# Presentation: 233785

## A Step Toward Constraining Supermassive Black-Hole GrowthQuasar Black Hole Mass Distributions  and Mass Functions

- Collaborators: Misty Bentz, Xiaohui Fan, Shai Kaspi, Dan Maoz, Hagai Netzer,       Chris Onken, Pat Osmer, Brad Peterson, Rick Pogge, Gordon Richards,         Francesco Shankar, Adam Steed, Christy Tremonti, David Weinberg

- Marianne Vestergaard
- University of Arizona

- A Step Toward Constraining Supermassive Black-Hole GrowthQuasar Black Hole Mass Distributions  and Mass Functions

- Santa Fe     July 12 2006

## How Can AGN MBH be Determined?

- Stellar kinematics
- Gas kinematics
- Reverberation mapping
- Scaling relationships

-            **(√)**** ****               ******
**         ****(√)****                ******
**          ****√                 √**** **
**          ****√                 √ **

- Local Universe

- Higher-z

- (Note: other secondary mass estimators exist....)

##                      MBH = f  v2 RBLR/G
Reverberation Mapping:   
RBLR= c τ  

vBLR
Line width in variable (rms) spectrum

- Reverberation Mapping:
**R****BLR****= c ****τ****  **
**v****BLR**
- Line width in variable (rms) spectrum

- Virial Mass Estimates

****

- t3

- t3 + 

## Virial Mass Estimates

**                     ****M****BH**** = v****2**** R****BLR****/G**
- Reverberation Mapping:   **R****BLR****=c****τ,  *****v*****BLR**
-    **Radius – Luminosity Relation:****                                                    ****	****	****	****	****	****            **(Kaspi et al. 2005; 							  Bentz et al. 2006;      					              Vestergaard  et al.,
-                                                                            in prep)
- Scaling Relationships:
-                               **M****BH**** ******** FWHM****2  ****L**** ****β**

-   RBLR  Lλ(5100Å)0.50
-   RBLR  Lλ(3000Å)0.50
-   RBLR  Lλ(1350Å)0.53

## 2006 Scaling Relationships: 
       	(calibrated to 2004 Reverberation MBH) 

CIV:
    1σ uncertainty: factor ~3.5
Hβ:

-        	(calibrated to 2004 Reverberation MBH)
- CIV:
-     1σ uncertainty: factor ~3.5
- Hβ:

**Virial Mass Estimates****:** **M****BH****=*****f *****v****2**** R****BLR****/G**

- (see also Vestergaard 2002; MgII : see MV et al. in prep; McLure & Jarvis 2002)

- 

- 

- ( Vestergaard & Peterson 2006)

## NGC 5548

**NGC 5548**

-  Filled circles: 1989 data from *IUE *and ground-based telescopes.
-  Open circles: 1993 data from *HST *and *IUE.*
- Dotted line corresponds to virial relationship with *M* = 6 × 107 *M*.

**Highest ionization**
**lines have smallest**
**lags and **
**largest Doppler**
**widths.**

- Peterson and Wandel 1999

**R**** ******** (M/V) ****-1/2**

**Notes:**
Why are we confident that we can estimate the black hole masses this way? Monitoring data show that the broad lines are gravitationally dominated by the black hole. Simultaneous UV and optical monitoring of the most well-studied nearby Seyfert 1 galaxy NGC 5548 show that all the broad lines measured are consistent with virial motion of the broad line region: the highest ionization lines are emitted closer to the central source and have line widths as expected if they are due to virial motion. 
Note that CIV is emitted from a distance about half that of H. This data show that any broad emission line can be used to estimate the black hole mass.

## Virial Relationships

- (Peterson & Wandel 1999, 2000; Onken & Peterson 2002)

- Emission lines:
- SiIV1400, CIV1549, HeII1640, CIII]1909, H4861, HeII4686

**All 4 testable AGNs comply:**
**NGC 7469: 1.2 ********10****7**** *****M*******
**NGC 3783: 3.0 ********10****7**** *****M*******
**NGC 5548: 6.7 ********10****7**** *****M*******
**3C 390.3:    2.9 ********10****8**** *****M********* **

- Scalings between lines:
***v***FWHM2(H) lag (H)
*** ******v***FWHM2(CIV) lag (CIV)

- R-L relation extends to high-z and high luminosity quasars:
- spectra similar (e.g., Dietrich et al 2002)
- luminosities are not extreme
-  R-L defined for 1042 – 1046 erg/s	                          (Vestergaard 2004)

**Notes:**
In addition, all the objects with testable data show that the broad lines that are measured so far all lie on a virial relationship. This virial relationship shows that there is a scaling of the velocities and lags between the lines. Also, we have reasons to believe that the R-L relations do extend to high-z, high-L quasars because quasar spectra are similar at all redshifts and the luminosities of high-z quasars are not extreme relative to the luminosity range over which the R-L relation is defined. Also, in my 2004 paper I discuss in more detail why I believe we can reliably apply these scaling relations to high-redshift quasars.
(Dietrich etal 2002 composite spectra binned in Luminosity are similar to redshift 4.5 at least)

## MBH-: Comparison of Active and Quiescent Galaxies

*M*BH-: Comparison of Active and Quiescent Galaxies

- Reverberation masses appear to fall along the *M*BH   -   relation for normal galaxies
- The scatter is also similar: ≲ a factor of 3

- Bulge velocity dispersion

- (Courtesy C. Onken)

-    **RM**
**works!!**

- Mass

**AGNs**

**Gals**

##  Masses of Distant Quasars 

-  Masses of Distant Quasars

- Ceilings at          MBH ≈ 1010 M  LBOL < 1048  			ergs/s
- MBH ≈ 109 M  beyond space density drop at          z ≈ 3

- (H0=70 km/s/Mpc; ΩΛ = 0.7)

- (Vestergaard 2004)

##  Masses of Distant Quasars 

-  Masses of Distant Quasars

- Ceilings at          MBH ≈ 1010 M  LBOL < 1048  			ergs/s
- MBH ≈ 109 M  beyond space density drop at          z ≈ 3

- (H0=70 km/s/Mpc; ΩΛ = 0.7)

- (DR3 Qcat: Schneider et al. 2005)

## Black Holes of Distant Quasars

- LBOL= BC1 L(1350Å) = BC2 L(4400 Å)

- Mass

- LBOL

- LBOL/LEdd

## Preliminary Mass Functions of Active Supermassive Black Holes  

- Different samples show relatively consistent mass functions (shape, slope, normalization)        (Vestergaard & Osmer, in prep.; Vestergaard, Fan, Osmer et al., in prep.)
- Goal:                 constrain BH growth    (with Fan, Osmer, Steeds, Shankar, Weinberg)

- (H0=70 km/s/Mpc; ΩΛ = 0.7)

-  BQS: 10 700 sq. deg; B16.16mag
-  LBQS:  454 sq. deg; 16.0*B**J*18.85mag
-  SDSS:   182 sq. deg;  *i** 20mag
-  DR3: 5000 sq. deg.; *i** >15, 19.1, 20.2

**Notes:**
I am working with Pat Osmer and Xiaohui Fan on determining the mass functions of active black holes at different redshifts. This is still work in progress, so the details may change.  Our first results show that different quasar samples especially at low redshift show relatively consistent mass functions, in terms of their normalization, shape, and slope to within the uncertainties.  Here you see the LBQS, BQS, and the color selected Sloan sample. Note how the Sloan sample lies slightly below the higher-redshift bin of the LBQS, consistent with lower space densities of the most massive of quasars at redshifts greater than 3.

## Preliminary Mass Functions of Active Supermassive Black Holes 

- Preliminary Mass Functions of Active Supermassive Black Holes

- Different samples show relatively consistent mass functions (shape, slope)                                                    (Vestergaard & Osmer, in prep.; Vestergaard, Fan, Osmer et al., in prep.)
- Goal:                 constrain BH growth    (with Fan, Osmer, Steeds, Shankar, Weinberg)

- (H0=70 km/s/Mpc; ΩΛ = 0.7)

-  BQS: 10 700 sq. deg; B16.16mag
-  LBQS:  454 sq. deg; 16.0*B**J*18.85mag
-  SDSS:   182 sq. deg;  *i** 20mag
-  DR3: 5000 sq. deg.; *i** >15, 19.1, 20.2

**Notes:**
Here the DR3 mass functions are superposed. You see the mass functions at low and intermediate redshift are consistent with those of the BQS and LBQS. The downturns at the low mass end is due to incompleteness at fainter magnitudes.

## Preliminary Mass Functions of Active Supermassive Black Holes 

- Preliminary Mass Functions of Active Supermassive Black Holes

- Different samples show relatively consistent mass functions (shape, slope)                        (Vestergaard & Osmer, in prep.; Vestergaard, Fan, Osmer et al., in prep.)
- Goal:                 constrain BH growth
-       (with Fan, Osmer, Steeds, Shankar, Weinberg)

- (H0=70 km/s/Mpc; ΩΛ = 0.7)

-  BQS: 10 700 sq. deg; B16.16mag
-  LBQS:  454 sq. deg; 16.0*B**J*18.85mag
-  SDSS:   182 sq. deg;  *i** 20mag
-  DR3: 5000 sq. deg.; *i** >15, 19.1, 20.2

## Preliminary Mass Functions of Active Supermassive Black Holes 

- Preliminary Mass Functions of Active Supermassive Black Holes

- Locally mapped volume                  (R ≤ 100 Mpc):
- 		MBH ≤ 3x109 M
- SDSS color-selected sample      and DR3: (Fan et al. 2001, Schneider et al. 2005)
- ~9.5 quasars per Gpc3 with           	MBH ≥ 5x109 M
**→ **need ~25 times larger volume locally           (R ≤ 290 Mpc)

- (H0=70 km/s/Mpc; ΩΛ = 0.7)

## Improving the Scaling Relationships

- Main goal: improve scaling
- laws by reducing scatter

**Improving the Scaling Relationships**

- Issues:
-  Host galaxy contamination
-  HST imaging
-  Improved Masses and RBLR
-  Improved monitoring of nearby sources
- Accuracy of Single-epoch  MBH estimates
-  HST & ground-based study

-  R-L relation scatter dominates scatter in mass scaling law

##  Main Results

- Single-epoch black hole mass MBH estimates
- Updated calibrations
- MBH accuracies:  ~factor of 4
- CIV: Narrow Line Seyfert 1 gals excluded
- MBH ≈ few 109 M,  even at  4 ≲ z ≲ 6               - but they are very rare!
- Ceilings: LBOL <1048 ergs/s, MBH ≲1010 M
- Mass Functions  - Stay Tuned!