240 likes | 258 Views
Quasars: old black holes with young stars Knud Jahnke Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie, Heidelberg. (?). Sebasti á n F. S á nchez (CAHA) Lutz Wisotzki (AIP) Asmus Böhm (AIP) Isabelle Gavignaud (AIP) +the GEMS team. Eva Schinnerer (MPIA) Vernesa Smolcic (MPIA) +the COSMOS team(s).
E N D
Quasars: old black holes with young stars Knud Jahnke Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie, Heidelberg (?) Sebastián F. Sánchez (CAHA) Lutz Wisotzki (AIP) Asmus Böhm (AIP) Isabelle Gavignaud (AIP) +the GEMS team Eva Schinnerer (MPIA) Vernesa Smolcic (MPIA) +the COSMOS team(s) Frederic Courbin (Lausanne) Geraldine Letawe (Liege) Lutz Wisotzki et al.
State of the art: • luminous QSOs lie in massive bulges (not only E) • most BH mass accretion in high-L type 1 QSOs • accretion at 10%—100% Eddington • Goals: • state & evolution of QSO host galaxies • role of QSOs in general galaxy formation & evolution (and vice versa) • host diagnostics: luminosities, morphologies, stellar composition, gas state, interactions
Imaging and spectroscopy samples • GEMS/E-CDFS: 80 type 1 QSOs (55 @ z<3) • optically selected and photo-z‘s (COMBO17) • V, z band optical ACS imaging • COSMOS: 120 type 1 QSOs, z<2.5 (future: ~500) • optically selected (SDSS & SDSS+MMT) • radio selected (VLA-COSMOS) • spectro-z‘s (IMACS, zCOSMOS, SDSS) • i band ACS imaging • VLT spectroscopy: 20 type 1 QSOs, 0.05<z<0.35 • 3 grisms optical, 3500—9000Å
S COSMOS 120 QSOs Broad-line AGN sample: redshift distribution (z<3) 55 QSOs GEMS
2“ 500 stars 4500 stars 500 stars F606W (GEMS) F814W (COSMOS) F850LP (GEMS)
z = 0.3–0.7 0.9–1.0 1.0–1.15 1.15–1.3 1.3–1.5 1.5–1.6 1.6–1.8 1.8–1.9 1.9–2.1 2.1–2.9 COSMOS ACS F814W 4“
z = 0.3–0.7 0.9–1.0 1.0–1.15 1.15–1.3 1.3–1.5 1.5–1.6 1.6–1.8 1.8–1.9 1.9–2.1 2.1–2.9 z=0.65 z=1.53 z=2.16 z=2.24
z = 0.3–0.7 0.9–1.0 1.0–1.15 1.15–1.3 1.3–1.5 1.5–1.6 1.6–1.8 1.8–1.9 1.9–2.1 2.1–2.9
Current status & knowledge • COSMOS: ~50/120 resolved type 1 QSO hosts • Jahnke et al. (in prep) • GEMS: ~45 resolved (with optical colour) • Sanchez et al. 2004 • Jahnke et al. 2004 • Jahnke et al. (in prep) • Others: Kukula/Dunlop et al., Hutchings et al., Falomo et al., Peng et al., Kuhlbrodt et al. (at high z, 1–10 objects each)
GEMS & ground based colours B&C03 (solar) disk dominated bulge dominated undecided
GEMS z=0.7 mag-size relation Inactive: z=0.7 z=0
COSMOS+GEMS: homogeneous inactive comparison samples z=0.6 z=1.0
Radio detected COSMOS+GEMS combined GOODS-MUSIC (Grazian et al. 2006)
Diagnostic power • Differential host galaxy evolution compared to inactive galaxies • Influence of interaction on QSO activity (from merger fraction) • Test unified model for AGN from radio loud—quiet & type 1—type 2 comparison (luminosities, morphology) • QSO host galaxy parent population • With 2nd COSMOS (HST?-) band: spectrum of interaction strength triggering AGN activity (5% of QSOs with NICMOS data); trying Subaru 0.5“ seeing data
QSO host spectroscopy: on-nucleus • FORS slitlets • Centered on QSO • PSF star in the field
2d host galaxy spectrum total host
QSO host spectroscopy Jahnke et al., submitted to MNRAS
Sample • 20 type 1 QSOs • Hamburg/ESO survey • 0.05 < z < 0.35 • Imaging available
Property overview • 20/20 successful host galaxy extraction • 7 confirmed disk dominated, 2 bulge dominated • 1 QSO with very faint host galaxy (upper limit) • Publication: • Courbin et al. 2002, A&A, 394, 863 • Letawe et al. 2004, A&A, 424, 455 • Magain et al. 2005, Nature, 437, 381 • Letawe et al., submitted to MNRAS • Jahnke et al., submitted to MNRAS
QSO host spectroscopy Trager et al. 1998 early type galaxies Kennicutt et al. 1992 late type galaxies Letawe et al., submitted to MNRAS
ISM state Letawe et al., submitted to MNRAS
rotation disturbed Letawe et al., submitted to MNRAS
Results/conclusions/summary • BL QSO host galaxies are very luminous • Radio selected type 1 QSO hosts @z=1 are (on average) more luminous than optically selected • Host galaxies span colour range from reddish to blue contribution of young stars • Early type hosts can be substantially bluer/have younger stellar populations than inactive counterparts (confirmed for z<1.1, SDSS+HES+GEMS) • No extreme starbursts! • Moderate to substantial UV flux at z~2, similar to LBGs • Merger/distortion fraction seems increased (to be quantified!)