figures 6 and 7 show how well the spectra from the second and third annuli are fit with a single temperature model. Beyond the central 30 kpc, all of the spectra are well fit with single temperature models and the addition of more free parameters does not significantly improve the fits.

The lack of a strong spectroscopic signature for a massive cooling flow is not due to the small spatial binning of the spectra. In Figure 8 we show a spectrum extracted from the central 100 kpc, excluding the central point source, fit to a single temperature plus cooling flow model with $`\dot{\mathrm{M}}`$ fixed at 140 $`\mathrm{M}_{}`$ yr-1 (the value obtained from a deprojection of the ROSAT PSPC data by Peres $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$  after adjusting to our adopted cosmology). All other parameters are treated as free parameters. Figure 8 shows that there are very large residuals below 2 keV and the resulting $`\chi ^2`$/DOF = 1175/355. Our results are in reasonable agreement with the spectral analysis of the ASCA SIS data on Hydra A by Ikebe $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (1997) who obtained $`\dot{\mathrm{M}}=30\pm 15`$ $`\mathrm{M}_{}`$ yr-1 (scaled to our adopted cosmology). The implications of these results for cooling flows will be discussed below.

### 3.1. Temperature Profile

The gas temperature profile derived from the ACIS-S and ACIS-I data is shown in Figure 9. The inner two temperature points for the ACIS-S data were derived from the best-fit to a single absorbed temperature plus cooling flow model. The remaining temperature points for the ACIS-S data were obtained without a cooling flow component in the spectral analyses. All ACIS-I spectra were fitted to single temperature models with $`N_H`$ fixed to the galactic value and a variable abundance of heavy elements. Figure 9 shows that there is good agreement between the two ACIS detectors and that the gas temperature in Hydra A increases from 3 to 4 keV within the central 200 kpc as noted in McNamara $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (2000). It is very difficult to obtain any temperature estimates from the ACIS-S data beyond 200 kpc due to the high background in the S3 chip; however, the ACIS-I data show that the temperature drops to about 3 keV at 400-600 kpc . Previous temperature profiles for Hydra A were derived from ASCA data by Ikebe $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (1997), Markevitch $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (1998), and White (2000). The primary difference between the Chandra and ASCA profiles is the lower gas temperature in the center of the cluster and the steeper temperature gradient. This is to be expected given the greater spatial resolution of Chandra.

### 3.2. Abundance Gradients

Intermediate temperature clusters like Hydra A emit strongly in both Fe L and Fe K lines. To determine the Fe abundance of the gas, we fitted the ACIS-S spectra in a broad energy band from 0.5-7.5 keV, that includes emission from both Fe L and K lines, and a hard band from 2.0-7.5 keV, that only includes Fe K lines. The best-fit Fe abundances are shown in Figure 10 based on an absorbed VMEKAL model with $`N_H`$, all $`\alpha `$-processed elements, and Fe treated as free parameters. This figure shows that there is excellent agreement between these two determinations and that there is a strong Fe abundance gradient within the central 100 kpc. The agreement between the two Fe estimates shows that potential low energy complications, e.g., excess absorption or cooling gas, do not have a significant impact on the Fe abundance measurements. An Fe abundance gradient in Hydra A also was reported based on ASCA data by Ikebe $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (1997) and Finoguenov, David, & Ponman (2000). While the magnitude of the measured Fe gradient is comparable between the ASCA and Chandra analysis, only Chandra has the spatial resolution to resolve the Fe distribution within the central few arcminutes. Figure 10 shows that the Fe gradient is confined to the central 100kpc, while analysis of the ASCA data implied a flatter gradient extending to 200-300 kpc.

Significant constraints on the Si abundance can only be obtained from the set of spectra with 40,000 net counts. Figure 11 shows that the Si distribution is similar to the Fe distribution with a rapid decline within the central 100 kpc. Beyond 100 kpc, the Si abundance is essentially constant within the uncertainties. Due to the large errors on the Si abundance, it is difficult to make conclusive comments on the radial variation in the Si/Fe abundance ratio.

### 3.3. Deprojected Temperature and Entropy Profiles

The projected temperature profile shows that there is a strong positive gradient within the central 200 kpc (see Figure 9). To determine the deprojected temperature profile in this region, we first fitted the outer ACIS-S spectrum to a single MEKAL model, with $`N_H`$ and the abundance of heavy elements treated as free parameters. We then fitted the spectrum extracted from the next smallest annulus to a two temperature model, with the parameters of one of the models frozen to the best-fit values derived from the outermost spectrum. The normalization of this model is adjusted to account for the volume within the outer shell projected along the line of sight toward the next smallest shell. This procedure is continued inward, adding a MEKAL model for each successive spectrum, with the free parameters of the remaining models frozen to the previously determined best-fit values. Finally, the best-fit temperatures, along with their associated errors, are fit to a power-law profile given by $`T(r)=T_0(r/10\mathrm{kpc})^\mathrm{p}`$. The best-fit is obtained with $`T_0=2.73\pm 0.07`$ keV and $`p=0.124\pm 0.014`$. The gas entropy is determined from the deprojected density profile and the best-fit power-law temperature profile (see Figure 12). This figure shows that the gas is approximately isentropic within the central 30 kpc, and the gas entropy only increases significantly at larger radii.

## 4. Mass Distributions

The gravitating mass distribution is determined from the equation of hydrostatic equilibrium, given by:

$$M_{tot}(<r)=\frac{kTr}{\mu m_pG}\left(\frac{dln\rho _{gas}}{dlnr}+\frac{dlnT}{dlnr}\right)$$
$`(1)`$
We use a parametric form for the gas temperature (the best power-law profile given above) along with the nonparametric density profile shown in Figure 3 to determine the mass distribution in Hydra A. To reduce the noise in the $`\mathrm{d}\mathrm{ln}\rho _{\mathrm{gas}}/\mathrm{d}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{r}`$ term, we determine the gradient at $`r_j`$ by differencing the densities at $`r_{j2}`$ and $`r_{j+2}`$. The density gradients are assumed to be equal in the innermost 3 points and the outermost 3 points. The cumulative gravitating mass, gas mass, Fe mass, and Si mass are shown in Figure 13. In addition, we show the gravitational potential in Figure 14, with the potential normalized to zero at 250 kpc. Of the four mass components shown in Figure 13, the Fe and Si are the most centrally concentrated, the gas is the most extended, and the dark matter is intermediate between the two. The central concentration of a given mass component can be quantized by calculating the ratio of the mass within 100 kpc to that within 200 kpc. For the gas and dark matter this ratio is 27% and 33%, respectively. Also shown in Figure 13 are the integrated Fe and Si masses that would be derived under the assumption of a uniform distribution of metals using the best-fit values derived from a spectral analysis of the integrated emission within the central 200 kpc. This figure shows that the assumption of a uniform distribution of heavy elements underestimates the Fe and Si masses by a factor of two at small radii and overestimates the Fe and Si masses by approximately 30-50% at large radii. This has important consequences concerning the chemical enrichment history of clusters.

The variation in the gas mass fraction with radius is shown in Figure 15. This figure shows that the gas mass fraction increases from 4% at 10 kpc (several times greater than a typical isolated giant elliptical) up to 15% at 200 kpc, which is typical of rich clusters (David, Jones, & Forman 1995; White & Fabian 1995; Evrard 1997). The effects of the cluster environment on the X-ray characteristics of the central dominant galaxy will be discussed in $`\mathrm{\S }6`$. The blue light within the central 47 kpc of Hydra A is $`L_B=9.2\times 10^{10}L_{}`$ (see $`\mathrm{\S }6`$) which gives $`M/L_B=76\mathrm{M}_{}/\mathrm{L}_{}`$. Assuming $`M/L_B=8\mathrm{M}_{}/\mathrm{L}_{}`$ for the stellar population of Hydra A gives a stellar mass fraction of 10% for a total baryon fraction of 15%. The total baryon fraction within the central 47 kpc is thus comparable to the gas mass fraction beyond 100 kpc.

### 4.1. Comparison with Theoretical Expectations

There has been a great deal of discussion in the literature concerning the expected density profile of CDM halos and the observed density distribution of galaxies and clusters. Based on an extensive set of numerical simulations of the formation and evolution of dark matter halos, Navarro, Frenk & White (1995,1998) concluded that dark matter halos have a universal density profile given by:

$$\frac{\rho _d}{\rho _{crit}(z)}=\frac{\delta _c}{\left(\frac{r}{r_s}\right)^\gamma \left(1+\left(\frac{r}{r_s}\right)^\alpha \right)^{(\nu \gamma )/\alpha }}$$
$`(2)`$
where $`\alpha =1`$, $`\nu =3`$, $`\gamma =1`$, $`\rho _{crit}(z)=3H^2/8\pi G`$ is the critical density of the universe at the cluster redshift, $`r_s`$ is a characteristic radius, and $`\delta _c`$ is the central overdensity which can be expressed in terms of the concentration parameter ($`c=r_{200}/r_s`$; where $`r_{200}`$ is the radius within which the mean halo density is $`200\rho _{crit}`$) as

$$\delta _c=\frac{200}{3}\frac{c^3}{\left[\mathrm{ln}(1+\mathrm{c})\mathrm{c}/(1+\mathrm{c})\right]}.$$
$`(3)`$
The NFW density profile varies from $`\rho _dr^1`$ at small radii to $`\rho _dr^3`$ at large radii. For a given cosmology, the concentration parameter decreases with increasing halo mass. Higher resolution simulations by Moore $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (1998) found a density profile similar to the NFW profile at large radii, but with a steeper density profile at small radii ($`\rho _dr^{1.5}`$) corresponding to $`\alpha =1.5`$, $`\nu =3`$, and $`\gamma =1.5`$. Jing (2000) examined how the density profile depends on the dynamic state of dark matter halos. He found significant variations in the density profile of halos at the present epoch in his simulations. By fitting the simulated halo density profiles with an NFW profile, he found that the observed distribution in the concentration parameter can be described by a lognormal function. Virialized systems have small residuals when fit with the NFW profile and a mean concentration parameter comparable to that predicted by NFW. Unrelaxed systems produce larger residuals and smaller concentration parameters when fit to the NFW profile.

The primary difficulty encountered when these theoretical predictions for CDM halos are compared to observations is the inferred presence of flat cores in the density profiles of dwarf and low surface brightness galaxies (Flores & Primack 1994; Burkert 1995; Moore $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1998). For example, Moore $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ showed that the HI rotation curves of low surface brightness galaxies are best fit with a modified King profile ($`\alpha =2`$, $`\nu =3`$, and $`\gamma =0`$). However, van den Bosch $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (2000) argue that the resolution of the present HI data are insufficient to decouple the disk and halo components of low surface brightness galaxies and cannot be used to place significant constraints on the central density distribution. They suggest that flat cores may only exist in low mass dwarf systems, that are more susceptible to the effects of supernovae driven winds. A recent paper by Swaters, Madore, & Trewhella (2000) demonstrates that high resolution $`\mathrm{H}_\alpha `$ rotation curves of low surface brightness galaxies do indeed increase faster with radius than lower resolution HI rotation curves. On cluster scales, Tyson, Kochanski, & Dell’Antonio (1998) analyzed strong lensing data on CL 0024+1654 and found evidence for a flat core, while Broadhurst $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (2000) concluded that a flat core is not required by the strong lensing data for this cluster. However, Shapiro, & Iliev (2000) show that the mass distribution used by Broadhurst $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ predicts a galaxy velocity dispersion much greater than that observed, while the mass distribution derived by Tyson $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ is consistent with the observed velocity dispersion.

The cumulative gravitating mass distribution of the Hydra A cluster in Figure 13 shows that there is little evidence for a flat core with a core radius greater than approximately 30 kpc. We cannot exclude the presence of a smaller core, since we are only able to constrain the gas temperature within two annuli in this region (see Figure 9). Between 30 and 200 kpc, the integrated mass scales as $`M(<r)r^{1.7}`$, or equivalently, $`\rho _dr^{1.3}`$, which is slightly steeper than the NFW profile and slightly flatter than the Moore profile. The mass profile is actually in very good agreement with simulations that incorporate the effects of gas cooling and star formation by Lewis $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (2000), who find $`\rho _dr^{1.4}`$. Fitting the mass distribution in Hydra A to these analytic models we obtain best-fit parameters of $`\delta _c=(7.48\pm 0.14)\times 10^4`$ and $`r_s=77\pm 10`$ kpc, $`\delta _c=(4.02\pm 0.36)\times 10^3`$ and $`r_s=234\pm 25`$ kpc, and $`\delta _c=4.54\times 10^5`$ and $`r_s=26\pm 2`$ kpc, for the NFW, Moore, and modified King profiles, respectively. The best-fit $`\delta _c`$ uniformly decreases with the level of mass concentration in the models. Eq. (3) is strictly valid only for the NFW profile and yields a concentration parameter of $`c_{NFW}=12.3\pm 0.18`$. The best fit profiles for the three mass models are shown along with the cumulative gravitating mass in Figure 16. This figure shows that both the NFW and Moore profiles provide reasonable fits to the data, supporting the results of numerical CDM simulations. Based on the rotation curve of the $`H_\alpha `$ disk in Hydra A published in Melnick $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (1997), the gravitating mass within 3.7 kpc is $`3.97.8\times 10^{10}\mathrm{M}_{}`$, for inclination angles ranging from 0 to $`45^{}`$. The addition of this point in Figure 16 favors the NFW profile. The gravitational potential of the central galaxy should not affect our results since the gas temperature at 10 kpc is 2.7 keV. This is significantly hotter than the virial temperature of the central galaxy ($`kT0.6`$ keV) derived from the stellar velocity dispersion of 307 km s-1 (McElroy 1995).

The Hydra A cluster is approximately a $`10M_{}`$ cluster. For the CDM$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ cosmology used by NFW (essentially the same as that used to estimate distance dependent quantities in this paper) the predicted concentration parameter for a $`10M_{}`$ halo is 4.0, which is only one-third of the observed value. The high observed concentration of the Hydra A cluster implies an improbable collapse redshift of $`z4`$ (using the expression given in the appendix of NFW). The high concentration parameter in Hydra A cannot be resolved with NFW by appealing to the possible presence of residual substructure since Jing (2000) finds that unrelaxed clusters yield concentration parameters lower than the NFW values. Based on the NFW simulations, a concentration parameter of $`c_{NFW}12`$ is expected for a 0.01 $`M_{}`$ dark matter halo, which actually corresponds to the integrated mass within the central 10 kpc of Hydra A. In summary, we find that the total density distribution in the central region of the Hydra A cluster is fairly steep with $`\rho _dr^{1.3}`$. The observed mass distribution is in reasonable agreement with CDM simulations, but the derived concentration parameter is more representative of a galaxy-size halo rather than a rich cluster of galaxies. This analysis will be extended to a sample of rich clusters in Robertson & David (2000).

## 5. Evidence for Feedback in the Cooling Flow

The morphological mass accretion rate across a spherical shell j can be estimated from:

$$\dot{M}_j=\frac{L_j}{\left(\mathrm{\Delta }H_j+\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _j\right)}$$
$`(4)`$
where $`L_j`$ is the deprojected X-ray luminosity within shell j, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_j`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _j`$ are the changes in gas enthalpy and gravitational potential across shell j. Eq. (4) gives the mass accretion rate assuming steady-state and no mass deposition, in agreement with the spectroscopic results beyond 30 kpc. This equation differs from that used in, e.g., Allen (2000) because we do not include the X-ray emission arising from gas condensing out of the flow. Figure 17 shows the resulting morphological $`\dot{\mathrm{M}}`$ profile using the deprojected X-ray luminosity, the best-fit power-law temperature profile, and the gravitational potential shown in Figure 14. Eq. (4) is only strictly valid beyond 30kpc and the only self-consistent solution is one with a constant $`\dot{M}`$, which is in fact the derived solution. Beyond 30 kpc, the morphological $`\dot{\mathrm{M}}`$ is nearly constant at 300 $`\mathrm{M}_{}`$ yr-1 (see Figure 17). This result provides strong evidence that there is a steady, (nearly) homogeneous cooling flow beyond 30 kpc. Inside 30 kpc, there is spectroscopic evidence for multiphase gas, but the spectroscopic mass deposition rate is more than a factor of 10 less than the morphological mass accretion rate at 30 kpc. Figure 17 also shows that the $`\dot{\mathrm{M}}`$ calculation is not very sensitive to the details of the gravitational potential. The change in gas enthalpy within the central 200 kpc is 2.5 keV per particle, while the change in gravitational potential is only 0.5 keV per particle (see Figure 14).

The discrepancy between the morphological mass accretion rate at 30 kpc and the spectroscopic $`\dot{\mathrm{M}}`$ within this radius suggests that some heating mechanism may be suppressing the accretion of the cooling gas. Many heating mechanisms have been proposed over the past two decades in the hopes of significantly reducing the morphological mass accretion rate of cooling flow clusters. One of the most promising is heating from a central radio source, since approximately 70% of cooling flow clusters have active central galaxies. Heinz, Reynolds, & Begelman (1998) showed that shock heating by expanding relativistic plasma can induce observable X-ray features in the ambient cluster gas. Tucker & David (1997) showed that collective heating effects from relativistic plasma can generate a duty cycle between accretion and outflow that can significantly reduce the integrated mass accreted over the lifetime of a cluster. A similar model based on Compton heating by a central AGN in ellipticals has been developed by Ciotti & Ostriker (1999). Recently, Soker $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (2000) proposed a moderate cooling flow model due to heating by radio sources that primarily affects the cooling rate of gas in the outer regions of cooling flows, significantly reducing their time-averaged mass accretion rates. In addition to direct heating, Churazov $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (2000) has shown that hot buoyant bubbles produced through shock heating by the expanding central radio source can dredge up cold material from the center of the cluster. In this paper we further examine the role of weak and strong shock heating by a central radio source and discuss the development of a convectively unstable region in cooling flows that can significantly reduce the net inflow of cooling gas.

### 5.1. Heating by Weak Shocks

The lack of evidence for gas deposition and the flattening of the entropy profile near the center of the cluster suggest that the cluster gas is being heated appreciably by the radio source. On the other hand, if this is the case, then the temperature decline towards the center of the cluster is surprising, since it is an indication of cooling. If the age of this cluster since its last major merger is about $`10^{10}`$ yr, then, in order to prevent the deposition of $`300\mathrm{M}_{}`$ yr-1 of cooled gas, the heating power needs to make up for the radiative heat loss within the central 150 kpc of the cluster, i.e., about $`2.5\times 10^{44}`$ erg s-1. This is plausible, since it is only 4 times the current radio power (Ekers & Simkin 1983). Here we consider some of the details of how heating by shocks from the radio source can prevent gas deposition.

It is generally argued that the mechanical power of expanding radio jets exceeds the radio power by a substantial factor. This leads to models in which the expanding radio jets drive a roughly spherical shock into the surrounding gas (Heinz, Reynolds, & Begelman 1998). Shock heating due to such radio outbursts is a good candidate for the required heating. The typical lifetime of cluster center radio sources is $`10^7`$$`10^8`$ yr (e.g., Taylor $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1990), so that the high incidence of central radio sources in cooling flow clusters (Burns $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1997) requires that they undergo frequent repeated outbursts. We begin by considering the accumulated heating effect of repeated weak shocks due to these outbursts.

The shock jump conditions may be written as

$$\frac{p_1}{p_0}=1+\frac{2\gamma }{\gamma +1}y$$
$`(5a)`$
and

$$\frac{\rho _1}{\rho _0}=\frac{(\gamma +1)(1+y)}{\gamma +1+(\gamma 1)y}$$
$`(5b),`$
where $`p`$ is the pressure, $`\rho `$ the density, $`\gamma `$ the ratio of specific heats, and subscripts ‘0’ and ‘1’ refer to pre-shock and post-shock conditions, respectively. The quantity $`y=\rho _0v_\mathrm{s}^2/(\gamma p_0)1`$ is the square of the shock Mach number minus 1, so that $`y1`$ for weak shocks and $`y1`$ for strong shocks. The specific entropy jump for a weak shock is then

$$\mathrm{\Delta }S\frac{2\gamma k}{3(\gamma +1)^2\mu m_\mathrm{H}}y^3.$$
$`(6)`$
For a weak shock the kinetic energy of the shocked gas is negligible compared to its increase in thermal energy. Assuming that the postshock pressure excess is roughly uniform, we can therefore estimate the shock strength by equating the mechanical energy that drives the shock to the excess thermal energy within the volume $`V`$ encompassed by the shock, i.e.,

$$E_\mathrm{T}\frac{1}{\gamma 1}(p_1p_0)V.$$
$`(7)`$
Using the shock jump condition for $`p_1`$, this gives an expression for $`y`$, which determines the specific entropy jump in the shock

$$\mathrm{\Delta }S\frac{(\gamma 1)^3(\gamma +1)k}{12\gamma ^2\mu m_\mathrm{H}}\left(\frac{E_\mathrm{T}}{p_0V}\right)^3.$$
$`(8)`$
The requirement that the shock is weak is $`E_\mathrm{T}p_0V`$. If the average repetition frequency of outbursts is $`1/\tau `$, then the average heating rate per unit volume due to weak shocks is

$$H=\rho _0T_0\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }S}{\tau }=\frac{(\gamma 1)^3(\gamma +1)p_0}{12\gamma ^2\tau }\left(\frac{E_\mathrm{T}}{p_0V}\right)^3.$$
$`(9)`$
Comparing this to the radiative cooling rate per unit volume, $`R=\rho _0^2\mathrm{\Lambda }(T_0)`$, gives

$$\frac{H}{R}=\frac{(\gamma 1)^4(\gamma +1)}{12\gamma ^2}\left(\frac{t_{\mathrm{c},0}}{\tau }\right)\left(\frac{E_\mathrm{T}}{p_0V}\right)^3,$$
$`(10)`$
where the cooling time is $`t_{\mathrm{c},0}=p_0/[(\gamma 1)R]`$.

Taking $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(T)T^\alpha `$, the ratio $`H/R\rho _0^4T_0^{(2+\alpha )}r^9`$, so that, if the gas is nearly isothermal, $`H/R`$ increases with $`r`$ only if $`\rho _0`$ decreases more rapidly than $`r^{9/4}`$. This is significantly steeper than the observed $`r`$ dependence of $`\rho `$ in the region of interest, so that $`H/R`$ is a decreasing function of $`r`$ within the central 150 kpc of the Hydra A cluster. Thus, heating by weak shocks can only dominate cooling at small $`r`$. The shock heating rate would dominate the cooling rate everywhere inside the point where they balance, i.e., $`r=r_\mathrm{b}`$, where $`H=R`$. At small $`r`$ the net heating time, $`p_0/[(\gamma 1)(HR)]p_0/[(\gamma 1)H]`$, would then be shorter than the cooling time and the gas is heated rapidly. Where the net heating is substantial it leads to convective instability because the heating time is shortest at small $`r`$. Where the heating is not too fast (which includes the region where the shocks are weak), convective instability drives mixing that will result in a nearly isentropic core.

Details of the process leading to convection are complex, since as the gas is heated it is redistributed and the pressure and density profiles are flattened in order to maintain hydrostatic equilibrium. At $`r_\mathrm{b}`$ the entropy of the gas remains fixed. To get a rough idea of what part of the gas becomes isentropic we use the crude estimate

$$t_\mathrm{S}=\frac{S(r_\mathrm{b})S(r)}{dS/dt|_r}$$
$`(11)`$
for the time it takes for the entropy of the gas at $`r`$ to rise to the entropy of gas at $`r_\mathrm{b}`$. Assuming that the gas is (initially) isothermal and $`\rho _0(r)r^\beta `$, the results above then give

$$t_\mathrm{S}=\frac{(\gamma 1)\beta \mathrm{ln}(r_\mathrm{b}/r)}{(r_b/r)^{94\beta }1}t_{\mathrm{c},0}(r).$$
$`(12)`$
Taking $`\beta =1.5`$, roughly appropriate for the region outside the isentropic core in Hydra, this gives $`t_\mathrm{S}0.1t_{\mathrm{c},0}`$ at $`r=r_\mathrm{b}/2`$. Since the cooling time is already relatively short in this region, this suggests that the bulk of the gas within $`r_\mathrm{b}`$ should be isentropic.

### 5.2. Heating by Strong Shocks

For the purpose of this discussion, heating by strong shocks adds one significant complication, that a single strong shock can cause a substantial entropy rise. This can produce ‘bubbles’ of gas with such high entropy that they rise well outside the isentropic core region ($`r_\mathrm{b}`$) before arriving at their equilibrium position. Convection still creates an isentropic core within a few free-fall times after passage of the shock, but some gas may rise well outside this core.

We identify the roughly isentropic region at $`r\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{_<}{^{}}30`$ kpc as that where the average shock heating rate exceeds radiative cooling. This determines the strength of shocks due to the radio outbursts as follows. The shock repetition time, $`\tau `$, is highly uncertain, but, as mentioned above, it needs to be comparable to the radio source lifetime to account for the high incidence of central radio sources in cooling flow clusters. Taking $`\tau =10^8`$ yr, the cooling time at $`r=30`$ kpc is too short relative to the shock repetition time for weak shocks to balance the radiative cooling rate. Instead we must appeal to stronger shocks to provide the heating, but in that case balancing the heating rate against the average cooling rate is complicated by the large excursions in gas properties caused by the shocks. Provided that the gas is reasonably close to hydrostatic equilibrium most of the time, we can use the ratio of the average rate of change of entropy due to shocks to that due to radiative heat loss, i.e.,

$$Q=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }S/\tau }{R/(\rho T)}$$

$$=\frac{t_\mathrm{c}}{\tau }\left[\mathrm{ln}\left(1+\frac{2\gamma y}{\gamma +1}\right)+\gamma \mathrm{ln}\left\{\frac{\gamma +1+(\gamma 1)y}{(\gamma +1)(1+y)}\right\}\right].$$
$`(13)`$
This is essentially the same as the expression for $`H/R`$ above, except that here $`t_\mathrm{c}`$ is an ‘average’ cooling time, which we assume to be close to the observed cooling time, and the expression for the entropy jump in terms of $`y`$ is exact. Taking $`t_\mathrm{c}/\tau 10`$ at $`r=30`$ kpc and $`\gamma =5/3`$ then requires $`y2`$ to make $`Q=1`$ there. If the observed pressure is close to the pre-shock pressure, $`p_0`$, equation (7) still gives a reasonable estimate for the shock energy. Taking $`y=2`$, $`kT=3.3\mathrm{keV}`$ and $`n_\mathrm{e}=0.027\mathrm{cm}^3`$, as observed at $`r=30`$ kpc, we get $`E_\mathrm{T}3.4\times 10^{60}\mathrm{erg}`$. For $`\tau =10^8\mathrm{yr}`$, this makes the average shock power about $`1.1\times 10^{45}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$. This is to be compared with the total power radiated by the gas within $`r=150\mathrm{kpc}`$, i.e., about $`2.5\times 10^{44}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$. Given the large uncertainty in the shock energy, the agreement is close, suggesting that the radiative cooling rate in the central 150 kpc and shock heating due to radio outbursts are tied together. Note that these numbers agree for $`\tau 4\times 10^8\mathrm{yr}`$.

Direct shock heating does not fully explain the lack of gas deposition, since the argument above suggests that it is insignificant compared to radiative cooling outside the central 30 kpc. In that case, with no heat source to make up for radiative losses, cooling gas from the region between 30 and 150 kpc flows into the central 30 kpc at about $`300\mathrm{M}_{}\mathrm{y}^1`$. If the system is to remain in an approximately steady state, then an equivalent amount of gas must be driven back into the region surrounding the core by each radio outburst. Again, taking $`\tau 10^8\mathrm{yr}`$, this means that each radio outburst must drive about $`3\times 10^{10}\mathrm{M}_{}`$ of gas from the core. This is roughly 30% of the mass of gas in the 30 kpc core. The core gas is roughly isentropic, so a strong shock can certainly cause a substantial entropy inversion, i.e., gas that can rise well outside the core. It is not clear that as much as 30% of the gas can be lifted from the core by a single shock. More accurate numbers and more detailed modeling are needed to determine if this is possible.

The detectability of the hot bubbles rising from the core is determined by their size and speed. They are unstable, and will tend to break up and mix with ambient gas as they rise. Given that they are unlikely to rise faster than the thermal speed, i.e., about $`730\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, they would take at least $`1.3\times 10^8`$ yr to reach 100 kpc. This means that some hot bubbles should be present most of the time during the cycles between outbursts. The mass of this hot gas is a few percent of the total gas mass within 100 kpc, so it may be difficult to detect when it is well away from the core. On the other hand, it would be easily detected after the passage of the shock, while it still forms a coherent, overpressured body. Because the hot gas rises relatively quickly (speeds of order the sound speed), it fills a relatively small volume compared to inflowing cooling gas (which is highly subsonic). Thus, apart from some mixing, the outflowing hot bubbles may have relatively little impact on the steady inflow due to cooling.

The shock itself would be easily detectable anywhere within the 30 kpc core region (for $`y=2`$, the density jump is a factor of 2 and the temperature jump a factor of 1.75). At $`r=30\mathrm{kpc}`$, the shock speed is $`v_\mathrm{s}=\sqrt{3\gamma kT_0/\mu m_\mathrm{H}}1560\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, so that the shock takes about $`10^7`$ yr to reach $`r=30`$ kpc. This means that the shock is easily visible for at least 10% of the time, or in at least 10% of all comparable sources. If this model applies to many clusters, such shocks should be detected soon. If shocks are not detected, then shocks from the radio source cannot be responsible for preventing the deposition of cooled gas and we would need to find another heat source.

This description of gas flows around Hydra A presumes that the system remains in a quasi-steady state. Using the relationship between stellar velocity dispersion and the mass of the central black hole (Gebhardt $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 2000; Ferrarese & Merrit 2000), the central galaxy in Hydra A should have a nuclear black hole with a mass of $`5\times 10^8\mathrm{M}_{}`$. As cooling gas accumulates in the cluster core, the density of gas around this black hole increases, presumably driving up the accretion rate until there is a radio outburst. The outburst heats and drives away the central gas, thereby reducing the accretion rate and quenching the outburst. This provides a feedback mechanism connecting the average mechanical power of radio outbursts to the total radiative power within the region where there would otherwise be a cooling flow (i.e., where the cooling time is shorter than the age of the system). The critical condition is that the net mass flow rate into the core region is kept small (the spectroscopically determined mass deposition rate is less than 10% of the rate at which cooling gas is delivered to the core in this system). In the absence of a detailed model for the outflow, it is not clear that this requires very close balance between the average mechanical heating rate and radiative cooling. The mechanical heating rate must at least match the cooling rate to prevent accumulation of gas in the core, but any energy deposited outside the cooling flow region has little impact on the current cooling rate and so is not closely controlled by this feedback process. Thus the mechanical heating rate may exceed the radiative heat loss in the cooling flow region. In that case, the net heat input to the cluster could be significant for the cluster as a whole. For example, an average excess heating rate of $`10^{45}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ for $`10^{10}`$ yr deposited in $`10^{14}\mathrm{M}_{}`$ of gas amounts to 1.0 keV per particle. This is close to what is required to account for “preheating” in clusters (e.g., Wu, Fabian, & Nulsen 2000) and the excess heating rate per unit mass could well be greater at early times, when AGNs were more active.

In summary, for Hydra A, gas in the region from about 30 to 150 kpc is cooling steadily and flowing inward, essentially as a (homogeneous) cooling flow at a rate of about $`300\mathrm{M}_{}`$ yr-1. Repeated outbursts from the central radio source drive shocks into the cluster and heat the region $`r<30`$ kpc strongly enough to prevent all but about 10% of the inflowing gas from cooling to low temperatures. Because it is heated from the center, the 30 kpc core is convective and remains roughly isentropic. During each outburst, gas near the center of the core is heated so much that it rises well outside the core before finding its equilibrium position. On average, the resulting mass outflow nearly balances the cooling inflow to the core. The rate of accretion onto the central black hole that is the source of the radio outbursts is determined by the state of gas in the core. This link provides the feedback that keeps the net gas flow rate into the core close to zero. This model has much in common with the model of Tabor & Binney (1993) for gas flows in elliptical galaxies. Shock heating fits well with current models of radio outbursts, but if shocks are the main heat source in the core, they soon should be detected in some systems. If shocks are not a major heat source, then any other process by which the AGN heats the cluster from its center would produce a similar general picture. The major factor distinguishing such models is the extent to which the heating is intermittent. Continuous heating would tend to make the whole of the region, which would otherwise be depositing cool gas, isentropic.

## 6. Source of the Central Abundance Gradient

Between 100 and 200 kpc the Fe and Si abundances are essentially constant with a Si/Fe abundance ratio twice solar (see Figures 10 and 11). This agrees with earlier results from ASCA observations of clusters indicating a significant role of Type II supernovae (SNe II) in the global enrichment of cluster gas (Mushotzky $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1996, Fukazawa $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 1998). Within the central 100 kpc there is an excess of Si and Fe above the globally averaged values. Using an average Si abundance of 0.5 solar gives an excess Si mass of $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_{Si}1.4\times 10^8\mathrm{M}_{}`$ within the central 100 kpc. Using an average Fe abundance of 0.25 solar gives an excess Fe mass of $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_{Fe}3.0\times 10^8\mathrm{M}_{}`$ within the same region. The ratio $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_{Si}/\mathrm{\Delta }M_{Fe}=0.5`$ is essentially consistent with the solar ratio of 0.38. Fukazawa $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ (2000) and Irwin & Bregman (2000) find that central metal excesses are common in cD clusters with cooling flows based on ASCA and BEPPOSAX observations. Fukazawa $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ also find that the excess metals have a nearly solar abundance ratio. However, ASCA was unable to resolve the distribution of excess metals in clusters and accurately determine the Fe and Si masses.

The primary sources of metals in the central region of the Hydra A cluster are stellar winds and Type Ia Supernovae (SNe Ia) from the old stellar population in the central galaxy and SNe II from the young stellar population in the blue disk reported by McNamara (1995). A central abundance excess will develop even if the gas is static due to the more extended distribution of the gas compared to the light from the central galaxy. Based on the spectroscopic mass deposition rate, only 10% of the gas within the central 100 kpc should have condensed out of the hot gas over the cluster lifetime with the remainder being continuously enriched. Convection will flatten the abundance gradients to some extent but will not completely erase all gradients. Convection will also dredge up material from within the central 10 kpc in the central galaxy that should be enriched by stars with supersolar abundances, typical of the central regions of elliptical galaxies.

To determine the origin of the excess metals, we first compute the number of supernovae required to produce the excess Si and Fe masses. We adopt the supernovae yields given in Finoguenov, David, & Ponman (2000), that are averaged over a Salpeter IMF and given by $`y_{Fe}(Ia)=0.74\mathrm{M}_{}`$, $`y_{Fe}(II)=0.070\mathrm{M}_{}`$, $`y_{Si}(Ia)=0.158\mathrm{M}_{}`$, $`y_{Si}(II)=0.133\mathrm{M}_{}`$. The excess Fe mass requires $`4\times 10^8`$ SNe Ia. Since the Si yield is nearly independent of supernova type, we can simply assume a yield of $`0.14\mathrm{M}_{}`$ per supernovae. To produce the excess Si mass requires $`10^9`$ total supernovae, or $`6\times 10^8`$ SNe II. Assuming 1 SNe II for every $`100\mathrm{M}_{}`$ of star formation (appropriate for a Salpeter IMF) requires an average star formation rate of $`60\mathrm{M}_{}`$ yr-1 over the past $`10^9`$ yr. McNamara (1995) showed that the observed luminosity and colors of the blue disk in Hydra A could only be reproduced by continuous star formation over the past $`10^9`$ yr with star formation rates of of $`<\text{ }1\mathrm{M}_{}`$ yr-1. Higher star formation rates are also permitted by the data, but only when coupled with shorter periods of star formation. It is thus unlikely that the central metal excess in Hydra A was produced by star formation in the blue disk.

The total light of the central galaxy can be estimated from the photometric observations by Peterson (1986) who gives $`M_V=23.65`$ and B-V=1.08 within a $`1.65^{}`$ diameter aperture. This gives $`L_B=9.2\times 10^{10}L_{}`$ within the central 47 kpc radius using our adopted cosmology. To reproduce the observed excess Fe mass requires an average SNe Ia rate of $`4\times 10^{13}L_B^1`$ yr-1 over the past $`10^{10}`$ years, which is approximately twice Tammann’s (1974) rate of $`2.2\times 10^{13}L_B^1`$ yr-1. Tammann’s rate is usually considered to be a factor of 4 too high (van den Bergh, McClure, & Evans 1987), but our estimate does not include the contribution from stars beyond the central 50 kpc. Given the large uncertainty in the present epoch SNe Ia rate in elliptical galaxies, the excess Fe can be accounted for by SNe Ia from the old stellar population of the central galaxy.

Mass loss from stars as they evolve off the main sequence also can be a significant source of metals. Using the Faber & Gallagher (1976) mass loss rate of $`10^{11}\mathrm{M}_{}\mathrm{L}_\mathrm{V}^1`$ yr-1 gives a stellar mass loss rate of $`2.5\mathrm{M}_{}`$ yr-1 within the central 47 kpc. If this gas has a solar abundance of heavy elements, and the present mass loss rate is assumed to hold over the lifetime of the galaxy, then stellar mass loss can only produce about 15% of the observed Si and Fe excess, and only about 6% of the total gas mass within this radius.

There is considerable evidence that the environment of early-type galaxies has a significant impact on their X-ray properties (e.g., Brown & Bregman 1998; Helsdon $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$ 2000), with isolated ellipticals having the lowest $`L_x/L_B`$ ratios and the central dominant ellipticals in groups having the highest $`L_x/L_B`$ ratios. Brighenti & Mathews (1998) have suggested that much of the hot gas in ellipticals arises from the accretion of circumgalactic gas. While the central galaxy in Hydra A is a rather extreme example, since it is located at the center of a rich cluster, it is useful to compare the gaseous properties within the central 10 kpc with that found in samples of more isolated ellipticals. The deprojected X-ray luminosity of the hot gas within the central 10 kpc is $`L(0.52.0\mathrm{keV})=8.6\times 10^{42}`$ ergs s-1 (excluding the central point source). Compared with the samples of ellipticals in Brown & Bregman and Helsdon $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑡}\mathrm{𝑎𝑙}.`$, the central galaxy in Hydra A is 100 times overluminous in X-rays for its observed $`L_B`$. The deprojected gas temperature within the central 10 kpc is 2.7 keV which is approximately 3 times higher than a typical elliptical. The higher temperature cannot result from heating by supernovae. Based on the calculations above, the production of the excess Si mass via SNe would only heat the gas by 0.6 keV per particle. Thus, the higher gas temperature must result from gravitational infall and compression. This is consistent with the result noted above that the hot gas in the central galaxy cannot be produced by stellar mass loss and must originate from the intracluster medium.

## 7. SUMMARY

We have presented a detailed analysis of the Chandra observations of the Hydra A cluster. The high spatial resolution of Chandra and the good photon statistics in these observations have allowed us to study the distribution of gas temperature, multiphase gas, and metals in the cluster core on scales of 10-20 kpc. These high resolution observations present significant challenges to the conventional cooling flow scenario and the processes by which the hot gas in clusters is enriched with heavy elements.

The large scale abundance ratio of heavy elements in the Hydra A cluster determined from the Chandra observations indicates that the gas was initially enriched by a predominance of SNe II, in agreement with earlier ASCA observations. The uniform distribution of Fe and Si beyond the central 100 kpc suggests that this enrichment occurred prior to the last major merger, during which any pre-existing gradients would have been erased. Within the central 100 kpc, the observed excess of Fe and Si has a solar abundance ratio.

The ACIS-S spectra do not show any statistically significant evidence for multiphase gas beyond the central 30 kpc, even through the cooling time of the gas at this radius is only 1 Gyr. Within 30 kpc, the spectroscopic mass deposition rate is roughly consistent with the observed star formation rate, but is more than an order of magnitude less than the morphological mass accretion rate at the same radius. The gas is also isentropic within the central 30 kpc. Based on these observations, we propose a scenario in which a small amount of the hot gas is able to cool and accrete onto the central black hole in Hydra A and trigger the formation of a radio jet which mechanically heats the gas via strong shocks. We show that the collective effect of numerous weak shocks is energetically insufficient to have a major impact on the cooling flow. The boost in gas entropy after the passage of a strong shock makes the central gas convectively unstable and produces buoyant bubbles of hot gas. Averaged over many outbursts, the mass accretion rate in the outer cooling flow region can be nearly balanced by the mass outflow rate in the expanding bubbles. This scenario makes definitive predictions that can be tested in the near future with Chandra and XMM. About 10% of cooling flow clusters should show evidence of strong shocks. By the end of AO-2, Chandra will have observed approximately 100 groups and clusters so this prediction can be easily tested. In addition, the greater throughput of XMM-Newton may permit the spectroscopic detection of hot buoyant bubbles in the outer parts of cooling flows. Based on our results, it is very likely that some there will be some fundamental changes in the cooling flow scenario over the next few years as data from Chandra and XMM-Newton continue to accumulate.

PEJN and TJP gratefully acknowledge the hospitality of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. We are grateful to J. Mohr for a very informative discussion about recent theoretical and observational results concerning dark matter halos. This work was partially supported by NASA contract NAS8-39073.
## References

Brighenti, F. & Mathews, W.G. 1998, ApJ, 495, 239.

Broadhurst, T., Huang, X., Frye, B., & Ellis, R. 2000, ApJ, 534, 15.

Brown, B.A. & Bregman, L.N. 1998, ApJ, 495, L75.

Burkert, A. 1995, ApJ, 447, L25.

David, L.P., Arnaud, K., Forman, W., & Jones C. 1990, ApJ, 356, 32.

Donahue, M., Mack, J., Voit, G.M., Sparks, W., Elston, R., & Maloney, P.R. 2000, (astro-ph 0007062).

Evrard, A.E. 1997, MNRAS, 292, 289.

Faber, S.M. & Gallagher, J.S. 1976, ApJ, 204, 365.

Fabian, A.C. & Nulsen P.E.J. 1977, MNRAS, 180, 479.

Fabian, A.C. 1994, ARAA, 32, 277.

Fabian, A.C., Sanders, J., Ettori, S., Taylor, G., Allen, S., Crawford, C., Iwasawa, K., Johnstone, R. & Ogle, P. 2000, (astro-ph 0007456).

Ferrarese, L. & Merrit, D. 2000, ApJ, 539, L9.

Finoguenov, A., David, L., Ponman, T. 2000 (preprint).

Flores, R. & Primack, J. 1994, ApJ, 427, L1.

Fukazawa, Y., Makishima, K., Tamura, T., Ezawa, H., Xu, H., Ikebe, Y., Kikuchi, K., Ohashi, T. 1998, PASJ, 50, 187.

Fukazawa, Y., Makishima, K., Tamura, T., Nakazawa, K., Ezawa, H., Ikebe, Y., Kikuchi, K., Ohashi, T. 2000, MNRAS, 313, 21.

Gebhardt, K., Bender, R., Bower, G., Dressler, A., Faber, S., Filippenko, A., Green, R., Grillmair, C., Ho, L., Kormendy, J., Lauer, T., Magorrian, J., Pinkney, J., Richstone, D., & Tremaine, S. 2000, ApJ, 539, L13.

Heckman, T. M., Baum, S.A., van Breugel, & W., McCarthy, P. 1989, Ap.J., 338, 48.

Helsdon, S.F., Ponman, T.J., O’Sullivan, E., & Forbes, D.A. 2000 (preprint).

Heinz, S., Reynolds, C. & Begelman, M. 1998, ApJ, 501, 126.

Hu, E.M., Cowie, L.L., & Wang, Z. 1985, Ap.J. Suppl., 59, 447.

Ikebe, Y., Makishima, K., Ezawa, H., Fukazawa, Y., Hirayama, M., Honda H., Ishisake, Y., Kikuchi, K., Kubo, H., Murakami, T., Ohashi, T., Takahashi, T., & Yamashita, K. 1997, ApJ, 481, 660.

Irwin, J.A. & Bregman, J.N. 2000 (astro-ph 0009237).

Jing, Y. 2000, ApJ, 535, 30.

Lewis, G., Babul, A., Katz, N., Quinn, T., Hernquist, L., & Weinberg, D. 2000, ApJ, 536, 623

Markevitch, M., Forman, W., Sarazin, C., & Vikhlinin, A. 1998, ApJ, 503, 77.

McElroy, D.B. 1995, A&A Supp, 100, 105.

McGaugh, S. & de Block, W. 1998, ApJ, 499, 41.

McNamara, B., & O’Connell, R. 1992, ApJ., 393, 579.

McNamara, B. 1995, ApJ, 443, 77.

McNamara, B., Wise, M., Nulsen, P. E. J., David, L., Sarazin, C., Bautz, M., Markevitch, M.,Vikhlinin, A., Forman, W., Jones, C., Harris, D. 2000, ApJ, 534, 135L.

Melnick, J., Gopal-Krishna, & Terlevich, R. 1997, AA, 318, 337.

Mohr, J., Mathiesen, B., & Evrard. A. 1999, ApJ, 517, 627.

Moore, B., Quinn, T., Governato, F., Stadel, J., & Lake, G. 1999, MNRAS, 310, 1147.

Mushotzky, R.F., Loewenstein, M., Arnaud, K.A., Tamura, T., Fukazawa, Y., Matsushita, K., Kikuchi, K., Hatsukade, I. 1996, ApJ, 466, 686.

Navarro, J., Frenk, C., & White, S. 1995, MNRAS, 275, 720.

Navarro, J., Frenk, C., & White, S. 1997, ApJ, 490, 493.

Peres, C., Fabian, A., Edge, A., Allen, A., Johnstone, R., & White, D. 1998, MNRAS, 298, 416.

Peterson, C.J. 1986, PASP, 98, 486.

Robertson, B. & David, L. 2000 (in preparation).

Sambruna, R., Chartas, G., Eracleous, M., & Mushotzky, R. 2000, (astro-ph 0002201).

Sarazin, C.S. 1986, Rev. Mod. Phys., 58, 1.

Shapiro, P. & Iliev, I. 2000 (astro-ph 0006353).

Soker, N., White, R., David, L. & McNamara, B 2000 (astro-ph 0009173).

Swaters, R., Madore, B., & Trewhella, M. 2000, ApJ, 531, L107.

Tammann, G.A. 1974, Supernovae and Their Remnants, ed. C.B. Comsovici (Dordrecht:Reidel), p. 155.

Taylor, G.B. 1996, ApJ, 470, 394.

Thomas, P.A., Fabian, A.C., & Nulsen, P.E.J. 1987, MNRAS, 228, 973.

Tucker, W. & David, L. 1997, ApJ, 484, 602.

Tyson, J.A., Kochanski, G. & Dell’Antonio, I. 1998, ApJ, 498, L107.

van den Bergh, S., McClure, R.D., & Evans, R. 1987, ApJ, 323, 44.

van den Bosch, F., Robertson, B., Dalcanton, J. & de Blok, W. 2000, AJ, 119, 1579.

Vikhlinin, A., Forman, W., Jones, C. 1999, ApJ, 525, 47.

Weisskopf, M., Tananbaum, H., Van Speybroeck, L., & O’Dell, S. 2000, Proc SPIE 4012 (astro-ph 0004127).

White, D. & Fabian, A.C. 1995, MNRAS, 273, 72.

White, D. 2000, MNRAS, 312, 663.

Wilson, A.S., Young, A.J. & Shopbell, P.L. 2000, (astro-ph 0009308)

.


format: text

text:
# Discovery of a redshifted Iron K–line in the X–ray afterglow of GRB 000214.

## 1 Introduction

Three years after the first identification of the X-ray afterglow from a Gamma Ray Burst (GRB) (Costa et al., 1997), the nature of Gamma Ray Bursts’ progenitors remains uncertain. The most widely discussed theoretical models for GRBs consider vastly different scenarios both in terms of the progenitors and environment. If the GRBs originate from neutron star-neutron star or neutron star-black hole mergers (Narayan, Paczynski and Piran 1992) then, for about a half of all GRBs, the explosion should be located far from the place where the progenitor binary system was formed and most probably in a low-density interstellar medium. On the other hand, if GRBs originate from Hypernovae (Paczynski, 1998; Woosley, 1993) or SupraNovae (Vietri & Stella, 1998), the immediate progenitor is a massive, rotating star, and thus the explosion should take place in a high density medium, probably a star-forming region. The discovery of emission lines in the X-ray spectrum of a GRB afterglow represents a major step toward the understanding of the nature of GRB progenitors. In fact, the measurement of X-ray lines emitted by a GRB or its afterglow provides a direct measurement of the redshift and a powerful diagnostic of both the nature of the central engine and the environment in which GRBs go off (Perna & Loeb, 1998; Mèszàros & Rees, 1998; Böttcher et al., 1999, Ghisellini et al., 1999; Paerels et al., 2000). Other methods, such as collecting offsets between GRBs afterglow and their host galaxies (Bloom et al., 1999) or searching for absorbing material between the GRB and the observer (Wijers & Galama, 1999; Owens et al., 1999), are comparatively less direct.

Presently, there are only two marginal detections of an X-ray emission line in GRB afterglows, one in GRB 970508 (chance probability for a statistical fluctuation of 0.7%, Piro et al. 1999) and one in GRB 970828 (probability of 1.7%, Yoshida et al. 1999). The presence of a strong iron line in the X-ray spectrum of a GRB afterglow implies a rich environment located very close to the GRB region and may be an important clue in favor of collapsar models (Mèszàros & Rees, 1998; Lazzati, Campana, & Ghisellini, 1999; Weth et al., 2000; Vietri et al., 1999). In fact, in the case of the Hypernova scenario an iron rich circumburst environment may be produced by the stellar wind before the explosion of the Hypernova (Mèszàros & Rees, 1998). A similarly favorable situation occurs in the SupraNova scenario (Vietri & Stella, 1998) where a supernova explosion precedes by a few months the GRB event. GRB 000214 (“Valentine’s Day Burst”) has no optical nor near-infrared afterglow (Rhoads et al., 2000; Wijers et al., in preparation) as is the case for about half of all GRBs with follow–up observations (e.g., Kulkarni et al., 2000). The lack of optical and IR counterparts to a GRB may result from extinction in a dense surrounding medium; therefore, searching for emission lines in the X-ray afterglows of these GRBs looks especially promising. Based on a BeppoSAX pointed observation of GRB 000214, we report on the detection of an Iron K$`\alpha `$ line from its X-ray afterglow.

## 2 Observation and results

GRB 000214 was detected both by the Gamma Ray Burst Monitor (GRBM) and Wide Field Cameras (WFC) on-board BeppoSAX on 2000 Feb. 14 01:01:01 UT. The prompt event, i.e. the gamma ray emission detected by GRBM, lasted $`10`$ s and had a fluence of $``$=$`1.4\times 10^5`$ erg cm-2 in the 40–700 keV band. The corresponding prompt X-ray emission detected by WFC had a fluence of $``$=$`1.0\times 10^6`$ erg cm-2 (2–10 keV). In the X-rays a complex multi-peaked structure lasting about 2 min after the burst proper was clearly seen; a detailed analysis of the early behaviour of GRB 000214 will be presented elsewhere. The evolution of the X to Gamma-ray spectrum from the prompt event showed a spectral softening similar to that observed in other GRBs (Frontera et al., 1998, 2000a, 2000b).

### 2.1 Narrow Field Instruments observation

A follow-up observation with the BeppoSAX Narrow Field Instruments (NFI) began about 12 hours after the burst and lasted about 104,000 s. The effective exposure time was 51,000 s on source time for the BeppoSAX Medium Energy Concetrator/Spectrometer (MECS), and 15,000 s in the Low Energy Concentrator/Spectrometer (LECS). A previously unknown X-ray source, 1SAX J1854.4-6627, was detected in the MECS and LECS field of view at a position of RA =$`18^h54^m27^s.0`$ and DEC = $`66^o27^{}30^{\prime \prime }`$ (J2000) (uncertainty radius of 50”). The source position lies within the WFC error circle (Paolino et al., 2000; Antonelli, 2000) and IPN error box (Hurley & Feroci, 2000). The 2–10 keV flux of 1SAX J1854.4-6627 decreased by a factor of about two, from $`(7.7\pm 0.8)\times 10^{13}`$ (first 11 ks) to $`(4.2\pm 0.7)\times 10^{13}`$ erg cm-2 s-1(last 10 ks), during the BeppoSAX observation (these fluxes were derived by using the best fit model to the spectra, see next section). In consideration of its fading behaviour and position within both the WFC and IPN error boxes, we concluded that 1SAX J1854.4-6627 represents the afterglow of GRB 000214.

The MECS lightcurve yields a flux decay ($`F(t)t^\beta `$) with $`\beta =(0.8\pm 0.5)`$ (hereafter all errors are quoted at 90% confidence level for one parameter of interest). Combining the MECS lightcurve with the WFC lightcurve from after the main event (extending for 39 s after burst onset) yields a flux decay with a power-law slope of $`\beta =(1.41\pm 0.03)`$. This slope is somewhat steeper than usually observed in GRB X-ray afterglows ($`\beta 1.2`$).

### 2.2 Spectral analysis of GRB 000214 X-ray afterglow

We extracted the LECS(0.1-4.0 keV) and MECS(1.6-10.0 keV) spectra of the source from the entire BeppoSAX observation (figure 1) using standard procedures (Fiore et al., 1999)111Fiore, F., Guainazzi, M., & Grandi, P., 1999, Cookbook for BeppoSAX NFI Spectral Analysis, (http://www.sdc.asi.it/software/). The extraction regions were chosen so as to maximize the signal-to-noise ratio. An accurate analysis of local background was performed in order to check for spurious features. After having verified that the local background is compatible with that derived from blank field observations available at the BeppoSAX Science Data Center, we used the latter in order to achieve a background subtraction with improved signal to noise (see also figure 2). Both the LECS and MECS spectra were binned so as to have at least 15 photons per bin. Spectral analysis was performed using the XSPEC10.0 package. We checked that our results are nearly insensitive to the details of the background subtraction.

We first fit the data with a power-law plus photoelectric absorption. The relative normalization of LECS versus MECS was left free to vary in the 0.7-1.0 range (Fiore et al., 1999). We obtained a best-fit value of $`\chi ^2=25.4`$ for 14 (d.o.f.). The column density best-fit value ($`N_H=0.7_{0.7}^{+7.5}\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2) is compatible with the Galactic value $`N_H=5.5\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2 (Dickey & Lockman, 1990), so we fixed it to this value. We obtained a power-law photon index of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=2.0\pm 0.3`$ and a flux of $`F_x(210keV)=(2.75\pm 0.9)\times 10^{13}`$ erg cm-2 s-1. The best-fit value was $`\chi ^2=27.5`$ for 15 (d.o.f.). These relatively high chisquare values (corresponding to a chance probability of $`P_\chi (\chi ^2,\nu )0.02`$ in the latter case) justified a deeper analysis. The residuals to the fit above show a clear excess around energies of $`45`$ keV which can be interpreted as an emission line (see figure 1). We added a narrow (with respect to MECS energy resolution, which is $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$E/E=8$`\times `$(E/6 keV)-0.5 FWHM%) Gaussian line to the previous model in order to fit the observed feature. We inferred in this way a line centroid energy of $`E=4.7\pm 0.2`$ keV and an intensity of $`I_l=(9\pm 3)\times 10^6`$ photons cm-2 s-1, translating into an E.W. of $`2.1`$ keV. The best fit chisquare value was $`\chi ^2=11.5`$ for 13 d.o.f. Applying an $`F`$–test to assess the statistical significance of the Gaussian feature we obtained a chance probability of 0.27% (corresponding to $`3.0\sigma `$ significance level). The other spectral parameters were only marginally affected by the inclusion of the Gaussian, with a power-law photon index of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=2.2\pm 0.3`$ and a flux of $`F_x(210keV)=(2.9\pm 0.9)\times 10^{13}`$ erg cm-2 s-1. The LECS normalization relative to the MECS depends mainly on the source position in the LECS and the different exposure intervals than the MECS (note that the source was fading). However the statistical uncertainty we determined for this normalization was greater than the nominal range; therefore we also fixed it to 0.8, the value inferred from a BeppoSAX observation of NGC 7469 (Piro et al.1999b), a Seyfert 1 galaxy with a $`0.110`$ keV spectrum similar to that of the GRB 000214 afterglow. The best fit chisquare value was $`\chi ^2=28`$ for 16 d.o.f. fitting data with the simple power-law model and $`\chi ^2=12.1`$ for 14 d.o.f. adding a Gaussian line to the previous model. Following this procedure, while the spectral parameters remain essentially unchanged a slightly improved statistical significance ($`F`$–test) was obtained for the fit with the power–law and Gaussian line (chance probability of 0.15%, or $`3.2\sigma `$).

We divided the MECS observation in two consecutive intervals (20 ks and 30 ks exposure). MECS spectra were extracted from each interval by the same method as above. As shown in figure 3 both spectra show evidence for an emission line at an energy compatible, within the errors, with the line detected during the entire observation. Note also that most of the flux decrease in the second part of the observation seems due to the continuum rather than the line. Poor statistics does not allow a more quantitative investigation.

## 3 Discussion and conclusions

The only cosmologically abundant element that can produce lines beyond 4 keV is iron, provided one precludes Doppler shifts to shorter wavelengths. Iron emits a K$`\alpha `$ line photons with an energy between 6.4 (for the lower ionization stages of iron) and 6.95 keV (for hydrogen-like iron). The observed feature may be also interpreted as the Iron recombination K–edge at 9.28 keV (corresponding to a redshift of $`z=0.9`$) but, in such a case, according to Weth et al. (2000), we should expect both a Fe K–edge and a K$`\alpha `$ line having about the same intensity. The Fe-K$`\alpha `$ line should be redshifted at an energy between 3.2 and 3.5 keV but no line is detected in the MECS spectrum of GRB 000214 afterglow within this range. If we identify the emission feature in GRB 000214 as Fe K$`\alpha `$, the corresponding redshift is between $`z=0.37`$ and 0.47. We will assume $`z=0.47`$ for simplicity, but none of the following discussion hinges upon this exact value.

The case of GRB 000214 differs from that of GRB 970508 in two ways. First, the iron line is more significant in GRB 000214: we find that the probability of a chance fluctuation is $`0.27\%`$, as compared to $`0.7\%`$. This difference becomes even more remarkable when one considers that there is no independent determination of the redshift for GRB 000214, while GRB 970508 has $`z=0.835`$ from optical observations (Metzger et al., 1997). Second, the afterglow observation of GRB 000214 did not allow detection of a possible reburst, contrary to GRB 970508. In fact, GRB 000214 was observed just once after the burst proper, beginning $`12`$ h after the main event, and for a total of $`10^5`$ s. GRB 970508, instead, was observed on four different occasions after the burst, beginning $`6`$ h after the main event, with the last set of observations more than $`6`$ days after the burst (Piro et al., 1999). Thus, for GRB 000214, we have no time coverage to exclude a reburst before or after the time of our observations: all we can say is that, during this limited time, the flux decreased by about a factor of $`2`$ (see Section 2.1). This is consistent with GRB 970508, where the line was bright as the flux was decreasing (Fig. 2a of Piro et al., 1999); thus the model of Vietri et al. (1999), connecting the appearance of the iron line to the reburst, is still viable.

For $`z=0.47`$, $`H_{}=70`$ km s-1 Mpc-1, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$, we find a total energy release, in the line only, of $`E_l=3\times 10^{48}`$ erg, i.e. $`N_l=3\times 10^{56}`$ photons emitted within the first $`t_d10^5`$ s after the burst; the emission is isotropic because the line is sub–relativistic. If each iron atom were to emit a single line photon, then $`M_{Fe}12M_{}`$, way too large. Thus each iron atom must produce several line photons (Lazzati et al., 1999), and, consequently, the time–scale $`t_{Fe}`$ over which every iron atom produces a photon satisfies $`t_{Fe}t_d10^5`$ s, and does not seem to begin fading. This implies that the time–scale $`t_d`$ is set by the geometrical factor: the line–emitting material must be located at $`R3\times 10^{15}`$ cm, and we are seeing some sizeable fraction of it.

The minimum iron mass is determined by Lazzati et al.(1999) as

$$M_{Fe}5\times 10^3M_{}\frac{F_{13}t_5R_{16}^2}{qE_{50}}$$
(1)
where $`F_{13}0.5`$ is the line luminosity in units of $`10^{13}`$ erg cm-2 s-1, $`t_51`$ is the line duration in units of $`10^5`$ s, $`R_{16}0.3`$ the material distance in units of $`10^{16}`$ cm, $`q`$ is the fraction of the absorbed ionizing fluence and reprocessed into the line ($`q0.1`$ as derived by Ghisellini et al., 1999) and $`E_{50}`$ is the total X–ray burst luminosity in units of $`10^{50}`$ erg; for GRB 000214 we find $`E_{50}8`$ if the burst emission were isotropic. With these values

$$M_{Fe}2.4\times 10^3M_{}.$$
(2)
This argues against a possible origin of this GRB in a neutron star - neutron star (or neutron star - black hole) binary merger. The problem is not one of total iron content of the model: for realistic parameters, this scenario can easily satisfy the above limit. The problem lies instead in the capacity of the model to deposit this much iron at these large distances, and at Newtonian speeds. In fact, under our assumption that the line is not blueshifted (at least, its Lorenz factor is $`1`$), the iron cannot have been released in the burst event itself: there is not time enough for matter ejected in the explosion to rush ahead of photons, slow down, and then be hit by the burst flash. The material generating the line must have been released well before the burst. Given their lack of atmospheres and winds, the only mechanism capable of releasing matter from inspiralling neutron stars is tidal interaction. A mass loss estimate for this process by Mèszàros and Rees (1992) has a lower limit of $`M_{th}=4\times 10^{30}g`$, enough to account (barely!) for Eq. 2, but this optimistically assumes that the typical viscosity damping time-scale equals the light travel time across the star (Bildsten and Cutler 1992). Though the exact amount of viscosity in a neutron star is not well–known, theoretical arguments fall short of the amount required for the correctness of the estimate by Mèszàros and Rees (1992), by about a factor $`2000`$ (Kochanek 1992, Eq. 4.7, Bildsten and Cutler 1992, see the discussions after Eq. 9 and 16).

In hypernova models, an intense wind should characterize the massive progenitor before the collapse. Calling $`A`$ the iron mass fraction relative to the solar abundance (Lang 1991, p. 84), we expect from Eq. 2 a minimum mass of

$$M1.4M_{}\frac{1}{AE_{50}}.$$
(3)
The radial mass distribution from a massive stellar wind is $`dM=\dot{M}dr/v_{\mathrm{}}`$. The most extreme ratios of stellar wind mass loss rate $`\dot{M}`$ to asymptotic speed $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ occur in Luminous Blue Variables and Red SuperGiant Variables ($`\dot{M}=10^4M_{}`$ yr-1, $`v_{\mathrm{}}=10100`$ km s-1, Lamers, 1995, van Loon et al., 1999). For these winds, at $`R3\times 10^{15}`$ cm there can only be $`M10^210^3M_{}`$, missing the above lower limit by $`23`$ orders of magnitude. The densest circumstellar envelopes around the progenitors of some peculiar core collapse supernovae (e.g. $`n10^810^9`$ cm-3 at $`R3\times 10^{15}`$ cm in SN1997ab, Salamanca et al., 1998) imply a mass of $`M10^110^2M_{}`$, substantially lower than required by Eq. 3. A model immune from these inconsistencies is the SupraNova, where a core collapse supernova explosion precedes the GRB event by months to years (Vietri and Stella 1998).

On the other hand, the lack of large amounts of material along the line of sight, as testified by the absence of photoelectric soft X-ray absorption on top of the Galactic value222The upper limit derived above, $`N_H=2.7\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2, for the non–Galactic column density, corresponds to a total mass, within $`12`$ light hours, of $`5\times 10^6M_{}`$, which could indicate a large amount of mass only for implausibly large ($`110^6`$) ionization fractions., and the development of a normal X–ray afterglow, clearly suggest the presence of outlying material located in the progenitor’s equatorial plane, at large angles from the line of sight. This material may be either left over from the progenitor’s formation process (as in a primordial gas cloud) or spewed out by the progenitor. Key future observations capable of discriminating between these possibilities will be the measurement of the line width, and a search of atomic species produced in the interiors of evolved stars. Velocities of $`1000kms^1`$ can rule out any primordial cloud and/or hypernovae winds; the detection of cobalt or nickel may establish the recent origin of the material from a SN explosion.

This research is supported by the Italian Space Agency (ASI) and Consiglio Nazionale Ricerche of Italy. Beppo-SAX is a joint program of ASI and the Netherlands Agency for Aerospace Programs (NIVR). We thank all members of the Beppo-SAX SDC, SOC and OCC. We also thank L. Burderi, G.L. Israel, F. Fiore, G.Matt and G. Bono and an anonymous referee for helpful comments.


text:
# Gas condensation within a bundle of carbon nanotubes – effects of screening.

One of the principal themes of condensed matter physics is the sensitivity of a system’s behavior to its dimensionality . Much interest in surface physics is attributable to the rich diversity of possible two dimensional ($`2`$D) phase diagrams. The discovery of the carbon nanotube (NT) has created the possibilty of interesting $`1`$D and quasi - $`1`$D phases involving adsorbed atoms and molecules\[$`4`$-$`9`$\]. In the case of small molecules/atoms, such as H2, He and Ne, the most energetically favored site is believed to be the interstitial channel (IC) between NTs , which is indeed a $`1`$D domain. In this paper we evaluate the phase behavior of a system of many H2 molecules within the ICs. An important role is played by the carbon environment, which screens the attraction between hydrogens. As a result, we find that the ground state cohesive energy of the system is reduced to a very small value ( less than $`5\%`$ of the well depth of the free space pair potential ). In this paper, we estimate the critical temperature for the condensation of hydrogen using alternatively localized and delocalized models of the hydrogen. A comparison is presented with similar results for the adsorption of neon and helium. In all cases, the effects of screening in reducing the transition temperature are significant.

Our study is a successor to a recent investigation of the intrachannel screening . That project evaluated the Axilrod-Teller-Muto triple dipole (DDD) interaction between two hydrogen molecules within the same IC and the surrounding carbon atoms. The DDD interaction has been shown empirically to account quantitatively for the three-body interaction involving simple gases in $`3`$D and semiquantitatively with similar effects in adsorbed films . The resulting net interaction is:

$$V_{total}(\stackrel{}{r})=V(\stackrel{}{r})+V_{DDD}(\stackrel{}{r}),$$
(1)
where $`V(\stackrel{}{r})`$ is the free space interaction. $`V_{total}(\stackrel{}{r})`$ has a well depth, $`1.35`$ meV, which is just $`46\%`$ of the free space well depth. As a consequence of the reduced attraction the H2 dimer’s binding energy falls from $`4.5`$ K to zero. This absence of the dimer bound state implies that the ground state of the strictly $`1`$D system is a gas . This result is manifested in the absence of a finite $`\rho `$ minimum in the $`1`$D equation of state $`E_{1D}(\rho )`$ at temperature $`T=0`$ in Fig. $`1`$ (dashed curve); here $`\rho `$ is the $`1`$D density. This curve has been obtained by Boronat and Gordillo  using their diffusion Monte Carlo method, together with the screened interaction of Kostov et al. . The curve contrasts strikingly with the result of a previous study which found a liquid with cohesive energy $`4.83`$ K for the $`1`$D system and the free space interaction between H2 molecules 111Because of some uncertainty about the adequacy of the DDD in describing the screening, we have explored the consequence of artificially reducing this interaction. Multiplying this interaction by $`0.845\pm 0.01`$ yields the threshold for there to be a dimer bound state. Multiplication by one-half yields a dimer binding energy of $`1.1`$ K ..

To study the collective properties of the H2, we must take into account the interaction between molecules of neighboring channels. Fig. $`2`$ depicts both the unscreened and the screened intermolecular interactions, the latter including the DDD term which we evaluated using the same procedure as Kostov et al. . Similarly, Fig. $`3`$ and Fig. $`4`$ illustrate the DDD screening effect in the interchannel interaction for the case of He and Ne atoms, adsorbed within the ICs. In all three cases, we observe quite a large DDD effect, which alters significantly the free space interchannel potential. Note that the distance scale in Fig. $`2`$, Fig. $`3`$ and Fig. $`4`$ is the longitudinal (along the axis of the IC) displacement $`z`$ between the two particles of neighboring channels. The spacing between neighboring ICs is a fixed parameter $`d=9.8`$ Å.

One can easily obtain a rigorous upper bound for the interacting system’s energy. To do so, we identify the system of uncoupled H2 (i.e. independent ICs) as the unperturbed system. The ground state of this latter system is a set of uncondensed $`1`$D gases. The variational theorem asserts that the fully interacting system’s energy satisfies

$$E(\rho )E_{var}(\rho ),$$
(2)
$$E_{var}(\rho )=E_{1D}(\rho )+\frac{3\rho }{2}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}dzV_{total}[(z^2+\rho ^2)^{1/2}].$$
(3)
The prefactor of $`3/2`$ is derived from a coordination number of $`3`$ neighboring ICs and the need to avoid double counting. More distant tubes (omitted here) would further lower this variational energy by less than $`1\%`$, which we neglect. Note that in Fig. $`2`$ the DDD term has regions which are both positive and negative. The integral is such that the negative contribution outweighs the positive contribution. This means that the environment enhances the interaction between molecules in adjacent channels. This might be called an “antiscreening effect”.

Fig. $`1`$ presents the resulting variational energy. There is a minimum at density $`\rho _0=0.091`$ Å-1, at which the ground state energy per particle is $`0.15\pm 0.01`$ K . This is a remarkably low density and weakly bound liquid. It is analogous to that found recently for 4He in the same environment . The latter calculation does not include environmental screening however.

What is the phase behavior of this unusual system? As was found for 4He, there is a low temperature region of separation into liquid and vapor phases. A droplet of “liquid” will involve condensation in contiguous ICs; this phase will be strongly anisotropic, and for that reason alone is worth further study. The critical region should be $`3`$D Ising-like, since the transition is inherently $`3`$D. The critical temperature may be estimated in at least two ways, based on alternative assumptions. The first of these ways is simply to note the general similarity between cohesive energy and critical temperature. For 4He in $`3`$D for example, the cohesive energy is $`E_c=7.17`$ K and the critical temperature is $`5.2`$ K. In $`2`$D, these values are also similar ($`E_c=0.85`$ K, $`T_c=0.87`$ K). On this crude basis, we estimate $`T_c0.1`$ K for H2 in NTs.

However, a quite different estimate is obtained if the H2 molecules become localized at sites created by the periodic potential provided by the NTs. In this case, a lattice gas model is appropriate. To describe the phase behavior of H2 in this model we follow the procedure of Cole et al. . In that approach we obtain $`J_t14`$ mK and $`c0.007`$, where an anistropic simple cubic Ising model was assumed with an interaction strength $`J_z`$ between neighboring spins along the $`z`$ axis (within the same channel) and a transverse interaction $`J_t=cJ_z`$. The critical temperature of the H2 condensation transition in this lattice-gas model is then $`T_c1.19`$ K .

Analogous assessments of the condensation properties of He and Ne in that model yield $`J_t2.6`$ mK, $`c0.009`$ and $`T_c0.18`$ K for He , and $`J_t15`$ mK, $`c0.009`$ and $`T_c1.05`$ K for Ne. The previous study of He condensation found $`T_c0.36`$ K in the nonscreening case.

In summary, we have derived estimates of the transition temperatures for quasi-$`1`$D condensations of gases in nanotube bundles. The effect of the carbon environment is significant. It provides strong screening of the intrachannel attraction but overall enhances the interchannel attraction 222 If the screening of both intra- and interchannel interactions were omitted, we would find the following values of $`T_c`$ for H2: $`4.8`$ K in the quasifree model and $`3.01`$ K in the localized model.. These phase transitions would be dramatically observable in specific heat measurements at low temperature because the tubes are thermodynamically inert in that temperature regime.

We are grateful to M. Chan, P. Eklund, P. Sokol, V. Crespi and J.K. Johnson for helpful discussions. We express our thanks to J. Boronat and M.C. Gordillo for carrying out the diffusion Monte Carlo calculations described above. This research has been supported by the Army Research Office and the Petroleum Research Fund of the American Chemical Society.

Figure Captions

Fig. $`1`$. Energy per molecule of $`1`$D H2 within a single channel (dashed curve from Ref.) compared with the energy per molecule in the case when interchannel interaction is included (full curve).

Fig. $`2`$. Potential energy of interaction between two H2 molecules in free space (dashed curve) and in adjacent channels (full curve) are shown. The difference arises from the DDD interaction of the two H2 molecules and the surrounding carbon atoms (dotted curve). The abscissa is the difference in $`z`$ coordinates of the two molecules.

Fig. $`3`$. Same as Fig. $`2`$ but for He.

Fig. $`4`$. Same as Fig. $`2`$ but for Ne.