Αποκάλυψις = apokálypsis= revelations Inspired by Apocalypse (Book of revelations)? Not...

of 50 /50

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Αποκάλυψις = apokálypsis= revelations Inspired by Apocalypse (Book of revelations)? Not...

  • = apoklypsis = revelationsInspired by Apocalypse (Book of revelations)?Not really

  • Ten important questions about AGN?1) Testing general relativity with AGN2) Physical parameters, mechanisms and modulators driving radio-loudness3) AGN and environment reciprocal influence on small and large scales4) Unified model: what to keep and what to change5) Very high energy phenomena in AGN6) Missing and elusive AGN: identification and relevance7) AGN from z=0 to high-z8) SMBH formation, and galaxy-AGN co-evolution: model predictions vs observational constraints9) What triggers, modulates and halts accretion onto SMBHs10) AGN and host galaxy separation: data, methods, and measurementsOthers? Please specify

  • Ten important questions about AGNSMBH formation, and galaxy-AGN co-evolution: model predictions vs. observational constraints 4.13 2) What triggers, modulates and halts accretion onto SMBHs 3.763) AGN from z=0 to high-z 3.524) AGN and environment reciprocal influence on small and large scales 3.485) Unified model: what to keep and what to change 3.25Testing general relativity with AGN 3.12 Physical parameters, mechanisms and modulators driving radio-loudness 3.00 Missing and elusive AGN: identification and relevance 2.90Very high energy phenomena in AGN 2.75 AGN and host galaxy separation: data, methods, and measurements 2.66

  • Lets start from the bottom: the other issues

  • Geometry of the torus:

    the polarization angle will give us the orientation of the torus, to be compared with IR results, and with the ionization conesUrry & Padovani 1995X-ray polarimetry

  • Geometry of the torus:

    the polarization angle will give us the orientation of the torus, to be compared with IR results, and with the ionization conesUrry & Padovani 1995

  • Key parameters of future polarimetric missions*NHXMPolarimeter also onboard IXO

    NHXM

    GEMS

    # of Telescopes

    1

    3

    Energy band

    (keV)

    2 35

    (2-10 + 6-35)

    2 10

    (+0.5 keV)

    Field of View diameter (arcmin)

    12

    14

    Half Power Diameter (arcsec at 30 keV)

    20

    Non imaging

    MDP (1 mCrab, 100 ks

    2-10 keV band)

    10%

    5%

    Rotation

    Not needed

    Yes (0.1 rpm)

    MDP (systematics)

  • Polarimetric sensitivitySoft X-ray channel6-35 keV channelTwo polarimetric channels (2 10 keV and 10 35 keV) for an effective diagnostic of the emission mechanisms 2-10 keV channel

  • FSRQs vs. BL Lacs

  • FSRQs: a typical AGN + jet

  • [email protected]

    * AGN 9: BLACK HOLES AND REVELATIONS May 24 2010

    Ghisellini et al. 2009, MNRAS, 396, L105PKS 0537-441 seems to be an outlier (not the only!) in the blazars divide...why?PKS 0537-441 is a FSRQ with non-thermal continuum so strongly enhanced that hides the broad lines......or it is a transitional object between FSRQs and BL Lac objects with an intermediate accretion rate?

  • Colpis reviewPiconcellis talkMontuori & Farina posters

    A NEW observational constrain for modelsWhere can we search for binary black holes?SDSS sampling the pairing phase?How many? Gas-rich environment, galaxy type In ULIRGs/disturbed systems buried AGN+STB?Bianchi, Chiab, Piconcelli et al. 2009X-rays able to reveal buried nucleiBinary black holes

  • 1. SMBH and AGN-galaxy co-evolution2. What triggers, modulates, and halts accretion onto SMBHs?Feedback

  • The fact: many observational evidenciesSeveral talks Observations vs. theory and modelsWhat is missing?

  • Colpi et al. 2007SCUBA galaxies: MBH lags the stellar growth - adjustmentQSOs: galaxy lags the MBH growth - dominanceAlexander et al. 2008Volonteris reviewGrowth BH vs. host galaxyEddington-limited SF at high-z (1000 M/kpc2)LAGNLedd (review by Maiolino)

  • Progenitors? Seed BH masses? Mseed,BH 100 M vs. 103-5 M Pop III stars? Any chance to observe them? High-z QSOs: already settled BHs with masses comparable with those of local SMBHs ... Gas accretion vs. gas consumption by star formation (1/3 high-z QSOs) and SN explosions Missing population of lower masses BHs at high-z Test case for WFXTMass function of seed BHsVolonteri+08; Devecchi & Volonteri 09Gas-dynamical collapsePop III remnants Proto-cluster Eddington ratio behaviour vs. z? (Shankar )

  • =MBH/Mstar increases with z by a factor7 from z=0 to z=3Large sample, no RLQ/RQQ dichotomyDecarlis talkSemi-analytic model by Lamastra, Menci+able to explain high-z QSOs and SMGs

  • unobscuredobscured in SMGsobscuredX-ray selectedz=2Sarrias talk

  • Large-scale outflow?Largely discussed by Maiolino and Polletta

  • Alexander et al. 2010 see also Nesvabda et al. 2008 Energy input required: 1059 erg over 30 Myrs wind radiatively driven by the AGNand/or supernovae winds from intense star formation. Energy injection required to drivethe outflow is comparable to the estimated binding energy of the galaxy spheroid, suggesting that it can have a significant impact on the evolution of the galaxy.Review talk by PollettaHow many? How much representative?z=2.07

  • Halting the accretion through mechanical removal of the gasradio mode?

  • Giodinis review

  • (from Fender et al. 2004; Remillard and McClintock 2007)LS low/hard stateHS high/soft stateVHS/IS very high and intermediate states

    Shocks during jet production

    Data for GX 339-4 Disc-jet coupling in X-ray binariesDisc-dominated phase(Lorentz factor)X-ray hardnessX-ray intensityjetcoronadisctrack of a simple X-ray transient outburst with a single optically thin jet production episode

  • 3. AGN from z=0 to high-zAGN physicsAGN evolutionAGN demography elusive AGNAGN census at high-zFraction of obscured AGNProperties of AGN across cosmic time

  • Miniuttis reviewIonized reflection to explain the soft excessand the broad-band spectrum

    Need for IXO to appreciate the features and BH spin measurements for large samples!See Ark 120 Nardinis talk

  • Luminosity Dependent Density Evolution (LDDE)(see previous results fromUeda et al. 2003)

    Lower luminosity AGNpeak at lower redshifts:DOWNSIZING(see models of galaxy andAGN formations)LF, Fiore, Comastri+05Marconi+04La Francas review: LDDE works for X-ray selected AGN, optically selected Type 1 (once faint ones are included) Downsizing: luminous QSO mostly radiate at z~2, lower-luminosity Seyferts mostly radiate at z

  • X-ray AGN LF Downsizing of AGN activityQuasar density peaks at z~2-3AGN density peaks at z~0.5 - 1Most of BH accretion happens in quasars at high-zMost of X-ray background in Seyfert 2s at low-z0.5-2 keV: Hasinger, Miyaji, Schmidt 05See also:-Ueda+03 (selection effects included)-Barger+05-Silverman+08-Della Ceca+08-Ebrero+09 (selection effects included)-Yencho+09-Aird+10

  • LDDE found also for optically selected AGN1once the faint end of the LF is probedBongiorno, Zamorani+08See also e.g. Fontanot+07, Shankar & Mathur 07

  • Evolution of luminous AGN at high-zLuminous AGN are found to decline exponentially up to z~4-6. Nothing isknown above z~3 for less luminous AGN, i.e. the bulk of the populationStill many open issues, mergers dominant, missing details? see Brusas talkWhat may we expect? What about the obscured QSOs at high-redshift?Brusa+09COSMOS; still limited numbers

  • PSU group results (CV, Steffen, Just, Gibson)+Young+10 but see earlier Einstein results

    Lusso+10 for X-ray selectedsee poster by Antonucci Properties of AGN similar at low and high redshift, despite different conditions of the environment

  • The fraction of absorbed AGN as function of LX and z*) Assuming no luminosity and redshift dependencesassumed *)predictedDECREASE WITH LUMINOSITYEarlier evidences of a decrease of the fraction of absorbed AGN with luminosity from Lawrence & Elvis (1982) and Lawrence (1991). Confirmed by Ueda et al. (2003).LF, Fiore, Comastri+05

  • - Type 2 fraction a strong function of luminosity a) At high (quasar) luminosity: type 2
  • 4. AGN and environment reciprocal influence on small and large scales

  • Feedback through winds Optical/UVPG 0946+301 - Arav et al. 2001Fast (v up to ~ 50000 km/s) winds in BAL QSOs~15-20% of QSOs (Brunis talk) + mini-BALs/NALQSOs (Giustinis talk)

  • Pounds et al. 2003a,bHigh-velocity (v~0.1c), highly ionized outflowsCommon! (Cappis talk; Tombesi et al. 2010)Relevant energy budget (duty cycle)X-rays

  • the longest look at a mini-BAL QSOnarrow absorption line with E ~ 7.0 keV + narrow absorption line with E ~ 7.3 keVFe XXV K blueshifted by 0.05c + Fe XXVI K blueshifted by 0.05cX-ray wind velocity ~ 3x UV wind velocitymini-BAL QSOsGiustinis talk

  • NGC 1365 (Risaliti et al. 2005)

  • Large scale structureNGC 5252: Tadhunter & Tsvetanov 1989[OIII]

  • Large scale structureBianchi et al. 2010Mrk 573: X-rays/[O III]Mrk 573: X-rays/RadioAGN ionization confirmed by high-resolution (RGS) spectra (Risalitis review)See results for Compton-thick Sey2 Tol0109-383 (Marinucci) and BLRGs (Torresi)

  • 5. Unified models: what to keep and what to change

  • Unified model: Pro: easy to understand, although with many componentsCon: needs some adjustment based on recent observations

    Absorber: putative torus not supported by recent high-resolution observations + X-ray spectra probably compact and clumpy Review talks by Fritz (torus still a good approximation for photometric points SED fitting) Risaliti+ absorption by dust lanes (Matt 2000) +

    BLR issues (number, shape, properties, true Sey2, naked QSOs) Review by Risaliti (see also Hawkins 04, Bianchi, Panessa; Nicastro from the theoretical side)

  • Compact (a few pc) tori with a clumpy/filamentary dust distribution (warm disk + geom. thick torus)

    No significant Sey1/Sey2 differenceTristram+09; (see also Jaffe+04, Meisenheimer+07; Tristram+07)Tristram+07 - Circinus

  • Eclipses of the X-ray source are COMMON in nearby AGN: NH ~ 1023-1024 cm-2

    v>103 km/sD 1013 cmn ~ 1010-1011 cm-2 X-ray absorber made of BLR cloudsRisaliti et al. 200n, n=[6,9]

  • Inner TORUS: BLR X-ray absorptionDNH > 1024 cm-2DT~10 hoursNGC 1365NGC 4151UGC 4203NGC 7582Bianchi et al. 2009Risaliti et al. 2010Risaliti et al. 2009Puccetti et al. 2007

  • 6. Testing General Relativity with AGN

  • The usual suspect: MCG-6-30-15First clear detection of relativistic Fe K line (Tanaka et al 95) and first evidences for a rapidly spinning Kerr BH (Iwasawa et al 96, 99) Review by Miniutti

  • BH spin measurements rely on the id. ISCO RinFabian et al 02Early results in MCG-6 indicate that Rin < 2 rgwhich translates into a BH spin of a > 0.94 Other models (complex absorption; Miller, Turner) too fine-tuned problems with observed variability

  • Swift J2127.4+5654 with SuzakuThe broadband analysis confirms results from Fe K diagnostics

    a ~ 0 is excluded but just at the 3 level a ~ 0.998 is excluded at more than 5Miniutti et al. 2009

  • See you at AGN10

    ******