The Rela(on Between Bars and AGN locally and at high redshi8

The Rela(on Between Bars and AGN locally and at high redshi8 Mauricio Cisternas Ins(tuto de Astrofisica de Canarias The Triggering Mechanisms for AGN, Leiden, July 24, 2013

What is triggering most AGN? o Major galaxy mergers? YES NO Recent/ongoing interac(ons in a minority (~15-25%) of AGN hosts Merging frac(on consistent with inac(ve galaxies Significant frac(on of disk- dominated hosts out to z~1 and even z~2 (e.g.: Gabor+09; Georgakakis+09; Jahnke+09; Cisternas+11a,b; Schawinski+11; Kocevski+12) o AGN in disks: how are they being fed? COSMOS AGN at z~0.6, HST/ACS

Black hole growth in disks: feeding o Stellar bars can drive ISM toward central regions, s(mulate nuclear star forma(on could bars also feed a BH? o Can a kpc structure be responsible for what happens in sub pc scales? o Should we expect to see a bar- AGN connec(on? AGN ac(vity short lived (~10-100 Myr), but bars are long lived (e.g., Berentzen+07, Kraljic+12, Athanassoula+13) Mar(ni et al. (2003) NGC 4639 Seyfert 1

Aiemp(ng to connect bars and AGN o Many (local) studies on the bar- AGN connec(on frac(on of barred and unbarred ac(ve galaxies frac(on of ac(ve and inac(ve barred galaxies o Summary of local results: Do AGN prefer barred galaxies? Yes they do! Arsenault+89 Knapen+00 Laine+02 Maia+03 Laurikainen+04a Coelho&Gadom11 Oh+12 Not more than inac4ve galaxies Moles+95 McLeod&Rieke95 Mulchaney&Regan97 Ho+97 Hunt&Malkan99 Lee+12 No, they avoid barred galaxies Shlosman+00 Zhang+09

Bar frac(on The rela(on between bars and AGN: beyond z=0 Silverman+08 Sheth+08 Redshi8

The rela(on between bars and AGN: beyond z=0 Summary of observa(onal results:

Bar- AGN connec(on out to z=0.8 o Data: COSMOS Survey 2 deg 2 mul(wavelength survey HST/ACS (F814W) 35+ photometric bands coverage from X- ray to radio o Sheth+08 Sample: L* & brighter spirals M V <- 20.7 to M V <- 21.7 (from z=0 to z=0.9) z<0.84 avoid SDSS u- band rejects ellip(cals, compact objects, merging systems, highly inclined disks Total sample of 2157 objects Bar detec(on: Ellip(city/PA and visually z=0.3 z=0.6 z=0.4 z=0.7

Bar- AGN connec(on out to z=0.8 AGN catalog of choice: Chandra- COSMOS Only central 0.9 deg 2 observed Flux limit: sensi(vity 3- (mes below XMM- COSMOS C- and XMM- COSMOS areas Op(cal/NIR iden(fica(on of X- ray sources (Civano+12) 76 galaxies from Sheth+08 have an C- COSMOS X- ray counterpart

Bar- AGN connec(on out to z=0.8 o Cau(on on using catalogs blindly! o Example: Op(cal counterpart to bright X- ray source (L X =10 43.4 erg/s) - Barred galaxy - > bar- driven AGN? - Interac(on- induced bars and AGN? - Actual X- ray source: background QSO? background QSO? interac(ng pair?

Bar- AGN connec(on out to z=0.8 Bar frac(on: o Dependent on stellar mass o Par(cularly at high- z Stellar mass- matched samples: Sheth+08 10 10.5 11 log(m * ) z=0.2-0.4 z=0.4-0.6 z=0.6-0.84

Bar- AGN connec(on out to z=0.8 Bar frac4ons: Cisternas+ in prep o High- z: no difference o Low- z: AGN show mild enhancement o Raw version: no L X cut

Bar- AGN connec(on out to z=0.8 Evolu(on of AGN bar frac(on follows evolu(on of inac(ve barred galaxies At high- z (and high- L x ): no difference in bar frac(on: Bars not relevant for these AGN? Luminous AGN fueling in disks occurs before the assembly of the Hubble sequence, perhaps in dynamically hot disks? log(l X )=43.5 log(l X )=43.6 log(l X )=43.4 log(l X )=43.6 At low- z (and low- L x ): minor enhancement in AGN bar frac(on: Bars becoming important below a luminosity threshold? log(l X )=44.1 log(l X )=43.5

Revisi(ng the local bar- AGN affair o Local universe: not as exci(ng as at high- z but definitely not quiescent o ~40% of nearby galaxies show nuclear ac(vity (Ho 08)

Revisi(ng the local bar- AGN affair o Local universe: not as exci(ng as at high- z but definitely not quiescent o ~40% of nearby galaxies show nuclear ac(vity (Ho 08) o >60% of nearby spirals are barred (Eskridge+00)

Revisi(ng the local bar- AGN affair o Local universe: not as exci(ng as at high- z but definitely not quiescent o ~40% of nearby galaxies show nuclear ac(vity (Ho 08) o >60% of nearby spirals are barred (Eskridge+00) o No clear evidence for a local bar- AGN connec(on o Usual approach: bar frac(ons of ac(ve/inac(ve galaxies, but: AGN ac(vity: six orders of magnitude in luminosity and BH accre(on rate Stellar bars: there are bars and bars- Bar strength closely related to gas inflow rate Bar strength and degree of AGN ac(vity: not discrete but con4nuous

Near- IR and X- ray data o Spitzer Survey of Stellar Structure in Galaxies 2300+ nearby (<40 Mpc) galaxies with IRAC 3.6um solid tracer of old stars - > stellar bars Parent sample of 144 barred galaxies Moderate inclina(ons; not disturbed or too faint, good Hubble type sampling Sheth+10 o Archival Chandra X- ray data Best tracer of low- luminosity AGN ac(vity No uniform survey of nearby galaxies Chandra archival data for ~20% of S 4 G galaxies For this study: 41 galaxies with ACIS data High resolu(on imaging: ~1 arcsec

X- ray Nuclear Morphologies Spitzer/IRAC 3.6um Chandra/ACIS Cisternas+13

By- product: BH growth in bulgeless galaxies Spitzer/IRAC 3.6um Chandra/ACIS 0.2-10 kev

Quan(fying Nuclear Ac(vity o Hard X- ray luminosi(es (2-10 kev) if enough counts: spectral modeling otherwise, assump(ons on power law index o Eddington ra(os (L bol /L Edd ) proxy of accre(on rate BH masses: - direct measurements - M BH - σ * or M BH - L Bulge NGC2787 Cts/s/keV 5 10 4 10 3 2 10 3 5 10 3 NGC1291 0.5 1 2 5 Energy (kev) NGC4450 NGC 1291 Cts/s/keV 10 3 2 10 3 5 10 3 0.01 NGC1367 1 NGC4579 3 0.01 0.02 0.1 0.1

Quan(fying Bar Strength 1. Bar Structure (Kim, S 4 G in prep) 2D image decomposi(on of disk+bulge+bar ellip(city & boxiness o =1 b/a, 2. Gravita(onal torque (Diaz- Garcia, S 4 G in prep) ra(o of tangen(al to radial forces NGC 1367 NGC 1300 c c x y + =1, a b Athanassoula+90 Q T (r) = F T max (r) hf R (r)i, Combes & Sanders81 ε=0.5 c=2.7 Q=0.1 ε=0.8 c=3.2 Q=0.6

Bar strength vs nuclear ac(vity Q b ell x box boxiness ellipticity ρ= - 0.1 ρ= 0.1 ρ= - 0.1 ρ= - 0.2 ρ= - 0.3 ρ= - 0.2 ρ= - 0.3 ρ= 0.0 No posi(ve correla(ons In some cases, nega(ve trends Brighter or more efficient AGN: no preference for strong bars (strong inflows) Local low- luminosity AGN ac(vity: not closely connected to bar proper(es Low- luminosity AGN: no need for significant inflows to exist Cisternas+13 X-ray Luminosity Eddington ratio

Bars and AGN over cosmic (me: Summary AGN bar frac(on evolves in a similar fashion as the inac(ve bar frac(on over the last 7 billion years Luminous AGN in disks occur without the need of stellar bars Minor enhancement of ac(ve bar frac(on at lower- z/l x : Is there a sweet spot in L AGN - redshi8 space where bars maier? Nearby universe: extent of bar- driven inflow does not directly impact BH fueling Low- luminosity AGN ac(vity not related to large scale features - > LLAGN do not need bar- driven inflows