Vital Statistics: 1.8 Ms

½ sq.deg @160 ksec

1761 sourcesDec ’06-June ’07

Catalog: Elvis et al., 2009, ApJS 184, 158

Martin Elvis, Francesca Civano, Aldcroft T., Fruscione A.,Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Salvanto M.,Vignali C., Puccetti S., Zamorani G., Brusa M., Cappelluti N., Fiore F., Comastri A., Salvato M., Mainieri V., Lanzuisi, G., and the COSMOS TEAM

The Chandra COSMOS X-ray Survey

1. Wedding Cake Sweet Spot2. ‘Galaxies’3. SEDs: Elvis was right!4. Dust Poor AGNs (mostly)5. Recoiling BH6. New Proposals: Chandra, HST

Chandra COSMOS hits a Sweet Spot

Faint

AREA

Flux

CDFs

COSMOS

XBootes

in the “Cosmic Wedding Cake”

Champ

1. Faint enough to find ‘not just more AGNs’

2. Not too deep to get IDs, SEDs, spectra

3. Big enough to have large samples, find rare objects

Chandra-COSMOS Sweet Spot

SEDs

IDs?

Spectra

Chandra-COSMOS Sweet Spot

SEDs

IDs?

Spectra

C-COSMOS Galaxies

LX>1042 erg/s

AGN?

Log X/O (2-10keV)

Lanzuisi et al., 2010, in preparation

X-ray luminous & heavily obscuredwhen enough counts

•Keck/DEIMOS spectra:• AGN + Starburst + Wind

Feruglio et al., in prep.

Spectroscopic RedshiftsSo far:• 631 spec-z(SDSS, zCOSMOS, IMACS, Keck)Mostly XMM sources

• Only 13 BL AGN not in XMM214 total

• 153 new Keck z coming soon Mostly:

• red (R-K)>~4• faint, i>22

Candidates: • double lines• z > 5

• High z Samples in dozens:22 sources at zspec>358 sources at zphot>3

z phot

z spec

z>3 Quasars

z=5.4Highest zX-ray selectedquasar

z=6.8 candidateSalvato et al.

BUT…

z>3 Quasars

COSMOS Type 1 AGN SEDs

XMM

Hot Dust Accretion Disk

αnir αopt

Quasar-Host-Reddening Mixing Diagram

(Polletta et al. 2007)Host Dominated

AGN Dominated

Reddening Dominated

???

E(B-V)

COSMOS AGN on Mixing Diagram

αopt

Consistent with meanE94+HOST+Reddening

COSMOS AGN on Mixing DiagramE94 mean SED works in 90% of COSMOS Quasars

(Hao et al. 2010)

αopt

Hot-Dust Poor AGNs

Number of Sources: 42/402

αopt

Hao et al. 2010: Letter circulated to COSMOS team

Hot-Dust Poor AGNs

Number of Sources: 42/402

αopt

Hao et al. 2010

E94E94 E94

Bolometric Luminosity vs Redshift

z<1.54.9%±0.8%

1.5<z<315.9%±3%

Larger Fraction At z>1.5Evolution

Hao et al. 2010

Hot Dust Covering Factor

Dust temperature =1500 KEmission Area =0.15 pc2

Sublimation radius =0.81 pc(Barvainis, 1987)

Covering factor ~ 0.2

Cf 75% for type1:type2 ratio

Hao et al. 2010

Accretion Disk Outer Radius

Tc~ R-3/4 KMeasure: Tc=1800 KRout=0.24 pc ≈ 6000 Rs

>> Gravitational Instability radius(rgi≈ few 100 Rs, Goodman et al. 2003)

Either:1) Not Rout

2) Or something stabilizes disk

Hao et al. 2010

SED Fitting & M-s Relation

E94 AGN

Starburst

Merloni et al. 2010

Hao et al. 2010

• M-σ relation: basis of co-evolution• Higher Mbh/Mhost at z~1?

Merloni et al. 2010

• Depends on SED fitting: • e.g. 817202 (z=1.53) = extreme

Starburst, if E94 SED required• If Hot-dust-Poor Quasar:

Lower Mhost

Higher Mbh

• Test: em. line EW• Moves points away from M-s• Need new AGN templates with separate Big Blue Bump and Hot Dust components

What are Hot-Dust Poor Quasars?

• Torus not yet formed? (Jiang et al. 2010: 2 z~6 HDPs) NO• plenty of cosmic time at z~2 (1-2Gyr)

• Accretion rate too low to drive wind? (Elitzur & Ho 2009) NO

• Lbol too low? (Elitzur & Schlosman 2006) NO

Hot dust destroyed:

1. Radiation: Eddington Outburst? Inflow/formation time

2. Dynamically: during merger?• Consistent with evolution to low HDP fraction at z < 1.5

Hao et al. 2010

Civano et al. 2010, Ap.J. in press, arXiv1003.0020C(see also Elvis 2009 and Comerford et al. 2009)

15”x15” HST+ Chandra

N

E

CID-42

• 3 times peculiar COSMOS source: 1. 2 sources in the optical image2. 2 nuclear emission line system3. Large velocity offset: 1100 km/s

• Too large for a merger4. Variable redshifted X-ray iron line in

absorption• Very RARE, 1 in 2600• Gravitational wave recoil?• Slingshot from triple BH

system?The best case of GW recoil BH

with both Imaging and Spectroscopic signatures

2.5kp

c

CID-42: GW or Slingshot Recoiling BH?

Resolved with HST but NOT with Chandra!

New DEIMOS/Keck spectrum

• R~2700 (1.4 x Comerford) ; 47 mins; Seeing 0.6”• Slit oriented in the direction of the nuclei

•Confirms offset broad Hb• Narrow offset component• nuclei unresolved

Keck/IFU done (Hai Fu)HST/STIS [proposed]Chandra/HRC [proposed]

SNLS/COSMOS AGN variabilitySumin Tang (Harvard)

240 type 1 AGNs, ~120 type 2 AGNs

4 years

Used to select variable AGNs for MMT/Hectospec ‘bulk reverberation’ program (see J.Trump talk)

ECHOES: Extended Chandra Cosmic Evolution Survey

Chandra Cycle 12• ECHOES: 1.4 Msec (out of 3Ms for VLP)~doubles coverage:

100ksec 1.4sq.deg ~HST area200ksec 0.9sq.deg ~ deep area

• Alternative: 800ksec on MCT3 ACIS fields, 2.4Ms

• TAC meeting June 21-25Results by end-August

HST Cycle 18 GO Proposal:The Dark Side of Accretion:

The Obscured AGN/Starburst Phase in COSMOS

• WFC/IR-grism + imaging•75 ‘DOGS’, 2.5/field

• 1.16 < z < 2.39 (4000A break, [OIII])• 60 MIPS selected• 15 Chandra X-ray selected

•60 orbits•Virtually no overlap w. MCT Faber/Ferguson program

Connecting galaxy and obscured BH growth• L(AGN) from L[OIII]: BH growth rate• Stellar age from 4000A break • Merger state, bulge mass from IR imaging

UV Imaging of COSMOS with the XMM ‘Optical Monitor’

• Millions of seconds of neglected UV data• 2” HPD (c.f. 6” GALEX)• Multiple epochs – variability• Simultaneous w X-ray: aOX

• Intermediate wavelength: SEDs• Partly funded by SI• Proposal in to NASA ADA

XMM-OMfilters

Vital Statistics: 1.8 Ms

½ sq.deg @160 ksec

1761 sourcesDec ’06-June ’07

Catalog: Elvis et al., 2009, ApJS 184, 158

Martin Elvis, Francesca Civano, Aldcroft T., Fruscione A.,Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Salvanto M.,Vignali C., Puccetti S., Zamorani G., Brusa M., Cappelluti N., Fiore F., Comastri A., Salvato M., Mainieri V., Lanzuisi, G., and the COSMOS TEAM

The Chandra COSMOS X-ray Survey

1. Wedding Cake Sweet Spot2. ‘Galaxies’3. SEDs: Elvis was right!4. Dust Poor AGNs (mostly)5. Recoiling BH6. New Proposals: Chandra, HST