1 / 39

Collaborators (“UFO Hunters”) : M. Dadina, M.Giustini, G. Palumbo, G. Ponti, J. Reeves,

X-raying UFOs in AGNs. Massimo Cappi and Francesco Tombesi INAF/IASF-Bologna. (Secret) Outline. Framework (Multiwavelength) Evidence for UFOs X-ray Observations: A variable phenomenon…up to now Not really clear…up to now Significance and consequences

Télécharger la présentation

Collaborators (“UFO Hunters”) : M. Dadina, M.Giustini, G. Palumbo, G. Ponti, J. Reeves,

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. X-raying UFOs in AGNs Massimo Cappi and Francesco Tombesi INAF/IASF-Bologna (Secret) Outline • Framework (Multiwavelength) Evidence for UFOs • X-ray Observations: A variable phenomenon…up to now Not really clear…up to now • Significance and consequences Interstellar and intergalactic feedback…E.T….Mars Attack Collaborators (“UFO Hunters”): M. Dadina, M.Giustini, G. Palumbo, G. Ponti, J. Reeves, T. Yaqoob, V. Braito (but N.1 is Tombesi)

  2. Framework: Fast winds/outflows/ejecta in AGNs Fast (v up to ~ 50000 km/s) winds in BAL QSOs (~20% of all QSOs) Jets in radio-loud AGNs M87 - Jet Sey2 NGC5252 OIII cones Weymann et al., ’91; Reichards et al., ‘03 Wide-angle winds & jets in Seyfert galaxies Tadhunter & Tsvetanov, Nature, 1989; Wilson & Tsvetanov, 1994 Cappi et al. 1995 …known/seen in AGNs since long ago See yesterday’s talks by Kriss and Gallagher

  3. Many details from Chandra/XMM gratings NGC3783 Exp=900 ks Kaspi et al. '01; Netzer et al. '02; Georges et al. '03; Krongold et al. ‘03 Clear now that often multiple ionization & kinetic components: outflows with v~100-1000 km/s Blustin et al. 2004 Framework: Warm absorbers…probe highest-v outflowing/ejected gas 50% of all Sey 1s exhibit WAs ASCA Fabian, et al. ’94 Otani, ’95, PhD Reynolds et al. '97 Georges et al. '97

  4. PDS456 (z=0.18) v~0.1c (If) interpreted as Kα resonant absorption by Fe XXV (6.70 keV) or FeXXVI (6.96 keV) 2 Energy (keV) 5 7 10 Reeves et al. 2003  massive, high velocity and highly ionized outflows in several RQ AGNs/QSOs Mass outflow rate: comparable to Edd. Acc. rate (~M◉/yr); velocity ~0.1-0.2 c Framework: Blue-shifted absorption lines/edges – High-v New and unexpected results from Chandra and XMM-Newton observations PG1211+143 (z=0.08) v~0.1c 2 Energy (keV) 5 7 10 Pounds et al. 2003a,b

  5. NGC1365 Risaliti et al. 2005 (See also Krongold et al. 2007 on NGC4051) Variability allows to place limits on location, mass, etc. Framework: Blue-shifted absorption lines/edges - Variability Absorbers variabilityon timescales 1000-10000s Mrk 509 (long-look, 200ks) Obs1 Obs2 Obs3 MC et al., 2009 Dadina et al. ‘05

  6. Mrk 509: Among brightest F~2-5x10-11 cgs and most luminous L~1-3x1044 ergs/s Type 1 Sey known EW(FeXXVI)~-20 -60 eV V~0.14-0.2c ∆t~100 ks Log~5 erg cm/s, Nh~2-4x1023 cm-2, v~0.14-0.2c From absorber parameters and variability, we estimated: R<500 Rs MC et al. 2009 MRK509 contour plots (MC et al. 2009)

  7. X-ray Observations: Variability MCG-5-23-16 (XMM+Chandra) Again, absorber variabilityon timescales ~20000s Braito et al., 2007 Data require large Nw, high , and vout=0.1c

  8. ii) Radiative-driven wind from accretion disk i) Thermally driven winds from BLR or torus Murray et al. ‘95, Proga et al. ‘00 …and/or… iii) Magnetically driven winds from accretion disk Balsara & Krolik, 93; Woods et al. ‘96 Emmering, Blandford & Shlosman, ’92; Kato et al. ‘03 Interpretation: (Three main)Wind dynamical models i)  Large R, low v ii) and iii) Low R and large v

  9. Theoretical Interpretation: (Three main) Wind dynamical models MHD+LD model by Proga et al. ‘00, ‘03 Overall numbers (Nh, , vout, etc.) are consistent with observations…

  10. Data Interpretation: Yes indeed…one expects (mostly/only) strong Fe line absorptions when accounting for proper wind geometries and physics Sim et al., 2008

  11. Most important (open) issue • Fundamental to: • PHYSICS of accelerated and accreted flows (winds?, blobs?, etc.), i.e. understand how BHs accelerate earth-like quantities of gas to relativistic velocities • COSMOLOGY: i.e. estimate the mass outflow rate, thus the impact of AGN outflows on ISM and IGM enrichment and heating! • Nw (cm-2) • Location (R, DeltaR) • Ionization state () • Velocity • Covering factor • Frequency in AGNs Elvis et al. ‘00,Creenshaw et al. ’03, King et al. ‘03, Chartas et al. ‘03, Yaqoob et al. ‘05, Blustin et al. ‘05,Risaliti et al. ’05, Krongold et al. ‘07 Current estimates have order of magnitude uncertainties, they go from: dM/dt (Lkin) few % to several times dMacc/dt (Ledd) This is a fundamental (open) issue

  12. Ejection/outflows: From source-by-sources to representative samples… We analysed in a systematic and uniform way, a (almost) complete sample of nearby, X-ray bright, radio-quiet AGNs(Tombesi et al. 2010a,b) 4-10keV fluxes z distribution of sources • Selection of all NLSy1, Sy1 and Sy2 in RXTE All-Sky Slew Survey Catalog (XSS; Revnivtsev et al. 2004) • Cross-correlation with XMM-Newton Accepted Targets Catalog • 44 objects for 104 pointed XMM-Newton observations • Local (z<0.1) • X-ray bright (F4-10keV=10-12-10-10 erg s-1 cm-2)

  13. Absorption lines search • Uniform spectral analysis: • Reduction and analysis of all EPIC pn spectra in the 4-10keV • Baseline model: absorbed power-law + Gaussian Fe K emission lines • Absorption lines search: • Addition of narrow line to baseline model stepping energy in 4-10keV and recording Δχ2 deviations • Visualization on energy-intensity contour plot (significance 68% red, 90% green, 99% blue) (e.g. Miniutti et al. 2007, MC et al. 2009) • Selection of narrow lines with F-test confidence levels ≥99% • Line parameters determined by direct fitting to the data Absorbed power-law Example of PG1211+143 (Tombesi et al. 2010a) Absorbed power-law + emission line

  14. Absorption lines significance F-test can overestimate the detection significance for a blind search of emission/absorption lines over a range of energies (e.g. Protassov et al. 2002). • Extensive Monte Carlo simulations(e.g. MC et al. 2009) • Additional significance test for lines at energies ≥7.1keV • Null hypothesis that spectra are fitted by model without absorption lines • 103 simulated spectra for each case • Simulated Δχ2 distribution for random generated lines • Selection of lines with MC confidence levels ≥95% Global probability for the lines to be generated by random fluctuations is very low (≤10-8 from Binomial distribution). • Checked no contamination from pn background and calibration • Independent confirmation of blue-shifted lines detection from MOS data (without relying on any statistical method)

  15. Results:Yes, we confirm there are indeed UFOs! (Ultra-Fast Outflows…) Blue-shift velocity distribution Cumulative velocity distribution • 36 absorption lines detected in all 104 XMM observations • Identified with FeXXV and FeXXVI K-shell resonant absorption • 19/44 objects with absorption lines (≈43%) • 17/44 objects with blue-shifted absorption lines (lower limit ≈39%, can reach a maximum of ≈60%) • 11/44 objects with outflow velocity >0.1c (≈25%) • Blue-shift velocity distribution ~0-0.3c, peak ~0.1c • Average outflow velocity 0.110±0.004 c Tombesi et al. 2010a (The UFO’s hunters commander in chief)

  16. Results Lines EW distribution • Most frequent detected line is FeXXVI Lyα • EW is in the range ≈10-100eV, with mean ≈40-50eV • Estimated global covering factor from fraction of sources with lines (C=Ω⁄4Π)≈0.4-0.6 • Geometry not very collimated, large opening angles favored (similar to WA)

  17. Physical photo-ionization modelling using XSTAR • Mean phenomenological SED from the radio-quiet sample: • SEDs 34 Type 1s from NED database • scattering due to source variability and different instruments • normalized SEDs to near-IR inflection point ~1.25μm (like Elvis et al. 1994) • average flux for each energy point Simple mean SED with three intervals:Radio to mm (Γ~2), mm to IR (Γ~0.1), IR to X-rays (Γ~2) • Xstar grid for direct spectral fitting: • input enenergy band 0.1eV, 106 eV • mean SED for radio-quiet sources • power-law Γ=2 for radio-loud sources • turbulent velocity v=500 km/s  NH~1022-1024 cm-2, logξ~3-6 erg s-1 cm-2 (vout, NH lower limits, unknown inclination angle)

  18. Tombesi et al., 2010c, in prep WAs in RQ from McKernan et al. (2007) (filled black circles), WA in RL from Torresi et al. (2009) and Reeves et al. (2009) (filled blue triangle), UFOs in RQ (red crosses)

  19. Ejection/outflows: • estimated distances: r<0.01-0.1pc (<102-105 rs) • (accretion disk winds? e.g. Elvis 2000; King & Pounds 2003) • Often vout > vesc, but not always, material shall fall back sometimes? (“aborted jet”? e.g. Ghisellini et al. 2004, Dadina et al. 2005) • variability time scales t~1day – 1year • Lbol/LEdd~0.1-1; Mout/Macc~0.1-1; Ek~1044-1045 erg s-1 ~0.1 Lbol • (last two estimates depend on covering fraction C) • Acceleration mechanism? Line, magnetically or momentum driven?

  20. Cosmological Importance of UFOs?: (on-going work) Role in feedback in the (co?)evolution of galaxies? Mbh~ б4 Role in heating groups and custers? Grav. scaling With SN preheating With AGN pre-heating Magorrian et al. '98 Tremaine '02; Gebhardt '02...etc WithQSO ejection/outflows (see e.g. King and Pounds '03, Crenshaw, Kraemer & George '03, ARA&A) Lapi, Cavaliere & Menci, ‘05

  21. Impact on physics of ejections/outflows? Momentum-driven accretion disk winds/outflows? As in King 2009? “Eddington winds from AGN are likely to have velocities ~0.1c and show the presence of helium- or hydrogen-like iron” (King 2009) • Eddington accretion episodes Lbol/LEdd~0.1-1 • electron scattering wind τ~1 at infinity • wind momentuum ~ photon momentuum (Moutv~LEdd/c) • typical velocity ~0.1c • typical ionization parameter logξ~4 and linear relation vout and ξ • (Fe XXV, Fe XXVI + Nickel ions?) • wind interaction with host galaxy, ram pressure • important for feedback SMBH and host galaxy • does explain the M-σ relation

  22. Future prospects: Astro-H calorimeter Calorimeter on board Astro-H, next Japanese X-ray satellite to be launched in 2013: good effective area (≈250 cm2 @ 6keV) and high energy resolution (FWHM≈7eV) from 0.1keV up to 12-13keV. • realistic spectra simulations of UFOs • absorption lines resolved, measured velocity broadening (down to ~100-200 km/s @ 6 keV) • estimates EW, blue-shift, centroid energies ~10 times better XIS-FI (100ks simulation) • better constrains on NH, logξ, vturbu

  23. Future pospects: IXO calorimeter X-ray Microcalorimeter Spectrometer (XMS): high effective area ~0.65m2 (~6500cm2 !!) @ 6keV and high energy resolution (FWHM≈2.5eV) from 0.1keV up to 12-13keV. Flux limits (EW=10eV) (Tombesi et al. 2009) logξ=3 erg s-1 cm, NH=1023cm-2, b=1000km/s (Tombesi et al. 2009) • Flux limits • 2-10keV flux limits for 5σ detection of narrow absorption lines in the 3-11keV • Different EWs, exposure times and responses • Lines of EW=10eV (50eV) in ≈6-9keV for ≈10-12 (10-13) erg s-1 cm-2 (expo 100ks) • Spectral variability on time-scales of 5 (10) ks for ≈10-11 (10-12) erg s-1 cm-2 • Spectra simulations • Simulations of highly ionized and massive absorbers • FeXXV/XXVI K lines detectable with high significance • Line details (profile, energy, broadening) measured with high accuracy (>30 times Astro-H) • Extend study to less bright sources • Time variability, dynamics of absorbers

  24. Future: Time vs. energy maps (in emission and absorption lines) NGC1365 F(2-10)=10-11cgs S/N>3 Acceleratedflow Deceleratedflow Simulation Credit:F. Tombesi Highest throughput for time-resolved detections of abs. lines  real-time, extreme dynamics, i.e. inward and outward accelerations!? (line ∆v/∆t) ....blob=test particle to test Kerr vs. Schwarzschild GR

  25. Conclusions • Search for narrow blue-shifted Fe K absorption lines in a complete sample of 44 radio-quiet AGNs observed with XMM-Newton • 36 detected absorption lines (22 at E≥7.1keV) • Global veracity is strong and publication bias solved • Existence of highly ionized, massive and ultra-fast outflows in radio-quiet AGNs: • ≈40% of sources have blue-shifted absorption lines (≈25% with v≥0.1c) • Outflow velocities up to relativistic values (≈0.2-0.3c) • Global covering factor ≈0.4-0.6, large opening angles favored • Important for: BH accretion physics, AGN feedback with host galaxy, SMBH growth, ... • Improvement expected from future X-ray missions, such as Astro-H and IXO

  26. Thanks for your attention, and watch-out for UFOs! and don’t be confused by the fact that UFOs are also called “Ultra-Fast Outflows”…

  27. PG 1115+080 (z=1.72) v~0.1-0.3c MOS PN Chartas, Brandt & Gallagher, 2003 X-ray Observations (ii/iii): Blue-shifted absorption lines/edges – High-z Massive outflows…also (mostly?) at high redshift 2 high-z BAL QSOs Chartas et al. 2002, Hasinger, Schartel & Komossa 2002 APM 08279+5255 (z=3.91) v~0.2-0.4c See also Wang et al. ’05 (v=0.8c in qso@z=2.6) N.B.: Would have been undetected at z=0...

  28. Critical Issues (i/ii): Observations • Lines statistical significance? (transient features, number of trials in time and energy, etc…) • Identifications of edges/lines energies? (Kallman et al. 2005, Kaspi et al. for PG1211) • Local “contamination”? (PDS456 at risk? McKernan et al. ’04, ‘05) • Publication bias? Only positive detection, low signif., Vaughan & Uttley ‘08) Outflow v (km/s) cz (km/s)

  29. Last but not least…for those still skepticals on UFOs • Publication bias solved : • Uniform analysis on complete sample of sources • Lines detection assessed by MC simulations • Global chance probability very low (≤10-8) • Detection independently confirmed by MOS data Not due to local contamination: No correlation between cosmological red-shift and lines blue-shift, no local (z≈0) absorption.

  30. Future (iv/vii): Better statistics on optically-classified samples: SDSS’s BALQSOs cross-correlated with 2XMM  22 spectra and 23 HRs to estimate Nh, , Lx, etc. Giustini et al., submitted See poster E17-0049-08 by Giustini et al.

  31. Future (v/vii): Shorter time-scales and better sensitivity…with XEUS NGC1365 F(2-10)=10-11cgs S/N>3 XMM results Risaliti et al. 2005 XEUS Simulation

  32. Future (vi/vii): Con-X, XEUS or IXO? Aeff  Flength2 x qcrit2 x Refl2 , where qc 0.5/E

  33. Summary I briefly reviewed the current evidence for blue-shifted absorption lines from highly ionized Fe in AGNs (in both Sey and QSOs) These indicate the existence of highly-ionized, high velocity, massive outflows in AGNs, BUT STILL ORDER OF MAGNITUDES UNCERTAINTIES on energy/momentum and mass involved. This topic still requires better measurements of intensity, energy and frequency/recurrency but has a great potential for the study of: launching mechanisms/characteristics of outflows/jets (mechanical energy emerging from BH), important not only for (relativistic) physics but also for link with cosmology • Prospects for future progress are to: • Confirm/secure these findings with longer XMM/Chandra observations • Probe lower time-scales (with > 2m**2 @6 keV, i.e. XEUS-like mission) • Probe high-velocity gas with high-energies (with Simbol-X and/or XEUS hxd)

  34. Future (iii/vii): Reduce timescales… …to probe the flow dynamics (∆v/∆t) of innermost regions by means of detection and time-resolved spectroscopy of energy-shifted absorption lines. Fiducial numbers: We wish to follow abs. lines from, say, ~1 to ~10 Rs, with intervals of 1Rs Let assume v~0.2c, then for BH mass= 108 M● ∆Time-scale ~5000 s BH mass= 106 M● ΔTime-scale ~50 s (Note: 1µs if 1 M●) Scaling from Mrk509 and XMM, and assuming EW(Fe)=-100 eV  Con-X(6000cm2) XEUS(25000cm2)@6keV F(2-10)=2x10-11cgs (~15 sources) 1000s100s F(2-10)=2x10-12cgs (~50 sources) 10000s 1000s F(2-10)=2x10-13cgs (~250 sources) 100000s 10000s N.B.: If v>0.2c, timescales consequently reduced Really needed because mostly BH mass≤ 107 M●

  35. X-ray spectra of winds/outflows

  36. Future (vi/vii): Simbol-X simulation (SDD+CdTe) Simulations of narrow emission and absorption lines Simulations Model: PL + 2 emission lines + 4 abs. lines 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 absorption lines (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 Eobserved~ 8-14 keV !! Acceleration Deceleration Eabs<100 eV  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

  37. Unfortunately XRS on-board ASTRO-E2 is lost Mrk 509, Astro-E2 simulation 100 ks Simulations High energy resolution to distinguish beetwen wind and blob(s) (line profile)

More Related