The First Generation of SMBHs and The First Generation of SMBHs and Their Host GalaxiesTheir Host Galaxies

Columbia University

AGN and Galaxy Evolution Castel Gandolfo 3-6 October, 2005

ZoltZoltáán (n (SoSołłtan)tan) Haiman Haiman

Mark Dijkstra, Bence KocsisMark Dijkstra, Bence Kocsis

OutlineOutline

1. Theoretical Expectations –

chemistry and cooling in cosmological models

2. Growth of the z~6 Quasars –

in hierarchical structure formation theories

3. Catching Proto-Galaxies in Assembling Stage

– imaging large scale gas infall in

Lyα emission

4. Prospects for Future Detections

– radio counts, gravity waves

Condensations in Hierarchical CosmologyCondensations in Hierarchical Cosmology

Smallest scalescondense first

Jeans mass: ~104-5 M

log (Mass/ M)

coll

apse

red

shif

t

00

1010

2020

3030

22 33 44 55 66 77

Consider lineargrowth of DMperturbationsin concordancecosmology

Modeling the Gas in the First Halos:Modeling the Gas in the First Halos:Cooling and Chemistry Cooling and Chemistry

Collapsed Dark Matter halos virialize,gas shock heated to virial temperature

Efficient cooling is a necessarynecessary condition for continued contraction following virialization(i.e. for anything “interesting” to happen)

Primordial gas chemically simple: H, He, H2

Radiative Cooling Function (H+He gas) Radiative Cooling Function (H+He gas)

cf. Halo virial temperature:

log( Temperature / K )

log(

coo

lin

g ra

te /

erg

s-1 c

m3 )

COSMIC TIME

MASS SCALE

K11

1

M1010

3

2

84

vir

zMT

Cooling and Chemistry Cooling and Chemistry

End of “Dark Age” controlled byEnd of “Dark Age” controlled by

abundance of Habundance of H2 2 :: (Saslaw & Zipoy 1967

Haiman, Thoul & Loeb 1996)

Molecular cooling to T~102 K (M~105 M ; z~20)

Atomic cooling to T~104 K (M~108 M ; z~12)

What is the molecular abundance?What is the molecular abundance?

nH2/nH ~10-6 after recombination

~10-3 in collapsed objects

Collapse of Spherical CloudCollapse of Spherical Cloud

Haiman, Thoul & Loeb (1996)

Clouds with virial temperature Tvir 200 K≳can form H2,cool and collapse

Gas Phase Chemistry:H + e- H- + H- + H H2+ e-

redshift

rad

ius

(pc)

103 M 104 M

106 M 105 M

3D Simulations of a Primordial Gas Cloud3D Simulations of a Primordial Gas CloudAbel, Bryan & Norman (AMR) Bromm, Coppi & Larson (SPH)

Mtot 106 M

z 20

T200 Kn 104 cm-3

M = few 100 M f* < 1 %

Tem

per

atu

re

D

ensi

tyT

emp

erat

ure

Den

sity

Gas Phase Chemistry:

H + e- H- +

H-+ H H2+ e-

What forms in these early halos?What forms in these early halos?

• STARS: FIRST GENERATION METAL FREE - massive stars with harder spectra - boost in ionizing photon rate by a factor of ~ 20 - return to “normal” stellar pops at Z 10≳ -3.5 Z⊙

(Tumlinson & Shull 2001 ; Bromm, Kudritzki & Loeb 2001; Schaerer 2002)

• SEED BLACK HOLES: (~102-6 M ⊙ ) - boost by ~10 in number of ionizing photons/baryon - harder spectra up to hard X-rays - must eventually evolve to quasars and remnant holes [to z~6 super-massive BHs; probed by gravity waves] (Oh; Venkatesan & Shull; Haiman, Abel & Rees; Haiman & Menou)

Remnants of Massive StarsRemnants of Massive Stars Heger et al. 2003 (for single, non-rotating stars)

10M 25M 40M 140M 260M

ZZ=Z=Z

ZZ=0=0

met

alic

ity

met

alic

ity

Feedback ProcessesFeedback Processes

• INTERNAL TO SOURCES - UV flux unbinds gas - supernova expels gas, sweeps up shells - H2 chemistry (positive and negative) - metals enhance cooling - depends strongly on IMF

• GLOBAL - H2 chemistry (positive and negative) - photo-evaporation (minihalos with <10 km/s) - photo-heating (halos with 10< <50 km/s) - global dispersion of metals (pop III pop II) - mechanical (SN blast waves)

Do most minihalos fail to form stars or black holes?

Global Feedback I. RadiativeGlobal Feedback I. Radiative

Soft UV background:

H2 dissociated by 11.2-13.6 eVphotons:

H2+ H2(*) H+H+’

this background inevitablethis background inevitableand it destroys moleculesand it destroys molecules

~ 1 keV photons promote free electrons more H2

H+ H++e- +’

H + e- H- +

H- + H H2+ e-

Soft X-ray background:

this background from quasarsthis background from quasarspromotes molecule formationpromotes molecule formation

⊝ ⊕

Haiman, Abel & Rees (2000)Haiman, Abel & Rees (2000)

Global Feedback II. Entropy Floor?Global Feedback II. Entropy Floor?Oh & Haiman 2003; Kuhlen & Madau 2005

Most of 1st generation objectsmay form in more massive halos

Redshift

Nor

mal

ized

En

trop

y

• First star creates ~ 100 kpc ionized bubble

• Star dies after ~106 yrs and HII region recombines

• Fossil HII region cools off CMB

• T~300 K implies excess entropy

• Contraction, H2 formation prevented

• Depends on density at illumination

What happens in TWhat happens in Tvir vir >10>1044K halos?K halos?

These halos, as opposed to minihalos, may be the dominant hosts of the “first generation” of black holes.

Behavior of gas has not been studied in same detail as for minihalos (no 3D simulations).

What happens in TWhat happens in Tvir vir >10>1044K halos?K halos?

Isothermal atomic cooling at T=104 K:

Jeans mass remains high most disks would be stable Oh & Haiman 2001Oh & Haiman 2001

direct collapse to 106 M BH ?

need H2 to fragment / form stars.

1/2

3

3/2

48

J 1cm

n

K10

TM10M

cf ~100 M for stars

Bromm & Loeb 2003Bromm & Loeb 2003Volonteri & Rees 2005Volonteri & Rees 2005

Can HCan H22 form in non-equilibrium chemistry? form in non-equilibrium chemistry?

log( Temperature / K )

log(

coo

lin

g ra

te /

erg

s-1 c

m3 )

universal ratio ofn(H2 )/n(H)~10-3

independent of density, temperature,background flux

Key: gas cools fasterthan it recombines,leaving extra electrons

Oh & Haiman (2002)

Conclusion: TConclusion: Tvir vir >10>1044K halos cool to ~100KK halos cool to ~100K

(Oh & Haiman 2001; Haiman, Spaans & Quataert 2001)

Similar to minihalos: Similar to minihalos:

Rely on H2 cooling and fragment on similar (few 100 M ) scales ?

Main difference:Main difference:

contract to higher densities less susceptible to feedback HD reduces temperature and fragmentation scale?

N.B.: cooling radiation may be observable as Ly ‘fuzz’

Uehara & Inutsuka 2000Machida et al. 2005Johnson & Bromm 2005

Outline of TalkOutline of Talk

1. Theoretical Expectations –

chemistry and cooling in cosmological models

2. Growth of the z~6 Quasars –

in hierarchical structure formation theories

3. Catching Proto-Galaxies in Assembling Stage

– imaging large scale gas infall in Ly

α

4. Predictions for the Future

– radio counts, gravity waves

High-z Supermassive BHsHigh-z Supermassive BHs

Example: SDSS 1114-5251 (Fan et al. 2003)

z=6.43 Mbh 4 x 109 M

e-folding (Edd) time:

4 x (/0.1) -1 107yr

Age of universe (z=6.43)

8 x 108 yr

How did this SMBH grow so massive?

No. e-foldings needed

ln(Mbh/Mseed) ~ 20 Mseed ~100 M

Growth of High-z Supermassive BHsGrowth of High-z Supermassive BHs

z=6.43

z=20

CDM mergertree

1. Most of the BH mass from z~15 seeds: must start early!2. High efficiency ( 0.2) ruled out, unless seeds very massive≳3. A super-Eddington accretion phase is required

min = 10 km/s

Assembly history of z=6.43 SDSS quasarAssembly history of z=6.43 SDSS quasar

Mbh=4.6×109M⊙

Mhalo=1013M ⊙

Lacey & Cole (1994)Lacey & Cole (1994)

Luminosity (Eddington):

Abundance:

=0.1

=1

min = 30 km/s

Assume:

Sum of smaller BHs, each growing exponentially from a stellar Sum of smaller BHs, each growing exponentially from a stellar seedseed

redshift

(Haiman 2004)

Gravity wave ‘Kick’Gravity wave ‘Kick’ of > 100 km/s of > 100 km/s

Favata et al. (2004)Favata et al. (2004)Merritt et al. (2004)Merritt et al. (2004)

Gravitational Lensing of SDSS QSOsGravitational Lensing of SDSS QSOs

• Expected Lensing Probability at z=6 - intrinsic lensing probability small, ntrinsic lensing probability small, 10∼10∼ -3 -3 (Comeford, Haiman & - but magnification bias can boost it to but magnification bias can boost it to 1 ∼1 ∼ Schaye 2003)

• Search for High-Magnification Lensing - for spherical lens, μ 2 produces multiple images - No 2nd image on HST images of 4 high-z QSOs to 0.3” resolution (Richards et al. 2004)

• Magnification without Multiple Images (Keeton, Kuhlen & - ellipticity and/or shear can give high μ Haiman 2004)

- average over realistic e, γ distributions - dwarfs (NFW), galaxies (SIS), clusters (NFW)• Fraction of Lens Systems without a detectable 2nd image - single image: 5-10% (mostly NFW) - 2nd image too faint or unresolved: 24-1% (mostly SIS)

Outline of TalkOutline of Talk

1. Theoretical Expectations –

chemistry and cooling in cosmological models

2. Growth of the z~6 Quasars –

in hierarchical structure formation theories

3. Catching Proto-Galaxies in Assembling Stage

– imaging large scale gas infall in Ly

α

4. Predictions for the Future

– radio counts, gravity waves

Processed ionizing radiation produced by embedded AGN (or other ionizing source)

Extended Lyman Extended Lyman EmissionEmission

Does the AGN turn or while there is stillsignificant infall of material from large(several 100 kpc) scales?

Cooling radiation from contracting gasLy photons scattered from the nucleus

Can we detect contracting extended (size ~Rvir) hydrogen envelope?

Isothermal atomic cooling ?Isothermal atomic cooling ?

log( Temperature / K )

log(

coo

lin

g ra

te /

erg

s-1 c

m3 )

~

~ Rvir

Rvir

10sRvir

Birnboim & Dekel (2003); Maller & Bullock (2004)

Can We Detect the Cooling Radiation?Can We Detect the Cooling Radiation?

2. How many halos can we hope to detect ?

~1 halo per JWST field at z=7~1 halo per JWST field at z=7

vvcirccirc ≥ 150 km/s≥ 150 km/s

~10 halos per field at z=3~10 halos per field at z=3

blind search in R=5 filter (narrow filter can go deeper)

10"5~(z)Avir/dR~θ

21716α erg/s/cm1010~F

1. How does cooling halo look like?

flux spread over Rvir:

JWST limiting line flux at 3 < z < 8:

“cooling flow” - extended Ly “blob”

3. What if a bright quasar turns on in a collapsing halo?

10-100 times brighter “fuzz”

(Haiman & Rees 2001)

(Haiman, Spaans & Quataert 2000)

mostly Ly emission:

constrains galaxy formation

Lyman Lyman Fuzz Around Young AGN Fuzz Around Young AGNHaiman & Rees 2001

log(Tvir/K)

log(

Flu

x/er

g s-1

cm

-2 a

sec-2

• Surface brightness should be detectableWeidinger et al. 2005Bunker et al. 2004Bergeron et al. 2002

Steidel et al. 2001Matsuda et al. 2005

• Challenge: interpretation of any possible detection of spatially resolved Lyα emission

LyLy Transfer Basics Transfer Basics Photons undergo random walk in space+frequency.

Different frequency translates to different m.f.p.

Moderate optical depth:

photon escapes in wing in

single flight.

Extreme optical depth:

photon escapes in single

“excursion”.

ττ ≲≲ 10 1033 ττ ≳≳ 10 1033

Less sensitive to profiles More sensitive to profiles

Spectrum Emerging from Static SphereSpectrum Emerging from Static Sphere

Red Blue

CoreWing Wing

Gas Infall vs. Outflow (moderate opt. depth)Gas Infall vs. Outflow (moderate opt. depth)

CF: Spatially resolved fuzz around z~4 quasar(Weidinger et al. 2004)

Monte CarloMonte CarloModel assumes:Model assumes:Dijkstra et al. 2005Dijkstra et al. 2005

gas in NFW halogas in NFW halo

power-law v(r)power-law v(r) central ionizingcentral ionizingsource (quasar)source (quasar)

Effect of Scattering in IGMEffect of Scattering in IGM

Transmission Through perturbedIGM

•ρ(r), v(r) around DM halo (Barkana 2004)•Ionizing QSO•Impact parameter

Characteristictransmission profileextending to red sideof Lyα line

Gas Infall vs. OutflowGas Infall vs. Outflow

CF: Spatially resolved spectrumof Steidel’s LAB # 2(Wilman et al. 2005)

interpretation:

Ly α generated by a buried source

absorption by 100 kpc shell, swept-up by super-wind

Alternative: IGM infall onto a density peak

Gas Infall vs. OutflowGas Infall vs. Outflow

IGM infall (Dijkstra et al.)(Dijkstra et al.) Absorbing Shell (Wilman et al.)(Wilman et al.)

Red Blue

-1300 km/s650 km/s

• Ly radiation emerges blue-shifted, smaller red peak

• IGM opacity can make it hard to detect at high z

Spectrum Emerging from Collapsing SphereSpectrum Emerging from Collapsing SphereDijkstra, Haiman & Spaans, in preparation

Diagnostic of Gas Infall: Brightness ProfileDiagnostic of Gas Infall: Brightness Profile

shallow v(r) steep v(r)

Surface Surface brightnessbrightnessprofileprofile

radius (arcsec)radius (arcsec)

• Blue photons come preferentially from central regions

• Surface brightness profiles flat (log. slope of -0.5)

• Scattering vs. Intrinsic effect distinguished using Hα

Outline of TalkOutline of Talk

1. Theoretical Expectations –

chemistry and cooling in cosmological models

2. Growth of the z~6 Quasars –

in hierarchical structure formation theories

3. Catching Proto-Galaxies in Assembling Stage

– imaging large scale gas infall in Ly

α

4. Predictions for the Future

– radio counts, gravity waves

Direct Detections in Radio Direct Detections in Radio Haiman, Quataert & Bower (2004)

Model assumesModel assumes

MMbhbh M Mhalohalo5/3 5/3 (1+z)(1+z)

(feedback; (feedback; Silk & Rees 1998Silk & Rees 1998))

RL distribution fromRL distribution fromFIRST-SDSS sampleFIRST-SDSS sample((Ivezic et al. 2003Ivezic et al. 2003))

Duty cycle of 2Duty cycle of 2101077yryr

Minimum BH massMinimum BH mass MMbhbh >10 >1077 M M ⊙ ⊙ ??

Gravity Waves from BH-BH Mergers (LISA)Gravity Waves from BH-BH Mergers (LISA)Menou, Haiman & Narayanan (2001); Volonteri et al. (2004)

Tens of mergers perTens of mergers peryear detectable in LISAyear detectable in LISAfrequency band.frequency band.

Can measure EddingtonCan measure Eddingtonratio if quasar counterpartratio if quasar counterpartis found (possible only tois found (possible only toz~1-2) z~1-2)

Many other motivationsMany other motivations

Kocsis, Frei, Haiman & Menou(2005)

Can We Identify a Unique Counterpart?Can We Identify a Unique Counterpart?Kocsis, Frei, Haiman & Menou (2005)

Angular and Angular and RadialRadiallocalization from GW localization from GW signal alone dependssignal alone dependson physical and orbitalon physical and orbitalparameters and orientationparameters and orientation

Angular Error: large, and dominated by LISA uncertaintyAngular Error: large, and dominated by LISA uncertainty

Radial Errors: - LISA dRadial Errors: - LISA dLL(z) measurement (z) measurement - Cosmological Model - Cosmological Model z z 0.005≲ 0.005≲ - Peculiar velocity- Peculiar velocity - Lensing-induced variations in d- Lensing-induced variations in dLL(z): (z): z z 0.03 0.03 at z=1at z=1

}}

Number of Quasars in 3D LISA Error BoxNumber of Quasars in 3D LISA Error Box

• Extrapolate known optical QSO LF to MBH ≲ 3x107M⊙

• Assume L/L(edd) ~ 0.3, consistent with recent obs+models• Compute mean number in error box (20% lensing correction)• Feasible at z<1 for 4x105M⊙ ≲ MBH ≲ 107M⊙

• Can be extended to z=3 if BHs spin rapidly

ConclusionsConclusions

1. Hosts of the first generation of BHs:

~108 M⊙ dark matter halos collapsing at z~10

(as opposed to minihalos relying on H2-cooling)

2. z~6 QSOs are not strongly lensed. Assembling ≳109 M⊙

BHs requires seeds growing uninterrupted since z~15

(and also a super-Eddington growth phase)

3. Lyα halos may offer diagnostic of early stages of the thick

collapsing gaseous envelopes around proto-galaxies

4. LISA can measure precise L/LEdd if QSOs accompany GWs

Le FinLe Fin