outline - sci.esa.intsci.esa.int/conferences/xeus/23_fe_lines_cappi.pdf · annalia longinotti,...
TRANSCRIPT
With help from Mauro Dadina, Barbara DeMarco, Magherita Giustini,Annalia Longinotti, Gabriele Ponti, Francesco Tombesi
Massimo CappiMassimo CappiINAF/INAF/IASF-BolognaIASF-Bologna
Probing variable iron emission and absorption lines in AGNs with XEUS
1. Evidence for (redshifted)relativistic Fe emission lines
2. Evidence for VARIABLE Feemission lines
3. Evidence for (blueshifted)relativistic ABSORPTION Fe lines
4. Evidence for VARIABLE Feabsorption lines
5. Future with/for XEUS
Outline
Kato et al. 2003
Hot X-ray emittingcorona
X-ray absorption spectroscopy:Probe of launching regions of jets/winds
Credit: A. Mueller
X-raying the innermost regions of accretion and ejection flows
X-ray “reflection” spectroscopy:Probe of innermost regions ofaccretion disk
Jet
Goals are to characterise the accretion and ejection flows near SMBHs
I – Broad, redshifted or double-peaked FeK lines: often weak,but quite common (~~2/3rd)
Accretion (i/i): Evidence for relativistic Fe emission lines
5
4
EW(B
road
FeK
) eV
2 main types of broad lines:
-Redshifted broad diskline(EW~100-200 (EW~100-200 eVeV) ) See Fabian’s talk
-Double-peaked profile Dovciak et al., ‘04(EW<60 (EW<60 eVeV))
⇒ Confirms results from Nandra et al. ’07, MNRAS, 382, 194
(N.B: See also many results showed at ESAC’s wokshop on broad lines AN, 2006)
See poster by Longinotti et al. (FERO project)
…model independent evidence that lines are indeed relativistic…
Variability of redshifted Fe component on short time-scales (~ 1000s) ⇒ model-independent evidence that line originates in innermost regions of accretion disk
Ponti et al., 2004,
RMS
vari
abili
ty (%
)
XMM - MCG6-30-15MCG-6-30-15 – Clean flare
Accretion (i/iv): Evidence for variable Fe emission lines
Statistics are a bit more complex, but key point is that Fe lines DO show fasttime variations and redshifted energies!!
⇒ Origin from orbiting hot spots in innermostregions of accretion disk?
XMM - NGC3516
Iwasawa et al., 2004
Accretion (ii/iv): Evidence for variable Fe emission lines
Tombesi et al., 2007
XMM – NGC3783
Accretion (iii/iv): Evidence for variable Fe emission lines
Orbital period (23 ks) + diskline fit of the line
⇒ r about 9-15 Rg, consistent with a hot spotor a spiral wave
(Armitage & Reynolds 2003)
(Tombesi et al. 2007)
De Marco et al., 2008, submitted
Accretion (iv/iv): Evidence for variable Fe emission lines
T about 32 ks, d about 20 rg, time-lag 15 ks,
PG1211+143 (z=0.08) v~0.1c
2 Energy (keV) 5 7 10Pounds et al. 2003a,b
⇒ massive, high velocity and highly ionized outflows in several RQ AGNs/QSOsMass outflow rate: comparable to Edd. Acc. rate (~M⨀/yr); velocity ~0.1-0.2 c
(If) interpreted as Kα resonant
absorption by Fe XXV (6.70 keV)
or FeXXVI (6.96 keV)Reeves et al. 2003
PDS456 (z=0.18) v~0.1c
2 Energy (keV) 5 7 10
Ejection (i/ii): Evidence for blue-shifted absorption Fe lines (High-v)
APM 08279+5255 (z=3.91) v~0.2-0.4c
2 high-z BAL QSOsChartas et al. 2002, Hasinger, Schartel & Komossa 2002
N.B.: Would have been undetected at z=0...
Massive outflows…also (mostly?) at high redshift
See also Wang et al. ’05 (v=0.8c inqso@z=2.6) and review by Cappi 2006, AN
Chartas, Brandt & Gallagher, 2003
PG 1115+080 (z=1.72) v~0.1-0.3c
MOS
PN
Ejection (ii/ii): Evidence for blue-shifted absorption Fe lines (High-z)
WA variability on timescales 1000-10000s
Risaliti et al. 2005
NGC1365 Mrk 509 (long-look, 200ks)
Cappi et al., in preparationDadina et al. ‘05
Obs1
Obs2
Obs3
Different phases in WA shall respond differently in time…(See also Krongold et al. 2007)
Ejection (ii/ii): Evidence for blue-shifted absorption Fe lines
1) Probe the flow DYNAMICS !(i.e. accelerations in innermost regions, near BHs)- Measure delta v, not only v!- On short time-scales (less than few 1000s)
2) Probe the HIGHEST VELOCITIES (v > 0.3c),and thus masses/kinetic energy, in outflowing components
Daniel Proga, 2005 (failed disk winds)
Future (i/vi): I see two main directions
…to probe the flow dynamics (∆v/∆t) of innermost regionsby means of detection and time-resolved spectroscopy
of energy-shifted absorption lines.
Fiducial numbers:We wish to follow emission and absorption lines from, say, ~1 to ~10 Rs, withintervals of 1RsLet assume v~0.2c, then forBH mass= 108 M● ⇒ ∆Time-scale ~ 5000 sBH mass= 106 M● ⇒ ΔTime-scale ~ 50 s (Note: 1µs if 1 M●)
Scaling from Mrk509 and XMM, and assuming EW(Fe)=50 eV ⇒
Con-X(6000cm2) XEUS(25000cm2)@6keVF(2-10)=2x10-11cgs (~ 15 sources) 1000s 100sF(2-10)=2x10-12cgs (~ 50 sources) 10000s 1000sF(2-10)=2x10-13cgs (~ 250 sources) 100000s 10000s
N.B.: If v>0.2c, timescales consequently reducedReally needed because mostly BH mass≤ 107 M●
Future (ii/vi): Reduce timescales…
A large effective area at energies E>3 keV is the major observationalrequirement for Fe emission and absorption X-ray spectroscopy
XMM (pn)
Con-X
XEUS@6 keV@1 keVArea (cm2)
600950XMM(PN)
600015000CON-X
2500055000XEUS
x3x4
x10
x15
Mrk509: XEUS TES F(2-10)=10-11cgs Exposure=100s S/N>3
V=±0.1c
V=±0.3c
V=±0.2c
Simula
tions
Future (iii/vi): XEUS simulation TES (2 m2@6 keV)
NGC1365 F(2-10)=10-11cgs S/N>3
Future (iv/vi): XEUS simulations WFI (2.5 m2@6 keV)
XMM resu
lts
Risaliti et al. 2005
XEUS S
imula
tion
NGC1365 F(2-10)=10-11cgs S/N>3
Highest throughput for time-resolved detections of abs./em. lines⇒ real-time, extreme dynamics, i.e. inward and outward accelerations!?(line ∆v/∆t) ....blob=test particle to test Kerr vs. Schwarzschild GR
Future (v/vi): XEUS simulations WFI (2.5 m2@6 keV)
Simula
tion
Credit:F. Tom
besi
Accelerated flow Decelerated flow
Conclusions
Clear evidence for relativistic emission and absorption Fe linesClear evidence for variable, often transient, emission and absorption lines
Variability on (short) time-scales equivalent to a few gravitational radii
Demonstrate Fe lines produced in theinnermost regions of accretion disk (emission) and
launching regions of jets/winds (absorption)
And this is a model-independent evidence…
Likely “tip of the iceberg” points to the need for:
1 ) Very high (>2m2@6 keV) throughput (main req.)
2) High ΔE/E @ 6 keV and high-E (E>10 keV) coverage (second req.)
Critical Issues (i/ii): Observations
Lines statistical significance?(transient features, number oftrials in time and energy, etc…)
Identifications of edges/linesenergies? (Kallman et al. 2005, Kaspiet al. for PG1211)
Local “contamination”? (PDS456 atrisk? McKernan et al. ’04, ‘05)
N.B: Overall evidence is robust
cz (km/s)
Out
flow
v (km
/s)
BECAUSE- “Physical bias” against highest ionizationin/outflowing gas (detectable only with Fe)- “Detection bias” against transient features- “Observational bias” against highest-v blueshiftedfeatures (poor high-E sensitivity…cut-off at ~7 keV)
WHILEX-ray absorption lines are naturally expected in modelsinvolving blobby/winds ejecta/outflows, such as thosepredicted by MHD simulations of accretion disks
The tip ofthe Iceberg?
Future (i/vii): In my opinion…
Edges at E~7.1-9.0 keV (rest-frame) + vout~ 0.1-0.5c ⇒ Eobserved~ 8-14 keV !!(maybe the reason why never seen earlier, except for high-z sources)
v=0.1c
(Wfi: S/N=100; Cdte: S/N=10) (Wfi: S/N=50; Cdte: S/N=10)
v=0.5c (?)
PDS456: XEUS WFI + CdTe (100 ks exposure)
High energies is a MUST HAVE to study relativistic outflows
Future (vii/vii): XEUS simulation (with CdTe)
Simula
tions
iii) Magnetically driven winds from accretion disk
Emmering, Blandford & Shlosman, ’92; Kato et al. ‘03
Interpretation: (Three main) Wind dynamical models
i) Thermally driven winds from BLR or torus
Balsara & Krolik, 93; Woods et al. ‘96
i) ⇒ Large R, low vii) and iii) ⇒ Low R and large v
Murray et al. ‘95, Proga et al. ‘00
ii) Radiative-driven wind from accretion disk
…and/or…
First unexpected “revolution” in extragal. astrophysics: not only most (all?) galaxies have SMBHs in their centers, but these correlate with bulge properties ⇒evidence for feedback mechanism between SMBH(AGN) and its’ host galaxy?
Magorrian et al. '98Tremaine '02; Gebhardt '02...etc
Mbh~ б4
(see e.g. King and Pounds '03, Crenshaw, Kraemer & George '03, ARA&A)
Importance (i/ii): Feedback in the (co?)evolution of galaxies
See Talksby PageandCroston
Second unexpected “revolution” in extragal. astrophysics: need preheating torecover L-T relations & cooling flows extra-heating ⇒ Energy feedback fromAGNs/QSOs and groups&clusters?
Lapi, Cavaliere & Menci, ‘05
Grav. scaling
With SN preheating
With AGN pre-heating
With QSO ejection/outflows
Perseus Cluster, Fabian et al. ‘05
Importance (ii/ii): Reheating of groups and clusters of galaxies
See Talk bySanders
ii) In an outflowing nuclear wind/jet (e.g. Reeves et al. ‘05)
Interpretation II (i/ii): Gravitational redshift
i) In a rotating absorbing corona
(Ruszkowski & Fabian, ‘00)
N.B: Origin in gravitational redshift require R<few Rg
(Picture from Elvis ’00)
iv) “Aborted” jet (Ghisellini, Haardt, Matt ’03)
Interpretation II (ii/ii): Inflowing wind/blobs/clumps
iii) Failed disk wind (Proga et al. ‘00)
N.B: If Infalling blobs/clouds Þ may represent suitable test-particles to probe GR under strong field
Optical depth
Density
Temperature
t > 1 out and inflow
Ejection/outflows: Massive outflows (ii/iii)
McKernan, Yaqoob & Reynolds 2004
PDS456
PG1211+143
Cast doubts on the AGNorigin of high-velocityabsorption gas...becauseconsistent with localWHIGM (N.B.: PDS456 isalong Gal. Plane)
Different phases in WA shall respond differently:e.g. with a range of response times in a radially segregated flow.This will be crucial to determine location and covering factor …
WA variability on timescales 1000-10000s Mrk766 RGS
Mason et al. 2003
Mrk766 EPIC pn (RMS)
Ponti et al., PhD thesisRM
S va
riab
ility
(%)
Framework (iv/iv): Warm absorbers…variable
III– Complex Absorption FeK lines: Narrow/broad(?) redshiftedabsorption lines:
Post-Chandra & XMM-NewtonAccretion/inflows: Observations (8/8)
Þ Direct probe of relativistic bulk inflows! (v~0.1-0.3c)
MCG-6-30-15 in low state(Ponti, private com.)
(Longinotti et al., submitted to A&A.)
i) Fake lines?ii) (very) wrong continuum (WA)? iii) 2 different lines? Þ 1 narrow + 1 Kerr(red, reverberation, tail of a Kerr line ?)iv) 1 relativistic line with resonant absorption?
Mrk335
E1821+643 (z=0.3) HETG data(Yaqoob & Serlemitsos, 2005)
(Reeves et al., astro-ph/0509280)
PG1211+143 (z=0.08) Chandra data
VERY NEW! and muchdebated
Model with narrow emission and absorption lines: PL (Г=1.9, F(2-10)=10-11erg/cm2s, Exp.=50 ks) + 2 FeK emission lines (E1=5 keV,E2=6.4 keV, σ1= σ2=50 eV, EW1=EW2=100eV) + 4 FeK absorptionlines (E1,2,3,4=7, 9, 12, 15 keV, σ1,2,3,4<50 eV, EW1,2,3,4=-100eV)
Edges and absorption lines at E~7.1-9.0 keV (rest-frame) + vout~ 0.1-0.5c Þ Eobserved~ 8-14 keV !!
Simulations of narrow emission and absorption lines
Simula
tions
Model: PL + 2 emission lines + 4 abs. lines
DEabs<100 eV Þ Idee would be to follow the evolution of blob ejections (or injections) N.B: Masses involved can be greater than Mearth (1027g/ejecta) >>10-11g in accelerators
Deceleration Acceleration
Future (vi/vii): Simbol-X simulation (SDD+CdTe)
Not only winds and accretion disk, but also outflowing and inflowing clouds?…
Magnetic Tower by Kato et al. 2003 Quasar wind model by Elvis 2000
v/c= 0 0.1 0.2 0.30.4
(see also Lynden-Bell 2003)
BlueshiftedLines?
Redshifted
Lines?
Gauss. abs. line if blobs?
Inverse P-Cygniprofile if wind?