Microquasars as seen with SIMBOL-X

1. Microquasars as seen with SIMBOL-X J. Rodriguez (CEA/SAp & AIM; France)

2. Ultra soft X-rays 0.1-3 keV: absorption, local conditions, circumstellar material } Self absorbed or not synchrotron emission: very long  -> infra red/Optical soft X-rays ~1keV-10 keV: -Thermal emission, disc -Iron complex (lines, edge) Hard X-rays >10 keV: -Inverse Compton, thermal vs non thermal -Non-thermal emission, jet corona, reflection

3. 12 Years of RXTE Remillard et al. ‘06 • Evolution along the outburst (mainly <20 keV PCA)=>disc, iron, corona (but only  • Short term (>16s) evolution=> disc,  • Phase spectroscopy and link Fe <-> QPO Miller & Homan ‘06 Rodriguez et al. ‘02

4. Where do we stand? • Spectral evolution between states: LS->HIMS->SIMS->SS • Hysteresis: extra parameter to dm/dt needed • Connection with radio behaviour (the jet line) • The fundamental plane: X-ray/radio correlation in LS • Tight connection with temporal behaviour => The Q-shaped pattern Belloni, Fender, et al. BH knowledge greatly increased, especially behaviour of disc, but still lacks understanding of the so-called corona and drivers of state changes

5. Some (key) questions • Interplay between spectral components • Emitting process(es) at high energies • Connection with jets • Iron complex : reflection, and also a probe of the metric close to the BH => Need for high sensitivity, good spatial and spectral resolution, broad band coverage, high time resolution (D. Barret’s talk)

6. Bright BH in outburst (1) • E.g. XTE J1550-564: In soft state, not detected with HEXTE > 20 keV (Sobczak et al. ‘00) • NH = 0.907±0.003 1022 cm-2 • kT = 0.759±0.001 keV • = 2.50±0.03 Line= 6.6 ±0.1 keV dof) • NH = 0.91±0.01 1022 cm-2 • kT = 0.760±0.003 keV • = 2.6±0.1 dof) • 1 ks => good determination of the spectrum up to ~80 keV, and precise estimate of all parameters • 100s => good spectrum up to ~80 keV, main parameters well constrained

7. Bright BH in outburst (2) 100 s spectra • NH = 0.88±0.02 1022 cm-2 • Ecut = 40-5+7 keV • Efold = 51 -19+27 keV • = 1.48±0.01 1.03 (295dof) • E.g. XTE J1550-564: In hard state, power law and cut off (Rodriguez et al. ‘03) Extension beyond 80 keV? FTEST gives 3e-18 chance improvement for the inclusion of the cut-off

8. Why do we need short times in bright BHs? GRS 1915+105 Each blue point = 1 day Each arrow = a few ks obs What happens in between? E.g when do ejections occur? In ~12 ks : 2 sequences of correlated X-ray radio behaviour: short times => constraints on the physics triggering the ejection

9. Short times: the 1915 case F TEST => 5e-20 chance F TEST => 2e-11 chance 1s accumulation !!

10. Accretion-ejection links today • With e.g. INTEGRAL integration of few hundreds of sec => averaging of spectra to get decent SNR • R. et al. ‘06 => spike = trigger of ejection, ejected material is corona BUT low statistics >25 keV and accumulation over several 10s of seconds

11. Accretion-ejection links with SIMBOL-X • Method: follow the evolution of spectral parameters along the sequence on s time scale • Aim: identify the real trigger of ejection, confirm the origin of the ejected material, understand how ejections take place (the disk-corona-jet connection) • Advantage of SX: the 10-80 keV at 1s resolution… never done so far => tight constraints on corona F1-100 keV disk~F1-100 keV pl F1-100 keV disk~10 * F1-100 keV pl kT=1.74 ± 0.07 keV Rin= 255-12+40km  = 2.1 ± 1.2 kT=1.48 ± 0.09 keV Rin= 380 ± 60 km  = 2.8 ± 0.4 => What happens between both : formation of the jet in X-rays

12. External Galaxies: LMC • Typical LHS, ~1037 erg/s (~10-10erg/s/cm2), powerlaw and cut-off, 10 ks observation • NH = 0.063±0.003 1022 cm-2 • Ecut = 27.7±1.2 keV • = 1.47±0.01 dof) Physics of outburst evolution => do source behave the same? Disc-corona connection in LMC, the Q shape?

13. LMC: Physical models • Comptt and reflection: 10 ks, kTinj=0.2 keV, kTe=67 keV, relrefl=0.25 Comptt alone not satisfactory NH = 0.05±0.02 1022 cm-2 Relref = 0.22 ± 0.06 kTinj= 0.21-0.02+0.003 keV kTe = 59.51-9+13 keV = 2.2±0.2 dof) F TEST => 8e-9 chance

14. External Galaxies: M 33 • Typical LHS, ~1037 erg/s (~10-10 erg/s/cm2), powerlaw and cut-off, 10 ks observation @ 795 kpc, 50 ks flux (20-100 keV)=2.6e-13 erg/s/cm2 • NH = 0.05±0.02 1022 cm-2 • Ecut = 33 -10+24 keV • = 1.5±0.1 dof) F TEST => 5e-5 chance NEVER BEEN OBSERVED

15. Quiescent microquasars • 10-10 erg/cm2/s <=> 1035 erg/s @ 6kpc =>early and late stages of outbursts, evolution of corona, connection with disc, jets, reflection component • 10-13 erg/cm2/s <=> 4.3 1032 erg/s @ 6 kpc <=>broad band spectra of quiescent sources behaviour of >10 keV emission for the 1st time: • physics of low luminosity accretion: physical properties of plasma, ADAF, .. • study of populations of hard quiescence vs. soft quiescence (Corbel et al. ‘05) • Valid for all transient sources of the Galaxy (~40 BH(C)s, + transient NSs) => ¿ a criterion to distinguish NS and BH based on quiescent spectra ?

16. To summarise • Bright sources • Better characterisation of hard X-rays in Soft States => better estimate the disc parameters, identification “true”  disc (e.g. Mc Clintock et al. ‘06 vs. Middleton et al. ‘06) => measure of BH spin • Spectral monitoring of GRS 1915+105 like object on s time scale Formation of jets in the X-rays Approach of disc and ejection of corona, does one cause the other ? • Quiescent microquasars • Behaviour of >10 keV emission Better constraints on the physics of low luminosity accretion Study of source population: hard vs soft quiescence • External Galaxies • Non biased study of source populations Transient sources low luminosity hard state BHs Characterisation up to quite high distance (~1 Mpc) • Physical properties of extragalactic microquasars: Do they behave the same? study of the Q-shape (spectral transitions) pattern Physics of corona, reflection in external galaxies