A Correlation between Galaxy Light Concentration and Supermassive Black Hole Mass

By Alister W. Graham, P. Erwin, Nicola Caon, Ignacio Trujillo. 2001

282 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We present evidence for a strong correlation between the concentration of bulges and the mass of their central supermassive black hole (Mbh)—more concentrated bulges have more massive black holes. Using C(1/3) from Trujillo, Graham, & Caon as a measure of bulge concentration, we find that log(Mbh/M☉) = 6.81(±0.95)C(1/3) + 5.03 ± 0.41. This correlation is shown to be marginally stronger (Spearman's rs = 0.91) than the relationship between the logarithm of the stellar velocity dispersion and log Mbh (Spearman's rs = 0.86) and has comparable or less scatter (0.31 dex in log Mbh, which decreases to 0.19 dex when we use only those galaxies whose supermassive black hole radii of influence are resolved and we remove one well-understood outlying data point).

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ec183c7d1625a91e3c447c171030abca8396ef42

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

A Theoretical Interpretation of the Black Hole Fundamental Plane (2007, methodology): “We also note that the (relatively large) scatter in the correlations betweenMBH and concentration or Sersic index in Figure 2 appears contrary to the conclusions of Graham et al. (2001), who argue for very small intrinsic scatter in these correlations.”
HST Photometry of Dwarf Elliptical Galaxies in Coma, and an Explanation for the Alleged Structural Dichotomy between Dwarf and Bright Elliptical Galaxies (2003, background): “Graham et al. (2001a, 2002a) showed the logarithm of n to correlate (r = 0.9) with a galaxy’s supermassive black hole mass.”
Masses and scaling relations for nuclear star clusters, and their co-existence with central black holes (2016, unknown): “G (Kormendy & Richstone 1995), dynamical mass (e.g. Magorrian et al. 1998; Häring & Rix 2004), stellar velocity dispersion (Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000) and central light concentration (e.g. Graham et al. 2001).”
ASASSN-14ae: a tidal disruption event at 200 Mpc (2014, background): “…a useful avenue for studying the properties of SMBHs despite their low predicted frequency ((1.5− 2.0)+2.7−1.3× 10 −5 yr−1 per galaxy; van Velzen & Farrar 2014), as the light emitted during the TDE flare may be sensitive to the black hole spin and mass (e.g., Ulmer 1999; Graham et al. 2001).”
The Millennium Galaxy Catalogue : morphological classification and bimodality in the colour-concentration plane (2006, background): “Certainly, any merging scenario would also need explain how the M SMBH–σ relation (Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000) and M SMBH –n relation (Graham et al. 2001) are preserved (see Novak et al. in press).”
AGN Host Galaxies at z ~ 0.4-1.3: Bulge-dominated and Lacking Merger-AGN Connection (2005, background): “…in massive, bulge-dominated host galaxies (Kauffmann et al. 2003), and that a tight correlation exists locally between SMBH mass and host galaxy properties such as bulge velocity dispersion and light-profile concentration (Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000; Graham et al. 2001).”
On the correlations between galaxy properties and supermassive black hole mass (2011, methodology): “The Sérsic index n has indeed been adopted by some as a good tracer for M• (Graham et al. 2001, 2003; Graham & Driver 2007).”
THE CHANDRA COSMOS SURVEY. III. OPTICAL AND INFRARED IDENTIFICATION OF X-RAY POINT SOURCES (2012, result): “Thus the anti-correlation could be due to a dependence of the Eddington ratio and the galaxy mass, which strongly correlates with C (Graham et al. 2001a,b).”
Total Galaxy Magnitudes and Effective Radii from Petrosian Magnitudes and Radii (2005, background): “Dwarf elliptical galaxies have exponential–like profiles and thus low concentrations (e.g., Graham et al. 2001; their figure 8), but are obviously not late–type galaxies.”
A Fundamental Relation between Compact Stellar Nuclei, Supermassive Black Holes, and Their Host Galaxies (2006, background): “…(Kormendy & Richstone 1995), mass (Häring & Rix 2004), velocity dispersion (Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000a), light concentration (Graham et al. 2001), and halo circular velocity (Ferrarese 2002) — it has become widely accepted that SBH and galaxy formation are closely…”
Selection bias in dynamically measured supermassive black hole samples: its consequences and the quest for the most fundamental relation (2016, background): “…light concentration or Sérsic index (e.g., Magorrian et al. 1998; Richstone et al. 1998; Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt & et al. 2000; Graham et al. 2001; Graham & Driver 2007a; Marconi & Hunt 2003; Häring & Rix 2004; Graham 2007; Satyapal et al. 2008; c© 2016 RAS Graham 2012;…”
A Cosmological Framework for the Co-Evolution of Quasars, Supermassive Black Holes, and Elliptical Galaxies. I. Galaxy Mergers and Quasar Activity (2007, background): “…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 (Graham et al. 2001; Graham & Driver 2007) of the spheroid.”
CONSTRAINTS ON BLACK HOLE GROWTH, QUASAR LIFETIMES, AND EDDINGTON RATIO DISTRIBUTIONS FROM THE SDSS BROAD-LINE QUASAR BLACK HOLE MASS FUNCTION (2010, background): “…dispersion (MBH–σ relationship, e.g., Gebhardt 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…”
Mass Deficits, Stalling Radii, and the Merger Histories of Elliptical Galaxies (2006, unknown): “Graham (2004) gives two estimates ofM for each galaxy, based on the empirical correlationwith concentration parameter (Graham et al. 2001) and on the Gebhardt et al. (2000) version of theM.relation.”
The Evolution of Galaxy Structure Over Cosmic Time (2014, background): “The concentration index however has to be measured very carefully, as different regions and radii used can produce very different values that systematically do not reproduce well when observed under degraded conditions (e.g., Graham et al. 2001; Graham et al. 2005).”
DISSIPATION AND EXTRA LIGHT IN GALACTIC NUCLEI. IV. EVOLUTION IN THE SCALING RELATIONS OF SPHEROIDS (2008, methodology): “We also consider the correlation between black hole mass and Sersic index in Figure 5, comparing to the data compiled in Hopkins et al. (2007c) (an update of the fits in Graham et al. 2001; Graham & Driver 2007).”
A New Empirical Model for the Structural Analysis of Early-Type Galaxies, and A Critical Review of the Nuker Model (2003, background): “Recently, the overall ‘‘ shape ’’ of a bulge’s light profile (as parameterized by the Sérsic [1968] r1/n shape index n) has been shown to correlate strongly (rS = 0.92) with the mass of its central SMBH (Graham et al. 2001a, 2003; Erwin, Graham, & Caon 2003).”
The Relation between Black Hole Mass, Bulge Mass, and Near-Infrared Luminosity (2003, background): “The correlation betweenMBH and bulge light concentration also has a comparably low scatter (Graham et al. 2001).”
Six months of multiwavelength follow-up of the tidal disruption candidate asassn-14li and implied tde rates from asas-sn (2015, methodology): “As the light emitted during the TDE may be sensitive to the black hole spin and mass (e.g., Magorrian & Tremaine 1999; Ulmer 1999; Graham et al. 2001; Metzger & Stone 2015), the detection and study of TDEs may provide a unique method for studying the properties of SMBHs.”
The BAHAMAS project: Calibrated hydrodynamical simulations for large-scale structure cosmology (2016, background): “It has been noted in previ- ous observational studies that the black hole mass is not solely a function of the velocity dispersion, but also depends on the morphology of the galaxy (e.g., Graham et al. 2001; Graham & Driver 2007).”