Thursday, August 9, 2012

1208.1716 (L. Ballo et al.)

Exploring X-ray and radio emission of type 1 AGN up to z ~ 2.3    [PDF]

L. Ballo, F. J. H. Heras, X. Barcons, F. J. Carrera
X-ray emission from AGN is dominated by the accretion disk around a SMBH. The radio luminosity, however, has not such a clear origin except in the most powerful sources where jets are evident. The origin (and even the very existence) of the local bi-modal distribution in radioloudness is also a debated issue. By analysing X-ray, optical and radio properties of a large sample of type 1 AGN up to z>2, where the bulk of this population resides, we aim to explore the interplay between radio and X-ray emission in AGN, in order to further our knowledge on the origin of radio emission, and its relation to accretion. We analyse a large (~800 sources) sample of type 1 AGN and QSOs selected from the 2XMMi X-ray source catalogue, cross-correlated with the SDSS DR7 spectroscopic catalogue, covering a redshift range from z~0.3 to z~2.3. SMBH masses are estimated from the Mg II emission line, bolometric luminosities from the X-ray data, and radio emission or upper limits from the FIRST catalogue. Most of the sources accrete close to the Eddington limit and the distribution in radioloudness does not appear to have a bi-modal behaviour. We confirm that radioloud AGN are also X-ray loud, with an X-ray-to-optical ratio up to twice that of radioquiet objects, even excluding the most extreme strongly jetted sources. By analysing complementary radio-selected control samples, we find evidence that these conclusions are not an effect of the X-ray selection, but are likely a property of the dominant QSO population. Our findings are best interpreted in a context where radio emission in AGN, with the exception of a minority of beamed sources, arises from very close to the accretion disk and is therefore heavily linked to X-ray emission. We also speculate that the RL/RQ dichotomy might either be an evolutionary effect that developed well after the QSO peak epoch, or an effect of incompleteness in small samples.
View original: http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.1716

No comments:

Post a Comment