# An X-ray and Optical Study of Matter Distribution in the Galaxy Cluster A 2319

## 1 Introduction

Detailed studies of the matter distribution in clusters of galaxies provide important clues on the growth of condensations and the evolution of the Universe. From X-ray observations it is possible to derive both the gas and the total binding mass distributions, under the assumption of hydrostatic equilibrium. Optical data, i.e. galaxy photometry and redshifts, combined with X-ray observations allow to check the validity of the hydrostatic equilibrium assumption and derive the spatial distribution of the dark matter. Most analyses in the past (Jones and Forman (1984); Cowie, Henriksen and Mushotzky (1987); Hughes, Gorenstein and Fabricant (1988); Hughes (1989); Gerbal et al. (1992); Briel, Henry and Böhringer 1992 ; Durret et al. (1994); David, Jones and Forman (1995); Cirimele, Nesci and Trèvese (1997)) were based on the further simplifying assumption that the gas is isothermal, at least within about 1 h$`{}_{}{}^{1}{}_{50}{}^{}`$ Mpc, possibly with the exclusion of a central cooling flow region (see e.g. Fabian, Nulsen and Canizares (1984); White, Jones and Forman (1997)). This leads to the $`\beta `$-model (Cavaliere and Fusco-Femiano (1976)) which predicts that the dynamical parameter $`\beta _{spec}\frac{\mu m_p\sigma _r^2}{kT}`$, representing the ratio between the energy per unit mass of galaxies and gas, equals the morphological parameter $`\beta _{fit}`$ defined by the fit of the gas density distribution with a King profile. The observations show that on average $`\beta _{fit}<\beta _{spec}`$ (Sarazin (1986); Evrard (1990)). However Bahcall and Lubin (1994) ascribed this ”$`\beta `$-discrepancy” to the underestimate of the slope of the galaxy density profile, appearing in the hydrostatic equilibrium equation, rather than to a failure of the model. In their X-ray–Optical analysis of a sample of Abell clusters, Cirimele, Nesci, & Trèvese (1997) (CNT) found that $`\mathrm{log}\rho _{gas}=\beta _{XO}\mathrm{log}\rho _{gal}+C`$ in a wide range of densities, as predicted by the hydrostatic isothermal equilibrium. This allows to define, for each cluster, a morphological parameter $`\beta _{XO}`$, independent of any analytical representation of $`\rho _{gas}`$ and $`\rho _{gal}`$. A comparison of $`\beta _{XO}`$ with $`\beta _{spec}`$ supports the explanation of the ”$`\beta `$-discrepancy” suggested by Bahcall and Lubin (1994) and the consistency of the ”$`\beta `$-model”, at least for several galaxy clusters of regular and relaxed appearance. The gas and binding mass distributions thus derived provide a typical value of the baryon fraction $`f_B`$, of the order of 0.2 within 1-2 h$`{}_{}{}^{1}{}_{50}{}^{}`$ Mpc (Cirimele, Nesci and Trèvese (1997); Evrard (1997); Ettori & Fabian (1999),Mohr et al., 1999). This relatively high value, compared with the results of primordial nucleosynthesis calculation (Walker et al. (1991); Olive, Steigman (1995) ,but see Burles and Tytler (1998)) implies that either the cosmological parameter is smaller than unity (White et al. (1993)), or $`f_B`$ is not representative of the cosmic value, and galaxy clusters are surrounded by extended halos of non baryonic dark matter (White and Fabian (1995)). The latter hypothesis raises the problem of understanding the mechanisms of a large scale baryonic segregation.

However, recently ASCA data have provided direct evidences of gas temperature gradients in the outer regions of several galaxy clusters (Arnaud (1994); Markevitch et al. (1994, 1996); Ikebe et al. (1996); Markevitch (1996); Markevitch et al. (1998)). According to Markevitch (1996), in the outer regions some clusters show a polytropic index even greater than 5/3, which is inconsistent with the hydrostatic equilibrium conditions. According to Ettori & Fabian (1998), a systematic difference between the electron and the proton temperatures cannot explain the inconsistency, and a real departure from hydrostatic equilibrium must happen in some cases. Even disregarding these extreme cases, once the temperature profiles are available it is worth: i) to check how far from the cluster center the hydrostatic condition can be assumed, specially if strong temperature gradients are present; ii) to estimate the correction to the total mass and baryon fraction implied by non-isothermality. Moreover some clusters show an anomalously high value of the dynamical parameter $`\beta _{spec}`$, possibly suggesting deviations from the equilibrium conditions and requiring a detailed analysis of the velocity distribution. The galaxy cluster A 2319 has been extensively studied in the past, so that many galaxy redshifts are available, ROSAT PSPC images can be retrieved from the public archive and a temperature profile based on ASCA data has been published by Markevitch (1996) (see however Molendi (1998), Molendi et al. (1999)).

In the present work we combine these data with the F band photometry of galaxies (Trèvese et al. (1992)), and compare the gas and galaxy density distributions. We generalize the definition of the morphological parameter $`\beta _{XO}`$ to verify the hydrostatic equilibrium conditions. The analysis suggests the consistency of the hydrostatic model in the presence of a temperature gradient. Thus we discuss the mass distribution as obtained by adopting a polytropic model or a simple parabolic representation of the temperature profile, and we compare the resulting baryon fraction with the limits provided by the standard nucleosynthesis calculations, then deriving constraints on the large scale baryon segregation and the cosmological parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_o`$.

We use $`H_o=50h_{50}kms^1Mpc^1`$.

## 2 The galaxy distribution

The galaxy cluster A 2319 has been studied by several authors in the radio , optical and X-ray bands. It is classified as a BM type II-III and as a richness 1, RS-type cD cluster (see Abell, Corwin and Olowin (1989)). The galaxy velocity dispersion $`\sigma `$1800 km s<sup>-1</sup> is particularly high. However, Faber and Dressler (1977), on the basis of 31 galaxy spectra already suggested that A 2319 is actually two clusters nearly superimposed along the line of sight: the main component A 2319 A with an average redshift $`\overline{v}_A`$=15882 and a velocity dispersion $`\sigma _A=873_{148}^{+131}`$ km s<sup>-1</sup> and the second component A 2319 B, located about $`8^{}`$ NW with $`\overline{v}_B`$=19074 and $`\sigma _B=573_{149}^{+120}`$ km s<sup>-1</sup>.

More recently Oegerle, Hill, and Fitchett (1995)(OHF) measured several new redshifts, applied the ”$`\delta `$-test”of Dressler and Shectman (1988) to locate the A and B components, and assigned the 139 galaxies of known redshift to the component A and B (or to the background/foreground) on the basis of their position and redshift, empirically trying to keep gaussian the velocity distribution of A 2319 B. They found N<sub>A</sub>=100 and N<sub>B</sub>=28 galaxies in the two components with $`\overline{v}_A`$=15727 km s<sup>-1</sup>, $`\sigma _A`$=1324 km s<sup>-1</sup> $`\overline{v}_B`$=18636 km s<sup>-1</sup> $`\sigma _B`$=742 km s<sup>-1</sup> respectively.

To assign individual galaxies to the A and B components we adopted the results of OHF to obtained a first order estimate of the cluster positions, average radial velocities $`\overline{v}^{(i)}`$, and velocity dispersions $`\sigma _{(i)}`$, and we computed the relevant core radii $`R_c^{(i)}`$ of the two components, where i=A,B identifies the component. Then we assumed the following probability distributions of galaxies respect to radial velocities v and projected distance b from the relevant cluster center:

$`P_i(b,v)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N_i}{N_A+N_B}}f_i(b)g_i(v)`$ (1)   
$`f_i(b)`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi R_c^{(i)^2}}{1\beta _{(i)}}}\left(\left[1+\left({\displaystyle \frac{b_{max}^{(i)}}{R_c^{(i)}}}\right)^2\right]^{(1\beta _{(i)})}1\right)\right\}^1\left[1+\left({\displaystyle \frac{b}{R_c^{(i)}}}\right)^2\right]^{\beta _{(i)}}`$   
$`g_i(v)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi \sigma _{(i)}^2}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(v\overline{v}_{(i)})^2}{2\sigma _{(i)}^2}}\right]`$   
where $`N_{(i)}`$ the first order estimate of the number of galaxies of the relevant component, and the $`b_{max}^{(i)}`$ is the radius of the circle containing the $`N_i`$ observed galaxies. This simple parameterization is independent of any assumption about the distance along the line of sight of the two clusters and their relative motion. Each galaxy is then assigned to the component of higher probability. The 99% confidence volumes are also considered for each cluster, and galaxies outside these volumes are assigned to the background or foreground. We obtain the new values N<sub>A</sub>=96 and N<sub>B</sub>=24 $`\overline{v}_A=15891kms^1`$, $`\sigma _A=1235\pm 90kms^1`$, $`\overline{v}_B=18859kms^1`$, $`\sigma _B=655\pm 97kms^1`$. Since the resulting velocity distributions of the two components do not show strong deviation from gaussian distributions, the reported uncertainties $`\sigma _{\sigma _A}`$ and $`\sigma _{\sigma _B}`$, on $`\sigma _A`$ and $`\sigma _B`$ respectively, have been computed as $`\sigma _{\sigma _i}^2=\sigma _{(i)}^2/[2(N_{(i)}1)]`$ i=A,B. The effect of membership uncertainty can be evaluated as follows. Given a sample of N galaxies with average velocity $`\overline{v}`$ and velocity dispersion $`\sigma `$, the addition of k galaxies with velocity $`v=\overline{v}+\delta `$ produces a new velocity dispersion $`\sigma ^2=(N\sigma ^2+k\delta ^2)/(N+k1)`$. Therefore, to increase $`\sigma _A`$ by more than $`2\sigma _{\sigma _A}`$ it is necessary to include in the sample A more than k=2 galaxies with a recession velocity exceeding $`\overline{v}_B+2\sigma _B\overline{v}_A+3.46\sigma _A`$ .

Although on the sole basis of the ”$`\delta `$ test” there is a 10% probability that A2319B is not a physical association, the strong clustering of large $`\delta `$ values in a region (see OHF fig.5) corresponding to enhanced X-ray emission suggest that it is a physical entity. Moreover, the analysis of bound orbits of the two components A 2319 A and A 2319 B led Oegerle, Hill, and Fitchett (1995) to the conclusion that ”there is a reasonably high probability that these clusters are not bound and will never merge”. The latter conclusion is supported by the discussion of FGB who compare the X-ray images with simulations of cluster collisions (see section 3). The above considerations suggest and legitimate the assumption, adopted in the following, that the two clusters are separate entities.

We have added to the spectroscopic information the F band photometry of A 2319, obtained by Trèvese et al. (1992) from microdensitometric scans of a Palomar 48 inch Schmidt plates, as part of a systematic study of the morphology and luminosity functions of galaxy clusters (Trèvese, Cirimele and Flin (1992); Flin et al. (1995); Trèvese, Cirimele and Appodia (1996); Trèvese et al. (1997)). Due to the low galactic latitude (b$`13^{}`$) the field of A 2319 is very crowded and the automatic star/galaxy classification is difficult. Thus we have revised the classification and recovered some misclassified object.

To focus our attention on the main component A, we reduced the effect of the B component excluding from our sample all the galaxies classified as B (or background/foreground). We adopted a fixed center $`(\alpha =19^h21^m11.8^s,\delta =+43^o56^{}39^{\prime \prime }(J2000))`$, derived from the centroid of X-ray emission as computed in a small (2 arcmin) circle around the intensity peak. This point is identified with the center of a spherical structure which we assume to represent the A component. We chose a magnitude limit $`m_F=m_3+2`$=16.33 mag and the resulting fraction of galaxies without measured redshift is 0.23. Thus, the fraction of galaxies without measured redshift and belonging to the B component is of the order $`0.23N_B/(N_A+N_B)`$, i.e. 4%, and is not expected to affect significantly the galaxy density profile. We fitted with a maximum likelihood algorithm the unbinned galaxy distribution using both a King profile $`\sigma _{gal}(b)=\sigma _0(1+(b/r_c)^2)^\kappa +\sigma _b`$ and with a de Vaucouleurs profile $`\sigma _{gal}(b)=\sigma _0exp(7.67(b/r_v)^{\gamma _g})+\sigma _b`$, where the background counts $`\sigma _b`$, $`r_v`$, $`\gamma _g`$, $`r_c`$ and $`\beta `$ are free parameters, while $`\sigma _0`$ is determined by the normalization to the total number of observed galaxies and $`b`$ is the projected distance from the cluster center. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test has been applied in both cases and the results are reported in Table 1, where the errors reported represent one-sigma uncertainties derived from Monte Carlo simulations described in section 4, and $`P_{KS}(>D)`$ is the probability of the null hypothesis that deviations larger than D are produced by random noise.

The surface density and the fitting profiles are shown in Figure 1. In this case the King profile has a slightly higher probability and will be adopted in the following to derive the volume distribution by numerical inversion. However, the differences between the two fitting curves, specially for $`b>0.1h_{50}^1Mpc`$, cannot affect significantly the subsequent discussion of the hydrostatic equilibrium conditions.

To obtain the total luminosity of the cluster, $`L_{tot}(r)`$, we fitted with a Schechter (1976) function the unbinned luminosity distribution excluding the brightest member, using a maximum likelihood algorithm, adopting a constant $`\alpha =1.25`$ and $`M^{}`$ as a free parameter, as in Trèvese, Cirimele and Appodia (1996). This gives:

$$L_{tot}(r)=10^{0.4(M_F^{}+28.43)}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2+\alpha )4\pi }{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+\alpha ,\frac{L_{lim}}{L^{}})}_0^r\rho _{gal}(r^{})r^2𝑑r^{}$$
(2)   
where $`L_{tot}`$ is expressed in units of $`10^{13}L_{}`$, $`r`$ in $`kpc`$ and $`L_{lim}`$ is the limiting luminosity corresponding to the magnitude limit ($`M_F=21.56`$ mag) of the galaxy sample adopted to derive $`\rho _{gal}`$. The value of $`M^{}`$ changes by less than 1% considering a sample which includes the galaxies of A 2319 B. The galaxy mass $`M_{gal}(r)`$ is then obtained from the total luminosity assuming an average mass-to-light ratio $`M/L_R=3.32\pm 0.14M_{}/L_R`$ from van der Marel (1991), adopting $`FR`$ for bright ellipticals (see Lugger (1989)) and computing $`F_{}`$ from the relation V-F=0.40 (B-V) (Kron (1980)).

To estimate the virial mass we have evaluated the r.m.s. velocity dispersion $`\sigma _r`$ in four concentric rings each containing 1/4 of the galaxies of known redshift of A 2319 A. The four values are 1148 km s<sup>-1</sup>, 1415 km s<sup>-1</sup>, 1327 km s<sup>-1</sup>, 1193 km s<sup>-1</sup> with a r.m.s uncertainty of about 200 km s<sup>-1</sup>. Thus in the following we assume a constant dispersion, derived from the entire A 2319 A sample, $`\sigma _r=1235\pm 90`$km s<sup>-1</sup>

The resulting virial mass $`M_V=3\pi b_G\sigma _r^2/2G`$ is $`M_V=2.89\times 10^{15}h_{50}^1_{}`$, namely only 2% less than the value given by OHF, since the decrease of $`\sigma _r^2`$ is almost entirely compensated by a slight increase of the projected virial radius $`b_G=21/b^1`$ (Sarazin (1988)), which in our case is $`b_G=1.736h_{50}^1`$ Mpc.

## 3 The gas distribution

From the ROSAT public archive we extracted the available Position Sensitive Proportional Counter (PSPC) images corresponding to two observations of A 2319, on March 1991 and November 1992, which cover a 128x128 arcmin<sup>2</sup> field with pixel size of 15x15 arcsec<sup>2</sup> and an effective resolution of about $`25^{\prime \prime }`$ FWHM, in the energy band 0.5-2.0 keV. The exposure maps (Snowden et al. (1992); Plucinsky et al. (1993)), providing the effective exposure time of each pixel, are also available at the ROSAT public archive for each observation. We divided each image for the relevant exposure map and combined the two images with weights proportional to the maxima of the exposure map (1514.6 s and 3200.8 s respectively). The resulting image is shown in Figure 2.

Feretti, Giovannini & Böhringer (1997) (FGB) discuss the radio structure of A2319, which shows a powerful radio halo. They also analyze two substructural features in the X-rays, one corresponds to the E-W elongation in the very center of the A component, detected in the image obtained with the ROSAT High Resolution Imager, and is interpreted by FGB as an evidence of a recent merging process, likely providing the energy for the radio halo . This feature is confined within the inner 5 arcmin and does not affect the analysis of the hydrostatic equilibrium, particularly in the region where the temperature is not constant, i.e. for $`r>5`$ arcmin. In the outer region the cluster structure is rather regular, as for most cD clusters, except for an elongation in the direction of the B component. According to FGB, the B component is in a pre-merger state and has not yet proceed far enough to disturb the bulk of the gas, as can be argued from a comparison with the cluster collision simulation by Schimu93 (Schindler and Müller 1993).

Thus we analyzed A 2319 A as a separate entity, as discussed in section 2. As a first approximation we ignored the presence of the B component, we assumed spherical symmetry and, as in CNT, we derived the volume density $`\rho _{gas}(r)`$ of the gas by both numerical inversion of the projection equation, and by fitting the observed surface brightness with a ”$`\beta `$-model” (Cavaliere and Fusco-Femiano (1976)) $`I(b)=I_0[1+(b/r_c)^2]^{3\beta +1/2}+I_b`$, obtaining consistent results. The results are also consistent with FGB and with a more recent analysis of Mohr et al. (1999). Then we applied the same procedure after the exclusion of the northern half ($`\delta >43^o56^{}39^{\prime \prime }(J2000)`$) of the image, to eliminate the effect of the B component. We have evaluated the constant background value $`I_b=8.86\times 10^4`$ cts s<sup>-1</sup> arcmin<sup>-2</sup> in the region $`b>3h_{50}^1`$ Mpc. The fitting parameters are reported in Table 2, together with the central proton density $`n_o`$. The one-sigma uncertainties have been evaluated by Monte Carlo simulations, described in section 4. The central proton density is obtained from the relation:

$$I_0[1+(b/r_c)^2]^{3\beta +1/2}=EM_{\nu _{min}}^{\nu _{max}}\mathrm{\Lambda }(\nu ,T)𝑑\nu $$
(3)   
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\nu _{rest},T)`$ is the rest-frame cooling function corrected for the cosmological dimming factor $`(1+z)^4`$ and computed with the code of Mewe et al. (1986) with 0.3 solar abundance corresponding to $`\frac{n_e}{n_p}=1.2`$ , $`\nu _{min}`$ and $`\nu _{max}`$ define the observing band in the rest-frame and $`EM_0^{\mathrm{}}(\frac{n_e}{n_p})n_o^2(1+\frac{r^2}{r_c^2})^{\frac{3}{2}\beta }𝑑l`$ (see Sarazin (1988)), and correction for absorption with $`N_H=8.8910^{20}cm^2`$ (Stark et al., (1992)) has been applied to $`I_o`$.

Again our results are consistent with the analysis of FGB. In particular we also find a smaller value of the core radius $`r_c`$ of the A component when the northern half is excluded to reduce the effect the B component. The observed surface brightness profile and the fitting $`\beta `$-model are shown in Figure 3.

For consistency with the optical analysis, where we eliminated the galaxies assigned to the B component, in the following we adopt the fit obtained after the exclusion of the northern half of the cluster image. The corresponding gas density profile $`\rho _{gas}(r)=\rho _{gas}^o[1+(b/r_c)^2]^{3\beta /2}`$ is obtained assuming a constant temperature equal to the emission-weighted temperature $`T_X=10.0\pm 0.7keV`$ (Markevitch (1996)). The non-isothermality does not significantly affect the results (Markevitch et al. (1996)), due to the weak dependence of the emissivity on temperature, in the adopted band (see next section). The gas density profile has been computed also by a non parametric numerical deprojection as in CNT, obtaining consistent results.

## 4  Hydrostatic model, mass distributions and baryon fraction

As pointed out in CNT, it is possible to check the hydrostatic equilibrium condition in a non-parametric way, by a direct comparison of the density profiles of gas and galaxies. Assuming spherical symmetry, the equilibrium condition implies (Bahcall and Lubin (1994)):

$$\frac{\mu m_p\sigma _r^2}{kT}=\frac{d\mathrm{ln}\rho _{gas}(r)/d\mathrm{ln}r+d\mathrm{ln}T/d\mathrm{ln}r}{d\mathrm{ln}\rho _{gal}(r)/d\mathrm{ln}r+d\mathrm{ln}\sigma _r^2/d\mathrm{ln}r+2A}$$
(4)   
where $`\sigma _r`$ is the radial galaxy velocity dispersion, $`A=1\left(\frac{\sigma _t}{\sigma _r}\right)^2`$ measures the anisotropy of the velocity distribution and $`\mu `$ is the average molecular weight which we assume equal to 0.58 (Edge and Stuart (1991)). For constant $`\sigma _r`$ and $`T`$, and $`A=0`$, this implies $`\rho _{gas}\rho _{gal}^\beta `$ where $`\beta _{spec}=\frac{\mu m_p\sigma _r^2}{kT}`$ is a constant representing the ratio between the energy per unit mass in the galaxies and the gas respectively (Cavaliere and Fusco-Femiano (1976)). In this case it is possible to define the morphological parameter $`\beta _{XO}d\mathrm{ln}\rho _{gas}(r)/d\mathrm{ln}\rho _{gal}`$ to be compared with $`\beta _{spec}`$ which is obtained from the spectroscopic observation of galaxies and the gas temperature derived from X-ray spectra. As already discussed in CNT, the very existence of a wide range of densities where $`\beta _{XO}`$ is constant supports, in many cases, the validity of the isothermal model. However in the presence of a temperature gradient, as in the case of A 2319 A, both $`\beta _{spec}`$ and $`\beta _{XO}`$ depend on radius and the equilibrium equation reads:

$$\beta _{spec}=\beta _{XO}+\beta _{TO},$$
(5)   
where $`\beta _{TO}d\mathrm{ln}T/d\mathrm{ln}\rho _{gal}`$ and we still assume that the galaxy velocity distribution is isotropic and $`\sigma _r`$ is constant. To check the validity of equation 5 we used the temperatures obtained by Markevitch (1996). We computed $`\beta _{spec}`$, $`\beta _{XO}`$ and $`\beta _{TO}`$ at three projected radii of 4, 10 and 20 arcmin, corresponding to the boundaries of the four rings whose temperatures are given by Markevitch (1996). With the constant velocity dispersion $`\sigma _r=1235\pm 90`$km s<sup>-1</sup> derived in section 2, $`\beta _{spec}`$ ranges from 0.86 $`\pm `$ 0.15 in the first point, to 1.52$`\pm `$ 0.47 in the outermost point, i.e. the ratio between the energy per unit mass in gas and galaxies is close to unity within a central isothermal region of about 0.5 h$`{}_{}{}^{1}{}_{50}{}^{}`$ Mpc, while it decreases in the outer regions.

Figure 4 shows $`\mathrm{ln}\rho _{gas}`$, obtained by numerical deprojection, versus $`\mathrm{ln}\rho _{gal}`$. From the slope of the curve is possible to derive a value of $`\beta _{XO}(r)`$ at each radius.

The values of $`\beta _{XO}(r)`$ range from $`0.59\pm 0.06`$ in the first ring, to $`0.64\pm 0.06`$ in the outermost ring. The one-sigma uncertainties are evaluated from Monte Carlo simulations described below. We also computed $`\beta _{TO}(r)`$, which is close to zero in the cluster center and increases up to 0.58$`\pm 0.44`$ at r$``$1 h$`{}_{}{}^{1}{}_{50}{}^{}`$ Mpc. The one-sigma uncertainties are derived from errors on the temperature values reported in Figure 2 of Markevitch (1996). Figure 5 shows $`\beta _{spec}(r)`$ as a function of the RHS of equation 5, ($`\beta _{XO}+\beta _{TO}`$).

We stress that the relation between the two quantities on the x and y axes is not automatically implied by their definition, since the galaxy density $`\rho _{gal}(r)`$ only appears in the RHS and is observationally independent of the quantities in the LHS.

The value of $`\beta _{spec}(r)`$ is slightly larger than $`\beta _{XO}+\beta _{TO}`$. This could indicate that $`\sigma `$ is still slightly overestimated due to the presence of the background component A 2319 B. However the intrinsic statistical uncertainty does not allow this level of accuracy. Furthermore, even small deviation from the spherical symmetry, or from isotropy of the velocity distribution, could have comparable effects.

All we can safely say is that there is an increase of $`\beta _{spec}`$ versus ($`\beta _{XO}+\beta _{TO}`$), which is consistent with a straight line of unit slope. Thus, within the present uncertainties the data are consistent with equation 5, namely with validity of the hydrostatic equilibrium, also in the outer region of the cluster where the temperature declines.

The accuracy of this type of check, as applied to a single cluster, is limited by various factors. Although future X-ray data will provide much higher signal-to-noise, the uncertainty on galaxy density profile is intrinsically limited by Poisson noise on galaxy counts. Moreover subclustering and unknowable deviations from spherical symmetry will always produce an uncertainty on the galaxy density deprojection.

Nevertheless, the systematic application of the method described, to all the cluster with measured temperature distribution (Markevitch et al. (1998)) will likely provide statistical indication on the validity of, or the deviation from, the equilibrium conditions in the outer parts of galaxy clusters.

Assuming that our results indicate the validity of hydrostatic equilibrium, we can derive the distribution of the total binding mass $`M_T(r)`$ of A2319A:

$$M_{tot}(r)=\frac{kT}{\mu m_pG}\left(\frac{d\mathrm{ln}\rho _{gas}(r)}{d\mathrm{ln}r}+\frac{d\mathrm{ln}T}{d\mathrm{ln}r}\right)r$$
(6)   
The slopes of the temperature profiles are crucial in establishing whether the non-isothermality causes an increase or decrease of the mass estimate, with respect to the isothermal $`\beta `$-model.

In fact, from equation 6, indicating with $`M_{tot}^{isot}(r)`$ the mass derived by an isothermal $`\beta `$-model with temperature $`T_{isot}`$ the fractional change in the mass estimate is:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(r)\frac{M_{tot}(r)M_{tot}^{isot}(r)}{M_{tot}^{isot}(r)}=\frac{T(r)T_{isot}}{T_{isot}}+\frac{T(r)}{T_{isot}}\frac{d\mathrm{ln}T}{d\mathrm{ln}\rho _{gas}}$$
(7)   
where the two terms on the r.h.s. of the equation can be of the same order.

It is customary to adopt a polytropic gas distributions as the simplest analytic representation of a non-isothermal gas in hydrostatic equilibrium. In this case $`T\rho _{gas}^{\gamma 1}`$, with the polytropic index $`\gamma `$ ranging from unity to 5/3 for an isothermal or adiabatic equilibrium respectively. The polytropic model implies (Cowie, Henriksen and Mushotzky (1987)):

$`\rho _{gas}(r)=\rho _{gas}^o[1+(r/r_c)^2]^\delta ,T(r)=T_o[1+(r/r_c)^2]^\alpha ,`$ (8)   
$`\delta ={\displaystyle \frac{3\beta /2}{1+\eta (\gamma 1)/2}},\alpha =\delta (\gamma 1)`$   
where $`\eta d\mathrm{ln}ϵ/d\mathrm{ln}T`$ and $`ϵ`$ is the emissivity of the gas, integrated in the adopted band. We can fit the temperature profile of A 2319 provided by Markevitch (1996), neglecting the effect of projection and adopting $`\eta 0.2`$, to determine the polytropic index $`\gamma `$. Notice that, due to small value of $`\eta `$, the result is not significantly different if we simply assume $`\delta =3\beta /2`$ and $`\eta =0`$ in the above expressions. The slope $`\left|dT/dr\right|`$ of the temperature profile reaches a maximum at $`r/r_c=\alpha +\sqrt{\alpha ^2+1}`$ and progressively decreases in the outer regions.

As a result, for $`T_{isot}=T_o`$, the quantity $`\mathrm{\Delta }(r)`$ is positive only for $`r/r_c<x_\gamma \sqrt{\gamma ^{1/\alpha }1}`$. This limit decreases for increasing $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$, e.g. $`x_\gamma 0.78`$ for $`\beta =1`$, $`\gamma =5/3`$ and $`\eta =0.2`$, while $`x_\gamma =\sqrt{e^21}2.53`$ for $`\beta =1/3`$ and $`\gamma =1`$. We stress that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(r)`$ is always negative at large radii, and this implies an enhancement of the “baryon catastrophe”. The best fit value is $`\gamma =1.091`$ and the resulting temperature profile is shown in Figure 6.

The quality of the fit is quite poor, and there is a probability of 91% that the deviations are non random. The increment of the mass in the central region, with respect to isothermal model, and the enhancement of the baryonic catastrophe obtained with a polytropic model are a mere artifact of the particular shape of the polytropic temperature profile, which is not a good representation of the data, at least in the case of A 2319 A.

More specifically, the data seem to indicate an almost isothermal central region and an increasing slope of the temperature profile for increasing radius.

This behavior is consistent with a change of the polytropic index with radius from an isothermal ($`\gamma =1`$) towards an adiabatic ($`\gamma =5/3`$) hydrostatic equilibrium (see Sarazin (1988)). A fit with the law $`T(r)=T_oar^2`$ is shown in Figure 6. In this case the probability is P($`>\chi ^2`$)=0.99.

Figure 7 shows $`M_{tot}^{isot}(r)`$, corresponding to the isothermal model, and $`M_{tot}(r)`$ as obtained with both the polytropic model and the quadratic interpolation of the temperature profile. On the basis of the above discussion we assume the latter as the best representation of the mass distribution.

In the same figure, galaxy and gas masses, $`M_{gal}(r)`$ and $`M_{gas}(r)`$ are also shown. The latter is computed both in the isothermal approximation and using the temperature profile: the result is only weakly dependent on the temperature changes.

$`M_{gas}(r)`$ is steeper than $`M_{gal}(r)`$ and $`M_{tot}(r)`$, which have more similar slopes. As a consequence the gas mass dominates over the galaxy mass at large radii. These results are consistent with previous findings of CNT.

The statistical uncertainties have been evaluated by Monte Carlo simulations of the entire reduction process. For the X-ray data, starting from a ”$`\beta `$-model” corresponding to the fitting parameters, we generated 500 random sets representing the photon counts in each radial ring with Poisson noise, and we extracted 500 random background values, with a standard deviation estimated from intensity fluctuation of the surface brightness outside $`3h_{50}^1`$ Mpc where the background value has been measured. Then we fitted with a ”$`\beta `$-model” each intensity profile, obtaining the statistical distribution of the fitting parameters. Finally we extracted 500 values of the temperature in each of the four rings corresponding to the data of Markevitch (1996), with the relevant standard deviations, and we fitted the temperature profile with a parabolic law. Then we applied to the simulated data the same algorithms applied to real data for the evaluation of the mass profiles. This procedure allows to define a one-sigma confidence interval for the gas mass $`M_{gas}`$ and for the total mass $`M_{tot}`$ as a function of radius. A similar procedure was adopted for the galaxy distribution. Then we extracted, for each cluster simulation, a random value of $`M/L_F_{}`$ from a gaussian distribution with a mean value and a standard deviation corresponding obtained from van der Marel (1991). The one-sigma confidence intervals are reported as shaded areas in Figure 7.

We define the luminous mass as the sum of the gas mass and the galaxy mass as deduced using an average stellar mass-to-light ratio (see section 2): $`M_{lum}=M_{gas}+M_{gal}`$. The above results imply that the dark matter $`M_{dark}=M_{tot}M_{lum}`$ has a distribution similar to $`M_{gal}(r)`$. This provides a constraint on the mechanism of galaxy and cluster formation.

Since an unknown fraction of the dark matter is baryonic, $`M_{lum}/M_{tot}`$ represents a lower limit on the baryon fraction $`f_b`$. Figure 8 shows this lower limit as a function of radius, as computed in the isothermal approximation and taking into account the temperature gradient by the polytropic model and by the quadratic interpolation. We can compare our estimate of $`f_b`$ with the results of Mohr et al. (1999) who gives the $`f_b`$ values $`f_b=0.213\pm 0.004`$ and $`f_b=0.297\pm 0.027`$, at $`1h_{50}^1`$ Mpc and at $`1.91h_{50}^1`$ Mpc respectively, the latter distance representing $`r_{500}`$, namely the radius within which the mean density is 500 times the critical density $`\rho _{crit}=3H_o^2/8\pi G`$. Our isothermal values $`f_b=0.180\pm 0.017`$ and $`f_b=0.252\pm 0.045`$ are slightly lower, because were derived by a fit of the southern part of the X-ray image, to exclude the effect of the B component.

At 2 $`h_{50}^1`$ Mpc $`f_b`$, as computed with the quadratic interpolation, becomes respectively 66 % and 56 % of the isothermal and polytropic values, thus mitigating the ”baryon catastrophe”.

Assuming $`f_b0.2`$ as typical of galaxy clusters, the residual discrepancy between $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b=f_b\mathrm{\Omega }_o`$ and the corresponding value derived from nucleosynthesis calculations $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b^{nucl}0.076\pm 0.004h_{50}^2`$ (Burles and Tytler (1998)), can be reconciled assuming $`\mathrm{\Omega }_o<\mathrm{\Omega }_b^{nucl}/f_b<\text{ }0.4`$.

## 5 Summary and Conclusions

We have performed a new analysis of the Abell cluster A 2319, and assigned the individual galaxies to the A 2319 A and A 2319 B components by an objective criterion taking into account both position and redshift. The resulting velocity dispersion of the A component is slightly smaller, but consistent with the previous determination of OHF.

We have obtained photographic F band photometry of the cluster galaxies, which allows us to construct the cluster luminosity function and galaxy density profile.

We have analyzed archival ROSAT PSPC images separating the A component on the basis of the optical information, and we have obtained a gas density profile of the A component. The result is consistent with recent studies of Feretti, Giovannini and Böhringer (1997), Mohr et al. (1999).

Since, according to Markevitch (1996), A 2319 A shows a radial gas temperature decrease, we have generalized the method introduced by Cirimele, Nesci & Trèvese (1997) CNT, in order to check the validity of the hydrostatic equilibrium in the case of a non isothermal gas.

We have derived the total mass profile $`M_{tot}(r)`$ through the non isothermal hydrostatic equation adding new evidence in favor of the results of CNT that the total mass and the galaxy mass have similar radial distributions, more concentrated with respect to the gas component.

Polytropic models imply smaller masses at large radii, respect to the isothermal model, i.e. a higher value of the baryon fraction. Thus, the use of a polytropic model would enhance the baryon catastrophe.

However we have shown that the polytropic model is inconsistent with the observed temperature profile, at least in the specific case of A 2319 A. A parabolic representation of the temperature profile gives, instead, a total mass larger than computed in the isothermal approximation, mitigating the baryon catastrophe.

In any case, $`f_b`$ is larger than $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b^{nucl}0.076\pm 0.004h_{50}^2`$, resulting from nucleosynthesis calculations and recent measures of the deuterium to hydrogen ratio (D/H), in high resolution studies of the $`Ly\alpha `$ forest (Burles and Tytler (1998)). Under the assumption that the value of $`f_b0.2`$, found for A 2319 A, which is consistent with other estimates (Evrard (1997), CNT, Ettori & Fabian (1999), Mohr et al., 1999) is typical of galaxy clusters, it is possible to derive the following conclusions. If the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_o=1`$ assumption is kept, then the baryonic fraction within galaxy clusters is not representative of the cosmic value and clusters must be surrounded by dark matter halos (White and Fabian (1995)). If, on the other hand, beyond $`r2h_{50}^1`$ Mpc the material has not yet fallen into the cluster, as infall models indicate, then $`f_b`$ is representative of the cosmic value and the cosmological parameter must be $`\mathrm{\Omega }_o=\mathrm{\Omega }_b^{nucl}/f_b`$ (White et al. (1993) and refs. therein), i.e. in our case $`\mathrm{\Omega }_o<\text{ }0.4`$, where the uncertainty on the latter value depends on the intrinsic spread of the baryon fraction, in the presently observable volumes around galaxy clusters.

Recently Markevitch et al. (1998) have collected temperature profiles for 30 galaxy clusters based on ASCA observations. However, only a minority of clusters is regular enough, specially in the outer regions, to allow an X-ray and optical check of the equilibrium conditions as suggested in the present paper. This limits the accuracy and the reliability of a “measure” of the cosmological parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_o`$, based on a comparison between the baryon fraction $`f_b`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b^{nucl}`$. Moreover future cosmic microwave background experiments are expected to provide tighter constraints on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_o`$ (Mandolesi et al. (1995)) as compared with the results derived from the analysis of the matter distribution in galaxy clusters.

On the basis of this new estimate of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_o`$, once the equilibrium conditions of the non-isothermal regions are verified by the systematic application of the analysis outlined in the present paper , it will be possible to extend the (otherwise questionable) estimates of the general distribution of luminous and dark matter based on the hydrostatic model, to the outer regions of galaxy clusters of a statistical sample, thus providing new constraints for the models of cluster formation an the physics of large scale baryon segregation.

We are grateful to the anonymous referee and to the editor for comments and suggestions. This work has been partly supported by Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica (MURST).