Αποκάλυψις = apokálypsis = revelations

Inspired by Apocalypse (Book of revelations)?

Not really …

Ten important questions about AGN?

1) Testing general relativity with AGN

2) Physical parameters, mechanisms and modulators driving radio-loudness

3) AGN and environment reciprocal influence on small and large scales

4) Unified model: what to keep and what to change

5) Very high energy phenomena in AGN

6) Missing and elusive AGN: identification and relevance

7) AGN from z=0 to high-z

8) SMBH formation, and galaxy-AGN co-evolution: model predictions vs

observational constraints

9) What triggers, modulates and halts accretion onto SMBHs

10) AGN and host galaxy separation: data, methods, and measurements

Others? Please specify…Others? Please specify…

Ten important questions about AGN

1) SMBH formation, and galaxy-AGN co-evolution: model predictions vs.

observational constraints 4.13

2) What triggers, modulates and halts accretion onto SMBHs 3.76

3) AGN from z=0 to high-z 3.52

4) AGN and environment reciprocal influence on small and large scales 3.48

5) Unified model: what to keep and what to change 3.25

6) Testing general relativity with AGN 3.12

7) Physical parameters, mechanisms and modulators driving radio-loudness 3.00• Missing and elusive AGN: identification and relevance 2.90

• Very high energy phenomena in AGN 2.75

• AGN and host galaxy separation: data, methods, and measurements 2.66

Let’s start from the “bottom”: the other issues

Geometry of the torus: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 cones

Urry & Padovani 1995

X-ray polarimetry

Key parameters of future polarimetric missions

9

NHXM GEMS

# of Te lescopes 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) << 1% Unknown

Background 0.13 Crab (2-10 keV)

0.4 Crab (6-35 keV) 0.2 mCrab

NHXM

Polarimeter also onboard IXO

Polarimetric sensitivity

Soft X-ray channel

6-35 keV channel

Two 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

dammando@ifc.inaf.it 15 AGN 9: BLACK HOLES AND REVELATIONS May 24 2010

Ghisellini et al. 2009, MNRAS, 396, L105

PKS 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?

Colpi’s reviewPiconcelli’s talkMontuori & Farina posters

A NEW observational constrain for models

Where 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. 2009

X-rays able to reveal buried nuclei

Binary black holes

1. SMBH and AGN-galaxy co-evolution

2. What triggers, modulates, and halts accretion onto SMBHs?

Feedback …

The ‘fact’: many observational evidencies

Several talks …Observations vs. theory and modelsWhat is missing?

Colpi et al. 2007

SCUBA galaxies: MBH lags the stellar growth -

adjustment

QSOs: galaxy lags the MBH growth - dominance

Alexander et al. 2008

Volonteri’s review

Growth BH vs. host galaxyEddington-limited SF at high-z (≈1000 M/kpc2)

LAGN≈Ledd (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 WFXT…

Mass function of seed BHsVolonteri+08; Devecchi & Volonteri 09

Gas-dynamical collapse

Pop III remnants Proto-cluster• Eddington ratio behaviour vs. z? (Shankar …)

Γ=MBH/Mstar increases with z by a

factor≈7 from z=0 to z=3Large sample, no RLQ/RQQ dichotomy

Decarli’s talk

Semi-analytic model by Lamastra, Menci+able to explain high-z QSOs and SMGs

unobscured

obscured in SMGs

obscuredX-ray selected

z=2

Sarria’s 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 Polletta

How many? How much representative?

z=2.07

Halting the accretion through mechanical removal of the gasradio mode?

Giodini’s review

(from Fender et al. 2004; Remillard and McClintock 2007)

LSLS – low/hard state

HS HS – high/soft state

VHS/IS VHS/IS – very high and intermediate states

Shocks during jet production

Data for GX 339-4

Disc-jet coupling in X-ray binaries

Disc-dominated phase

(Lorentz factor)

X-ray hardness

X-r

ay

inte

nsity

jet

corona

disc

track of a simple X-ray transient outburst with a single optically

thin jet production episode

3. AGN from z=0 to high-z

AGN physicsAGN evolution

AGN demography – elusive AGNAGN census at high-z

Fraction of obscured AGNProperties of AGN across cosmic time

Miniutti’s reviewIonized reflection to explain the soft excess

and the broad-band spectrum

Need for IXO to appreciate the features and BH spin measurements for large samples!

See Ark 120 – Nardini’s 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+05

Marconi+04

La Franca’s 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<1. At z=2, metals already formed and big BH in place.

Evolution of luminous AGN at high-z

• Radio

(Wall+05)

• Soft X-ray (Hasinger+05)

• Soft X-ray (Silverman+04)

• Optical (Fan+01,04)

LX>1045 erg/s

Luminous 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 population

Still many open issues, mergers dominant, missing details? see Brusa’s 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 dependences

assumed *)

predicted

DECREASE 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).

INCREASE WITH THE REDSHIFT

LF, Fiore, Comastri+05

- Type 2 fraction a strong function of luminosity a) At high (quasar) luminosity: type 2 <20%; optical color selection is

highly complete since all are type 1s, and includes most of luminosity AGN population emitted in the Universe

b) At low (Seyfert) luminosity: type 2 ~80%; optical color selection miss most of the AGNs in the Universe in terms of number

The fraction of absorbed AGN as function of LX and z

Strong support from many works

BUTIs the ‘receding-torus’ model the

right answer?

Support from IR observations

(CF; Maiolino+ 07)

4. AGN and environment reciprocal influence on small and large scales

Feedback through winds

Optical/UV

PG 0946+301 - Arav et al. 2001

Fast (v up to ~ 50000 km/s) winds in BAL QSOs

~15-20% of QSOs (Bruni’s talk)

+ mini-BALs/NALQSOs (Giustini’s talk)

Pounds et al. 2003a,b

Reeves et al. 2003

PDS456 (z=0.18) v~0.1c

2 Energy (keV) 5 7 10

High-velocity (v~0.1c), highly ionized outflowsCommon! (Cappi’s talk; Tombesi et al. 2010)Relevant energy budget (duty cycle…)

X-rays

the longest look at a mini-BAL QSO

narrow absorption line with E ~ 7.0 keV + narrow absorption line with E ~ 7.3 keV

Fe XXV K blueshifted by 0.05c + Fe XXVI K blueshifted by 0.05c

X-ray wind velocity ~ 3x UV wind velocity

mini-BAL QSOs

Giustini’s talk

NGC 1365 (Risaliti et al. 2005)

Large scale structure

NGC 5252: Tadhunter & Tsvetanov 1989

[OIII]

Large scale structure

Bianchi et al. 2010

Mrk 573: X-rays/[O III] Mrk 573: X-rays/Radio

AGN ionization confirmed by high-resolution (RGS) spectra (Risaliti’s 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 ‘components’Con: 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 difference

Tristram+09; (see also Jaffe+04, Meisenheimer+07; Tristram+07)

Tristram+07 - Circinus

Eclipses of the X-ray source are COMMON in nearby AGN:

ΔNH ~ 1023-1024 cm-2

v>103 km/sD ≈ 1013 cm

n ~ 1010-1011 cm-2

X-ray absorber “made” of BLR clouds

Risaliti et al. 200n, n=[6,9]

Inner TORUS: BLR X-ray absorption

NH > 1024 cm-2

hoursNH~1023 cm-2

days

NH~3*1023 cm-2

days NH~1023 cm-2

hours

NGC 1365

NGC 4151

UGC 4203

NGC 7582

Bianchi et al. 2009Risaliti et al. 2010

Risaliti et al. 2009

Puccetti et al. 2007

6. Testing General Relativity with AGN

The usual suspect: MCG-6-30-15

First 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)

Iwasawa et al 96

Review by Miniutti

BH spin measurements rely on the id. ISCO ≅ Rin

Fabian et al 02Early results in MCG-6 indicate that Rin < 2 rg

which 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 Suzaku

The broadband analysis confirms results from Fe K diagnostics

a ~ 0 is excluded but just at the 3σ level a ~ 0.998 is excluded at more than 5σ

Miniutti et al. 2009

See you at AGN10