230 likes | 241 Views
ASCA Observations of NLS1s. BH Mass from X-ray Variability and X-ray Spectrum K. Hayashida, K. Mori (Osaka University). Narrow Line Seyfert 1 (NLS1). Seyfert Type 1 whose Broad Emission Line Width is Narrow. (???). Models. Edge On. Pole On. Small BH. Statistical Properties.
E N D
ASCA Observations of NLS1s BH Mass from X-ray Variability and X-ray Spectrum K. Hayashida, K. Mori (Osaka University)
Narrow Line Seyfert 1 (NLS1) • Seyfert Type 1 whose Broad Emission Line Width is Narrow. (???)
Models Edge On Pole On Small BH Statistical Properties Narrow Hb Width Rapid / Large Ampl. X-ray Variability Steep Soft X-ray Spectrum
BH Mass Estimation of NLS1 • X-ray Variability • Application of the Method developed in Hayashida et al., 1998,ApJ500,p.642. • Black Body Fit to Soft Component • Classical Method in (X-ray) Astronomy Preliminary Results were appeared in Hayashida, 1998(IAU Sympo 188), and Hayashida, 1999 (Adv. in Space Res.).
AGNs SBHC(CygX-1) Light Curve Ix(t)/<I> 1.0 Ix(t)/<I> Time 0.0 NPSD * Frequency Time Power per Log Frequency Log(f * P(f)) Log Frequency (Hz) Mass Estimation from Variability • Assumptions • X-ray Variability of BHs (from SBHC to AGNs) is Similar to Each Other. • Variability Time Scale is Proportional to System Size, i.e., BH Mass. • Cyg X-1 BH = 10 Mo • Use Normalized Power Spectrum Density (NPSD)
NLS1 ASCA Sample • 14NLS1 • Zw1, Ton S180, PHL1092, PKS0558-504, 1H0707-495, RE1034+39, NGC4051, PG1211+143, Mrk766, PG1244+226, IRAS13224-3809, PG1404+226, Mrk478, Ark564. • 9BLS1 s for Comparison • MCG-6-30-15, NGC5548, Mrk841, Mkn509, 3C120, NGC3227) from ASCA • MCG-6-30-15, NGC4151,NGC5506,ESO-G103,NGC5548 from Ginga
Hb FWHMvs Mvar BLS1: 107-108Mo NLS1: 105-107Mo
Calibration : Mass from BL width vs Mvar Mrev and Mph from Wandel, A. et al., 1999 (astro-ph/9905224) *)Mrev for NGC4051 is preliminary (ct=6.5days).
Summary-1 • We estimated BH masses of NLS1s from X-ray Variabiliy. • BH Masses in NLS1s from X-ray variability distribute from 105 to 107 Mo, while those in BLS1 range107-108Mo. • Calibrationto Mrev were Shown.
2nd Method X-ray Spectrum of NLS1s
1st vs 2nd MBBfit vs Mvar
Can we reconcile the Contradiction ? • For MBBfit < Mvar • Inclination Effect • cos Factor … MBBfit gives under-estimate • Tc > Te Effect • MBBfit gives under-estimate, too.
Extreme NLS1 Class/State ? (IRAS13, H0707, etc) Ix(t)/<I> Ix(t)/<I> 1.0 Cyg X-1 Light Curve 0.0 Time NPSD * Frequency f * P(f) Time Frequency (Hz) Extreme NLS1 Class/State ? • For MBBfit >Mvar • X-ray Variability of Extremely Enhanced Soft Components => Variability Amplitude is Also Enhanced ? • Mvar underestimation
0.5Rs <-> Kerr BH <-> Slim Disk Solution ADAF (Slim Disk) Standard Disk ADAF From Mineshige et al., 1999 see also Abramowicz 1995.
Summary-2 • Soft Component of NLS1s was fitted with a BB model with kT of 0.1-0.2keV. • BH mass estimated about 105Mo (r=3Rs) or 105-106Mo (r=0.5Rs) . • Lbb exceeds LEdd for r=3Rs, but not for r=0.5Rs. • MBBfit was compared with Mvar; Contradiction of 2 order of magnitudes was found. Possible reconciliation was discussed.
NLS1s : Personal View • NLS1s have smaller BH of 105-107 Mo. • In some of NLS1s, high mass flow rate makes near or super Eddington accretion. • In the extreme high accretion rate • Variability Amplitude is enhanced. • Hard X-ray emission is suppressed. • Mass flow rate changes with time scales of years, reflecting the smallness of system. • NLS1=Evolving Stage of Seyferts to BLS1.