近傍活動銀河核のX線可視同時モニター観測

2015 11 11'12
X"
"
"
"
"
"
• 
–  MCG'06'30'015":"
–  NGC3516":"X
– 
AGN
– 
"
"
–  NGC"3516"
• 
"
"
• 
• 
(2012 )"
(2013'2014 ;"2015 )"
X
"
"
–  Differen:al"imaging"photometry"
– 
"
"AGN"
"
"
•  Weather"risk"
"
"
– 
– 
"
"
• 
– 
– 
"
"
"
" " " " " " " " "
NGC3516"
miniTAO
IRSF
MGC'06'30'011
" " " " " " " " " "
"KWFC"
→
→reverbera:on"mapping"
"
""
"
"
• 
– 
→
→
→
"(MGC'06'30'011)"
infrared
UV"
op:cal
X'ray
(Shang+11)
Hot"corona
Urry"&"Padovani"(1995)
Figure"credit:"NASA/CXC/SAO
X
"
• 
–  ①
"X
"
–  ②X
X
" X'ray"reprocessing"model)"
X
"
""""""""""""""""""""""""
X
X
200
AGN STORM. II. Swift Observations
3a)
X
nction
V
UVW2
−0.5
0.5
"
Edelson+15;"NGC"5548"
12
Edelson et al.
HX
1
SX
0.2 0.4
0.0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" 13X
""
""""""
UVW2
3
"
4
– 
3
HST
4 5
3a)
2015"
(BH)
" "
AGN STORM. II. Swift Observations
" "
" " " 3b)"
"CCF"
" " "
"
– 
13
3b)
2
• 
2
UVM2
3
42
UV
V
1.3
B
1.2 1.4 1.6
UV'
1.6
U
2.0 2.4
2
UVW1
3
X'UV
−20
−10
0
Lag (days)
10
20
1.1
(CCF)
13
① 3b)
②
Cross Correlation
Centroid
Distribution (Frequency)
Cross Correlation
Centroid
Distribution
(Frequency)
bution (Frequency)
VB
B SX
U UVW1
UVM2
UVW2
HSTHST
SX
V
U
UVM2
UVW2
SX HX
HX
UVW2
HST
HX UVW1
50
150
0 010050
250 0300
0 200
40000 200
200 400
50 0 50
150 0 150
100 0 200 100
200 400
500
150150
0 300
100
200
0 50
15000 200
100
250
150
200
400 400200200400
4000 0200200500 0500
CrossCross
Correlation
CorrelationFunction
Function
U
UVM2
UVW2
SX HX
HX
HST
HX UVW1
VB
B SX
U UVW1
UVM2
UVW2
HSTHST
SX
−0.5
0.5 −0.5
−0.5 0.5 0.5
−0.5−0.5 0.50.5 −0.5
0.5 −0.5
−0.5 0.5 0.5
0.5 0.5
−0.5
0.5
0.5 0.5
−0.5
0.5
−0.5 −0.5
0.5 −0.5
−0.5
0.5
−0.5 −0.5
0.5 −0.5
AGN STORM. II. Swift Observations
3a)
"
−6
−4
720
−2
0
Lag (days)
2
740
760
780
800
Truncated Heliocentric Julian Day Number (THJD = HJD − 2,456,000)
4
820
Figure 2. Light curves for the intensive monitoring period (HJD 2,456,706-2,456,831), going from shortest wavelength (top) to longest
(bottom). Top two panels show the Swift hard and soft X-ray (HX and SX respectively) light curves, in units of c/s. Third panel shows the
HST light curve, in units of 10−14 ergs−1 cm−2 Å−1 . Error bars for this light curve are typically ∼1.5%, just barely visible in the plot. The
bottom six panels show the Swift light curves, again in units of 10−14 erg cm−2 s−1 Å−1 . Dashed gray lines show times THJD 747.179,
785.752 and 818.993, three local maxima of the HST light curve.
Figure 3. (3a) Interpolated cross-correlation functions for the intensive monitoring period light curves (Figure 2), with all correlations
measured relative to the HST light curve, after removing long term trending (see Section 3). Note that the interband lag goes from negative
to increasingly positive as the band’s wavelength increases. Note also that the UV/optical correlations are all strong (rmax = 0.57 − 0.90)
but the X-ray/UV correlations are much weaker, (rmax < 0.45). (3b) Cross-correlation centroid histograms derived from the CCFs as
discussed in the text. All distributions except HX appear consistent with a Gaussian.
X
• 
"
–  X
– 
→
X'ray"reprocessing"model "
"
"="Light"travel":me"
Fausnaugh+15;"
NGC"5548"
"
C3516
X
Figure 5. Time delay (ICCF centroid) as a function of pivot wavelength of the filters. The horizontal error bars represent the rms width of the filters. The best fit
model is shown by the dashed magenta line, while the fit fixing = 4/3 is shown by the dotted magenta line. Predictions for a thin-disk model with ṁE = L/LEdd
are shown by the solid cyan lines, although the assumptions of the model are unlikely to hold at large ṁE (see §5.3). The mean lag of the He II 1640 and 4686
lines is shown by the horizontal dashed black line (Paper I, Paper IV).
河 NGC 4593 の X 線–可視光の同時観測
2. Power Law: A broken power-law is used to model the
AGN continuum emission. This component has four
free parameters—a flux normalization factor, two spectral indices, and the location of the transition between indices. A loose prior (a Gaussian distribution with mean
b 5700 Å and width b700 Å) is imposed on the transition
c
wavelength, to prevent it from moving to the edges of
the spectra.
sion lines. We found that these templates produce a poorer
fit than the Dietrich et al. (2002) templates at the blue end of
the spectrum, which may be a result of the limited wavelength
coverage of our MODS spectra in the near-UV.
Each epoch was fit independently, and the resulting component parameters
c are in reasonable agreement,
c after allowing for the intrinsic variability of the power-law and Balmer
continuum. The flux rescaling factors of the power-law and
e
e
fgalaxy templates are degenerate,
a,g so the prior imposed on the
3. Balmer continuum: The Balmer continuum component
host galaxy flux at 5100 Å (rest frame) does the most to conis estimated from a grid of models calculated by Dietrich
strain these parameters. Figure 6 shows an example of the deet al. (2002),
evaluated at varying
temperatures, electron 東工大理、
composition, using
the spectrum from 2014 June 08, overlaid
広大理、
北大理、
兵庫県立大理、
理研
densities, and optical depths. Again, we simply choose
with the filter transmission curves.
the template that produces the overall minimum value
of 2 . The templates have a single parameter, a flux
4.2. Synthetic Photometry
rescaling factor.
Next, we estimate the contribution of each model component
to the observed flux in each broad-band filter. We first reapply
We ignored blended Fe II emission, because Fe emission is
Galactic reddening to the model components, since differential
relatively weak in NGC 5548 (Denney et al. 2009; Mehdipour
extinction may affect the integrated flux across broad-band filet al. 2015) and varies with an amplitude <50–75% that of H
ters. We then calculate the observed flux using the synphot
(Vestergaard & Peterson 2005). This component is therefore
IRAF task and filter transmission curves for the calibration
expected to contribute very little flux to the broad-band photelescopes (WC18 BVRI filters and LT ugriz filters), truncated
tometric measurements and have a negligible impact on the
observed lag. In order to assess the effect of this omission,
at 3000 Å and 1µm to represent the atmospheric transmission
we also fit the spectra with the small blue bump template of
cut-off. Uncertainties on the broad band fluxes of individual
Mehdipour et al. (2015), which includes blended Fe II emiscomponents were estimated by resampling the posterior dis-
、小久保充 、土居守 、深沢泰司 、川端弘治 、伊藤亮介 、
光 d 、伊藤洋一 、森鼻久美子 、斎藤嘉彦 、牧島一夫
b
究センター、c
d
AGN"
e
"X
f
g
ンジンの新描像と X 線–可視光の相関の関連
X
は、従来の描像においては、大質量ブラックホール (BH) の近傍に形成さ
高温電子雲 (コロナ) において、降着円盤の黒体可視光光子が逆コンプトン
1a)。またコロナで生じた一次 X 線は、降着円盤を照らすことにより円盤
X
連動して増加することが期待されていた。しかし、これまでの
AGN の X
14
は、NGC 5548 や NGC 4395 のように両者に良い相関が見られる天体もあ
のように相関が不完全な天体もあり (e.g., [3, 4])、従来のように単純な描像
。
X
• 
X
– 
– 
&`'
)
X
SRPC "
HGPC "
X
X
(HXPC)
HGPC
"X
"X
(BBVC)
SRPC
௷‫ࣶޝ‬ಠ
૒ӯॆ
+
→"NGC"3516"
Credit:"
ル描像 (パネル a) と時間変動解析から得られた我々の新描像
(パネル b)[9]。
X
(a)
格化した
の変動
ount-Count Correlation
"X"
X
(
て、X 線信号を時間変動の
Noda+11,13 "
全X線(2-10 keV)
"
"
"
NGC"3516"(11h06m47.5s"+72d34m07s;"Sy1.5)"
X
(AO'8,"AO'9)+
ToO(AO'10)"
2013.04.10*11,,26*27,,05.12*13,,23*24,,29*30
2013.10.07*08,,11.04*05
2014.04.08*09,
ToO,,,,:,,,,,2015.05.12*16
北海道大学附属天文台ピリカ望遠鏡
東京工業大学みつめ望遠鏡（明野）
東京大学木曽観測所
NGC3516"DSS
兵庫県立大学西はりま天文台なゆた望遠鏡
広島大学かなた望遠鏡 + 光赤外線大学間連携
B,"V"
optical flux variation (mJy)
(mJy)
1.5
(2013'2014 )
B band (MSI,KWFC,MINT,HOWPol)
g’ band (MITSuME)
2-10 keV (Suzaku)
4
1
3
0.5
2
1
0
0
-0.5
300
400
500
600
MJD - 56000 (days)
700
800
X" X-ray flux "
(10'11"erg"s'1"cm'2)
NGC"3516"
NGC"3516"X
1.1
0.1
CCF
CCF centroid distribution
>0.98
1
CCCD fractional histgram
0.08
cross correlation
0.9
0.06
0.8
0.04
0.7
0.6
0.5
X
0.02
-10
-5
0
0
5
lag (days)
NGC"3516"2013'2014
"
"
• 
–  X"
–  X
"
"HGPC"
•  X
"
–  CCF"
–  X
X
• 
"τ 2"days"
"reprocess"
+
(Maoz+02;
– 
"
">0.98"
" " "
" " "
" " "
" "
"
)"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
Maoz+02
"
NGC"3516"
• 
ToO"
"
–  Maoz+02(
&
– 
"X "SRPC"
–  SRPC"
→
–  X
"SRPC"
•  ToO"
–  5/1"Swil" "X
–  ToO"
X
–  X
–  X "HGPC"
)→HGPC
X
"
"
X
Noda"+13,"14 →ToO"
"
"
(2015 5 )"
→5/12'16"Suzaku/
"
"2013 5
"SRPC"
"
ToO"
" "
"
(
"day)
"
"
"
• 
"
– 
– 
PSF"
AGN
"
–  →
"AGN+
AGN+"
"
AGN+"
"
"
Differen:al"Imaging"Photometry"(DIP)
"
"
"1."
"
"2."
"3."
"
"
AGN
"
"
"
"
"
"PSF
"""
"
"
DIP"
"
• 
–  KWFC"
0.2
(2013.05.12)"
8
KWFC 2013.05.12 B band
KWFC 2013.05.12 B band
7
0.16
FWHM (pix)
0.18
flux
0.1"mJy
0.14
0.12
6
5
4
3
0.1
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
2
0.45
0.8
0.5
0.55
MJD-56424 (days)
0.6
0.65
0.7
MJD-56424 (days)
0.75
0.8
"
→"AGN"
DIP"
"
• 
–  KWFC"
0.2
(2013.05.12)"
KWFC 2013.05.12 B band
0.0826+0.0143*x
­ 
0.18
flux
0.16
­ 
0.14
0.12
0.1
"
2
3
4
5
6
FWHM (pix)
"
7
8
"
"
DIP"
"
• 
(pix)
FWHM,
(1σ
1σ
KWFC
)
0.035'0.10"(mJy/pix)
1.3"(pix)
0.04'0.13"mJy
MSI
"'0.010"(mJy/pix)
1.9"(pix)
"0.02"mJy
MINT
"'0.014"(mJy/pix)
3.0"(pix)
"0.04"mJy
–  Φ"8.3"arcsec" FWHM=2"arcsec"
DIP
"fgal
→"
–  KWFC"
9"mJy"(Sakata+10)"
" "1"%"
"
"
"
• 
– 
– 
– 
"KWFC"flux"
"
"
MINT"flux"
0.2
MINT flux (in unit of the avg flux of the ref. stars)
flux (in unit of the avg flux of the ref. stars)
"
KWFC
MINT
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-0.05
300
400
500
600
MJD-56000
700
800
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-0.05
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
KWFC flux (in unit of the avg flux of the ref. stars)
"
• 
"scaqer"
– 
→
"
"scaqer"
(1σ)"
– 
DIP"
→
0.06"mJy "
"
"
"
1"mJy
50mJy
"
"
"
"
"""""""
5"% "
"1"%
"
"
"
"
"
"
"""""""""
"
"DIP"
"
"2013'2014
"
"
0.1"%"
DIP
NGC"3516"
•  ToO"
–  X
"
ToO"
(2015 5 )"
"HGPC"
ToO"
"
X
0.8
"
3-10 keV Count rate (cnt/s)
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
40%
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
2.9"
0
50
100
150
Time (ksec)
200
250
)
DIP
post"process"
"
"