~ 1–10 kpc~ 10 pc

Nuclear structure studied by X-rays,
and the relevance to thesurrounding ionized gas
2017/11/6 @ EAYAM 2017
Taiki Kawamuro (NAOJ)
Collaborators: Y. Ueda (Kyoto Univ.), F. Tazaki (NAOJ), Claudio Ricci (PUC), Y. Terashima (Ehime Univ.),
Richard Mushotzky (UMD), M. Shirmer (MPA), J. H. Turner (Gemini obs.), R. Davies (MPA), K. Ichikawa(Columbia Univ.), N. Isobe (JAXA/ISAS), A. Tanimoto (Kyoto Univ.), M. Imanishi, T. Izumi (NAOJ)

AGN and the connection to the host gal.
- Tight correlation between

the massive black hole (MBH) and host gal. properties.
→ the co-evolution
GÜLTEKIN ET AL.

Vol. 6

Black hole mass

204(Gultekin+09)

stellar dispersion in the bulge

Figure 1. M–σ relation for galaxies with dynamical measurements. The symbol indicates the method of BH mass measurement: stellar dynamical (pentagrams),dynamical (circles), masers (asterisks). Arrows indicate 3σ68 upper limits to BH mass. If the 3σ68 limit is not available, we plot it at three times the 1σ68 or at 1.5 tim
the 2σ68 limits. For clarity, we only plot error boxes for upper limits that are close to or below the best-fit relation. The color of the error ellipse indicates the Hubtype of the host galaxy: elliptical (red), S0 (green), and spiral (blue). The saturation of the colors in the error ellipses or boxes is inversely proportional to the area

2 /16

8.12

−1 4.24

AGN and the connection to the host gal.
- Tight correlation between

the massive black hole (MBH) and host gal. properties.
→ the co-evolution- AGN may be a key object.

✓ SMBH growth✓ High energy output(i.e., AGN feedback)AGN uniﬁed model

3 /16

AGN and the connection to the host gal.
- Tight correlation between

the massive black hole (MBH) and host gal. properties.
→ the co-evolution
AGN- AGN may be a key object.
✓ SMBH growth✓ High energy output
star(i.e., AGN feedback)f!

!" #$%%&'( $( )*""#$%% &'((%$%)" *+,-. /#% ('$-" 0%"#1& *+- + 23$% 4'5#+$&-1)6735, &%51)8193"'1): %+5# 8%915'", -9'5% 1( "#% &+"+ 53;% ;%')<&%51)8198%& ')&%2%)&%)"9, 3-')< "#% =)1*) >?@ +)& + 59+--'5+94'5#+$&-1)6735, +9<1$'"#0. /#% -%51)& +)& "#'$& 0%"#1&- *%$%
+ A*%+=9, <3'&%&B &%51)8193"'1) ') *#'5# "#% <3'&')< "%$0 C*#'5#(1$5%- "#% &%51)8198%& /DEF4 '0+<% "1 51$$%-21)& "1 "#% +,'0+<%G '- *%'<#"%& ;, + 51%(('5'%)" ! ! H!I: -"$1)<9, $%&35')< '"'02+5" 1) "#% &%51)8193"'1) 2$15%--: +)& + A-"$1)<9, <3'&%&B&%51)8193"'1) *'"# (399 '029%0%)"+"'1) 1( "#% <3'&')< "%$0"! ! I#.

@'<. J -#1*- "#% 1$'<')+9 &+"+ +)& "#% $%-39"- 1( "#%-% "#$%%&%51)8193"'1)- (1$ "#% KL !!!M" NHHO 9')% 1( P$= NOQ. R% &'-29+,"#% KL !!!M 9')% ')"%)-'",: 5%)"$1'& 8%915'", +)& @RSP 0+2&%$'8%& ($10 -')<9%T51021)%)" E+3--'+) ('""')< 1( "#%KL !!!M" NHHO 9')% ') %+5# -2%5"$30 1( "#% 1$'<')+9 /DEF4 &+"+
C"12 $1*G: +- *%99 +- 1( %+5# -2%5"$30 1( "#% "#$%% &%51)8198%&&+"+ 53;%- C-%51)&: "#'$& +)& (13$"# $1*-G. U- %V2%5"%&: +)%V5%99%)" 0+"5# "1 "#% KL !!!M +,- '0+<% C-%% @'<. QG '- 1;"+')%&3-')< "#% A-"$1)<9, <3'&%&B 0%"#1& C@'<. J: ;1""10 $1*G: *#'5#+9-1 -%%0- "1 +5#'%8% "#% ;%-" -2+"'+9 $%-193"'1) ') "#% 8%915'", +)&orm

MK573 [Halpha]MK573 [OIII]- AGN influence can be
02"

02"

seen as ionizedgas emission (e.g., [OIII])+2o06’00"+2o06’00"

58"

58"

56"

56"

54"

54"

52"

52"

50"
hmss
1 4 1 2 3 . 3203 . 2 0

s
23.10

s
23.00

s
22.90

s
22.80

s
22.70

s
22.60

s
22.50

~150"
hms
s
1 4 1 2 3 . 3203 . 2 0

MK573 [OIII/Halpha]ckp

ation(Ferruit+99)
s
23.10

s
23.00

s
22.90

s
22.80

s
22.70s
22.60

s
22.50

MK573 [F606W]

02"
10"

+2o06’00"

05"
58"

4 /16

AGN and the connection to the host gal.
- Tight correlation between

the massive black hole (MBH) and host gal. properties.
→ the co-evolution
AGN- AGN may be a key object.
✓ SMBH growth✓ High energy output
star(i.e., AGN feedback)f!

!" #$%%&'( $( )*""#$%% &'((%$%)" *+,-. /#% ('$-" 0%"#1& *+- + 23$% 4'5#+$&-1)6735, &%51)8193"'1): %+5# 8%915'", -9'5% 1( "#% &+"+ 53;% ;%')<&%51)8198%& ')&%2%)&%)"9, 3-')< "#% =)1*) >?@ +)& + 59+--'5+94'5#+$&-1)6735, +9<1$'"#0. /#% -%51)& +)& "#'$& 0%"#1&- *%$%
+ A*%+=9, <3'&%&B &%51)8193"'1) ') *#'5# "#% <3'&')< "%$0 C*#'5#(1$5%- "#% &%51)8198%& /DEF4 '0+<% "1 51$$%-21)& "1 "#% +,'0+<%G '- *%'<#"%& ;, + 51%(('5'%)" ! ! H!I: -"$1)<9, $%&35')< '"'02+5" 1) "#% &%51)8193"'1) 2$15%--: +)& + A-"$1)<9, <3'&%&B&%51)8193"'1) *'"# (399 '029%0%)"+"'1) 1( "#% <3'&')< "%$0"! ! I#.

@'<. J -#1*- "#% 1$'<')+9 &+"+ +)& "#% $%-39"- 1( "#%-% "#$%%&%51)8193"'1)- (1$ "#% KL !!!M" NHHO 9')% 1( P$= NOQ. R% &'-29+,"#% KL !!!M 9')% ')"%)-'",: 5%)"$1'& 8%915'", +)& @RSP 0+2&%$'8%& ($10 -')<9%T51021)%)" E+3--'+) ('""')< 1( "#%KL !!!M" NHHO 9')% ') %+5# -2%5"$30 1( "#% 1$'<')+9 /DEF4 &+"+
C"12 $1*G: +- *%99 +- 1( %+5# -2%5"$30 1( "#% "#$%% &%51)8198%&&+"+ 53;%- C-%51)&: "#'$& +)& (13$"# $1*-G. U- %V2%5"%&: +)%V5%99%)" 0+"5# "1 "#% KL !!!M +,- '0+<% C-%% @'<. QG '- 1;"+')%&3-')< "#% A-"$1)<9, <3'&%&B 0%"#1& C@'<. J: ;1""10 $1*G: *#'5#+9-1 -%%0- "1 +5#'%8% "#% ;%-" -2+"'+9 $%-193"'1) ') "#% 8%915'", +)&or

MK573 [Halpha]MK573 [OIII]- AGN influence can be02"

seen as ionizedgas emission (e.g., [OIII])+2o06’00"+2o06’00"

58"

58"

56"

56"

54"

54"

52"

52"

50"
hms
s
1 4 1 2 3 . 3203 . 2 0s
23.10

s
23.00

s
22.90

s
22.80

m02"

s
22.70

s
22.60

s
22.50

~150"
hms
s
1 4 1 2 3 . 3203 . 2 0atckp

ion(Ferruit+99)
s
23.10

s
23.00

s
22.90

s
22.80

s
22.70s
22.60s22.50

Do all AGNs influence the host galaxy in the same eﬃciency?
MK573 [OIII/Halpha]MK573 [F606W]

02"
10"

+2o06’00"

05"
58"

5 /16

Do all the AGN eﬀectively influence the host galaxy?
Likely, No- Even the simplified torus can obscure the AGN emission.

6 /16

Do all the AGN eﬀectively influence the host galaxy?
Likely, No- Even the simplified torus can obscure the AGN emission.
- Hard X-ray surveys (> 10 keV) havediscovered buried AGNs.
(e.g., Ueda+07, Winter+09, Ricci+17)

Geometrically-thinGeometrically-thick
7 /16

Strategy using multi-wavelength data
Relation between the geometrical thickness of the torus
and strength of ionized gas emission
Torus thickness
w/ X-ray spectroscopy

nuclear ~ 10 pc~ 10–100 kpc
circumnuclear ~ 1–10 kpc
Ionized gas ([OIV])
w/ Spitzer

8 /16

X-ray Spectroscopy of AGN- A powerful tool to unveil the nuclear (< 10 pc) scale structure
Inverse Compton (plus absorption)(<~ 10 rg; e.g., Morgan+08,12)

Reflection (~ 0.1-1 pc; e.g., Shemmer+10,11; Gandhi+15)
Soft scattered emission (> 1 pc; e.g., Bianchi+10, Go ́ mez-Guijarro+17)
Flux

Energy [keV](Brooks/Cole Thomson Learning)

9 /16

X-ray Spectroscopy of AGN- A powerful tool to unveil the nuclear (< 10 pc) scale structure
Inverse Compton (plus absorption)(<~ 10 rg; e.g., Morgan+08,12)

Reflection (~ 0.1-1 pc; e.g., Shemmer+10,11; Gandhi+15)
Soft scattered emission (> 1 pc; e.g., Bianchi+10, Go ́ mez-Guijarro+17)
Flux

Energy [keV](Brooks/Cole Thomson Learning)

10 /16

X-ray Spectroscopy of AGN- A powerful tool to unveil the nuclear (< 10 pc) scale structure
Inverse Compton (plus absorption)(<~ 10 rg; e.g., Morgan+08,12)

Reflection (~ 0.1-1 pc; e.g., Shemmer+10,11; Gandhi+15)
Soft scattered emission (> 1 pc; e.g., Bianchi+10, Go ́ mez-Guijarro+17)
Flux

Energy [keV](Brooks/Cole Thomson Learning)

11 /16

X-ray Spectroscopy of AGN- A powerful tool to unveil the nuclear (< 10 pc) scale structure
Inverse Compton (plus absorption)(<~ 10 rg; e.g., Morgan+08,12)

Reflection (~ 0.1-1 pc; e.g., Shemmer+10,11; Gandhi+15)
Soft scattered emission (> 1 pc; e.g., Bianchi+10, Go ́ mez-Guijarro+17)
Flux

scattered frac.
= fscat
Energy [keV](Brooks/Cole Thomson Learning)

12 /16

AGN accretion
power
6 [O IV] line, a proxy ofV. theCharmandaris
et al.

aperturefromwhich
we extracted the spectra. PAH emission, which is a- [OIV]λ25.89
umstar formation activity (Förster Schreiber et al. 2004), can be detected inA proxy of the AGN power ? (e.g., Rigby+09, Melendez+09)
ctra of both Seyfert types, while it is most prominent in the average star
- HighIonization
potential= 54.9 eV region (PDR) andm. PAH
emissionoriginatesfrom a energy
photo-dissociation
contamination
fromdestroyed→
bylessthe UV/X-ray
photons
in a starburst
strong radiation field produced nrs and/oran dust
accretion
disk surrounding a SMBH.
- lowextinction[O iv] 26 MICRON AS AN INTRINSIC AG

12Rati(Rigby+09)

log N
23.0
23.5
23.8
24.0
24.1
24.2
24.3
24.4
24.5
24.6
24.724.8
24.9
25.0
25.1
25.2
25.3
25.4
25.5

11

•
O

logLAGN/Lsun
AGN
log Inferred
Luminosity(L )Normalized Flux [Fν]No. 2, 2009

[OIV]

1098(Charmandaris+10)
7Rest wavelength [μm]567log L[O IV] (LO )8•log L[O IV]/Lsun

spec
13 /16IBIS
resu

Figure 3. Intrinsic AGN luminosity, as inferred from the hard X-rays, vs. [O iv]
luminosity. Seyfert 1–1.5 AGNs are plotted in black as squares (detections) andarrows (nondetections); Compton-thin Seyfert 1.8–2 AGNs are plotted as red
open circles and arrows; Seyfert 1.8–2 of unknown column are plotted as blue

gure 1. Left: A comparison among the average mid-IR spectrum of Sy 1s (solid linCorrelation between LX and L[OIV]- Hard X-ray (E = 14-200 keV) Swift/BAT 70-m Cataloglog L[O IV] [erg s-1]

・Sample includes AGNs w/ the geometrically-thick torus- Obscured AGNs obs. by Suzaku X-ray satellite (0.5–40 keV)・Scattered fraction (or torus thickness) can be estimated42(a)4140
Blue: log Lx < 43.3
Black: log Lx > 43.3

3941

(TK+16a)4243

44-1log LBAT[ergs]
10-50 keV

45
14 /16

Correlation between LX and L[OIV]- Hard X-ray (E = 14-200 keV) Swift/BAT 70-m Catalog

・Sample includes AGNs w/ the geometrically-thick torus- Obscured
AGNs
obs.
by Suzaku
X-raysatellite(0.5–40The
AstrophysicalJournalSupplement
Series,225:14(23pp), 2016
July keV)・Scattered fraction (or torus thickness) can be estimatedlow scat. AGN(fscat < 0.5%)(TK+16a)15 /16Summary-

We studied the connection between the geometrical thicknessof the torus and ionized gas strength/morphology- AGN eﬀects on surrounding material could depend on

the nuclear obscuration.
noitaioniz

16 /16