480 likes | 760 Views
The Links Between AGN and Galaxy Formation. Omar Almaini University of Nottingham. The Links Between AGN and Galaxy Formation. Galaxy formation models …and their problems The AGN/galaxy connection Feedback and AGN winds Observing black hole/bulge growth
E N D
The Links Between AGN and Galaxy Formation Omar Almaini University of Nottingham
The Links Between AGN and Galaxy Formation • Galaxy formation models …and their problems • The AGN/galaxy connection • Feedback and AGN winds • Observing black hole/bulge growth • Summary & future prospects
CDM cosmological model in excellent agreement with wide range of observations: e.g. CMB, galaxy clustering, type 1a SN, element abundances, Cepheid distance scale, stellar ages, baryon fraction in clusters…
Semi-analytic Galaxy Formation Models + Messy physics (gas cooling, star-formation, dust, SN feedback etc…) N-body merger trees =
Producing the local K-band luminosity function -SN feedback is essential! Benson (2003)
Problem can be solved with extreme super-winds >5x1049 erg per solar mass required Benson (2003)
Local galaxies are strongly bimodal Kauffmann et al. 2003; Balogh et al. 2004
Can’t make enough red galaxies at z>1 Data Model e.g. Daddi et al. 2002; Roche, Almaini et al. (2002), Roche, Dunlop & Almaini (2003); Somerville et al. (2003)
The diversity of ERO galaxies • 30-40% old, passive systems • 30-40% dusty starburst • Typical redshifts 1.0<z<1.5 • Strongly clustered • High space density Many old, massive systems already in place at z~1-1.5
‘EROs’ at higher redshift Recent discovery of many old, passive systems at z>1.5 Using J-K>2 colour selection find population of very red galaxies at z>2 Cimatti et al. 2004 Glazebrook et al. 2004 Van Dokkum et al. 2003
Summary of galaxy formation problems Classic Problems • Predicts too many dwarf gals • Predicts “cuspy” cores • Why are there no galaxies • with > 300 km/s? Newer Problems • Fail to produce EROs • Fails to predict SCUBA sources • Bimodal local galaxy pop. Need a mechanism for switching off star-formation in most massive galaxies
The black-hole/bulge mass relationship. MBH = 1.5x1082004M MBH = 0.2 % Mbulge Gebhardt et al. (2000), Ferrarese & Merritt (2000) c.f. Magorrian (1998)
AGN radiative energy EAGN ~ 0.1 MBH c2 = 2 x 10-4 Mbulge c2 Ebulge~ Mbulge2 Binding energy of the bulge ~ 10-6 Mbulge2300c2 Can the black hole influence its host galaxy? MBH = 2x10-3 Mbulge Less than 1% of the AGN energy could blow the galaxy apart
The X-ray background: Most accretion activity is absorbed Unobscured AGN
“AGN winds are ubiquitous” - Brad Peterson “My wind model explains everything” - Martin Elvis
APM-08279 – lensed BAL quasar at z=3.91 Fe XXV K ? v1~0.2 c v2~0.4c Chartas et al. (2002)
Massive X-ray outflow in PDS 456 XMM EPIC pn/MOS Reeves et al. (2003)
Momentum outflow: Mwind v ~ L Edd/c . Massive X-ray outflow in PDS 456 XMM RGS-2 V~50,000 kms-1 NH = 5x1023 ~ 10 M yr-1 Reeves et al. (2003)
~ King & Pounds 2003 Investigated supercritical accretion M > M Edd . . • Assuming all excess matter ejected in a wind: • Compton-thick, quasi-spherical outflow • Momentum outflow: . Mwind v ~ f L Edd/c
Outflow drives wind bubble through host galaxy King 2003 (c.f. Silk & Rees 1998, Fabian 1999, Blandford 1999, Di Matteo et al. 2004… ) . Momentum outflow: Mwind v ~ L Edd/c M(R) 2 R Mgas(R) 2 R Shell velocity v2 Ledd / 2 MBH4
The black-hole/bulge mass relationship. MBH = 1.5x1082004M MBH = 0.2 % Mbulge Gebhardt et al. (2000), Ferrarese & Merritt (2000) c.f. Magorrian (1998)
Observations of AGN-driven super- winds now required!
quasar elliptical? A cartoon model of massive galaxy formation SCUBA phase
The Cooling-Flow Problem XMM RGS (Virgo) Sakelliou et al. 2002
Chandra VLA
What is so special about submm sources? fn The James Clerk Maxwell Telescope (Hawaii) 1000 100 10 Wavelength / m
Results of submm surveys • Highly luminous (ULIRG) systems • SFR ~ 1000 M yr-1 • Massive systems • Evidence for outflowing winds Progenitors of massive elliptical galaxies?
Genzel et al. (2003) Mass determinations for submm sources Swinbank et al. (2004) Massive (CO) Massive (Ha)
Semi-analytic models have great difficulty producing submm sources… Baugh et al. (2005)
Most SCUBA sources DO NOT contain powerful quasars Almaini et al. 2003
William Herschel Telescope 4m Depth R~27 Seeing 0.7” 5 " 5 "
5 " HST ACS Imaging – (Almaini et al. 2005)
1.945 Ms ACIS-I exposure “True” color image 0.5-2.0 keV 2.0-4.0 keV4.0-8.0 keV P.I.: W.N. Brandt
1.945 Ms ACIS-I exposure “True” color image 0.5-2.0 keV 2.0-4.0 keV4.0-8.0 keV P.I.: W.N. Brandt 17/20 SCUBA galaxies X-ray detected Alexander et al. 2005
Composite 2-20 keV spectra (12Ms) Joint spectral fitting 12Ms Chandra spectra!
1.945 Ms ACIS-I exposure “True” color image 0.5-2.0 keV 2.0-4.0 keV4.0-8.0 keV P.I.: W.N. Brandt Modest X-ray luminosities Lx = 1043-1044 ergs-1 Suggest black holes <108M Alexander et al. 2005 Evidence for growing black holes?
Fuel supply Eddington limited growth Archibald et al. (2002)
Where do we go from here? • Need detailed prescription for AGN feedback in semi-analytic models. • Can we detect merging black holes with LISA (Madau 2004)? • How prevalent are AGN-driven winds? • How massive were first black holes? • What influence did they have on the IGM at z>10?
Conclusions • Overwhelming evidence for CDM hierarchical structure formation • Problems with semi-analytical galaxy formation models - mechanism required to terminate SF in massive gals - plus other problems… • AGN feedback is a likely solution - may be related to the origin of the M/ relation - could also explain high-mass cut-off & cluster heating problem