The black hole mass–stellar velocity dispersion correlation: bulges versus pseudo-bulges

By Jian Hu. 2008

180 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We investigate the correlation between the supermassive black holes (SMBHs) mass (Mbh) and the stellar velocity dispersion ( ) in two types of host galaxies: the early-type bulges (disk galaxies with classical bulges or elliptical galaxies) and pseudobulges. In the form log(Mbh=M ) = + log( =200 km s 1 ), the best-fit results for the 39 early-type bulges are the slope = 4:06 0:28 and the normalization = 8:28 0:05; the best-fit results for the 9 pseudobulges are = 4:5 1:3, = 7:50 0:18. Both relations have intrinsic scatter in logMbh of .0.27 dex. The Mbh- relation for pseudobulges is different from the relation in the early-type bulges over the 3 significance level. The contrasting relations indicate the formation and growth histories of SMBHs depend on their host type. The discrepancy between the slope of the Mbh- relations using different definition of velocity dispersion vanishes in our sample, a uniform slope will constrain the coevolution theories of the SMBHs and their host galaxies more effectively. We also find the slope for the “core” elliptical galaxies at the high mass range of the relation appears steeper ( ’ 5-6), which may be the imprint of their origin of dissipationless mergers.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/59924974844d29208e2397b614918e8bbf18bbe5

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In Global and Planetary Change

Citations in the corpus

Discriminating Between the Physical Processes that Drive Spheroid Size Evolution (2009, background): “Since then, various observations have found that such a difference exists, with the sense and magnitude predicted (Greene, Ho & Barth 2008; Hu 2008; Gadotti & Kauffmann 2009).”
REVISITING THE SCALING RELATIONS OF BLACK HOLE MASSES AND HOST GALAXY PROPERTIES (2012, background): “…stellar velocity dispersion (e.g., Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000; Merritt & Ferrarese 2001; Tremaine et al. 2002; Wyithe 2006a,b; Hu 2008; Gültekin et al. 2009a, hereafter G09; Schulze & Gebhardt 2011; McConnell et al. 2011a; Graham et al. 2011; Beifiori et al. 2012, hereafter…”
PRECISE BLACK HOLE MASSES FROM MEGAMASER DISKS: BLACK HOLE–BULGE RELATIONS AT LOW MASS (2010, background): “If low-mass galaxies do not feed their BHs very effectively, then the BH never approaches the “limiting” value set by the galaxy potential(Hu 2008; Greene et al. 2008; Younger et al. 2008).”
Timing the starburst–AGN connection (2010, result): “…galaxies, classical bulges (bulges in galaxies with discs) and pseudo-bulges follow slightly different σ–Mbulge relations, and therefore MBH estimated from a MBH–σ relation will be different from that estimated from a MBH–Mbulge relation (Hu 2008; Gadotti & Kauffmann 2009; Graham & Li 2009).”
The evolution of massive black holes and their spins in their galactic hosts (2012, background): “…line-of-sight velocity dispersionσ of the bulge (Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000; Gültekin et al. 2009; Graham 2008; Graham et al. 2011;Hu 2008), and at the relation between the MBH mass and the bulge c© 0000 RAS, MNRAS000, 000–000 16 E. Barausse lo g 1 0 M B H [ M O• ] log10 σ…”
A ∼50,000 M⊙ SOLAR MASS BLACK HOLE IN THE NUCLEUS OF RGG 118 (2015, background): “Total masses are plotted for POX 52 (Thornton et al. 2008), and NGC 4395 (Filippenko & Ho 2003). ulges (Hu 2008), which are more disk-like, flat, and rotationally dominated than classical galaxy bulges, and tend to have younger stellar populations (Kormendy & Ho 2013).”
THE MBH–LSPHEROID RELATION AT HIGH AND LOW MASSES, THE QUADRATIC GROWTH OF BLACK HOLES, AND INTERMEDIATE-MASS BLACK HOLE CANDIDATES (2012, methodology): “…excess nuclear light was due to an AGN rather than a massive nuclear disk and dense star cluster (Balcells et al. 2007; Graham & Spitler 2009), and the exclusion of the Sc galaxy NGC 2748 due to potential dust complications with its estimated black hole mass (Atkinson et al. 2005; Hu 2008).”
STELLAR VELOCITY DISPERSION MEASUREMENTS IN HIGH-LUMINOSITY QUASAR HOSTS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR THE AGN BLACK HOLE MASS SCALE (2013, background): “…galaxies lie systematically below the MBH– σ∗ relation of normal unbarred galaxies (e.g., Graham 2008a,b; Graham & Li 2009), and still others have found deviations in both the slope and intercept for galaxies hosting pseudobulges (e.g., Hu 2008; Gadotti & Kauffmann 2009; Kormendy et al. 2011).”
Observational evidence for intermediate-mass black holes (2017, background): “SMBHs in inactive galaxies with pseudobulges (Hu 2008; Kormendy & Ho 2013) and spiral galaxies with megamaser BH mass measurements (Greene et al. 2010; Läsker et al. 2016) are also found to fall below the MBH −Mbulge relation of early-type galaxies (Kormendy & Ho 2013), which suggests that most…”
Black hole evolution – I. Supernova-regulated black hole growth (2015, methodology): “Measurements of the BH mass correlation with the pseudo-bulge mass show a larger scatter and fall below the correlation between BH mass and classical bulge relation (Hu 2008; Kormendy, Bender & Cornell 2011; Sani et al. 2011).”
On the correlations between galaxy properties and supermassive black hole mass (2011, background): “Conversely, Hu (2008) found similar slopes and different zero-points.”
An expanded Mbh–σ diagram, and a new calibration of active galactic nuclei masses (2010, methodology): “For reference, the equivalently produced relation using all 50 galaxies from Graham (2008b) has a slope and intercept of 4.87 ± 0.36 and 8.12 ± 0.06, respectively, while Hu (2008) reported values of 4.59 ± 0.32 and 8.14 ± 0.06.”
Black Holes in Pseudobulges and Spheroidals: A Change in the Black Hole-Bulge Scaling Relations at Low Mass (2008, result): “There are a handful of dynamical masses measured in pseudobulges, which may suggest that the BHs are in general undermassive compared to Mbulge (C. Y. Peng & L. C. Ho 2008, in preparation) or (Hu 2008).”