Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: constraints on dark matter self - scattering cross - section can be obtained from astrophysical observations . upper limits on the cross - section per unit mass , @xmath6 have been computed , most famously , from the bullet cluster @xcite which is a plane of the sky collision between two galaxy clusters . the distribution of mass was measured using lensing , and that of the gas using observations of its x - ray emission . from the consistency of the mass - to - light ratios of the sub - cluster and the main cluster , which implies that very little dark matter was lost due to self - interaction during the merger , @xcite derive an upper limit on the cross - section , as @xmath7 @xmath3  g@xmath4 . based on the same argument , but using @xmath8-body simulations to model the collision , @xcite derive @xmath9 @xmath3  g@xmath4 . the authors note that because the separation on the sky between the centroid of the visible galaxies and dark matter is consistent with zero , the dark matter s interaction cross - section is @xmath10 @xmath3  g@xmath4 . relaxed clusters offer a different route to the upper limit on @xmath6 . random scattering between dark matter particles will tend to make the dense cluster core more spherical . @xcite used an elliptical core of ms2137 - 23 to place an upper limit of @xmath11 @xmath3  g@xmath4 . the value relies on the assumption that the measured ellipticity comes solely from the cluster core , instead of projection of mass from outside the core , and that there has been no recent merger activity in the cluster . this is the most stringent upper limit on @xmath6 from astrophysical observations .    clusters also present a potential opportunity to measure a lower limit on @xmath6 ( c.f . @xcite ) consider galaxies in the central regions of a cluster . these galaxies , usually ellipticals , consist of a compact stellar component and a more extended dark matter halo . as galaxies orbit the cluster centre , they move through the ambient dark matter halo of the cluster . the galaxies stellar matter and dark matter interact with the ambient dark matter differently . the motion of stars is subject to the gravitational field of the cluster and is unaffected by individual dark matter particles . the galaxies dark matter particles , on the other hand , can interact and scatter off the cluster s dark matter , thereby retarding the forward motion of galaxy s dark matter , making it lag behind the stellar component of the galaxy . if the scattering cross - section and the density of dark matter are large enough , this drag force will eventually result in a spatial separation between the stellar and dark matter components of the galaxy , which might be detectable . one can quantify the above scenario and estimate the separation as a function of relevant parameters . assume that the mass of the core of the cluster interior to the centre of the galaxy is @xmath12 , the dark matter and the stellar masses of the galaxy are @xmath13 and @xmath14 , respectively , and their average distance from the core are , @xmath15 . let the cross - sectional area of the galaxy s dark matter halo be @xmath16 . the force of gravity between the cluster core and the two components of the galaxy are , respectively , @xmath17 @xmath18.\label{newtdm}\ ] ] in the second equation gravity is partly counteracted , or screened by the self - interaction and scattering between the core s and galaxy s dark matter particles . the quantity @xmath19 is the covering factor , or the ` optical depth ' , and is assumed to be small . over time , the difference in the two accelerations amounts to a displacement , or separation @xmath20 if ( i ) the galaxy orbit were exactly radial , ( ii ) the cluster s dark matter space density scaled as @xmath21 , so @xmath22 were independent of radius at all epochs , ( iii ) the spatial distribution of stars and dark matter within the galaxy were point - like , and ( iv ) the expression in the square brackets in eq . [ newtdm ] were an appropriate way to quantify the retarding force , then the displacement would be exactly @xmath23 . of these , assumption ( iv ) is the least objectionable and will lead to a relatively small error . assumption ( iii ) , if it is not valid and dark matter halos are actually extended and overlapping , will tend to underestimate the force in equation  ( [ newtdm ] ) and hence the separation @xmath24 . then a larger cross - section would be required to produce a given displacement . hence a point - like mass distributions is conservative , if a lower limit on @xmath6 is being sought . assumptions ( i ) and ( ii ) , and the @xmath25 dependence of @xmath24 in eq . [ disp ] combined summarize the dynamical evolution of the cluster and the galaxy s orbit , and are not necessarily independent of each other . for a typical relaxed cluster the central density profile is not too far from @xmath21 , however , it is not expected to be exactly that , and would have most likely varied over time . consequently , the shape of the galaxy s orbit and how it evolved in the past is important , and would constitute the largest source of uncertainty in @xmath24 .    equation  [ disp ] can be rewritten as @xmath26 thus , for typical values of masses and distances , and assuming that the self - scattering cross - section is at most a few decades below the most stringent astrophysically obtained upper limit , the separation between the dark and visible components of galaxies will be or order of kpc , and hence potentially observable . our order - of - magnitude estimate can be compared to the results of @xmath8-body simulations carried out by @xcite , who modeled the bullet cluster . for the specific geometry and parameters of that cluster , and assuming @xmath27 @xmath3  gm@xmath4 , the separation between the stellar and dark matter in the sub - cluster can be read off from their figure  5 , as @xmath28  kpc . this is smaller than the separation we get for the parameters assumed in eq . [ dispunits ] . the main difference between the two estimates is due to the nature of the encounters in the two cases . in the bullet cluster , the two merging clusters made one passage past each other , so that the sub - cluster spent little time in the dense core region of the larger cluster . for the bullet cluster , the current separation of the sub - components is 720 kpc . a merger velocity of 4700 km  s@xmath4 ( following * ? ? ? * ) gives an encounter time of @xmath29  yrs . the velocity may well be significantly lower @xcite . but @xcite report that velocity of @xmath30 2800 km  s@xmath4 would not greatly change their results .    in the scenario we outlined above , the galaxies have been orbiting the inner cluster core for about a hubble time . also , @xmath31  kpc is a more appropriate value for the bullet cluster . taking these in to account , eq . [ dispunits ] gives @xmath32  kpc , comparable to their estimate of @xmath28  kpc . thus , the bullet cluster itself is a ( limited ) test of eq . [ dispunits ] . this comparison with the bullet cluster demonstrates that the longer duration of the encounter and smaller distances in our scenario give rise to a larger separation , more likely to be detected . abell 3827 is rather unique ; it is a nearby example of a multiple galactic cannibalism in progress , where the massive central ellipticals are closely surrounded by lensed images . the cluster s dynamical state , its proximity to us , and the fortuitous lensing configuration make it a prime candidate for detecting any displacement between the dark and visible matter due to non - zero dark matter scattering cross - section . in this paper we use strongly lensed images to reconstruct the mass distribution in the core of abell 3827 . as we will show , the core contains a galaxy whose visible and total mass are apparently separated by a few kpc . one possible interpretation of this result is the scenario described in the previous section . the cluster s lensing features were recently discovered by @xcite , whose findings we summarize below . abell 3827 ( @xmath33 ) appears to be in the last stages of merger @xcite . the outer cluster looks smooth and relaxed , and there are no significant secondary galaxy concentrations . the core of the cluster contains five ellipticals , called @xmath34 , within @xmath35  kpc of the centre , which appear to be in the process of spiraling inwards to form a single central galaxy . these ellipticals have probably undergone several orbits around the centre and have been tidally stripped , as evidenced by the extended @xmath36 diffuse light around the core . @xcite estimate the velocity dispersion of the cluster to be @xmath37 km  s@xmath4 , making abell 3827 a rather massive cluster . the relative radial velocities of @xmath38 are within 400 km  s@xmath4 of each other . the velocity of @xmath39 is about @xmath40 km  s@xmath4 compared to the systemic velocity . @xmath41 is probably not a part of the cluster core because its velocity is about @xmath42 km  s@xmath4 and its magnitude is @xmath43 fainter compared to that of the other four ellipticals . the cluster core lenses ( at least ) two background sources ; the main source , at @xmath44 , is extended and consists of at least three knots , @xmath45 . all three appear to be lensed into quads , but in one quad only three images are identified , and in another , only two . the second source , at @xmath46 , forms a single arc ; a counter arc may be lost in in the glare of the ellipticals . based on their spatial distribution , the images of the quads can be labelled by their time order , even though time delays have not been measured ( cf . accordingly , we will write @xmath47 to mean the @xmath48th arriving image of the @xmath49th knot within source @xmath50 . the images to the north - east of the cluster s centre of light are the 1st arriving ones ; the two sets of images in the west are ( clockwise ) the 3rd and 2nd arriving , and finally the images to the south - east are 4th arriving . the 2nd and 3rd arriving images are close together and form a nearly merging pairs across the critical curve . one can loosely divide the lens modeling methods into two categories , depending on the prior information they use . the fixed - form methods assume that mass follows light , and parametrize this relation with a handful of scalings . free - form methods use different types of priors ; most notably they do not require that mass trace light .    the authors of the discovery paper , @xcite carried out a lensing mass reconstruction using lenstool , a fixed - form method @xcite . the reconstruction reproduces the positions of only 5 of the 10 images well . the mean scatter between observed and recovered images is less than @xmath51 , while the astrometric uncertainty is @xmath52 . overall , the mass model has @xmath53 per degree of freedom , indicating that there is additional information in the astrometry . this is not surprising ; the dynamical state of the cluster core is probably unsettled , so it is quite possible that light does not follow mass . this , combined with fact that abell 3827 has a relatively large number of lensed images  ten  makes a free - form reconstruction a logical choice . we use a free - form reconstruction method , pixelens @xcite . the reconstruction is done in a circular window , which is divided into many equal - sized square pixels . the mass within each pixel is uniformly distributed but each pixel s mass value is allowed to vary independently of others . pixelens takes advantage of the fact that the lensing equation is linear in the mass pixels and in the coordinates of the source , and so it is relatively straightforward to come up with solutions that reproduce image positions exactly . in fact , since the unknowns outnumber the knowns ( coordinates of the lensed images ) by a large factor , an infinity of solutions are possible . pixelens generates a user - specified number of individual models , according to a weak and adjustable prior of which the ensemble average is considered in this paper . the prior and the model - sampling technique are motivated and explained in detail in the above papers , so here we just remark on two points that are important for the modelling . first , along with the image positions , a notional centre must be given . the default behaviour of pixelens is to require the local density everywhere to point at most @xmath54 away from the centre . in this work we increase the allowed angle ( called dgcone for `` density - gradient cone '' ) somewhat , typically to @xmath55 this allows more substructure , as appears to be demanded by the data . second , to account for the mass exterior to the modeling window , pixelens can add external shear of any magnitude . the shear axis can be within @xmath54 of a user - specified shear direction , denoted by shear . we typically set shear 60 on the basis of the axis of the diffuse light on arcminute scale around the cluster core which permits any shear orientation from @xmath56 to @xmath57 . the version of the lens - reconstruction software used is included as an online supplement . other examples of free - form techniques for cluster lenses are described in @xcite and @xcite .      to start with , we create a reference , or fiducial reconstruction . it uses all the 10 images identified by @xcite . as the centre we use the centre of light ( also the centre of their figure 2 frame ) , which is about @xmath58 west of n2 .    at the redshift of the cluster , @xmath59 , the critical surface mass density for sources at infinity is @xmath60 gm/@xmath3 , and @xmath61 corresponds to 1.93 kpc , for @xmath62 , @xmath63 , and @xmath64 . the diameter of the reconstruction window was set to 29 pixels , with the scale of @xmath65/pixel , so the angular and physical size of the window are about @xmath66 and 77 kpc , respectively . the fiducial pixelens reconstruction is shown in figure  [ kmass ] ; the mass density contours are spaced by @xmath67 . the map is an average of 500 individual models . ( the mass map is not sensitive to the number of individual models in the ensemble as long as it is greater than @xmath68 , the pixel size within the range @xmath69-@xmath58 per pixel , or the orientation of the reconstruction window with respect to the cardinal directions . ) figure  [ massenc ] is a plot of mass enclosed as a function of radius . our fiducial reconstruction is indistinguishable from the average of 18 reconstructions discussed in sections  [ effp ] and [ effs ] , and shown as the red thick line . the thin dotted lines are all the 18 models , and the errorbars represent their rms dispersion . the two blue solid flanking lines enclose 90% of the 500 individual mass models of the fiducial reconstruction . note that at large radii , i.e. outside the images , the enclosed mass begins to level off since the image positions do not require any mass at those radii . however , the 90% errorbars are fully consistent with the density profile continuing on with the same slope as at smaller radii . figure  [ karriv ] shows the arrival time contours of the @xmath70 and @xmath71 knots of source @xmath50 . from the contours , we see that the model indicates extra images appearing next to the first arriving image of @xmath70 . these may be spurious , or may actually be present , depending on the local mass substructure . they do not , however , affect the larger - scale features of the mass maps , which are the focus of this paper . the plot of arrival - time contours also provides a simple model for the ring - like extended image ( cf . * ) which in this case arises from the extended source @xmath50 . detailed comparison would , however , be very difficult because the ring is faint and in many places overlaid with the light from the ellipticals . we have not attempted to use the arc @xmath72 as a lensing constraint , since it has no identified counter image . in principle it is possible to extract some strong - lensing information from this arc . if pointlike features could be identified , they could be put in as multiple - image constraints in the usual way . another possibility would be to assume two fictitious image positions along the arc , which in models would have the effect of forcing a critical curve to pass through the arc . the mass contours in figure  [ kmass ] show deviations from circular symmetry , which are due to mass inhomogeneities in the lens . we isolate these by subtracting a smooth component , as follows . figure  [ profile ] shows pixel mass as a function of the distance from the centre of the fiducial reconstruction . as already mentioned when discussing figure  [ massenc ] , the lack of lensing constraints beyond about 20  kpc leads pixelens to put very little mass into those pixels ; so the tapering off of points in figure  [ profile ] is an artifact . the average projected density profile slope where the images constrain the mass well , i.e. around @xmath73 , is @xmath74 , and is representative of most mass maps in this paper . this is shown as the thick straight line in this log - log plot ; the other two lines have slopes of @xmath75 and @xmath76 , and represent the reasonable range of possible power - law slopes . to isolate the mass inhomogeneities we subtract circularly symmetric density profile of slope @xmath77 from the reconstructed mass maps ; a change of @xmath78 in the assumed smooth profile slope would not have made a significant difference . the normalization of the subtracted profile is adjusted such that the contours of substructure , or the excess mass density left after the subtraction of the smooth cluster profile , contain 0.5 , 1 , 2 , 4 and 8 % of the total mass within the full @xmath66 window . this normalization is calculated separately for each mass map and each of the five contour levels . figure  [ fiducial ] shows the five contour levels of the mass substructure , as red solid lines ; thicker lines represent contours of smaller enclosed mass . images are shown as black solid dots , and labeled at the periphery of the figure . the arc @xmath79 has no detected counter images . image @xmath80 was not identified by @xcite , but looking at their figure 2 , the present authors feel @xmath80 is the location of that image . it is not used in the fiducial reconstruction but is used in some other ones . galaxies are denoted by green squares and labeled as in @xcite ; @xmath41 is a smaller square because the galaxy is probably background and less massive . figure  [ fiducial ] shows that the mass substructure does not trace the visible galaxies , an indication that the cluster core is not in equilibrium , but is dynamically disturbed . there is one dominant mass clump , to the north east ( upper left ) of galaxy @xmath81 , but not centered on @xmath81 . this clump is the main subject of the paper , and we will refer to it as the ne-@xmath81 clump . a smaller clump is between galaxies @xmath82 , and seems to be avoiding @xmath83 . the following sections will demonstrate that even though the details of the reconstructions differ , the main features of this fiducial mass map , and most importantly the existence and location of ne-@xmath81 clump , and the lack of mass associated with @xmath83 , are robust to changes in priors , centre of the reconstruction window , and , to some degree , the subsets of images used in reconstruction . figure  [ lots3 ] shows maps of substructure mass contours for nine reconstructions . the image set used is the same as in the fiducial case , but the priors are different . the assumed values of dgcone , and shear are shown in each panel . since the cluster core is most likely not in equilibrium , we tried three different lens centres . the fiducial one is called @xmath84 , and was identified by @xcite as the cluster s centre of light ; it sits between @xmath83 and @xmath85 . centre @xmath86 is shifted by @xmath87 from @xmath84 and is close to @xmath85 . centre @xmath88 is shifted by @xmath89 with respect to @xmath84 ; it coincides with the location of galaxy @xmath83 , the central - most elliptical in the core . the three choices for the lens centre are used in the reconstructions of the three rows of figure  [ lots3 ] , respectively . their location is marked with a cross . ( we remark again that the lens centre in pixelens is needed because the density gradients , used for dgcone , are calculated with respect to the lens centre . the other utility of the lens centre will be put to use in section  [ cent ] . ) figure  [ lots3 ] shows that all reconstructions , with the possible exception of the middle panel of the third row , require a mass lump to the ne of galaxy @xmath81 . the size and position of the lump vary between panels , but in none of these is the lump centered on @xmath81 ; it is always to the upper left of that galaxy . the other common feature is that @xmath83 has relatively little excess mass associated with it . the nearby mass clump sometimes encompasses @xmath85 or @xmath39 , but not @xmath83 . figure  [ lots4 ] shows the effect of leaving out some of the lensed images from the reconstruction . the images plotted in each panel are the only ones used in the corresponding reconstruction . the lens centre is always @xmath84 , and the pixelens priors are shown in each panel . most changes to the image set makes little difference to the global features of the recovered mass maps , and specifically the ne-@xmath81 mass clump . since this mass clump is of primary interest for us , we examine its dependence on the images more closely . from this figure , and other reconstructions not shown here , we know that the single most important image that determines the location of the clump near @xmath81 is image @xmath90 . in the lower right panel @xmath90 was not used , and the mass clump moved to a different , lower , or more southerly , location . in that reconstruction , both the mass distribution and the image configuration have an approximate bilateral symmetry , with the axis inclined by @xmath91 to the @xmath92-axis . the location of @xmath90 predicted by such a bilaterally symmetric mass distribution would have been very close to the observed @xmath93 . however , the observed @xmath90 is about @xmath94 clockwise from @xmath93 .    to make that happen , one needs a large mass clump roughly where pixelens puts the ne-@xmath81 clump . this can be understood in terms of the arrival time surface . @xmath90 is a saddle point image . a sufficiently large mass just outside of the image circle will create a local bump in the arrival time surface and a saddle point will be created between it and the centre of the lens .    in section  [ expl ] we will present additional arguments to show why @xmath90 requires a large mass to exist beyond the location of galaxy @xmath81 . one might be tempted to say that @xmath90 has been misidentified , and is actually much closer to @xmath93 . if that is assumed , the reconstructed mass and observed galaxy positions bear no correspondence to each other , as shown in the lower right panel of figure  [ lots4 ] . furthermore , the imaging data as presented in @xcite shows a definite , though faint smudge at the location of @xmath90 . we conclude that @xmath90 is real , and hence the true mass distribution is close to what our fiducial reconstruction looks like . the mass substructure , i.e. the excess left after subtracting the smooth cluster profile , of all eighteen reconstructions of figures  [ lots3 ] and [ lots4 ] are superimposed in figure  [ superpose ] . for clarity , we plot only the contours enclosing 1% of the total mass in every reconstruction . the figure highlights the features common to most reconstructions : the massive ne-@xmath81 mass clump , and the secondary clump around galaxies @xmath85 and @xmath39 , which avoids @xmath83 . the main goal of the paper is to estimate the lower limit on the dark matter cross - section using eq . [ dispunits ] as applied to galaxy @xmath81 and the ne-@xmath81 mass clump . in this section we estimate the parameters associated with the ne-@xmath81 clump , namely , its mass , @xmath13 , size , @xmath95 , and distance from @xmath81 , @xmath24 , and give a measure of dispersion in these properties between reconstructions . figure  [ superpose ] gives a visual impression of the systematic uncertainties in our reconstructions . because the shape and location of the ne-@xmath81 clump is not exactly the same in various reconstructions , there is no unique way of quantifying its average properties and estimating the dispersion in these properties between the various mass maps . we chose to use an iso - density mass substructure contour to define the clump , and the corresponding mass excess within that contour as the clump s mass , its center of mass as the center of the clump , and the enclosed area , @xmath50 , to define the size of the clump , i.e. @xmath96 . first , we need to decide what to take as the boundary of the clump . in most reconstructions , including the fiducial one , the mass substructure contours containing 0.5 and 1% of the total mass are disjointed , and enclose separate mass clumps , while the contours containing 4 and 8% of the total mass form one contiguous region . this suggests that @xmath97 of the total recovered mass is in the individual clumps , therefore we take the closed 1% contour located to the ne of the @xmath81 galaxy as defining the clump . two of the reconstructions , the bottom middle in figure  [ lots3 ] and the bottom right in figure  [ lots4 ] have no excess mass at 1% level in the vicinity of @xmath81 , so we exclude them . with these choices , the average and rms dispersion in the mass of the ne-@xmath81 clump based on the 16 maps is @xmath98 , its distance from the centre of the elliptical @xmath81 is @xmath99 , and its size @xmath100 . our fiducial reconstruction gives @xmath101 , @xmath102 , and @xmath103 , all of which are within the rms of the 16 maps , so when estimating @xmath6 in section  [ dmx ] we will use the fiducial values . we also need to estimate @xmath104 , the clumps distance from the cluster centre . equation  [ disp ] assumes that the centre of the elliptical galaxy and the centre of its displaced dark matter halo are equidistant from the cluster centre , i.e. @xmath105 since the displacement @xmath24 is small . therefore we take @xmath106 , same for all reconstructions . the uncertainty in @xmath104 comes from the uncertainty in the location of the cluster centre . in section  [ cent ] below we show that the latter is of order @xmath107 , which translated into a fractional error , which is smaller than that in the other two relevant lengths , @xmath24 or @xmath95 .    while the errors in the estimated properties of the ne-@xmath81 mass clump are relatively small , @xmath108 , we stress that these are not the main sources of uncertainty in estimating the parameters of the dark matter particle cross - section , @xmath6 . the dominant sources of uncertainty are the unknown dynamics of the cluster , the evolution in cluster core s density profile slope , and the galaxy orbit shape , especially that of elliptical @xmath81 ( see section  [ intro ] ) , and can not be quantified using lensing data . to properly address these one would need to carry out a series of n - body simulations with a range of initial conditions .      based on their observations , @xcite quote image astrometric uncertainty of @xmath52 . since pixelens reproduces image positions exactly , we need to check if astrometric errors could have affected our results . here we redo the fiducial reconstruction but randomly shift the observed images within @xmath109 of their true positions . five realizations are shown in figure  [ fake ] . to reduce run - time , we used 300 models to create an ensemble , instead of the usual 500 . since all five reconstructions look very similar and have small rms dispersions ( @xmath110 and @xmath111 ) , smaller than the ones presented in the section  [ props ] we conclude that astrometric errors have not affected our results . in addition to the ne-@xmath81 clump , the other notable feature of the reconstructions is that regardless of the input model parameters ( see figures  [ fiducial]-[fake ] ) there is very little mass excess associated with @xmath83 , the centrally located elliptical galaxy . this suggests that the peak of the mass distribution is not very close to @xmath83 . here we ask which one of our three trial centres , @xmath84 , @xmath86 , or @xmath88 comes closest to the true cluster centre , defined as the location of the largest mass concentration . we use the following procedure .    a pixelens pixel can assume any mass value provided it agrees with the image positions and priors , like dgcone and shear . if there is no smoothing , the resulting maps usually show a lot of fluctuations between neighbouring pixels . to avoid that , we impose a nearest neighbour smoothing constraint by requiring that a pixel can not have a mass value larger than twice the average of its eight neighbours . the only exception to this rule is the pixel at the centre of the reconstruction window , which has no imposed upper bound . it is reasonable to suppose that the closer the reconstruction centre is to the real centre , the more mass the central pixel will contain .    from our total ( not substructure ) mass maps we calculate the fraction of total mass contained in the central pixel . for the centres @xmath84 , @xmath86 and @xmath88 we calculate that percentage of mass as @xmath112 ,   @xmath113 ,   and @xmath114 respectively . these values are averages and rms for the three sets of three maps shown in figure  [ lots3 ] . recall that @xmath88 is centered on galaxy @xmath83 , whereas @xmath84 and @xmath86 correspond to blank spots between @xmath83 and @xmath85 . since the central pixel of @xmath88 contains the least mass , and has the smallest dispersion of the three cases , it supports our finding in the earlier sections that there is very little excess mass associated with the optical light of elliptical @xmath83 . of the three , centre @xmath86 is closest to the largest concentration of mass in the cluster . finding the centre of the cluster is not the main goal of the paper , however this section demonstrates that the uncertainty in the location of the centre is of order of @xmath107 , and hence smaller than fractional uncertainties in the other length measurements entering eq . [ dispunits ] , i.e. @xmath24 and @xmath95 , therefore when estimating @xmath104 it is reasonable to use @xmath84 as the centre of the cluster , as we have done in section  [ props ] .      to further test the robustness of the ne-@xmath81 mass clump we carry out a reconstruction where pixelens is allowed to add point masses at specified pixel locations . in other words , we allow some pixels to override the nearest neighbour constraint described in section  [ cent ] . we chose pixels containing the observed galaxies @xmath81-@xmath39 , and use pixelens command ptmass x y area1 area2 , where x and y is the location of the point mass , and area1 area2 are the lower and upper limits on the area enclosed by its einstein ring . we used @xmath115 and @xmath0 arcsec@xmath116 as representative values for mass associated with individual galaxies . figure  [ ptmass ] shows the results . the contour levels of the mass substructure are the same as before , at 0.5 , 1 , 2 , 4 , and 8% of total . there is a substantial amount of mass associated with individual galaxies , including @xmath81 , but a large mass to the upper left of @xmath81 is still required , as shown by the 1% substructure mass contour . in fact , the ne-@xmath81 clump , without the @xmath81 point mass , roughly contains @xmath117 , similar to what we find for the fiducial reconstruction , in section  [ dmx ] . also consistent with earlier findings , is that compared to other ellipticals , @xmath83 has the least amount of mass associated with it . in this section we create a series of four synthetic mass distributions that illustrate why an excess mass lump is needed where pixelens places it , to the north east of @xmath81 . these synthetic maps have mass distributions similar enough to the real cluster to make the comparison meaningful . however the images produced by them do not attempt to exactly reproduce the observed images .    in figure  [ fourmassc ] the mass map in the upper left is roughly what abell 3827 would look like if mass followed light , in other words , mass clumps are placed at the observed locations of galaxies @xmath81-@xmath39 , indicated by the green squares . the blue contour has the critical surface mass density for @xmath118 . the black solid dots are the locations of the observed images of source @xmath70 . the four extended islands of red points mark the locations of images produced by this synthetic mass configuration . these images were selected such that the second arriving images cluster around the observed @xmath119 . the other images were unconstrained . the locations of the 1st , 2nd and 3rd arriving images can be relatively well reproduced by the mass - follows - light scenario . however , the 4th arriving images are consistently far from the observed @xmath90 . this is the basic reason why mass - follows - light models do not work .    what does one have to do to ( approximately ) reproduce @xmath90 ? in the upper right panel of figure  [ fourmassc ] we move the mass clump associated with @xmath81 to the left ( east ) . the 4th arriving images are hardly affected . next , in the lower left panel we keep the mass clump at its original position but increase its mass by @xmath120 . the configuration of images changes but the location of @xmath90 is still not reproduced . finally , in the lower right panel we move the mass clump to the left _ and _ increase its mass by @xmath120 . now the bulk of the 4th arriving images move to where the observed location of @xmath90 . this is basically the mass distribution that pixelens finds , with its massive ne-@xmath81 clump . a further test of the veracity of pixelens s reconstructions is to use the images created by the synthetic mass distributions of the previous section as input for pixelens . we use the mass distributions of the upper left and lower right panels of figure  [ fourmassc ] . for each of these we take two quads from the red dots in figure  [ fourmassc ] , for a total of eight images to be used as lensing constraints . the two panels of figure  [ pxmass ] show the synthetic mass distributions as the smooth contours , while the jagged contours are the pixelens reconstructions . the black mass contours are at 0.25 , 0.5 , 0.75 and 2 of the critical surface mass density for @xmath118 , while the blue contour is at the critical density . the magenta empty circles are the images used in the reconstruction . the first of the two synthetic mass models ( left panel ) is approximately elliptical and does not have a mass lump to the left of the centre . pixelens recovers the mass map quite well ; most importantly it does not create a fictitious massive clump near the 4th arriving image . the second synthetic mass map ( right panel ) does have a mass clump , and pixelens recovers it well . the reconstructions of the preceding sections and the tests with synthetic lenses show that the two main features of the lensing mass reconstructions are robust . ( 1 ) the ne-@xmath81 mass clump is present consistently in most reconstructions , and it is never centered on galaxy @xmath81 . ( 2 ) the second , less massive clump is near galaxies @xmath85 and @xmath39 , but avoids @xmath83 , so that there is no excess mass associated with that central elliptical . we interpret ( 1 ) to mean that the visible and the dark components of @xmath81 are separated , and we hypothesize that the cause of the separation is the scenario described in section  [ intro ] , namely that the scattering between the galaxy s and the cluster s dark matter particles induced the galaxy s halo to lag behind its stellar component . other interpretations of the observed separation are discussed in section  [ other ] . conclusion ( 2 ) also speaks to the dynamically disturbed nature of the cluster core , though there is not enough information to speculate what happened to the halo of @xmath83 and how the mass clump is related to the nearby @xmath85 and @xmath39 . we now concentrate on ( 1 ) , and estimate @xmath6 from eq . [ dispunits ] and the parameters based on the reconstructions presented in sections  [ effp ] and [ effs ] and summarized in section  [ props ] . we do not consider the rms dispersions quoted in that section here , because the main source of uncertainty is not in the measured properties of the ne-@xmath81 clump , but in the dynamics of the cluster . for a conservative lower limit on @xmath6 we want to use the smallest linear distances , @xmath104 , @xmath95 , and @xmath24 consistent with the reconstruction , so we use the sky projected quantities , and make no attempt to estimate the corresponding three - dimensional values .    to obtain @xmath12 we measure the projected mass within @xmath104 from figure  [ massenc ] and halve it to account for the core being a sphere instead of a long tube ; @xmath121 . one major source of uncertainty is related to the quantity @xmath22 entering eq . [ dispunits ] . first , if @xmath22 depends on radius , i.e. distance from cluster center , then the unknown shape and ellipticity of @xmath81 s orbit and hence how it ` samples ' @xmath22 becomes an issue . second , the radial dependence of @xmath22 may well be time dependent . from our lensing reconstruction we can measure how this quantity scaled with radius at the present epoch . the projected @xmath122 , which implies that the space density @xmath123 , and mass enclosed @xmath124 , so @xmath125 . this is a relatively weak radial dependence , but it does not tell us much about the temporal dependence . in future work , these uncertainties can be constrained through n - body simulations that sample possible merger histories and have the present day configuration resembling abell 3827 .    the other large source of uncertainty is also related to cluster dynamics , and it is @xmath5 , the duration of the encounter , because it can not be measured directly from the reconstruction . a lower limit on @xmath5 would be one dynamical time at the present radius if @xmath81 , roughly @xmath126yr . the upper limit is the age of the universe , @xmath127  yrs . the most likely @xmath5 would probably correspond to several dynamical times within the extended core region of the cluster , or @xmath128 yr . putting all the parameters together in to eq . [ dispunits ] we express the lower limit on the dark matter self - interaction cross - section as @xmath129    while this value is safely below the astrophysically measured upper limit on self - scattering , it is interesting to compare it to the estimates of the self - annihilation cross - section for dark matter particles , because in most particle models the latter are expected to be larger than the scattering cross - sections . to facilitate the comparison we express our result in terms of cross - section per particle of mass @xmath130 , and attach a subscript to indicate that this refers to self - scattering , @xmath131 if the dark matter particle is a thermal relic , its self - annihilation cross - section can be expressed in terms of dark matter density and typical velocity @xcite , @xmath132 a different constraint comes from considering the observed abundance of annihilation by - products . for neutrinos , @xcite get an upper bound which is more stringent than provided by other experimental and observational considerations , @xmath133 for a range of particle masses between @xmath134 and @xmath135 gev . while our result is well above ( i.e. inconsistent with ) the thermal relic estimate , @xmath136 , for particle masses above @xmath134  mev , it is comparable to @xmath137 , especially if particle mass is somewhat below @xmath138 gev . here we offer other interpretations for the separation between the ne-@xmath81 mass clump and the elliptical galaxy @xmath81 . \(i ) the ne-@xmath81 mass clump could belong to the line of sight structures , and not the cluster core , or galaxy @xmath81 . in that case the alignment of ne-@xmath81 clump with the cluster ellipticals is not expected . however , there are no additional light concentrations in the direction of the ne-@xmath81 clump , so if this mass is external to the cluster core , it would still need to have a very high mass - to - light ratio . \(ii ) the ne-@xmath81 mass clump could be primarily due to the baryonic gas associated with galaxy @xmath81 , which has been separated from its parent galaxy by ram pressure of the cluster gas . however , in the cluster s core one would expect the gas of individual ellipticals to have been stripped and dispersed on short time - scales , and in the case of a late stage merger , as in abell 3827 , long before the galaxies of the merging clusters reach the new common cluster core . observations of other massive clusters do not show x - ray emitting gas associated with individual galaxies in the core . examination of an archival chandra image of abell 3827 also shows no discernible substructure ( proposal i d 08800836 ) . ( iii ) because the visible and dark components of @xmath81 have different spatial extents , the gravitational field gradient of the cluster could have resulted in different forces acting on the two components , which could lead to the observed separation . however , it is hard to imagine how tidal forces would lead to such a large offset . another possibility is that the stellar component of @xmath81 is wobbling around the centre of its dark matter s potential well . separation due to this effect have been observed , but only for the central cluster galaxies . @xmath81 is not the central elliptical ; @xmath81 and ne-@xmath81 clump are both about @xmath0  kpc from cluster s largest mass concentration ( section  [ cent ] ) . \(iv ) finally , because the lensed images are faint , extended and close to bright ellipticals , the identification and location of images could be partially wrong . since image positions are the most important input for pixelens mass reconstruction , misidentified images could lead to wrong recovered mass maps . additional observations would help ; for now we note that random astrometric uncertainties , of order @xmath139 , in the image positions do not affect the main features of the reconstruction ( section  [ uncert ] ) . in this paper we argue that if the dark matter self - scattering cross - section is only a few orders of magnitude below its most stringent astrophysically determined upper limit , @xmath140  @xmath3  g@xmath4 , then it should be detectable in the cores of massive galaxy clusters . the dark matter particles of individual galaxies that have been orbiting the cluster centre for about a hubble time will be scattering off the dark matter of the cluster , resulting in a drag force , not experienced by the visible stellar component of the galaxies . over time this drag will amount to a spatial separation between the dark and visible components of the galaxy , whose magnitude is estimated by eq . [ dispunits ] . we suggest that at least one elliptical in the core of abell 3827 is an example of such a scenario . our free - form lensing reconstructions show that there a massive dark clump , the ne-@xmath81 clump , located about @xmath141 , or @xmath1 kpc from the centre of light of @xmath81 . we performed many mass reconstructions to test the robustness of the ne-@xmath81 clump , and quantified the uncertainty in its properties . a series of synthetic mass models , presented in section  [ tests ] , further support the existence of the clump and its separation from the visible component of @xmath81 . we interpret this clump as the dark matter halo of @xmath81 which is lagging behind its stellar counterpart . if this interpretation is correct , we estimate the lower limit on the cross - section as given in eq . [ estim ] . the largest source of systematic uncertainty in this equation relates to the unknown dynamics of the cluster and central galaxies , the shape and inclination of the orbit of @xmath81 , and the true three dimensional distances and separations within the core .    in section  [ other ] we note that other interpretations of the observed separation can not be ruled out at this point . future observations as well as numerical simulations should be able to differentiate between the various scenarios , and also quantify the uncertainties associated with the dynamical state of the cluster . using purely collisionless simulations . the stellar and dark matter components of superimposed , mass distributions of different several orbits around the cluster centre the two components wobble there is no need for non - zero @xmath6 , section  [ intro ] , check if an observable separation can develop over a hubble time . as already mentioned , abell 3827 is special in having very favorable parameters for the detection of the dark matter - light offset . first , a3827 is a very massive cluster , hosting several massive ellipticals in the very core . @xcite note that within a similar radius , abell 3827 is slightly more massive than abell 1689 @xcite , a cluster with over 100 strong lensing features . they also note that the central galaxy of abell 3827 is perhaps the most massive cd galaxy in the local universe . second , the fortuitous location of the background source a produces strong lensing features that are optimal in configuration and distance for mass reconstruction in the most relevant regions ; the low redshift of abell 3827 and source a ensure that the images are close to the cluster centre , @xmath142 . these factors make it unlikely that there are many other clusters out there where the offset would be detectable . llrw would like to thank henry lee for discussing with her the images of this unusual object prior to publication , keith olive for discussions about particle dark matter , and larry rudnick for help with chandra data archive . beacom , j. f. , bell , n. f. & mack , g. d. 2007 , phys.rev.lett . , 99 , 231301 bertone , g. , hooper , d. & silk , j. 2005 , phys.rept . , 405 , 279 carrasco , e. r. , gomez , p. l. , verdugo , t. , lee , h. , diaz , r. , bergmann , m. , turner , j. e. h. , miller , b. w. & west , m. j. 2010 , apj , 715 , l160 clowe , d. , bradac , m. , gonzalez , a. h. , markevitch , m. , randall , s. w. , jones , c. , zaritsky , d 2006 , apj , 648 , l109 coe , d. , fuselier , e. , bentez , n. , broadhurst , t . , frye , b. , ford , h. , 2008 , apj , 681 , 814
Abstract:

Answer: if dark matter has a non - zero self - interaction cross - section , then dark matter halos of individual galaxies in cluster cores should experience a drag force from the ambient dark matter of the cluster , which will not affect the stellar components of galaxies , and thus will lead to a separation between the stellar and dark matter . if the cross - section is only a few decades below its current astrophysically determined upper limit , then kpc - scale separations should result . however , such separations will be observable only under very favorable conditions . abell 3827 is a nearby late stage cluster merger with four massive central ellipticals within @xmath0  kpc of each other . the ten strong lensing images tightly surrounding the ellipticals provide an excellent set of constraints for a free - form lens reconstruction . our free - form mass maps show a massive dark extended clump , about @xmath1  kpc from one of the ellipticals . the robustness of this result has been tested with many reconstructions , and confirmed with experiments using synthetic lens mass distributions . interpreted in terms of dark matter collisionality , our result yields @xmath2  @xmath3  g@xmath4 , where @xmath5 is the merger s age .