1 / 30

The redshift dependence of the M BH - M host relation in quasars

Roberto Decarli. The redshift dependence of the M BH - M host relation in quasars. Max-Planck Institut fuer Astronomie Università degli Studi dell’Insubria. A. Treves R. Falomo M. Labita. J.K. Kotilainen R. Scarpa M. Uslenghi. Decarli et al., 2010a-b, MNRAS 402, 2441 & 2453.

lacota-preston
Download Presentation

The redshift dependence of the M BH - M host relation in quasars

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. Roberto Decarli The redshift dependenceof the MBH-Mhost relationin quasars Max-Planck Institut fuer AstronomieUniversità degli Studi dell’Insubria A. TrevesR. Falomo M. Labita J.K. KotilainenR. ScarpaM. Uslenghi Decarli et al., 2010a-b, MNRAS 402, 2441 & 2453 AGN9 Ferrara - May, 26, 2010

  2. MBH – host galaxy relations Gultekin et al. (2009)

  3. MBH – host galaxy relations Blackholes BLR Host galaxies Rinf = G MBH / s*2~ 0.001 Rhost Gultekin et al. (2009)

  4. ? ? ? MBH – host galaxy relations Blackholes BLR Host galaxies Rinf = G MBH / s*2~ 0.001 Rhost Gultekin et al. (2009)

  5. Our study • 96 quasars (48 RQQs, 48 RLQs) with 0<z<3 (2x the sample by Peng et al., 2006 and 3x McLure et al., 2006) • Host galaxy luminosity from high res. images • Black hole masses from spectra

  6. Our study • 96 quasars (48 RQQs, 48 RLQs) with 0<z<3 (2x the sample by Peng et al., 2006 and 3x McLure et al., 2006) • Host galaxy luminosity from high res. images • Black hole masses from spectra • For low-z quasars, images in the HST-WFPC2, spectra from the SDSS and HST-FOS and from on-purpose observations at the Asiago 1.82m Telescope. • For z>0.5 targets, images taken at the NOT and the ESO/VLT, spectra from the NOT and ESO/3.6m Telescope.

  7. Virial estimate of MBH • MBH = G-1RBLRvBLR2 • RBLR~ lLla (Kaspi et al., 2000, 2005, 2007) • vBLR = f FWHM

  8. Virial estimate of MBH • MBH = G-1RBLRvBLR2 • RBLR~ lLla (Kaspi et al., 2000, 2005, 2007) • vBLR = f FWHM

  9. QSO PSF

  10. QSO PSF

  11. QSO PSF

  12. QSO PSF

  13. QSO PSF

  14. The MBH–Mhost ratio as a function of z G ≡ MBH/Mhost increases of a factor ~7 from z=0 to z=3 log G = (0.28 ± 0.06) z + - (2.91 ± 0.08) Decarli et al (2010 a,b)

  15. The MBH–Mhost ratio as a function of z G ≡ MBH/Mhost increases of a factor ~7 from z=0 to z=3 log G = (0.28 ± 0.06) z + - (2.91 ± 0.08) Decarli et al (2010 a,b)

  16. The MBH–Mhost ratio as a function of z G ≡ MBH/Mhost increases of a factor ~7 from z=0 to z=3 log G = (0.28 ± 0.06) z + - (2.91 ± 0.08) Decarli et al (2009 a,b)

  17. Unresolved hosts / disk contaminations Decarli et al (2010 a,b)

  18. Unresolved hosts / disk contaminations Decarli et al (2010 a,b)

  19. Different SFHs Decarli et al (2009 a,b)

  20. Different SFHs G ≡ MBH/Mhost increases of a factor ~7 from z=0 to z=3 log G = (0.28 ± 0.06) z + - (2.91 ± 0.08) Decarli et al (2009 a,b)

  21. The MBH–Mhost ratio as a function of z G ≡ MBH/Mhost increases of a factor ~7 from z=0 to z=3 log G = (0.28 ± 0.06) z + - (2.91 ± 0.08) Peng et al. (2006) McLure et al. (2006) Merloni et al. (2010) Decarli et al. (2010) Decarli et al (2010 a,b)

  22. Conclusions • We probed the MBH-Mhost relation up to z=3, both for RLQs and RQQs • The MBH-Lhost is practically constant • Once we correct for the evolution of the M/L ratio, G increases of a factor ~7 from z=0 toz=3, similarly for RLQs and RQQs

  23. What is the fate of z=3 galaxies withMBH/Mhost~0.01? What does it mean? The MBH-Mhost ratio at z=3 is 7 timeslarger than at z=0 They move onto the local MBH-Mhost Mhost increases with Cosmic Timethrough merger events Mhost increasesby gas consumption Evolution of the host galaxyfundamental plane Theydo not move onto thelocal MBH-Mhost Why don’t we see such highG in the local galaxies?

  24. Only 1-2 major mergersare expected(e.g., Volonteri et al., 2003) Stellar populations are old.If strong SF occurs, the Gevolution is even stronger MBH-s* studies also finda similar trend in G The high-mass end of the MBH-host relations is poorlyconstrained, but… What does it mean? They move onto the local MBH-Mhost Mhost increases with Cosmic Timethrough merger events Mhost increasesby gas consumption Evolution of the host galaxyfundamental plane Theydo not move onto thelocal MBH-Mhost Why don’t we see such highG in the local galaxies?

  25. Luminosity Function bias • The scatter in the MBH-Mhost (Lhost, s*, etc) relation introduces a bias (Lauer et al., 2007). • The steeper is the luminosity function, the larger is the bias. •  log MBH =  ((M2)-(M1)) / ∫M1M2(M)dM

  26. Radiation pressure?

  27. N/H ratio

More Related