Relation between SMBH and gas properties in simulations ... › event › 829 › attachments › 2137 › 4235 › 5.Lu… · Simulations performed with the Lagrangian GADGET-3 SPH

Luigi BassiniLuigi Bassini Trieste, 25/06/2019

Relation between SMBH and gas properties in simulations and observations

Luigi BassiniUniversità degli studi di Trieste

Astro@TsSupervisors: Elena Rasia, Giuliano Taffoni

Bassini et al. 2019, Arxiv: 1903.03142Gaspari et al. 2019, Arxiv: 1904.10972


McConnel & Ma 2013

BH mass and hosting Galaxy:

MBH � �

MBH � L

MBH �Mbulge

Magorrian et al. 1998;

Gebhardt et al. 2000;Merritt & Ferrarese 2001;

Häring & Rix 2004;

Gültekin et al. 2009;

Beifiori et al. 2012;

Tremaine et al. 2002;

McConnell et al. 2011;

Ferrarese & Merritt 2000;

Wyithe 2006a,b; Hu 2008;

Schulze & Gebhardt 2011;

Graham et al. 2011;

Kormendy & Gebhardt et al. 2000;

Gültekin et al. 2009; Schulze & Gebhardt 2011; McConnell et al. 2011;

Marconi & Hunt 2003;

Hu 2009; Sani et al. 2011; Beifiori et al. 2012;

MBH � �

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1086/383567/fulltext/17731.text.html


Correlation does not imply causation

Jahnke & Macciò2011

(see alsoPeng et. al 2007)


Which one is the most fundamental variable?

Shankar et al. 2016

residuals


7.5

8

8.5

9

9.5

10

10.5

11

1 10

log

MBH

(Msu

n)

kT (keV)

Bogdan et al. 2018

More recently:Correlation between BH mass of BCGs/BGGsand large scale properties of hosting Cluster

MBH � T500

7.5

8

8.5

9

9.5

10

10.5

11

10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5lo

g M

BH (M

sun)

log Mbulge (Msun)

BGG/BCG sampleMcconnell & Ma 2013

MBH �Mbulge

Scatter around Mbh-T500 lower than in Mbh-Mbulge!

(See also Phipps et al. 2019 and Gaspari et al. 2019)


๏Employ numerical simulations to understand how relation sets up;

๏ How evolves with redshift;

๏ How BH mass grows.

Goals of our work:

MBH �M500

Bassini et al. 2019, Arxiv: 1903.03142

Luigi Bassini, University of Trieste SMBHs: Environment and Evolution 20/06/2019

29 Cosmological hydrodynamical zoom-in simulations extracted from a parent N-body

simulation of 1.4 Gpc side

Simulations performed with the Lagrangian GADGET-3 SPH code (see Beck et al. 2016)

mass resolution: mDM = 8.47⇥ 108h�1M�

mgas = 1.53⇥ 108h�1M�

At z=0 we consider all 135 clusters with:

Subgrid models: radiative cooling, star formation and associated feedback, metal

enrichment and chemical evolution, BH accretion and AGN feedback.

M500 > 1.4⇥ 1013M�

Numerical set up (Dianoga set)


Simulation vs Observations MBH ∝ Tα500

Numerical results in agreement with Xray observations

10�1 100 101

T500 [keV]

108

109

1010

1011

MB

H[M

�]

HR SimulationsLR SimulationsBogdan et al. 2018Gaspari et al. 2019

In numerical simulations, scatter

comparable with the scatter around the

Magorrian relation


Purpose: understand how the relation sets up

(1) Rapid growth for

gas accretion

1012 1013 1014 1015 1016

M500 [M�]

108

109

1010

1011

MB

H[M

�]

Time= 13.91

Sample z=0.0

(2) Structures enter R500

(M500 grows for mergers)

(3) Structures reach the center

(BH grows for gas accretion

and merger)

(M500 grew by more than 40% in the last Gyr)

Systems right after a cluster merger


SMBHs growth:

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Time [Gyr]

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

MBH

(z)/

MBH

(z=

0)

MBH

MaccBH

MmerBH

5 4 3 2 1 0.5z

At z>2 BHs gain mass via gas accretion. Gas is accreted at

the Eddington limit;

At z<2 gas accretion slows down with an accretion rate

which is a fraction of the Eddington limit;

At z<1 BH-BH mergers are the main channel for SMBH mass

growth;

At z=0 the two component equally contribute to the

total mass of SMBHs


Conclusions for relation :

๏At z>2 BH mass grows by rapid gas accretion and systems set on the relation;

๏ Once on the relation, systems evolve as a stairway (structures enter R500 M500 grows move towards the center MBH grows via 2 channels)

๏ Massive cluster gain more mass wrt central BH relation becomes shallower with time;

๏ Both masses (gas accreted & BH-BH merger) correlate with M500

๏ Gas accretion dominate BH mass growth at z>2 BH-BH mergers dominate BH mass growth at z<1

MBH �M500


Comprehensive study of the correlations between the (direct) masses of supermassive black holes (SMBHs) and X-ray hot halo properties, by

using both a Bayesian analysis of archival datasets and physics-driven theoretical models.

Gaspari et al. 2019, Arxiv: 1904.10972

X-RAY HALO SCALING RELATIONS OF SUPERMASSIVE BLACK HOLES


M∙ ∝ TαX M∙ ∝ σβ

e


Theoretical model: Chaotic Cold Accretion (CCA)

Gaspari & Sadowski 2017


What about residuals?

r = 0.71

r = 0.49

At fixed temperature

At fixed sigma


Evolution of M500 and BH mass

1013 1014 1015

M500 [M�]

100

101

102

Mz=

0/M

z=2

[M�

]

M500

MBH

Ratio between M500 at z=0 and M500 at z=2

vs m500 at z=0

Ratio between BH mass at z=0 and BH mass at z=2

vs M500 at z=0



1013 1014 1015

M500 [M�]

100

101

102

Mz=

0/M

z=2

[M�

]

M500

MBH


vs m500 at z=0


vs M500 at z=0



1013 1014 1015

M500 [M�]

100

101

102

Mz=

0/M

z=2

[M�

]

M500

MBH


vs m500 at z=0


vs M500 at z=0



1013 1014 1015

M500 [M�]

100

101

102

Mz=

0/M

z=2

[M�

]

M500

MBH


vs m500 at z=0


vs M500 at z=0


0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Time [Gyr]

108

109

1010

MBH

[M�

]

Gas Accreted MassMerged mass

5 4 3 2 1 0.5z

BH Mass evolution

BH mass evolution of three BHs divided into two channels: Gas accretion

and Merger

z=0.74

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

z

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

N

redshift at which merged mass

equals gas accreted mass

z=0.74


Relation between BH mass components and M500

1013 1014 1015 1016

M500 [M�]

108

109

1010

1011

MBH

[M�

]

Gas Accreted MassMerged Mass

z=01012 1013 1014 1015

M500 [M�]

108

109

1010

1011

MBH

[M�

]


z=1

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

z

0

10

20

30

40

50

N


redshift at which half of the final

gas accreted/merged BH mass is assembled

z=2.0z=0.54

-0.3

-0.1

0.1

0.3

M?

�0.5

0.0

0.5MBH

�1.0

�0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

MgasBH

-0.1 0.0 0.1

T

�1.0

�0.5

0.0

0.5Mmer

BH

-0.4 0.0 -0.4

M?

�0.5 0.0 0.5

MBH

-1.0 0.0 1.0

MgasBH

-0.2 0.0 0.2 �0.5 0.0 0.5 �0.5 0.0 0.5 �0.5 0.0 0.5

�0.10�0.050.000.050.10

-0.2

0.0

0.2

�0.5

0.0

0.5

�1.0�0.50.00.51.0

T

MmerBH

z=1

z=0


Questions addressed:๏ Does SMBHs in BCGs correlate with global properties

of hosting cluster?

๏ Does this relation evolve with redshift?

๏ How does the relation set up?

๏ Is the scatter around this relation lower than in MBH − M⋆

How:๏ 29 zoom-in cosmological hydrodynamical simulations


7.5

8

8.5

9

9.5

10

10.5

11

10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5lo

g M

BH (M

sun)

log Mbulge (Msun)

BGG/BCG sampleMcconnell & Ma 2013

7.5

8

8.5

9

9.5

10

10.5

11

1 10

log

MBH

(Msu

n)

kT (keV)

Bogdan et al. 2018

Mbh-T500 in this work has smaller scatter than Mbh-Mbulge

More recently:Correlation between BH mass of BCGs/BGGsand large scale properties of hosting Cluster

MBH �MbulgeMBH � T500

WARNING: Mbulge data taken from literature, with different techniques for different authors


σ = 0.217 ± 0.023 σ = 0.191 ± 0.022

Scaling relations:

MBH ∝ Tα500MBH ∝ Mβ

500

1013 1014 1015

M500 [M�]

108

109

1010

1011

MB

H[M

�]

SimulationBogdan et al. 2018

100 101

T500 [keV]

108

109

1010

1011

MB

H[M

�]

SimulationBogdan et al. 2018


1012 1013 1014 1015 1016

M500 [M�]

108

109

1010

1011

MB

H[M

�]

Single BH EvolutionSample z=0.0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Time [Gyr]

108

109

1010

MBH

[M�

]

Gas Accreted MassMerged mass

5 4 3 2 1 0.5z



MBH � L



MBH �Mbulge


1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015

log Mgas,500 [M�]

1011

1012

1013

1014

1015

1016lo

gM

500

[M�

]D6.4D10.1D28.10D29.5Sample z=0.0

1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015

log Mgas,500 [M�]

1011

1012

1013

1014

1015

1016

log

M50

0[M

�]

D5.1D11.1D12.7Sample z=0.0


Sabra et al. 2015

MBH � Vc

BH mass and dark matter halo:

Ferrarese 2002;Bandara et al. 2009;

Booth & Schaye 2010;Bogdan et al. 2012;

Kormendy & Bender 2011;Volonteri et al. 2011;

Sun et al. 2013;


MBH � Vc

BH mass and dark matter halo:


McConnel & Ma 2013


MBH �Mbulge

Magorrian et al. 1998;

Häring & Rix 2004;

Marconi & Hunt 2003;

Hu 2009;

Sani et al. 2011;


MBH �Mbulge

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1086/383567/fulltext/17731.text.html


McConnel & Ma 2013


MBH � �

Gebhardt et al. 2000;Merritt & Ferrarese 2001;

Gültekin et al. 2009;


Tremaine et al. 2002;


Ferrarese & Merritt 2000;

Wyithe 2006a,b;

Hu 2008;

Schulze & Gebhardt 2011; Graham et al. 2011;

MBH � �


McConnel & Ma 2013


MBH � L

Kormendy & Gebhardt et al. 2000;Gültekin et al. 2009;

Schulze & Gebhardt 2011;



Other works followed:

Phipps et al. 2019


Other works followed:

Phipps et al. 2019

Gaspari et al. 2019

Documents

Relation between SMBH and gas properties in simulations ... › event › 829 › attachments › 2137 › 4235 › 5.Lu… · Simulations performed with the Lagrangian GADGET-3 SPH