Cosmic Evolution of Black Holes and Spheroids. II. Scaling Relations at z = 0.36

By T. Treu, J. Woo, M. Malkan, R. Blandford. 2007

143 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We use high-resolution images obtained with the Advanced Camera for Surveys on board the Hubble Space Telescope to determine morphology, nuclear luminosity, and structural parameters of the spheroidal component for a sample of 20 Seyfert galaxies at z = 0.36. We combine these measurements with spectroscopic information from the Keck Telescope to determine the black hole mass-spheroid luminosity relation (MBH-LB), the fundamental plane (FP) of the host galaxies, and the black hole mass-spheroid velocity dispersion relation (MBH-σ). The FP is consistent with that of inactive spheroids at comparable redshifts. Assuming pure luminosity evolution, we find that the host spheroids had smaller luminosity and stellar velocity dispersion than today for a fixed MBH. The offsets correspond to Δ log LB,0 = 0.40 ± 0.11 ± 0.15 (Δ log MBH = 0.51 ± 0.14 ± 0.19) and Δ log σ = 0.13 ± 0.03 ± 0.05 (Δ log MBH = 0.54 ± 0.12 ± 0.21), respectively, for the MBH-L and MBH-σ relations (the double error bars indicate random and systematic uncertainties, respectively). A detailed analysis of known systematic errors and selection effects shows that they cannot account for the observed offset. We conclude that the data are inconsistent with pure luminosity evolution and the existence of universal and tight scaling relations. In order to obey the three local scaling relations by z = 0, assuming no significant black hole growth, the distant spheroids have to grow their stellar mass by approximately 60% (Δ log Msph = 0.20 ± 0.14) in the next 4 billion years, while preserving their size and holding their stellar mass-to-light ratio approximately constant. The measured evolution can be expressed as MBH/Msph ∝ (1 + z)1.5±1.0, consistent with black holes of a few × 108 M☉ completing their growth before their host galaxies. Based on the disturbed morphologies of a fraction of the sample (6/20), we suggest collisional mergers with disk-dominated systems as the physical mechanism driving the evolution.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dd24395b128aac73b14c762caa5c0d5c1153f8cb

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

THE NON-CAUSAL ORIGIN OF THE BLACK-HOLE–GALAXY SCALING RELATIONS (2010, background): “As an example, the evolution of the scaling relations (Treu et al. 2004; Peng et al. 2006a,b; Treu et al. 2007; Schramm et al. 2008; Jahnke et al. 2009; Merloni et al. 2010; Bennert et al. 2010; Decarli et al. 2010) is investigated in order to constrain the physical drivers behind co-evolution and…”
A synthesis model for AGN evolution: supermassive black holes growth and feedback modes (2008, background): “…> 0, despite the large observational biases (Merloni, Rudnick & Di Matteo 2004; McLure et al. 2006; Shields et al. 2006; Peng et al. 2006; Wu 2007; Treu et al. 2007; Salviander et al. 2007; Shen et al. 2008; Schramm, Wisotzki & Jahnke 2008), but the question of if, and, in case, by how much did…”
An expanded Mbh–σ diagram, and a new calibration of active galactic nuclei masses (2010, background): “…of changing f can be far-ranging, from individual objects to large AGN surveys (Barth, Greene & Ho 2005; Woo et al. 2006, 2008; Dong et al. 2007; Treu et al. 2007; Zhang, Dultzin-Hacyan & Wang 2007; Shen et al. 2008a,b; Vestergaard et al. 2008; Trump et al. 2009; Greene et al. 2010; Lamastra et…”
Selection bias in dynamically measured supermassive black hole samples: its consequences and the quest for the most fundamental relation (2016, background): “…with their hosts is the subject of intense observational efforts, bothlocally and at high redshift (e.g., Shields et al. 2006; Lauer et al. 2007b; Treu et al. 2007; Woo et al. 2008; Gaskell & Kormendy 2009; Shankar et al. 2009a; Merloni et al. 2010; Schulze & Wisotzki 2011; Falomo et al. 2014;…”
Cosmic Evolution of Black Holes and Spheroids. III. The MBH-σ* Relation in the Last Six Billion Years (2008, methodology): “…with our pilot study (Treu et al. 2004), we reported the first direct measurement of the MBH-σ∗ relation beyond the local Universe (Woo et al. 2006, hereafter paper I), and updated it with corrected AGN continuum luminosities using Hubble Space Telescope (HST) images in paper II (Treu et al. 2007).”
PRECISE BLACK HOLE MASSES FROM MEGAMASER DISKS: BLACK HOLE–BULGE RELATIONS AT LOW MASS (2010, background): “However, the Treu et al. (2007) sample is clearly composed predominantly of late-type galaxies.”
How Mergers May Affect the Mass Scaling Relation between Gravitationally Bound Systems (2007, background): “…use [Oiii] and CO emission line widths to infer the gravitational potential of quasar bulges (Shields et al. 2003, 2006; Salviander et al. 2006, 2007; Ho 2007) suggest similar trends3, and residual traces of evolution remain detectable even below z = 1 (Treu et al. 2004, 2007; Woo et al. 2006).”
ON THE COSMIC EVOLUTION OF THE SCALING RELATIONS BETWEEN BLACK HOLES AND THEIR HOST GALAXIES: BROAD-LINE ACTIVE GALACTIC NUCLEI IN THE zCOSMOS SURVEY (2009, background): “Additional systematic errors in the derived black hole masses introduced by the use of any of these relations will be further discussed in section 4.3 (see also the discussion in Treu et al. 2007).”
Doing Science with eLISA: Astrophysics and Cosmology in the Millihertz Regime (2012, background): “However, the origin of the M• −σ relation (Ciotti et al., 2010, King, 2003, Silk and Rees, 1998, Wyithe and Loeb, 2003), and its evolution at look-back times is still unclear (Peng, 2007, Robertson et al., 2006, Treu et al., 2007, Woo et al., 2008).”
The black hole mass–stellar velocity dispersion correlation: bulges versus pseudo-bulges (2008, background): “The validity of this relation have been explored for intermediate mass black holes (IMBHs) in dwarf galaxies (Barth et al. 2005), the local active galaxies (McLure & Dunlop 2002; Green & Ho 2006), and Seyfert galaxies at z = 0.36 (Woo et al. 2006; Treu et al. 2007).”
Discriminating Between the Physical Processes that Drive Spheroid Size Evolution (2009, methodology): “…we consider observations from z = 0–1 from Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) active galactic nuclei (AGN) samples (Salviander et al. 2006, 2007), from z = 1–3 from lensed quasar hosts (Peng et al. 2006), and at z = 0.36 from narrowredshift Seyfert samples (Woo et al. 2006; Treu et al. 2007).”
Comparing and Calibrating Black Hole Mass Estimators for Distant Active Galactic Nuclei (2007, methodology): “As noted by Treu et al. (2007), MW, MN, MSh, and MSa agree on average to within a few per cent of MT.”
Selection Bias in Observing the Cosmological Evolution of the M•-σ and M•-L Relationships (2007, background): “…and Fine et al. (2006) in the context of the correlation between black hole mass and dark matter halo mass, and by Salviander et al. (2007) and Treu et al. (2007) in the context of the M - relation, but apparently has not been appreciated by most observers studying the evolution of the M…”