Massimo CappiMassimo Cappi

INAF-IASF, BolognaINAF-IASF, Bologna

Probing high velocity inflows and outflows in AGNs via time-resolved X-ray spectroscopy

I) accretion (in)flows in AGNs Accretion modes/conditions + relativistic/fundamental physics ….from source-by-source analysis to large

samples

II) ejection (out)flows from AGNs Acceleration physics + interaction with host galaxies/cosmology….from source-by-source analysis to large

samples

Outline

Main collaborators: V. Braito, A. Celotti, M. Dadina, B. DeMarco, M. Giustini, K. Iwasawa, G. Miniutti, G. Palumbo, G. Ponti, J. Reeves, F. Tombesi, T. Yaqoob

Credit: A. Mueller

Evidence of complex, narrow, redshifted FeK lines…

Origin in innermost regions of accretion disk+ blob-like structure (or inflowing blobs?)

Turner et al. '02

XMM – NGC3516

Bianchi et al., 2004

Chandra – NGC3516

Guainazzi et al., 2003Dovciak et al., 2004

XMM – ESO198-G024

I - Accretion/inflows: Redshifted Fe lines/components

Redshifted (component of) Fe lines DO show fast time variations, although not

always with a clear interpretation!

XMM - NGC3516

Iwasawa, Miniutti & Fabian, 2004

I - Accretion/inflows: …and variable Fe lines/components

Can fit line maxima by three Keplerian orbits with same inclination & central mass !!

XMM – Mrk766

Turner et al. 2005

I - Accretion/inflows: Source-by-source analysis

NGC3783Tombesi et al. 2007

IC4329aDeMarco et al. 2010b

Consistent with origin from hot spots, or spiral waves, in inner regions of accretion disk?

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

I - Accretion/inflows: From source-by-source to representative samples

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

But see Barbara De Marco’s talk, this afternoon

Variability in redshifted Fe line on time-scales ~10 ks demonstrate its origin within few tens Rg (hot spots, spiral waves, or else?? Not really clear)

Fabian, et al. ’94Otani, ’95, PhDReynolds et al. '97Georges et al. '97

50% of all Sey 1s exhibit WAs

ASCA

Many details from Chandra/XMM gratingsNGC3783 Exp=900 ks

Kaspi et al. '01; Netzer et al. '02; Georges et al. '03; Krongold et al. ‘03

Clear now that often multiple ionization & kinetic

components: outflows with v~100-1000 km/s Blustin et al. 2004

II - Ejection/outflows: Warm absorbers…probe highest-v gas

II - Ejection/outflows: Blue-shifted absorption lines/edges – High-v

PG1211+143 (z=0.08) v~0.1c

2 Energy (keV) 5 7 10

New and unexpected results from Chandra and XMM-Newton observations

Pounds et al. 2003a,b

massive, high velocity and highly ionized outflows in several RQ AGNs/QSOs

Mass outflow rate: comparable to Edd. Acc. rate (~M◉/yr); velocity ~0.1-0.2 c

(If) interpreted as Kα resonant

absorption by Fe XXV (6.70 keV)

or FeXXVI (6.96 keV)Reeves et al. 2003

PDS456 (z=0.18) v~0.1c

2 Energy (keV) 5 7 10

Absorbers variability on timescales 1000-10000s II - Ejection/outflows: Blue-shifted absorption lines/edges - Variability

Risaliti et al. 2005

NGC1365 Mrk 509 (long-look, 200ks)

MC et al., 2009Dadina et al. ‘05

Obs1

Obs2

Obs3

Variability allows to place limits on location, mass, etc.

(See also Krongold et al. 2007 on NGC4051)

MRK509 contour plots (MC et al. 2009)

Mrk 509: Among brightest F~2-5x10-11 cgsand most luminous L~1-3x1044 ergs/sType 1 Sey known

EW(FeXXVI)~-20 -60 eVV~0.14-0.2c∆t~100 ks

Log~5 erg cm/s, Nh~2-4x1023 cm-2,

v~0.14-0.2c

From absorber parameters and variability, we estimated:R<500 Rs

MC et al. 2009

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.

Again, absorber variability on timescales ~20000s MCG-5-23-16 (XMM+Chandra)

Braito et al., 2007

X-ray Observations: Variability

Data require large Nw, high , and vout=0.1c

iii) Magnetically driven winds from accretion disk

Emmering, Blandford & Shlosman, ’92; Kato et al. ‘03

Interpretation: (Three main) Wind dynamical models

i) Thermally driven winds from BLR or torus

Balsara & Krolik, 93; Woods et al. ‘96

i) Large R, low vii) and iii) Low R and large v

Murray et al. ‘95, Proga et al. ‘00

ii) Radiative-driven wind from accretion disk

…and/or…

Theoretical Interpretation: (Three main) Wind dynamical models

MHD+LD model by Proga et al. ‘00, ‘03

QuickTime™ and aYUV420 codec decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Overall numbers (Nh, , vout, etc.) are consistent with observations…

Data Interpretation:

Sim et al., 2008

Yes indeed…one expects (mostly/only) strong Fe line absorptionswhen accounting for proper wind geometries and physics

Critical Issues (i/ii): Observations

Lines statistical significance? (transient features, number of trials in time and energy, etc…)

Identifications of edges/lines energies? (Kallman et al. 2005, Kaspi et al. for PG1211)

Local “contamination”? (PDS456 at risk? McKernan et al. ’04, ‘05)

Publication bias? Only positive detection, low signif., Vaughan & Uttley ‘08)

cz (km/s)

Ou

tflo

w v

(km

/s)

Critical Issues (ii/ii): Interpretation/Theory

Nw (cm-2)

Location (R, DeltaR)

Ionization state ()

Velocity

Covering factor

Frequency in AGNs

Current estimates have order of magnitude uncertainties, they go from:

dM/dt (Lkin) few % to several times dMacc/dt (Ledd)

This is a fundamental (open) issue

Elvis et al. ‘00, Creenshaw et al. ’03, King et al. ‘03, Chartas et al. ‘03,

Yaqoob et al. ‘05, Blustin et al. ‘05, Risaliti et al. ’05, Krongold et al. ‘07

Fundamental to:

i) PHYSICS of accelerated and accreted flows (winds?, blobs?, etc.), i.e. understand how BHs accelerate earth-like quantities of gas to relativistic velocities

ii) COSMOLOGY: i.e. estimate the mass outflow rate, thus the impact of AGN outflows on ISM and IGM enrichment and heating!

• Selection of all NLSy1, Sy1 and Sy2 in RXTE All-Sky Slew Survey Catalog (XSS; Revnivtsev et al. 2004)

• Cross-correlation with XMM-Newton Accepted Targets Catalog

• 44 objects for 104 pointed XMM-Newton observations

• Local (z<0.1)

• X-ray bright (F4-10keV=10-12-10-10 erg s-1 cm-2)

z distribution of sources 4-10keV fluxes

Again, we analysed in a systematic and uniform way, a (almost) complete

sample of nearby, X-ray bright, radio-quiet AGNs (Tombesi et al. 2010a)

I - Ejection/outflows: From source-by-sources to representative samples…

Absorption lines search

Uniform spectral analysis:

• Reduction and analysis of all EPIC pn spectra in the 4-10keV

• Baseline model: absorbed power-law + Gaussian Fe K emission lines

Example of PG1211+143 (Tombesi et al. 2010a)

Absorption lines search:

• Addition of narrow line to baseline model stepping energy in 4-10keV and recording Δχ2 deviations

• Visualization on energy-intensity contour plot (significance 68% red, 90% green, 99% blue) (e.g. Miniutti et al. 2007, MC et al. 2009)

• Selection of narrow lines with F-test confidence levels ≥99%

• Line parameters determined by direct fitting to the data

Absorbed power-law

Absorbed power-law + emission line

Absorption lines significance

Extensive Monte Carlo simulations (e.g. MC et al. 2009)

• Additional significance test for lines at energies ≥7.1keV

• Null hypothesis that spectra are fitted by model without absorption lines

• 103 simulated spectra for each case

• Simulated Δχ2 distribution for random generated lines

• Selection of lines with MC confidence levels ≥95%

F-test can overestimate the detection significance for a blind search of emission/absorption lines over a range of energies (e.g. Protassov et al. 2002).

Global probability for the lines to be generated by random fluctuations is very low (≤10-8 from Binomial distribution).

• Checked no contamination from pn background and calibration

• Independent confirmation of blue-shifted lines detection from MOS data (without relying on any statistical method)

Results: Yes, we confirm there are indeed UFOs! (Ultra-Fast Outflows…)

• 36 absorption lines detected in all 104 XMM observations

• Identified with FeXXV and FeXXVI K-shell resonant absorption

• 19/44 objects with absorption lines (≈43%)

• 17/44 objects with blue-shifted absorption lines (lower limit ≈39%, can reach a maximum of ≈60%)

• 11/44 objects with outflow velocity >0.1c (≈25%)

• Blue-shift velocity distribution ~0-0.3c, peak ~0.1c

• Average outflow velocity 0.110±0.004 c

Blue-shift velocity distribution Cumulative velocity distribution

Tombesi et al. 2010aQuickTime™ and a

TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.

(The UFO’s hunters commander in chief)

Results

• Most frequent detected line is FeXXVI Lyα

• EW is in the range ≈10-100eV, with mean ≈40-50eV

• Estimated global covering factor from fraction of sources with lines (C=Ω⁄4Π)≈0.4-0.6

• Geometry not very collimated, large opening angles favored (similar to WA)

Lines EW distribution

Last but not least…for those still skepticals on UFOs

Publication bias solved :

• Uniform analysis on complete sample of sources

• Lines detection assessed by MC simulations

• Global chance probability very low (≤10-8)

• Detection independently confirmed by MOS data

Not due to local contamination:

No correlation between cosmological red-shift and lines blue-shift, no local (z≈0) absorption.

Physical photo-ionization modelling using XSTAR

Xstar grid for direct spectral fitting:

• input enenergy band 0.1eV, 106 eV

• mean SED for radio-quiet sources

• power-law Γ=2 for radio-loud sources

• turbulent velocity v=500 km/s

Mean phenomenological SED from the radio-quiet sample:

• SEDs 34 Type 1s from NED database

• scattering due to source variability and different instruments

• normalized SEDs to near-IR inflection point ~1.25μm (like Elvis et al. 1994)

• average flux for each energy point

Simple mean SED with three intervals: Radio to mm (Γ~2), mm to

IR (Γ~0.1), IR to X-rays (Γ~2)

NH~1022-1024 cm-2, logξ~3-6 erg s-1 cm-2

(vout, NH lower limits, unknown inclination angle)

Ejection/outflows:

• estimated distances r<0.01-0.1pc (<102-105 rs)

(accretion disk winds? e.g. Elvis 2000; King & Pounds 2003)

• Often vout > vesc, but not always, material shall fall back sometimes? (“aborted jet”? e.g. Ghisellini et al. 2004, Dadina et al. 2005)

• variability time scales t~1day – 1year

• Lbol/LEdd~0.1-1

• Mout/Macc~0.1-1

• Ek~1044-1045 erg s-1 ~0.1 Lbol

(last two estimates depend on covering fraction C)

• Acceleration mechanism? Line, magnetically or momentum driven?

WAs in RQ from McKernan et al. (2007) (filled black circles), WA in RL from Torresi et al. (2009) and Reeves et al. (2009) (filled blue triangle), UFOs in RQ (red crosses)

Ejection/outflows:

Momentum-driven accretion disk winds/outflows? As in King 2009?

“Eddington winds from AGN are likely to have velocities ~0.1c and show the presence of helium- or hydrogen-like iron” (King 2009)

• Eddington accretion episodes Lbol/LEdd~0.1-1

• electron scattering wind τ~1 at infinity

• wind momentuum ~ photon momentuum (Moutv~LEdd/c)

• typical velocity ~0.1c

• typical ionization parameter logξ~4 and linear relation vout and ξ

(Fe XXV, Fe XXVI + Nickel ions?)

• wind interaction with host galaxy, ram pressure

• important for feedback SMBH and host galaxy

• does explain the M-σ relation

Future prospects: Astro-H calorimeter

Calorimeter on board Astro-H, next Japanese X-ray satellite to be launched in 2013: good effective area (≈250 cm2 @ 6keV) and high energy resolution (FWHM≈7eV) from 0.1keV up to 12-13keV.

• realistic spectra simulations of UFOs

•absorption lines resolved, measured velocity broadening (down to ~100-200 km/s @ 6 keV)

• estimates EW, blue-shift, centroid energies ~10 times better XIS-FI (100ks simulation)

• better constrains on NH, logξ, vturbu

Future pospects: IXO calorimeterX-ray Microcalorimeter Spectrometer (XMS): high effective area ~0.65m2 (~6500cm2 !!) @ 6keV and high energy resolution (FWHM≈2.5eV) from 0.1keV up to 12-13keV.

Flux limits

• 2-10keV flux limits for 5σ detection of narrow absorption lines in the 3-11keV

• Different EWs, exposure times and responses

• Lines of EW=10eV (50eV) in ≈6-9keV for ≈10-12

(10-13) erg s-1 cm-2 (expo 100ks)

• Spectral variability on time-scales of 5 (10) ks for ≈10-11 (10-12) erg s-1 cm-2

Flux limits (EW=10eV) (Tombesi et al. 2009) logξ=3 erg s-1 cm, NH=1023cm-2, b=1000km/s (Tombesi et al. 2009)

Spectra simulations

• Simulations of highly ionized and massive absorbers

• FeXXV/XXVI K lines detectable with high significance

• Line details (profile, energy, broadening) measured with high accuracy (>30 times Astro-H)

• Extend study to less bright sources

• Time variability, dynamics of absorbers

Summary

I) accretion (in)flows in AGNs Redshifted FeK lines/components do varyon short time-scales Probe of accretion modes/conditions + relativistic/fundamental physics

II) ejection (out)flows from AGNs Blueshifted Fe absorption lines confirmed,

and variable

Probe launching regions of winds/jets + Impact for feedback

After 10 years of Chandra and XMM-Newton observations, we are able to move from source-by-source analysis to representative samples:

IXO Science Case for YB in CV- Call for ideas/contributions/suggestions

Section on Strong Gravity: (<7 pages)

The idea is to start from white papers + RFI1&2 for Decadal, and UPDATE with new results

I- Probing Strong Gravity with X-rays:

• Time-resolved spectroscopy to probe the kinematics and dynamics of the inner BLR and wind/jet formation regions

• Time-resolved spectroscopy (e.g. waterfalling diagram) to probe the kinematics and dynamics of the inner regions of accretion disk.

...the idea could be to present these studies as unique way to probe/go/travel from the outer parts down into the innermost regions of the accretion disk (where winds/blobs/ejecta/jets also form).

II- Measuring BH Spins with X-rays, using several independent techniques:

• FeK+FeL fitting, and time-lags • Continuum fitting (in GBHCs and AGNs) • QPOs• time-resolved spcetroscopy (i.e. reverberation)• Polarization measurements...the idea would/could be to present the 5 different (independent!) techniques as a way to then "calibrate" the

FeK measurements, that is the technique we want to be able to apply to several tens of AGNs (maybe up to z about 1) in order to attempt the "spin distributions"

Contact me directly (cappi@iasfbo.inaf.it) for any contributionsAny other section (i.e. Neutron Stars) or Observatory Science:

Call for ideas/proposals from Xavier Barcons

Due date is end of April

Thanks for your attention, and by the way,

watch-out for UFOs!

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

II- X-ray absorption spectroscopy:Probe of launching regions of winds/jets/UFOs

Credit: A. Mueller

After 10 years of Chandra and XMM-Newton observations, we are able to move from source-by-source analysis to representative samples

I - X-ray emission spectroscopy:Probe of innermost regions of accretion disk

Jet

III– Complex Absorption FeK lines: Narrow/broad(?) redshifted absorption lines:

Accretion/inflows: A parenthesis….

Direct probe of relativistic bulk inflows! (v~0.1-0.3c)

MCG-6-30-15 in low state(Ponti, private com.)

(Longinotti et al., submitted to A&A.)

i) Fake lines?ii) (very) wrong continuum (WA)? iii) 2 different lines? 1 narrow + 1 Kerr(red, reverberation, tail of a Kerr line ?)iv) 1 relativistic line with resonant absorption?

Mrk335

E1821+643 (z=0.3) HETG data(Yaqoob & Serlemitsos, 2005)

(Reeves et al., astro-ph/0509280)

PG1211+143 (z=0.08) Chandra data

VERY NEW! and much debated

Mrk 509 and 3516,

nandra and dadina