Exploring the Origin of the BH Mass Scaling Relations

Exploring the Origin of the BH Mass Scaling Relations Vardha Nicola Bennert Assistant Professor California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo in collaboration with Tommaso Treu, Chelsea E. Harris (UCSB), Matthew W. Auger (Cambridge, UK) Jong-Hak Woo (Seoul National University), Matthew A. Malkan (UCLA), et al. Dartmouth College July 30 2012

BH Mass Scaling Relations in Local Universe Mass of BH ~ 0.2 % of mass of stars in bulge (e.g. Gebhardt et al. 2000, Ferrarese & Merrit 2000, Marconi & Hunt 2003, Haering & Rix 2004) Gebhardt et al. (2000) Marconi & Hunt (2003)

Why Do We Care? Different scales: μpc-scale of accretion onto BH pc-scale of BH sphere of influence kpc-scale of bulge Formation & evolution of galaxies linked to BHs Theoretical models: Mergers, AGN feedback (e.g. Volonteri et al. 2003; Ciotti & Ostriker 2007; Hopkins et al. 2007, 2009; Di Matteo et al. 2008) Urry & Padovani (1995)

Evolution? Active phase: quenches SF M(BH) can only increase Spheroid Ageing of stellar pop. Accretion of gas: active phase Merging of progenitor bulge Triggers AGN phase Triggers SF Merging BHs Merger Stellar mass transfer: disk bulge

Approach Understand relations: evolution Study evolution: AGNs Understand evolution: robust baseline (1) M(BH)-L, M(BH)-sigma to 4-6 Gyrs (Bennert et al. 2010, ApJ, 708, 1507) (2) M(BH)-M to 10 Gyrs (Bennert et al. 2011, ApJ, 742, 107) (3) M(BH)-L, M(BH)-sigma, M(BH)-M in local Universe (Bennert et al. 2011, ApJ, 726, 59; Harris, Bennert et al. 2012, ApJS, accepted +...)

M(BH) L @ 4-6 Gyrs Seyfert-1 galaxies SDSS DR7: broad Hβ 35 @ z~0.4 uet al. 2007; 21 NICMOS + Keck) 6 @ z~0.6 HST images: Spheroid luminosity AGN luminosity for M(BH) Keck spectra: M(BH) Sigma

M(BH) L @ 4-6 Gyrs Including high-z sample (Peng et al. 2006): 0.66 < z < 4.5 27 gravitationally lensed AGNs 17 non-lensed AGNs

M(BH) L @ 4-6 Gyrs With selection effects: BH growth precedes bulge assembly (Merloni et al. 2010, slope 0.7; Decarli et al. 2010, slope 1.5) Evolution mass dependent? (di Matteo et al. 2008; Hopkins et al. 2009)

Mergers (13/40)? Gas-rich major merger with spiral: spheroid grows through disruption of disk, no significant BH growth (Croton 2006) Scatter: different type of mergers/time scales? ACS (Treu et al. 2007) NICMOS (Bennert et al. 2010)

Mergers (13/40)? Comparable to fraction in GOODS at same z (Treu et al. 2007) Cannot infer link between merger & AGN activity (but: Canalizo & Stockton 2001, Urrutia et al. 2008, Bennert et al. 2008) Larger than in local universe (Patton et al. 2002) ACS (Treu et al. 2007) NICMOS (Bennert et al. 2010)

Late-type galaxies (>15/40)? Eventually fall on local relation (downsizing)? More intrinsic scatter? (Gueltekin et al. 2009) Pseudobulges? (Kormendy et al. 2011) ACS (Treu et al. 2007) NICMOS (Bennert et al. 2010)

Surprise: M(BH) - L(host) No evolution (z<1)? (Jahnke et al. 2009) (a) Growth of bulge through re-distribution of stars? Secular evolution or minor mergers? (b) More fundamental relation (late-type galaxies)? (Peng 2007, Jahnke & Maccio 2011) Dominant growth mechanism of spheroids? Higher-mass/higher z: major mergers Lower-mass/lower z: minor mergers (Hopkins et al. 2009)

Passive luminosity evolution? Uncertainties

AGNs in GOODS: 1<z<2 Deep multi-color HST images Evolutionary trend confirmed M(BH) M* @ 8-10 Gyrs

M(BH) M* @ 8-10 Gyrs 4/11 clear spirals (Schawinski et al. 2011: 80% spirals at comparable z) No clear signs of mergers/interactions Secular evolution/minor mergers: Non-negligible role in growing BHs?

M(BH) sigma @ 4-6 Gyrs Same sample (Woo et al. 2012, in prep.) No passive luminosity evolution Distinguish different scenarios (dissipational/dissipationless mergers) Probe fundamental plane between M(BH), L, sigma (Hopkins et al. 2007)

A local baseline of the BH mass scaling relations (i) Understand evolution = understand local relations (ii) True bulge dispersion Wide range of morphologies: disk kinematically cold but rotating Questions global sigma measurements (high z & fiber-based SDSS) (iii) Measure sigma from three different spectral ranges CaHK region (~3735-4300A) MgIb, Fe region (~5100-5300A) CaII triplet (~8500-8700A)

A local baseline of the BH mass scaling relations (i) Understand evolution = understand local relations (ii) True bulge dispersion Wide range of morphologies: disk kinematically cold but rotating Questions global sigma measurements (high z & fiber-based SDSS) (iii) Measure sigma from three different spectral ranges (iv) Probe selection effects in reverberation-mapped AGN sample

A local baseline of the BH mass scaling relations SDSS DR6: z=0.02-0.08; M(BH)>10^7 M(sun) Majority spirals (~65%) Keck spectra: Spatially resolved along major axis ~100 objects M(BH) sigma SDSS images: Spheroid luminosity Spheroid mass AGN luminosity for M(BH)

Spatially resolved sigma and velocity Effect of disk present but negligible

Spatially resolved sigma and velocity CaT & CaHK match MgIb can overestimate sigma by 5%

M(BH)-L, M(BH)-sigma, M(BH)-M in local Universe Inactive galaxies and active galaxies follow same relations

Understand relations: evolution Study evolution: AGNs Understand evolution: robust baseline (1) M(BH)-L, M(BH)-sigma to 4-6 Gyrs (Bennert et al. 2010, ApJ, 708, 1507) M(BH)-total L not evolving? (2) M(BH)-M to 10 Gyrs (Bennert et al. 2011, ApJ, 742, 107) Approach Summary BH growth precedes bulge assembly Evolutionary trend confirmed (3) M(BH)-L, M(BH)-sigma, M(BH)-M in local Universe (Bennert et al. 2011, ApJ, 726, 59; Harris, Bennert et al. 2012, ApJS, accepted +...) Active = inactive galaxies Effect of disk/spectral region negligible

Work in Progress Kelsi Flatland Rebecca Rosen Bryan Scott