Upload
others
View
8
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Exploring High-z Black Hole - Bulge Relations
With Semi-AnalyticsMadeline Marshall
with Stuart Wyithe & Simon Mutch
Black Hole - Host Relations
• Correlations between black holes and hosts at low redshift
• To understand, need to study at high redshift
Kormendy & Ho (2013)
High Redshift Quasars
Mechtley et al. (2016)
• Try to detect hosts using quasar subtraction technique
• Haven’t detected any z~6 hosts in rest-frame UV or optical (only upper limits so far)
• We’re observing two z~6 quasars with JWST, so developing models while we wait
• Semi-analytic model designed for studying galaxy formation during EoR
• Adds galaxies to haloes from N-body dark matter simulation
• Models processes like gas cooling, star formation, feedback, mergers etc.
MERAXES Semi-Analytic Model
(Mutch et al. 2016)
• Seed black holes in all galaxies
• “Radio-mode” hot gas accretion:
• Bondi–Hoyle accretion rate
• Eddington-limited
• “Quasar-mode” cold gas accretion:
• Due to galaxy mergers & disc instabilities (NEW)
• Eddington-limited
MERAXES Black Hole Growth
(Qin et al. 2017)
Artist* impression of a black hole
*my
• Galaxy mergers:
• In major mergers, remnant is a bulge
• In minor mergers, mass of secondary’s stars sent to bulge
• Disc instabilities:
•
• Enough disc material is sent to bulge such that it becomes stable
• Get a starburst, with stars added to bulge
MERAXES Bulge Growth
(New, analogous to Tonini et al. 2016)
A galaxy with a disc and a bulge
Mdisk >V 2diskRscale
G
�5
�4
�3
�2lo
g(�
/dex
�1M
pc�
3)
z = 8 z = 7 z = 6 z = 5
8 10 12
log(M⇤/M�)
�5
�4
�3
�2
log(
�/
dex
�1M
pc�
3)
z = 4
8 10 12
log(M⇤/M�)
z = 3
8 10 12
log(M⇤/M�)
z = 2
8 10 12
log(M⇤/M�)
z = 0
Q17 Meraxes
M18 MeraxesM18 Meraxes(Tiamat-125-HR)
Q17 Meraxes(Tiamat-125-HR)
Katsianis2015
Davidzon2017
Santini2012
Ilbert2013
Muzzin2013
Huertas-Company2016
Grazian2015
Gonzalez2011
Duncan2014
Song2016
Stefanon2017
Bell2003
Cole2001
Thanjavur2016
Baldry2012
Perez-Gonzalez2008
Pozzetti2010
Yang2009
✓
Calibration Stellar Masses
Model
Observations
Calibration Black Hole - Bulge Relation
9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5
log(Mbulge)
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
log(
MB
H)
Kormendy & Ho (2013)- Ellipticals
Kormendy & Ho (2013)- Classical Bulges
Scott et al. (2013)
Jiang et al. (2011)
Graham and Scott (2015)
Reines & Volonteri (2015)
z = 0
Kormendy & Ho (2013)- Fit
9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5
log(M⇤)
Model
Observations
✓
BulgeFractio
n
Verification Bulge Masses
✓ModelSDSSObservations(Thanjavuretal.2016)
BulgeFractio
n
Verification Bulge Masses
• Also verified with:
• Stellar mass - disc size relation
• Stellar mass - star formation rate relation
• High-z UV galaxy luminosity function
✓
✓✓✓
ModelSDSSObservations(Thanjavuretal.2016)
Black Hole - Bulge Relations
9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5
log(Mbulge)
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
log(
MB
H)
9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5
log(M⇤)
z = 7
z = 6
z = 5
z = 4
z = 3
z = 2
z = 0
9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5
log(Mbulge)
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
log(
MB
H)
9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5
log(M⇤)
z = 7
z = 6
z = 5
z = 4
z = 3
z = 2
z = 0
Redshift Dependence
• Very little evolution for z<5
• Get smaller black holes for same size bulge at z>5
�3.5
�3.0
�2.5
�2.0
log(
MB
H/M
⇤)
M⇤, total
Mbulge
Kormendy & Ho (2013)
02468Redshift
-3.5
-3.0
-2.5
-2.0
log(
MB
H/M
Bulg
e)
106M� < MBH < 107M�
107M� < MBH < 108M�
MBH > 108M�
�3.5
�3.0
�2.5
�2.0
log(
MB
H/M
⇤)
M⇤, total
Mbulge
Kormendy & Ho (2013)
02468Redshift
-3.5
-3.0
-2.5
-2.0lo
g(M
BH/M
Bulg
e)
106M� < MBH < 107M�
107M� < MBH < 108M�
MBH > 108M�
8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5
log(Mbulge)
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
log(
MB
H)
Bulge Dominated Galaxies
Disk Dominated Galaxies
8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5
log(M⇤)
Morphological Dependence
• Disc dominated galaxies offset from black hole-bulge but not black hole-stellar relation [See also Simmons et al. (2017) observations and Martin et al. (2018) simulations]
• Relative significance of growth modes different for bulges and discs
• Bulges grow more during disc instabilities than minor mergers
• Both modes grow the total stellar mass by the same amount in proportion to the black hole growth
•
Morphological Dependence
7.0 7.5 8.0
log MBH/M�
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Num
ber
ofQ
uas
arH
osts
6 8 10 12
log M/M�
Stellar
Gas
0 1 2 3
Disk Scale Length (kpc)
Stellar
Gas
0.6 0.8 1.0
B/T
High-z Quasar Hosts
• z=5 quasar hosts are:
• Mostly bulge-dominated
• Have gas and stellar masses around ~1010 M⦿
• Can observe in ~100s in JWST imaging, if no quasar light
7.0 7.5 8.0
log MBH/M�
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140N
um
ber
ofQ
uas
arH
osts
6 8 10 12
log M/M�
Stellar
Gas
0 1 2 3
Disk Scale Length (kpc)
Stellar
Gas
0.6 0.8 1.0
B/TBulge Fraction
CONCLUSIONS
• We haven’t detected high-z quasar hosts in the optical/near-IR, yet
• Need to make models to estimate their properties & the evolution of the black hole - host relations
• Will try to confirm this using JWST
Madeline Marshall