IntegratingIntegrating X-rayX-ray andand InfraredInfrared Views of Views of BALBAL QuasarsQuasars

Sarah Gallagher (UCLA) October 2006

`torus’`torus’1-100 pc1-100 pc

`big blue bump’`big blue bump’lt dayslt days

`corona’`corona’~AUs~AUs

NASA/CXC

IR IR Optical-UV Optical-UV X-rayX-ray

outflow from here

A Model for A Model for AllAll RQ QuasarsRQ Quasars

(Gallagher et al. 2002a: Adapted from Königl & Kartje 1994; Murray et al. 1995)

X-ray continuum X-ray continuum sourcesource

~light mins (10~light mins (1012-14 12-14 cm)cm)UV/optical continuum UV/optical continuum sourcesource

~light hrs-days (10~light hrs-days (1015-1615-16 cm) cm)

UV emission lines

~light yr (1017-18

cm)

The Views Through the WindThe Views Through the Wind

UV

X-ray

shielding shielding gasgas

BAL WindBAL Wind

= 2

X-ray Absorption by Neutral Gas

NH

=

(assuming solar metallicity)

almost optically thick to Compton

scattering

PG 2112+059 (PG 2112+059 (zz=0.466): =0.466): First BAL Quasar X-ray SpectraFirst BAL Quasar X-ray Spectra

= = 1.97±0.25; N1.97±0.25; NHH ~ 10 ~ 102222 cm cm-2 -2

(Gallagher et al. 2001) (Gallagher et al. 2001)

X-ray Spectroscopy of X-ray Spectroscopy of ~12 RQ BAL Quasars ~12 RQ BAL Quasars

normal underlying X-ray continuanormal underlying X-ray continua significant intrinsic absorptionsignificant intrinsic absorption

• NNHH = (0.1-5.0) x 10 = (0.1-5.0) x 102323 cm cm-2-2

from >5 keV continuum:from >5 keV continuum:• normal normal oxox (UV/X-ray flux ratio) (UV/X-ray flux ratio)

not just simple absorptionnot just simple absorption• partial coverage? ionized gas? partial coverage? ionized gas? ΔΔvv??

(e.g., Gallagher et al. 2002b; (e.g., Gallagher et al. 2002b; Chartas et al. 2002, 2003; Chartas et al. 2002, 2003; Aldcroft & Green 2003; Grupe et al. 2003; Aldcroft & Green 2003; Grupe et al. 2003;

Page et al. 2005; Shemmer et al. 2005)Page et al. 2005; Shemmer et al. 2005)

ChandraChandra BAL Quasar Survey BAL Quasar Survey

35 luminous BAL quasars35 luminous BAL quasars bona fide BAL featuresbona fide BAL features z = 1.4—2.9z = 1.4—2.9 MMBB ~ -26.1 to -28.4 ~ -26.1 to -28.4 UV spectra for all (from literature) UV spectra for all (from literature)

4—7 ks exploratory observations4—7 ks exploratory observations 35 observed; 27 detected (77%)35 observed; 27 detected (77%)

Large, well-defined sample

(Gallagher et al. 2006)(Gallagher et al. 2006)

Collaborators: Niel Brandt, George Chartas, Gordon Garmire (Penn State), Robert Priddey (Hertfordshire), & Rita Sambruna (Goddard)

Rough continuum shape: Rough continuum shape: HRHR

• from hardness ratio: (hard-soft)/(hard+soft)from hardness ratio: (hard-soft)/(hard+soft)

(analogous to (analogous to B-VB-V spectral index) spectral index)

Relative UV-to-X-ray power: Relative UV-to-X-ray power: oxox

• from hard-band flux:from hard-band flux: oxox(corr)(corr)

Exploratory Surveys: Exploratory Surveys: X-ray DataX-ray Data

fainter in X-rays

228 SDSS Quasars with ROSAT228 SDSS Quasars with ROSAT (Strateva et (Strateva et al. 2005)al. 2005)

UV Luminosity vs.UV Luminosity vs. oxox

brighter in X-brighter in X-raysrays

Define:

oxox = oxox - ox ox (L(Luvuv))

log(Luv) (ergs s-1 Hz-1)

Spectral Shape vs. X-ray Weakness: Spectral Shape vs. X-ray Weakness: X-ray Faint X-ray Faint X-ray Hard X-ray Hard

Fainter

Harder(more absorbed)

Softer(less absorbed)

Brighteroxox

AllAll RQ BAL quasars show evidence for X-ray RQ BAL quasars show evidence for X-ray absorption absorption

(complex with N(complex with NHH ~ (1—80)x10 ~ (1—80)x102222 cm cm-2-2))

% covered

normal RQ quasars:

= 2.0 ± 0.25

ox = 0.0 ± 0.15

BAL Quasars

55 BQS Quasars with z<0.555 BQS Quasars with z<0.5 (Data from Brandt, Laor, & (Data from Brandt, Laor, & Wills 2000)Wills 2000)

oxX-ray weak

(400x)X-ray normal

Bright Quasar Survey z<0.5 SampleBright Quasar Survey z<0.5 Sample

oxox

BQS + Chandra BAL QuasarsBQS + Chandra BAL Quasars

Chandra BALQs

CIV EWCIV EWaa and and oxox: : no correlationno correlation for BAL quasars for BAL quasars

UV Spectra:UV Spectra:X-ray Bright vs. X-ray WeakX-ray Bright vs. X-ray Weak

CIV CIV

SiIV SiIV

X-ray BRIGHT X-ray FAINT

vvmax max vs. vs. oxox

oxox

vvmaxmax and and oxox: ~3: ~3 correlation correlation

high velocity appears to require large Nhigh velocity appears to require large NHH

ee~~11

(Gallagher et al. 2006)(Gallagher et al. 2006)

Conclusions I:Conclusions I: Exploratory X-ray ObservationsExploratory X-ray Observations

compact & thick ‘X-ray—only’ absorberscompact & thick ‘X-ray—only’ absorbers• X-ray & UV absorption not consistentX-ray & UV absorption not consistent• some may be Compton-thick! some may be Compton-thick!

((ee ~ 1; N ~ 1; NHH~1.5x10~1.5x102424 cm cm22)) likely correlation of vlikely correlation of vmaxmax & & oxox

•firstfirst UV/X-ray correlation found UV/X-ray correlation found supports supports radiative drivingradiative driving of UV outflows of UV outflows

vterm œ (GMBH/Rlaunch)1/2

Link Between Shielding Gas and vLink Between Shielding Gas and vmaxmax??

BH BH

smaller Rlaunch higher vterm larger Rlaunch lower vterm

thicker shield more X-ray weak thinner shield less X-ray weak

(cf. Chelouche & Netzer 2000; Everett 2005)(cf. Chelouche & Netzer 2000; Everett 2005)

Phenomenological differences:Phenomenological differences:• BAL properties: BAL properties: lower EW and vlower EW and vmaxmax with with

increasing Lincreasing Lradio radio

(e.g, Becker et al. 2000, Gregg et al. 2006)(e.g, Becker et al. 2000, Gregg et al. 2006)

• X-ray properties: X-ray properties: no evidence that X-ray no evidence that X-ray weakness due to absorption weakness due to absorption

(e.g, Brotherton et al. 2005, Schaefer et al. 2006, (e.g, Brotherton et al. 2005, Schaefer et al. 2006,

Miller et al. 2006)Miller et al. 2006)

Radio-Loud BAL QuasarsRadio-Loud BAL QuasarsSee Brotherton talk & Benn poster #334

PG1004+130 PG1004+130 (a.k.a. PKS1004+13)(a.k.a. PKS1004+13)

X-ray weak: NH~1022 cm-2

Only RL BALQ with X-ray spectra. (Miller et al. 2006)

Phenomenological differences:Phenomenological differences:• BAL properties: BAL properties: lower EW and vlower EW and vmaxmax with with

increasing Lincreasing Lradio radio (e.g, Becker et al. 2000, Gregg et al. 2006)(e.g, Becker et al. 2000, Gregg et al. 2006)

• X-ray properties: X-ray properties: no evidence that X-ray no evidence that X-ray weakness due to absorption weakness due to absorption

(e.g, Brotherton et al. 2005, Schaefer et al. 2006, (e.g, Brotherton et al. 2005, Schaefer et al. 2006, Miller et al. 2006)Miller et al. 2006)

Not the same thing – radiative driving Not the same thing – radiative driving may not be dominant acceleration may not be dominant acceleration mechanismmechanism

Radio-Loud BAL QuasarsRadio-Loud BAL QuasarsSee Brotherton talk & Benn poster #334

Test: Compare SEDs of BAL and non-BAL Test: Compare SEDs of BAL and non-BAL QuasarsQuasars

mid-IR bright?mid-IR bright?• UV-optically faint or “cocoon” pictureUV-optically faint or “cocoon” picture

(e.g., Goodrich 1997; Krolik & Voit 1998; Gregg et al. (e.g., Goodrich 1997; Krolik & Voit 1998; Gregg et al. 2002)2002)

enhanced star formation?enhanced star formation?• merger merger ULIRG ULIRG quasar quasar

(e.g., Sanders et al. 1988)(e.g., Sanders et al. 1988)

BAL Quasars: Evolution or BAL Quasars: Evolution or Orientation?Orientation?

Or: is it just a phase?

(e.g., Hazard et al. 1984; Becker et al. (e.g., Hazard et al. 1984; Becker et al. 2001)2001)

`torus’`torus’1-100 pc1-100 pc

`big blue bump’`big blue bump’lt dayslt days

`corona’`corona’~AUs~AUs

NASA/CXC

IR IR Optical-UV Optical-UV X-rayX-ray

outflow from here

QuestionQuestion: are BAL quasars inherently : are BAL quasars inherently different?different?• check: (1) differences in mid-IR SEDs vs. non-BAL check: (1) differences in mid-IR SEDs vs. non-BAL

quasarsquasars (2) evidence for enhanced star formation(2) evidence for enhanced star formation

Large Bright Quasar Survey (z =1.4—3.0)Large Bright Quasar Survey (z =1.4—3.0)• 38 – 38 – SpitzerSpitzer MIPS: MIPS: LL88 (8 (8 m luminosity) + Lm luminosity) + Lfir,SFfir,SF, L, Lfir,QSOfir,QSO

• 38 – 2MASS: 38 – 2MASS: LL5000 5000 (5000 Å luminosity)(5000 Å luminosity)• 38 – LBQS: 38 – LBQS: LL25002500 (2500 Å luminosity) (2500 Å luminosity)• 35 – VLA (FIRST, NVSS, Stocke et al. 1992)35 – VLA (FIRST, NVSS, Stocke et al. 1992)• 35 – 35 – Chandra Chandra (Gallagher et al. 2006) +(Gallagher et al. 2006) + XMM-Newton XMM-Newton (Clavel et al. (Clavel et al.

2006)2006)• 25 – SDSS 25 – SDSS • 16 – SCUBA (Priddey et al. 2006)16 – SCUBA (Priddey et al. 2006)

BAL Quasar SED ProjectBAL Quasar SED ProjectX-ray,X-ray, UV-optical,UV-optical, IR,IR, submm, submm,

radioradio

Collaborators: Collaborators: Dean Hines, Robert Priddey, Niel BrandtDean Hines, Robert Priddey, Niel Brandt

VLA SCUBA MIPS 2MASS SDSS Chandra

log

(L)

(e

rg s

-1)

log() (Hz)

(Gallagher et al., submitted)(Gallagher et al., submitted)

BAL Quasars: BAL Quasars: notnot mid-IR brightmid-IR bright

LBQS BALQs and SDSS comparison sample — statistically LBQS BALQs and SDSS comparison sample — statistically indistinguishable. indistinguishable.

BAL Quasar Composite SEDBAL Quasar Composite SED5000 Å8 m 2 keV

Comparison SED: SDSS luminous (LComparison SED: SDSS luminous (Lbol bol > 10> 1046.246.2 erg s erg s-1-1) composite ) composite (Richards et al. 2006)(Richards et al. 2006)

BAL Quasar SEDs by BAL TypeBAL Quasar SEDs by BAL Type

VLA SCUBA MIPS 2MASS SDSS Chandra

log

(L)

(e

rg s

-1)

log() (Hz)

(Gallagher et al., submitted)(Gallagher et al., submitted)

LLfir,SFfir,SF vs. L vs. Lfir,QSOfir,QSO

no evidence for S

FHiBALQs

LoBALQs

Conclusions IIConclusions II BAL Quasars:BAL Quasars:

• UV-optical shows reddening UV-optical shows reddening (e.g. Sprayberry & Foltz 1992; Reichard et al. 2003; (e.g. Sprayberry & Foltz 1992; Reichard et al. 2003;

Trump et al. 2006)Trump et al. 2006)

• X-ray shows strong absorptionX-ray shows strong absorption• range of star-formation contributions to FIRrange of star-formation contributions to FIR• no mid-IR excessno mid-IR excess

no evidence for “cocoon”no evidence for “cocoon” outflows are commonoutflows are common

Ultraviolet

Multiwavelength Synthesis: Multiwavelength Synthesis: The Stratified Wind PictureThe Stratified Wind Picture

X-ray

Mid-Infrared

Gallagher 2006

silicatessilicates

BAL Quasar IRS SpectraBAL Quasar IRS Spectra

(Gallagher et al. in prep; see also Shi et al. 2006)(Gallagher et al. in prep; see also Shi et al. 2006)

Physical Parameters of the Physical Parameters of the Stratified WindStratified Wind

WindWind

ComponentComponentR R

(cm)(cm)ffcovcov

(erg cm)(erg cm)

NNH H

(cm(cm-2-2))

v v (km/s)(km/s)

X-rayX-ray 101015-1615-16 >f>fUVUV~100~100

(O(OVIIVII/O/OVIIIVIII))101022-2422-24 ??????

UltravioletUltraviolet 101017-1817-18

(R(RBLRBLR))0.2(1-f0.2(1-fQSO2QSO2))

~1~1(C(CIV/IV/OOVIVI))

101021-2221-22 10103-43-4

Mid-IRMid-IR >1pc>1pc ffQSO2QSO2 neutralneutral ...... 101022

See also Aoki #185; Ganguly #88; Rodriguez-Hidalgo talk; Simon #196; Wang #90