The Relation between Black Hole Mass, Bulge Mass, and Near-Infrared Luminosity

By A. Marconi, L. Hunt. 2003

1,362 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We present new accurate near-infrared (NIR) spheroid (bulge) structural parameters obtained by a two-dimensional image analysis of all galaxies with a direct black hole (BH) mass determination. As expected, NIR bulge luminosities Lbul and BH masses are tightly correlated, and if we consider only those galaxies with a secure BH mass measurement and an accurate Lbul (27 objects), the spread of MBH-Lbul is similar to MBH-σe, where σe is the effective stellar velocity dispersion. We find an intrinsic rms scatter of ≃0.3 dex in log MBH. By combining the bulge effective radii Re measured in our analysis with σe, we find a tight linear correlation (rms ≃ 0.25 dex) between MBH and the virial bulge mass (∝Reσ), with ⟨MBH/Mbul⟩ ~ 0.002. A partial correlation analysis shows that MBH depends on both σe and Re and that both variables are necessary to drive the correlations between MBH and other bulge properties.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/60dde50f7f228e6f5520c4bedd2ad825c3e0eea8

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 Instrumentation

Citations in the corpus

Fast outflows in compact radio sources: evidence for AGN-induced feedback in the early stages of radio source evolution (2008, background): “…between the mass of the central black hole and the properties of the ⋆ E-mail: jholt@strw.leidenuniv.nl † Present address: Leiden Observatory, PO Box 9513, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands. galaxy bulge (e.g. Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000; Tremaine et al. 2002; Marconi & Hunt 2003).”
Active galactic nuclei: what’s in a name? (2017, background): “The luminosity of the spheroidal component of a galaxy correlates with the mass of its SMBH (at least at relatively low redshifts: e.g. Marconi and Hunt 2003; Gültekin et al. 2009) and hence with its Eddington limit.”
Hot and cold gas accretion and feedback in radio-loud active galaxies (2007, methodology): “To derive black-hole masses for radio galaxies we use the relationship betweenMBH and K-band absolute bulge magnitude derived by Marconi & Hunt (2003) for nearby sources: log10 MBH = 8.21 + 1.13 × (log10 LK − 10.9) (4) whereLK is the K-band luminosity in solar units.”
DISSIPATION AND EXTRA LIGHT IN GALACTIC NUCLEI. II. “CUSP” ELLIPTICALS (2008, background): “…central BHs, and include the cusp ellipticals in our sample for which direct kinematic or maser measurements of a central BH have been possible (compiled from Magorrian et al. 1998; Merritt & Ferrarese 2001; Tremaine et al. 2002; Marconi & Hunt 2003; Häring & Rix 2004; Aller & Richstone 2007).”
A Theoretical Interpretation of the Black Hole Fundamental Plane (2007, methodology): “In their analysis of the relation between BH mass and host luminosity or dynamical mass,Mdyn, Marconi & Hunt (2003) (see also de Francesco et al. 2006) noted that the residuals of the MBH − σ relation (effectivelyMBH/σ4; Tremaine et al. 2002) were significantly correlated with the effective radii…”
The Chandra Deep Field-South: Optical Spectroscopy. I. (2003, background): “We also show in this figure the effect expected from the correlation found between the bulge luminosity and the black hole mass (Marconi & Hunt 2003).”
Self-regulated growth of supermassive black holes by a dual jet-heating active galactic nucleus feedback mechanism: methods, tests and implications for cosmological simulations (2011, background): “Observations by Magorrian et al. (1998) first pointed out a relationship between the central BHs and their host galaxy bulge mass with a quasi-linear scaling (Laor 2001; McLure & Dunlop 2002; Marconi & Hunt 2003; Häring & Rix 2004).”
CONSTRAINTS ON BLACK HOLE GROWTH, QUASAR LIFETIMES, AND EDDINGTON RATIO DISTRIBUTIONS FROM THE SDSS BROAD-LINE QUASAR BLACK HOLE MASS FUNCTION (2010, background): “…et al. 2000; Merritt & Ferrarese 2001; Tremaine et al. 2002), concentration or Sersic index (e.g., Graham et al. 2001; Graham & Driver 2007), bulge mass (e.g., Magorrian et al. 1998; Marconi & Hunt 2003; Häring & Rix 2004), and binding energy (e.g., Aller & Richstone 2007; Hopkins et al. 2007b).”
The anti‐hierarchical growth of supermassive black holes (2004, background): “…the mass of the central black holes and either the mass and luminosity (Kormendy & Richstone 1995; Magorrian et al. 1998; McLure & Dunlop 2002; Marconi & Hunt 2003) or the velocity dispersion (Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000; Merritt & Ferrarese C© 2004 RAS Downloaded from…”
Supermassive black hole demography: the match between the local and accreted mass functions (2004, background): “K 20 = −0.2) as discussed in Section 3.1, it is apparent that the Marconi & Hunt (2003) relationship yields higher BH masses at fixed luminosity.”
THE NON-CAUSAL ORIGIN OF THE BLACK-HOLE–GALAXY SCALING RELATIONS (2010, background): “…the mass and the velocity dispersion of their host galaxies’ bulges (Magorrian et al. 1998; Ferrarese & Merrit 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000; Tremaine et al. 2002; McLure & Dunlop 2002; Marconi & Hunt 2003; Häring & Rix 2004; Gültekin et al. 2009; Jahnke et al. 2009; Merloni et al. 2010).”
A remarkably flat relationship between the average star formation rate and AGN luminosity for distant X-ray AGN. (2015, methodology): “This model predicts the distribution of stellar masses, for which they correct to BH masses assuming MBH = 0.002 ×M∗ based on Marconi & Hunt (2003), as a function of X-ray luminosity.”
OPTICAL DISCOVERY OF PROBABLE STELLAR TIDAL DISRUPTION FLARES (2010, background): “…depends sensitively on the black hole mass and spin, hence a large sample of TDEs will allow properties of back holes to be studied without relying on scaling relations with global parameters 2 of galaxies (Gebhardt et al. 2000; Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Graham et al. 2001; Marconi & Hunt 2003).”
Doing Science with eLISA: Astrophysics and Cosmology in the Millihertz Regime (2012, background): “Thus more massive galaxies grow more massive black holes: the black hole sees the galaxy that it inhabits, and the galaxy sees the black hole at its centre despite its small influence radius (Häring and Rix, 2004, Magorrian et al., 1998, Marconi and Hunt, 2003).”
A Cosmological Framework for the Co-Evolution of Quasars, Supermassive Black Holes, and Elliptical Galaxies. I. Galaxy Mergers and Quasar Activity (2007, background): “These correlations take various forms, relating the black hole mass to, e.g., the mass (Magorrian et al. 1998; McLure & Dunlop 2002; Marconi & Hunt 2003; Häring& Rix 2004), velocity dispersion (Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000; Tremaine et al. 2002), and concentration or Sersic index…”
Selection bias in dynamically measured supermassive black hole samples: its consequences and the quest for the most fundamental relation (2016, background): “…relation, such as “pseudo-bulges” (e.g., Kormendy et al. 2011), or examine whether bulge or total luminosity is a better predictor ofMbh (e.g., Marconi & Hunt 2003; Häring & Rix 2004; Kormendy & Bender 2011; Läsker et al. 2014), or consider the connection to nuclear star clusters only in…”
Fueling Low-Level AGN Activity through Stochastic Accretion of Cold Gas (2006, methodology): “From the bulge mass function, theMBH − Mbulge relation (Magorrian et al. 1998; Marconi & Hunt 2003; Häring & Rix 2004) then determines the black hole mass function.”
Local supermassive black holes, relics of active galactic nuclei and the X-ray background (2003, methodology): “The latter correlation was thought to be the tightest but Marconi & Hunt (2003) have recently shown that all the correlations have similar intrinsic dispersion when considering only galaxies with secure BH detections (see also McLure & Dunlop 2002; Erwin, Graham, & Caon 2003).”
PRIMUS: THE DEPENDENCE OF AGN ACCRETION ON HOST STELLAR MASS AND COLOR (2011, background): “We assume a constant scaling between the black hole mass and the host galaxy stellar mass, Mbh ≈ 0.002M∗ (Marconi & Hunt 2003, where we have assumed M∗ ≈ Mbulge).”