Upload
whitney-grant
View
217
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Coevolution of black holes and galaxies at high redshift
David M Alexander (Durham)
The growth of black holes
Black Hole
Accretion Disk
Action: Star formation
Acti
on
: A
GN
acti
vit
y
Mbh/Msph~10-3
Some key issues in observational cosmology
The black-hole-host connection
Th
e ro
le o
f en
vir
on
me
nt?
Difficulty in Constructing a
Complete AGN Census
• Most AGNs are hidden at optical wavelengths by dust and gas
• Host-galaxy dilution for lower-lum AGNs
SDSS optical quasar selection identifies a small
fraction (~1-10%) of all AGNs
X-ray surveys provide a more complete census of AGN
activityC
entral en
gin
e
Obscuring “torus”
X-r
ays:
pen
etr
ate
h
igh
colu
mn
d
en
sit
ies
5 ks Chandra BootesMurray et al. (2005)
• Detection of even low-luminosity AGN out to high redshift
• Need deeper spectroscopy (~70% complete) although photozs now getting to good quality (e.g., Luo et al. 2010)
X-ray Surveys: great steps towards a complete census of AGN activity
2 Ms Chandra deep fieldsBrandt et al. (2001), Alexander et al. (2003);Giacconi et al. (2002); Luo et al. (2008)
Just CDF-N sources
High (quasar) luminosities
Moderate (Seyfert) luminosities
Low luminosities
(1) Below detection limit: stacked X-ray data of IR-bright z~2 galaxies - hidden AGNs
Particularly when allied with infrared identification of the most heavily obscured
AGNs
Daddi et al. (2007); see also Fiore et al. (2008, 2009), Donley et al. (2008), and others
Alexander et al. (2008)
(2) Spectroscopic identification of individual X-ray undetected luminous
AGNs
Steidel et al. (2002); Alexander et al. (2008)
IR spectra and SEDs
Optical spectroscopy
Growth of black holes
Note: the definition of high redshift here is “only” z~1-4 - the identification of large numbers of typical z>6 AGNs is challenging: only ~1 of z>6 AGN probably per deep X-ray field and none reliably identified to date (see Gilli and Brandt talks)
Key result from X-ray surveys: AGN “cosmic downsizing”
Ueda et al. (2003)
Fiore et al. (2003)
Hasinger et al. (2005)
Luminosity-dependent density evolution: high-luminosity AGNs (i.e., quasars) peaked at higher redshifts than typical AGNs
Also Cowie et al. (2003); Barger et al. (2005); La Franca et al. (2005); Aird et al. (2010) amongst others
Grew more rapidly in past
Growing more rapidly now
z~0: Heckman et al. (2004)
Downsizing in “active” black-hole masses?
In general this appears to be true - massive black holes (~108 solar masses) were growing more rapidly at z~1 than in the present day, where smaller
black holes (<107 solar masses) were most active (Heckman et al. 2004; Goulding et al. 2010)
However, current observational constraints do not yet allow robust conclusions
z~1: Babic et al. (2007)
Gro
wing
mor
e ra
pidl
y no
w
Gre
w mor
e ra
pidl
y in
pas
t
See also Ballo et al. (2007); Alonso-Herrero et al. (2008)
Constraints at higher redshifts?
Marconi et al. (2004)
Model result (Soltan type approach)
Higher-redshift constraints are key since many models predict rapid black-hole growth at high redshift
But these are challenging due to lack of spec-zs of a complete sample and black-hole-host galaxy mass relationship uncertainties: Brusa et al. (2009)
similar z~2 constraints to Alexander et al. (2008) above
Alexander et al. (2008)
Limited constraints for highly selected sample
z~2 ULIRGs vs SDSS
Tracing the black-hole-host mass relationship
Black-hole masses estimated with virial technique (see Vestergaard
talk)
Host-galaxy masses estimated from a variety of techniques:
Host vel disp (em and abs lines), CO line widths, absolute
magnitudes, stellar masses, and SED fitting
But general concensus is for modest evolution in MBH-MGAL ratio with
redshift - with relationship ~2-4x higher at z~2 and perhaps higher at z~2-6: factor ~4 based on Merloni et
al. (2010)
Evolution perhaps only significant at highest masses (>3x108 solar
masses): see Di Matteo talk (also Merloni et al. 2010)
Virial black-hole mass estimator: MBH=G-1 RBLR V2
BLR
Challenging to measure *both* black hole and host mass without
significant uncertainties (see Wang talk)
See also McLure et al. (2006); Peng et al. (2006a,b); Shields et al. (2006); Woo et al. (2006, 2008); Salviandar et al. (2007); Treu et al. (2007); Jahke et al. (2009); De Carli et al. (2010)
Merloni et al. (2010) result in COSMOS
Similar result for rapidly evolving z~2 SMGs
Estimated MBH using virial mass estimator for the few z~2 SMGs with
broad lines
Estimated MGAL for the majority which are host-galaxy dominated
Not significant difference in average MBH-MGALratio for various z~2
populations
But require constraints of more typical z~2-6 AGNs - want to test if there is a
black-hole mass dependence: need better spectroscopy, imaging, and
larger-area deep X-ray surveys
Alexander et al. (2008); Hainline et al. (2010)
Lamastra et al. (2010)
SAM results, including feedback
Tentative evidence for feedback inducing blow out?
Broad (800 km/s) high-velocity (200-500 km/s) [OIII] gas
Alexander et al. (2010); see Nesvadba et al. (2006,2007,2008) for results on rarer z~2 radio-loud AGNs
Di Matteo et al. (2005) simulation
~4-8 kpc extent of broad [OIII gas]Collapsed IFU spectrum of z~2.07 SMG
What role does environment play?
A key laboratory of black-hole growth mechanisms:
a distant protocluster?
400ks Chandra exposure of SSA22
z=3.09 SSA22 protocluster
Predicted to become a massive Coma-like
cluster by the present day
The galaxy density is ~6x higher than the field already at z~3.09
• The AGN activity per galaxy is larger in the protocluster compared to the field by a factor of 6.1+10.3 (enhanced at the 95% confidence level) for AGNs with LX > 3 × 1043 ergs s−1.
• Fraction of LAEs hosting AGNs appears to be positively correlated with the local LAE density (96% confidence level).
Enhanced black-hole growth compared to the field
LBGs
LAEs
Lehmer et al. (2009a)
LX > 3 × 1043 ergs s−1
Lehmer et al. (2009b)
More massive black holes active at earlier times?
Implication: the characteristic X-ray luminosity and “active” black-hole mass appears to be a function of environment as well as redshift
Lehmer et al. (2009a)
• If the AGN fraction is larger in the protocluster simply due to the presence of more massive SMBHs, then an average protocluster AGN would be more luminous than an average field AGN by the same factor
• For this to be the case, the SMBHs would have to be ≈3−10 times more massive in the protocluster than the field: likely 108-109 solar masses rather than 107-108 solar masses
Good agreement with that found for a z=2.3 protocluster (Digby-North et al. 2010)
Host galaxies appear more massive in protocluster
And AGN fraction declines to lower redshifts
Require more constraints for more protoclusters, particularly at high redshift
Need deep X-ray observations of other overdense regionsNeed wider area X-ray surveys to cover full range of environments
Martini et al. (2009)
AGN fraction in massive galaxy clusters
z~3.09 protocluster AGN fraction• Significant drop (1-2 orders of magnitude) in AGN fraction for similarly overdense regions at z<1
• AGN activity has been “switched off” in galaxy clusters/protoclusters since z~3 to z<1
• Need to trace this out from z~2-8 with X-ray observations of more protoclusters/overdense regions
Has heating of the ICM tentatively started?
~17% of extended Ly emitters host luminous AGN in the z~3.09 protocluster; AGNs are luminous enough to power the 10-100 kpc
extended Ly emission
QuickTime™ and aH.264 decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Geach et al. (2009) Ly images of some protocluster AGNs
Potential heating mechanisms
AG
N p
ow
er
Star-formation power NASA press conference movie
• AGN cosmic downsizing possibly due to increase in active black hole with redshift
• typical active black holes at z~1 are ~108 solar masses; more work required to obtain reliable results at higher redshifts
• Evolution in black-hole-host mass relationship quite modest out to z~2 - may be stronger out to higher redshift but current samples are limited
• possible black-hole mass dependence - need constraints for typical black holes• possible evidence for z~2 feedback inducing blow out
• Environmental dependencies on black-hole growth: AGN fraction increases in z~2-3 protoclusters than compared to field - probably due to more massive “active” black holes
• AGN fraction significantly decreases compared to field at z<1 - possibly due to gas depletion or heating
• AGN activity in z~3 protocluster luminous enough to power 10-100 kpc Ly halos - early evidence for ICM heating?
SummarySummary