Download A Coevolution Scheme for Supermassive Black Holes and Galactic

Masayuki UMEMURA
Center for Computational Physics, University of Tsukuba, Japan
Collaborators
Nozomu KAWAKATSU
Masao MORI
Jun’ichi SATO
Black Hole-Bulge Correlation
1. BH-Bulge Mass Relation
 MBH /Mbulge  0.001
(Kormendy & Richstone 1995; Richstone 1995; Magorrian et al. 1998;
Merrifield et al. 2000; Kormendy 2000; Merritt & Ferrarese 2001)
 MBH Mbulge1.53
MBH /Mbulge  0.005(MV -22) ; MBH /Mbulge  0.0005 (MV -18)
(Laor 2001)
2. MBH- Relation
MBH, =4.72 (Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Merrit & Ferrarese 2000)
MBH, =3.75 (Gebhardt et al. 2000)
MBH, =4.02±0.32 (Tremaine et al. 2002 )
3. MBH /Mdisk  0.005 for Disk component (Salucci et al. 2000; Sarzi et al. 2000)
Why does SMBH mass linearly correlate with bulge mass ?
What is the basic physics to determine
MBH /Mbulge  O(10-3) ?
Present Prediction
MBH
Mbulge
0.14  0.001
(erad  l*t*
0.14  m*c 2 )
( = 0.007 : H  He nuclear fusion energy
conversion efficiency)
Richstone 1995
Relativistic Radiation Hydrodynamics
(Umemura et al. 1997; Fukue et al. 1997; Umemura et al. 1998)
dv r
1 dP d   r



 ( F  v r E  v r P rr  v  P r )
dt
r
 dr dr c
v
2
Radiation Drag
1 d ( rv )  
 ( F  v E  v P  v r P r )
r dt
c
Radiation Drag
 : dust extinction
F : radiation flux
E: radiation energy density
P: radiation stress-tensor
Angular Momentum
Extraction
e.g. Poynting-Robertson effect
in solar system
Sato & Umemura, in preparation
0.6
0.5
radiation field
2

  Rh 
L*
3
E  3.45 10 

 erg cm
12
 3 10 L   1 kpc 
2
Y
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
velocity
vd 
0
1
2

1
2
 M
  R 
GM tot
 6.67 107  11tot   h  cm s -1
Rh
 10 L   1 kpc 
cold gas
Tc  102 K, M c  105 M , Rc  10 pc
Momentum loss
px (t )  px 0e
t / t
t  2.02 108 yr
0
X
0.5
1
SMBH Formation by Radiation Drag in Bulge
Umemura, 2001, ApJ, 560, L29
Kawakatsu & Umemura, 2002, MNRAS, 329, 572
Angular Momentum Extraction
Bulge
L*

d ln J
dt

E
c

 L
c2 R2

(: optical depth by dust)
R
MDO
L

(1

e
)
2
c Mg
photon number
conservation
Mass Accretion Rate
(Massive Dark Object)
d ln J
M  M g
dt
L

(1

e
)
2
c
Optically-Thick Regime
Mass Accretion Rate
L
L 
-1 

0.1
M
yr
 12 
c2
 10 L 
M
 M Edd
 M BH 
 0.2 M yr   8

 10 M 
-1
1
Radiation Drag Time-Scale
tdrag
1
 L 
c R
2 Z 
7

 8.6  10 yr  12  Rkpc 

 L
10
L
Z




2
2
Mass of MDO
t
M MDO   Mdt
0

t
0
L / c2dt
1
Mass Accretion by Radiation Drag
M
L
c2
M

M
L
 kt

0.14

ke
Mc 2
MDO-Bulge Mass Ratio
t M
M MDO


dt  0.14 (1  e  kt )
0 M
M

M (1  ekt )  M (1  f g )  M bulge (stellar component)
M MDO

M bulge
0.14 1  0.001 1
( = 0.007,  = net stellar conversion eficiency)
BH Growth
Radiation Drag Growth
M MDO  0.14
L=LEdd
M

(1  e  kt ) M

MMDO
Eddington Growth
M BH  M 0e t / tEdd
MBH
  L / LEdd
tEdd  1.9  1080.42 yr
tcross
 M BH
 M 0e t / tEdd

 M MDO

t  tcross
t  tcross
M BH
M bulge
[tcross  4tEdd 1  10910 yr for   0.1  1]
 
0.14 1  0.002 

0.5


1
t
SMBH to Bulge Mass Correlation
Present Prediction
Rees Diagram
(1984)
radiation drag
103 M d MBH d 1010 M
MBH- Relation
Radiation drag: M BH  M
GM
Virialization:
  2 , Rvir
Rvir
1
Rmax  M 1/ 3 (1  zmax ) 1
2
CDM fluctuations: (1  zmax )   CDM  M   (  16 )

M BH  M   6 /(23 )
e.g. M BH   4 for  = 16
 M BH   4 in more massive bulge 


4
M


in
less
massive
bulge
 BH

MBH- Relation
Present Prediction
Tremaine et al. 2002
Why small BHs in disks?
 Disks without AGNs
 Sy1s
 Sy2s
 NLSy1s
0.03
Kawakatu & Umemura 2003
submitted to ApJ
0.1
f bulge  M bulge / M galaxy
1
Geometrical Dilution of Radiation Fields
Elliptical Galaxies
Disk Galaxies
low drag efficiency
high drag efficiency
 Disks
without AGNs
 Sy1s
 Sy2s
 NLSy1s
Present Prediction
Sy1
with
Starburst
0.03
0.1
f bulge  M bulge / M galaxy
Sy2 with starburst
1
 NLS1s
Coevolution of SMBHs and Bulges
 SMBHs have been thought to be the central engine of AGNs.
z=6.3 QSO  tBH109yr
 QSO hosts are mostly luminous, well evolved elliptical galaxies.
 Recently, the demography of galactic centers have shown a
tight correlation between SMBHs and galactic bulges.
The formation and evolution of SMBH, bulge, and QSO are
mutually related.
ULIRG
QSO
>1
LLAGN
<1
Mbulge(star)
MBH
MMDO
LAGN
L*
tw
tcross(109-10yr)
t
• There is time delay between L* and LAGN. LAGN/L* increases until tcross .
• LAGN is peaked around tcross. (QSO phase)
• MBH /Mbulge increases with LAGN or age until tcross .
Radiation Hydrodynamic Growth of BH
via Radiation Drag
+
Chemical Evolution of Bulge
PEGASE (Foic & Rocca-Volmerange 1997)
Evolutionary spectral synthesis code
Kawakatu, Umemura & Mori, 2003, ApJ, 583, 85
Optical Depth Evolution
Galactic wind
100
10
1
0.1
0.01
0.001
tthin
107
tw
108
Time [yr]
109
Luminosity Evolution
<1
Lbulge
13
10
1012
ULIRG
1011
1010
10
M BH
Galactic wind
>1
1014
LLAGN
LAGN
tw tcrit
9
108
109
tcross
1010
Time [yr]
• LAGN /Lbulge exhibits a AGN-dominant peak around 109yr. (QSO phase)
• QSO phase is preceded by an optically thin, host-dominant “proto-QSO” phase.
• Proto-QSO phase is preceded by an optically thick, host-dominant phase. (ULIRGs)
5000
v BLR
Emission Line Width
(Kaspi et al.1997; Loar et al. 1997; Peterson et al. 2000)
 1700  M 10 M  km/s
8
14
BH
>1
<1
1500
1000
100
ULIRG
LLAGN
tw tcrit
108
109
tcross
1010 Time [yr]
 In Proto-QSO phase, the width of broad emission lines is less than 1500km/s.
Proto-QSO = NLQSO1 = Growing BH phase
“A Coevolution Scheme for SMBHs and Galactic Bulges“
LBG
ULIRG
Proto-QSO
QSO
LLAGN
<1
>1
<1
<1
<1
Bulge
enshrouded BH
Type 2 QSO
Nucleus
10-100 pc
tthin  107 yr
growing BH
twin  1089 yr
tcross  109 yr
time
Summary on BH Formation
• MBH /Mbulge  0.14  =0.001 : Radiation drag growth
(key physics: =0.007)
• MBH - Relation: CDM spectrum
• MBH /Mbulge  0.005 for Disks: Geometrical dilution
Summary on Coevolution
• LAGN /Lbulge exhibits a AGN-dominant peak around 109yr. (QSO phase)
MBH /Mbulge  10-4-10-3 in QSO phase (key physics:  = 0.007)
• QSO phase is preceded by a host-dominant “proto-QSO” phase.
MBH /Mbulge < 10-5 -10-4 in proto-QSO (growing BH phase)
Proto-QSOs are narrow line QSOs.
Their properties are similar to those of high redshift radio galaxies.
• Proto-QSO phase is preceded by an optically thick, host-dominant phase. (ULIRGs)
Thank you
for attention