Reconciling galaxy cluster shapes, measured by theorists vs observers
David Harvey, Andrew Robertson, Sut-Ieng Tam, Mathilde Jauzac, Richard, Massey, Jason Rhodes, and Ian G. McCarthy

TL;DR
This study compares theoretical and observational measures of galaxy cluster shapes, revealing significant discrepancies and proposing calibrated, observable-based shape measures to improve the use of cluster shapes in astrophysics.
Contribution
The paper introduces a method to match simulated cluster shapes with observable measures and tests it using real data, addressing discrepancies between theory and observation.
Findings
Observable shape measures are rounder than theoretical moments of inertia.
Projected moments overestimate ellipticity by 56-430%.
Inner cluster ellipticity becomes decoupled from outer regions, indicating feedback effects.
Abstract
If properly calibrated, the shapes of galaxy clusters can be used to investigate many physical processes: from feedback and quenching of star formation, to the nature of dark matter. Theorists frequently measure shapes using moments of inertia of simulated particles'. We instead create mock (optical, X-ray, strong- and weak-lensing) observations of the twenty-two most massive () relaxed clusters in the BAHAMAS simulations. We find that observable measures of shape are rounder. Even when moments of inertia are projected into 2D and evaluated at matched radius, they overestimate ellipticity by 56\% (compared to observable strong lensing) and 430\% (compared to observable weak lensing). Therefore, we propose matchable quantities and test them using observations of eight relaxed clusters from the {\emph Hubble Space Telescope} and {\emph Chandra X-Ray Observatory}.…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
