# Baryon Distribution in Galaxy Clusters as a Result of Sedimentation of Helium Nuclei

## 1. Introduction

An accurate determination of the total gravitating mass of galaxy clusters is crucial for the ‘direct’ measurements of the cosmic mass density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ through the mass-to-light technique (e.g. Bahcall, Lubin & Dorman 1995) and the baryon fraction method (e.g. White et al. 1993). The latter has received much attention in recent years because of the rapid progress in X-ray astronomy and particularly the large spatial extension of the hot and diffuse X-ray emitting gas in clusters. In the conventional treatment, the volume-averaged baryon fraction $`f_b`$, defined as the ratio of the gas mass $`M_{\mathrm{gas}}`$ to the total mass $`M_{\mathrm{tot}}`$ of a cluster, is obtained by assuming a thermal bremsstrahlung emission and hydrostatic equilibrium for the intracluster gas. While such an exercise has been done for almost every X-ray selected cluster with known temperature, the resultant baryon fractions show rather a large dispersion among different clusters. In particular, $`f_b`$ appears to be a monotonically increasing function of cluster radius, and thereby cannot, in principle, be used for the determination of the cosmic density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ since the asymptotic form of $`f_b`$ at large radii does not approach a universal value (White & Fabian 1995; David et al. 1995; Markevitch & Vikhlinin 1997a,b; White et al. 1997; Ettori & Fabian 1999; Nevalainen et al. 1999; Markevitch et al. 1999; Wu & Xue 1999). This leads to an uncomfortable situation that a greater fraction of dark matter is distributed at small scales than at large scales. It is commonly believed that these puzzles have arisen from our poor understanding of the local dynamics inside clusters such as cooling/non-cooling flows, substructures, mergers, etc. Yet, a satisfactory explanation has not been achieved.

The conventional cluster mass estimate from X-ray measurement of intracluster gas assumes a constant mean molecular weight $`\mu `$. That is, all the chemical elements of the X-ray emitting gas obey exactly the same spatial distribution. Under this assumption, the total mass of the cluster $`M_{\mathrm{tot}}\mu ^1`$, while the mass in gas $`M_{\mathrm{gas}}\mu `$. Consequently, the cluster baryon fraction $`f_b(M_{\mathrm{gas}}/M_{\mathrm{tot}})`$ depends sensitively on the value of $`\mu `$. It appears that our estimates of total mass and baryon fraction of a cluster would be seriously affected if its chemical elements do not share the same spatial distribution.

The Boltzmann distribution of particles in a gravitational field $`\varphi `$ follows $`n\mathrm{exp}(m\varphi /kT)`$, where $`n`$ and $`m`$ are the number density and the individual mass of the particles, respectively. The heavier a particle is, the slower its thermal motion will be. So, heavy ions in the intracluster gas will have a tendency to drift toward the cluster center. As a consequence of this sedimentation of heavy ions toward the central region, given that the cluster has survived for a sufficiently long time in the Universe, $`\mu `$ will no longer be a constant in the cluster. If the intracluster gas is entirely composed of hydrogen and helium with their primordial abundances, the value of $`\mu `$ will be higher at cluster center while asymptotically reaches 0.5 at large radii for a fully ionized hydrogen gas.

The chemically inhomogeneous distribution in galaxy clusters was initiated by Fabian & Pringle (1977), who studied the sedimentation of iron nuclei. They found that the iron nuclei in the X-ray gas may settle into the cluster core within a Hubble time. Taking into account the collisions of iron nuclei with helium nuclei, Rephaeli (1978) argued that a much longer sedimentation time than the Hubble time was required so that the iron nuclei would not have enough time to sediment into the core. In this Letter we wish to focus on helium nuclei instead of iron nuclei. Since the drift velocity $`v_DAZ^2`$ (e.g. Fabian & Pringle 1977), where $`A`$ and $`Z`$ are the atomic weight and the charge of the ion, respectively, the helium nuclei will settle much faster than the iron nuclei, and thus the sedimentation may eventually take place. Indeed, Abramopoulos, Chana & Ku (1981) have calculated the equilibrium distribution of the elements in the Coma cluster, assuming an analytic King potential, and found that helium and other heavy elements are strongly concentrated to the cluster core. In particular, Gilfanov & Sunyaev (1984) have demonstrated that the diffusion of elements in the X-ray gas may significantly enhance the deuterium, helium, and lithium abundances in the core regions of rich clusters of galaxies. For simplicity, we assume that the intracluster gas consists of hydrogen and helium, and then demonstrate their equilibrium distributions in the gravitational potential characterized by the universal density profile (Navarro, Frenk & White 1995, 1997; hereafter NFW). As will be shown, under the scenario of helium sedimentation, the baryonic matter in clusters can be more centrally distributed than the dark matter, in contradiction to what is commonly believed. This may open a possibility to solve the puzzle for an increasing baryon fraction with cluster radius.

## 2. Sedimentation of helium nuclei in galaxy clusters

Our working model is based on the assumption that the intracluster gas composed of hydrogen and helium is in hydrostatic equilibrium at a temperature $`T`$ with the underlying gravitational potential. This can be justified by a simple estimate of their relaxation time $`t_{\mathrm{eq}}`$ (Spitzer 1978)

$`t_{\mathrm{eq}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3m_pm_\alpha k^{3/2}}{8(2\pi )^{1/2}n_pZ_p^2Z_\alpha ^2e^4\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{T}{m_p}}+{\displaystyle \frac{T}{m_\alpha }}\right)^{3/2}`$ (1)   
$`=`$ $`6\times 10^6\mathrm{yr}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n_p}{10^3\mathrm{cm}^3}}\right)^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{T}{10^8\mathrm{K}}}\right)^{3/2},`$   
where $`m_p`$, $`m_\alpha `$, $`Z_p`$, and $`Z_\alpha `$ are the masses and the charges of proton and helium nucleus, respectively. $`n_p`$ is the proton number density, and the Coulomb logarithm is taken to be $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda }40`$. Obviously, $`t_{\mathrm{eq}}`$ is much shorter than the present age of the Universe, and hence, the protons and the helium nuclei are readily in hydrostatic equilibrium at the same temperature.

According to the Boltzmann distribution of particles in a gravitational field, heavy particles tend to be more centrally distributed in galaxy clusters than light particles. Therefore, with respect to protons, helium nuclei will tend to drift toward the cluster center. An immediate question is: Is the drift velocity sufficiently large for the helium nuclei to have settled into the cluster core within the Hubble time ? The drift velocity $`v_D`$ of helium nuclei can be estimated through (Fabian & Pringle 1977)

$`v_D`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3A_\alpha m_p^{1/2}g(2kT)^{3/2}}{16\pi ^{1/2}Z_\alpha ^2e^4n_p\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda }}}`$ (2)   
$`=`$ $`8.8\times 10^6\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{s}\left({\displaystyle \frac{g}{3\times 10^8\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}^2}}\right)`$   
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{n_p}{10^3\mathrm{cm}^3}}\right)^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{T}{10^8\mathrm{K}}}\right)^{3/2},`$   
where $`g`$ is the gravitational acceleration. Eq.(2) indicates that within the Hubble time the helium nuclei can drift a distance

$$r_D=1.8\mathrm{Mpc}(\frac{g}{3\times 10^8\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}^2})(\frac{n_p}{10^3\mathrm{cm}^3})^1(\frac{T}{10^8\mathrm{K}})^{3/2}h_{50}^1,$$
(3)   
which is indeed comparable to cluster scales. Moreover, as $`r_Dgn_p^1`$, the value of $`r_D`$ (and $`v_D`$) increases rapidly with cluster radius $`r`$. Therefore, Eq.(3) suggests that the majority of the helium nuclei have probably sedimented into the cluster core within the Hubble time. Note that, due to the requirement of electrical neutrality, the electrons of the same charge will simultaneously sediment along with the helium nuclei. Here, we have not considered the effects of magnetic fields and subcluster mergers, which may somewhat retard the sedimentation of helium nuclei (Rephaeli 1978; Gilfanov & Sunyaev 1984).

The sedimentation of helium nuclei in galaxy clusters will lead to a dramatic change of baryonic matter distribution. Consequently, the determination of gas and total mass of a cluster will be affected through the mean molecular weight $`\mu `$. Another significant effect is that a sharp peak in the X-ray emission concentrated in cluster core will be expected due to the electron - helium nucleus radiation. This provides an alternative scenario for the ‘cooling flows’ seen in some clusters, for which a detailed investigation will be presented elsewhere. In the present Letter, we only focus on the dynamical effect. In the extreme case, the X-ray gas will be helium-dominated at cluster center, while hydrogen-dominated at large radii. The mean molecular weight $`\mu `$, which is commonly used as a constant, will be a decreasing function of the cluster radius. At cluster center, $`\mu `$ reaches $`4/3`$, the value for a fully ionized helium gas, while at large radii, $`\mu `$ approaches $`0.5`$, the value for a fully ionized hydrogen gas.

The conventional mass estimate from X-ray measurement assumes a constant mean molecular weight of $`\mu =0.59`$. As the total dynamical mass $`M_{\mathrm{tot}}`$ of a cluster is uniquely determined by the intracluster gas at large radii, the difference between $`M_{\mathrm{tot}}^c`$ (the value from the conventional method with $`\mu =0.59`$) and $`M_{\mathrm{tot}}`$ as a result of helium sedimentation is simply

$$M_{\mathrm{tot}}=\frac{0.59}{0.5}M_{\mathrm{tot}}^c=1.18M_{\mathrm{tot}}^c.$$
(4)   
This indicates that the conventional method using X-ray measurement of intracluster gas, together with a constant mean molecular weight, may have underestimated the total cluster mass by $`20\%`$, which in turn, results in an overestimate of the total baryon fraction by the same percentage. While the effect of the helium concentration toward cluster center can alter the gas distribution, the total mass in gas of the whole cluster remains unaffected because of the mass conservation.

## 3. Gas distribution under the NFW potential

We now demonstrate how hydrogen and helium are distributed in clusters described by the NFW profile

$$\rho =\frac{\rho _s}{(r/r_s)(1+r/r_s)^2}.$$
(5)   
As has been shown by Makino et al. (1998), such a potential results in an analytic form of gas number density:

$$n_{\mathrm{gas}}(x)=n_{\mathrm{gas}}(0)e^{\eta _{\mathrm{gas}}}(1+x)^{\eta _{\mathrm{gas}}/x},$$
(6)   
where $`x=r/r_s`$, and $`\eta _{\mathrm{gas}}=4\pi G\mu m_p\rho _sr_s^2/kT`$. Except for the small core radius, $`n_{\mathrm{gas}}(x)`$ is well approximated by the conventional $`\beta `$ model. If we neglect the interaction between protons and helium nuclei, then

$$n_p=n_{p0}e^\eta (1+x)^{\eta /x}$$
(7)   
$$n_\alpha =n_{\alpha 0}e^{8\eta /3}(1+x)^{8\eta /3x}$$
(8)   
where $`\eta =2\pi Gm_p\rho _sr_s^2/kT`$. Eqs (7) and (8) give $`n_\alpha n_p^{8/3}`$, which differs from the prediction by Gilfanov & Sunyaev (1984), $`n_\alpha n_p^6`$. The discrepancy is probably due to the fact that we have not accounted for the diffusion-induced electric fields.

We display in Fig.1 the radial distributions of protons and helium nuclei as well as their combined result for a typical nearby cluster with $`kT=7`$ keV, $`\eta _{\mathrm{gas}}=10`$ and $`r_s=1`$ Mpc (e.g. Ettori & Fabian 1999). It is apparent that the intracluster gas is dominated by different elements at different radius ranges: Within the core radius of a few tenth of $`r_s`$, the number density of helium is about four times larger than that of hydrogen because of the sedimentation of helium nuclei, giving rise to a significant excess of both mass in gas (see Fig.2) and X-ray emission in the central region of the cluster relative to the conventional model. Outside the core radius, helium profile shows a sharp drop and protons become the major component of the gas. It has been claimed that the total gas distribution can be approximated by the $`\beta `$ model (Makino et al. 1998). In fact, it is easy to show that both the narrow (helium) and extended (hydrogen) components of intracluster gas can be fitted by the $`\beta `$ models with different $`\beta `$ parameters. This provides a natural explanation for the double $`\beta `$ model advocated recently for the cooling flow clusters (e.g. Ikebe et al. 1996; Xu et al. 1998; Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard 1999; etc.). Also plotted in Fig.1 is the mean molecular weight calculated by $`\mu =(n_p+4n_\alpha )/(2n_p+3n_\alpha )`$. The constant mean molecular weight is now replaced by a decreasing function of radius. The asymptotic values of $`\mu `$ at small and large radii are $`4/3`$ and $`1/2`$, respectively.

We present in Fig.2 a comparison of gas masses determined by the invariant and variant mean molecular weights using the same cluster parameters as in Fig.1. To facilitate the comparison, we require that the total particles within $`r_{200}`$ remains unchanged, where $`r_{200}`$ is the radius within which the mean cluster mass density is 200 times the critical mass density of the Universe ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$). It appears that the sedimentation of helium nuclei leads to a remarkable concentration of baryonic matter towards cluster center, which challenges the conventional prediction that the baryon fraction increases monotonically with radius (Fig.3). This opens a possibility that the asymptotic baryon fraction at large radii may match the universal value defined by the Big Bang Nucleosysthesis, although a detailed investigation will still be needed.

## 4. Conclusions

Intracluster gas is mainly composed of hydrogen and helium. Their average abundances over a whole cluster should be of the cosmic mixture. However, their spatial distributions are entirely determined by the underlying gravitational potential of the cluster, and thus follow the Boltzmann distribution. On the other hand, clusters are believed to have formed at redshift $`z1`$. Therefore, the helium nuclei in clusters may have entirely or partially sedimented into the central cores of clusters today. This will lead to a significant change of the radial distributions of gas and baryon fraction. In the present Letter, we have only discussed the impact on the dynamical aspect of clusters. We will present elsewhere the effect on the cluster X-ray emission (e.g., cooling flows, the double $`\beta `$ model, etc.) as a result of the sedimentation of helium nuclei.

In the conventional treatment where the mean molecular weight is assumed to be constant, one may have underestimated the total dynamical mass of clusters by $`20\%`$. Using a more vigorous way in which the NFW profile is taken as the background gravitational field of clusters, we have studied the hydrogen and helium distributions. Indeed, the sedimentation of helium nuclei toward cluster centers has significantly changed the distribution of intracluster gas, with gas being more centrally concentrated than dark matter. This may open a possibility to resolve the puzzle that the baryon fraction increases monotonically with radius predicted by the conventional model. In a word, a number of cosmological applications of the dynamical properties of clusters will be affected by the sedimentation of helium nuclei if it has really taken place during the evolution of clusters, which includes the determination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ through $`f_b`$, the constraints on the cosmological models through X-ray luminosity - temperature relation, etc. A detailed theoretical study, together with the observational constraints, will be made in subsequent work.

We thank an anonymous referee for helpful comments. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation of China, under Grant No. 1972531.