Scientific cases for Simbol-X of interest of the Italian community Based on the High Energy Astrophysics study: Fields of interest and perspective for the national community ASI 2003-2004 Fabrizio Fiore
Two main themes Accreting Black holes Non-thermal emission, particle acceleration mechanisms
Accreting Black Holes L/L E 10 0 10-1 B H B ULX? M82 IMBH? NLSy1 AGN 10-2 LLAGN 10 0 10 2 10 4 10 6 10 8 10 10 M/M? 1. A hidden parameter -- the BH spin 2. Possible violation of the mass scaling; ionization, m e c 2
Black Hole spectral states Done & Gierlinski 2003
Hard Colour Intrinsic colours Co-add objects onto same plot all RXTE database archive obs Cyg X1, LMC X3, X1, GX339, J1655, J1550, J1859, J1650 Done & Gierlinski 2003 Spectral evolution with L/L Edd hard spectra well defined track, soft spectra show variety of spectra at L/L Edd Γ (3-6.4) 4.5 3.0 1.5 Steady jet 1.5 3.0 Transient jet 4.5 No jet Γ (6.4-16)
Origin of hard X-rays Dissipate energy in optically thick disk cool, no hard X-rays MUST dissipate in optically thin material so that E >> kt (Compton) Optically thin accretion flow low L/L Edd only! Magnetic reconnection above disk no known alternatives at high L/L Edd! Collapse of optically thin flow gives hard/soft transition? Esin et al 1997 Hard/soft transition associated with disk moving inwards. Adapted from C. Done
L h /L s LS 1 Hard (low L/L Edd ) Soft (high L/L Edd ) VHS HS US Adapted from C. Done
High Energy view of the Galactic Center
Stellar Black Hole goals Study the low/hard state, Comptonization models Extend color analysis at high E Test ADAF models Search for stellar BH in the Galactic Center and in nearby galaxies Census of Stellar BH
Scale accretion flow to AGN Same accretion flow onto higher mass black hole (?) All that should change is disk temperature need M and L/L Edd Magorrian-Gebhardt relationships linking M to properties of host galaxy so now possible! But AGN have more complex environment. Harder to disentangle intrinsic spectrum, so need very good S/N spectra Adapted from C. Done
Bright AGNs: the BeppoSAX legacy F(15-150)=2 10-10 cgs 100ks S/N 15-150keV 65
AGN spectral studies SX baseline SX improved
Hard X-ray Surveys Most direct probe of the super-massive black hole (SMBH) accretion activity, recorded in the CXB spectral energy density SMBH census Strong constraints to models for the formation and evolution of structure in the Universe AGN number and luminosity evolution AGN clustering and its evolution
Imaging surveys up to 8-10 kev (ASCA,BSAX, Chandra, XMM): most of the CXB <6-7 kev is resolved in sources. But only 40-50% in the 5-10 kev band. < 1 % E>10keV. The light-up and evolution of obscured, accreting SMBH is still largely unknown Worsley et a. 2004
The sources making the 30-40 kev CXB are the same we see below 10 kev? What did we learn below 10 kev? What do we expect to learn above 10 kev?
The sources making the 30-40 kev CXB are the same we saw below 10 kev? Residual CXB after subtracting the resolved fraction below 10 kev Comastri 2004 We need to resolve: 80% of CXB @10-30keV (similar to Chandra and XMM deep fields below 10 kev) 50% of CXB @ 20-40keV
The sources making the 30-40 kev CXB are the same we see below 10 kev? What did we learn below 10 kev? What do we expect to learn above 10 kev?
2-10 kev AGN luminosity function models Solid = observed dashed = best fit LDDE with constant N H distribution La Franca et al. 2005
2-10 kev AGN luminosity function models 2-10keV 0.5-2keV LDDE with variable absorbed AGN fraction La Franca et al. 2005
A working scenario small mass progenitors. Feedback is effective in self-regulating accretion and SF, cold gas is left available Galactic cold gas available for accretion and obscuration increases at high z large mass progenitors. Feedback is less effective, most gas is quickly converted in stars at high z.
The sources making the 30-40 kev CXB are the same we see below 10 kev? What did we learn below 10 kev? What do we expect to learn above 10 kev?
1) Paucity of z>1, logl X <44 sources? Real or are we missing highly obscured AGNs? 2) Compare the obscuration properties of Seyfert 2 galaxies and QSO2 Sensitive observations at the peak of the CXB (~20-40 kev) to probe highly obscured AGN in the golden edge of nuclear and galaxy activity
1) Paucity of Seyfert like sources @ z>1 is real? Or, is it, at least partly, a selection effect? Are we missing in Chandra and XMM surveys highly obscured (N H 10 24 cm -2 ) AGN? Which are common in the local Universe
How deep should we go? And how hard? Residual CXB after subtracting the resolved fraction below 10 kev Comastri 2004 We need to resolve: 80% of CXB @10-30keV (similar to Chandra and XMM deep fields below 10 kev) 50% of CXB @ 20-40keV
CXB fraction >50% res.cxb >80% res.cxb F(20-40keV)< 7 10-15 cgs or 0.75 mcrab 10-15 cgs or 0.1 mcrab F(10-30keV)< 10-14 cgs or 0.65 mcrab 2 10-15 cgs or 0.13 mcrab
Direct Imaging at E=10-80 kev 1mCrab = 250 sources deg 2 = 12 sources X 15 diam. FOV 0.5 mcrab = 550 deg 2 = 27 sources X 15 diam. FOV 0.1mCrab = 2350 deg 2 = 120 sources X 15 diam. FOV
The sources making the 30-40 kev CXB are the same we see below 10 kev? What did we learn below 10 kev? What do we expect to learn above 10 kev? What do we expect to learn with Simbol-X?
Hard X-ray focusing mission proposed for 2010-2015 HPD FOV Flim µcrab %CXB sources/fov FWHM 20-40keV 1Msec NuStar 40 15 0.8 40% 15 NeXT 30 12 0.7 50% 12 Simbol-X baseline 30 7 1.4 35% 2 Simbol-X ML 15 12 0.5-0.7 65% 25
Four Challenges Image quality 15 HPD High throughput 0.5-1 10 3 cm 2 @30keV Low internal background Rejection of CXB from outside the FOV
(1) Image quality: which PSF do we need? 50 HPD; eq. 2µCrab 10 1 10 1 10 30 HPD Eq.2µCrab 1 15 HPD Eq.0.2µCrab
Image quality: which PSF do we need?
(2) SX Multilayer optimization See G. Pareschi presentation
(3) Internal Background non-active shields instruments Katayama et al. astro-ph/0210135 ASCA-SIS 6 10-4 cts/s/cm 2 /kev LEO 27deg inclination PN 9 10-3 cts/s/cm 2 /kev SIS 15 HEO MOS 1.7 10-3 cts/s/cm 2 /kev SIS 3 HEO 114,000 km apogee 7,000 km perigee
(3) Internal Background HEO Active shield instrument EXOSAT 200,000 km apogee 500 km perigee ME Argon 1-15 kev ME Xenon 5-50 kev 1.5cm thick ME Xenon total internal BKG 10-50 kev = 50-60 cts/s/detector 3 10-3 cts/s/kev/cm 2 = 2 10-4 cts/s/kev/cm 2 /mm 10 times less than XMM MOS
(3) Internal Background HEO Simulations From Armstrong et al. 1999 Montecarlo for an L2 orbit Assuming 90% efficiency anticoincidences, total BKG= 10-4 cts/s/cm 2 /kev/mm Within a factor of 2 of that seen by EXOSAT ME 20 times less than XMM MOS 2-3 times higher than LEO low inclination orbit BKG
(3) Technical developments (1) ASI phase-a study 2004: Payload for high energy astrophysics
(4) Technical developments (2) Baffling to screen CXB from outside the FOV ASI phase-a study 2004: Payload for high energy astrophysics
SX flux limit Background is an issue: source spot size on detector scales with (f.l.) 2 : 30m vs. 8m f.l. 39 times larger spot! 2.3mm 2 for a 5 HPD 1/3 mcrab in 150ks for HPD=5 1/10 mcrab in 1Msec! 1/3 mcrab = 3 10-14 cgs 20-40keV 50% of the CXB resolved 700 sources/deg -2 7 sources per 7 diam. FOV 1/10 mcrab=9 10-15 cgs 20-40keV 80% of the CXB resolved, similar to what Chandra and XMM do below 10 kev. 2350 sources/deg -2 25 sources per 7 diam FOV
Flux limits S/N=3 1Msec
Flux limits S/N=3 1Msec Circinus galaxy: a nearby (4Mpc), highly obscured (N H =2 10 24 cm -2 ), low luminosity (logl 20-100keV =41.7) AGN BeppoSAX MECS-PDS data Circinus X 100 a bright Seyfert
Flux limits S/N=3 1Msec Markarian 3: a highly obscured (N H =5 10 23 cm -2 ), high luminosity (logl 20-100keV =43.8) Seyfert at 60Mpc BeppoSAX MECS-PDS data Mark3 X 10 a QSO2
Flux limits S/N=3 1Msec NGC1068: a Compton thick (N H = 10 25 cm -2 ) AGN at 20 Mpc observed luminosity logl 20-100keV =42, unobscured luminosity logl 20-100keV 44, A nearby QSO2??!! BeppoSAX MECS,PDS NGC1068 X 10 a QSO2
Blazars
Radio Galaxies Lobes of powerful radio-galaxy at the center of a cluster. Total spectrum = ICM + NT emission from the radio lobes. 10-100 kev imaging is required to study the NT spectrum
NT emission from Cluster of galaxies
Clusters radio halos
Clusters radio halos
NT emission and particle acceleration in SNR