1. ASCA Observations of NLS1s
BH Mass from X-ray Variability
and X-ray Spectrum
K. Hayashida, K. Mori
(Osaka University)

2. Narrow Line Seyfert 1 (NLS1)
Seyfert Type 1 whose Broad Emission Line Width is Narrow. (???)

3. Statistical Properties
Pole On
Edge On
Small BH
Models
Narrow Hb Width
Steep Soft X-ray Spectrum
Rapid / Large Ampl.
X-ray Variability

4. BH Mass Estimation of NLS1
X-ray Variability
Application of the Method developed in Hayashida et al., 1998,ApJ500,p.642.
Black Body Fit to Soft Component
Classical Method in (X-ray) Astronomy
Preliminary Results were appeared in Hayashida, 1998(IAU Sympo 188), and Hayashida, 1999 (Adv. in Space Res.).

5. Mass Estimation from Variability
Log(f * P(f))
NPSD * Frequency
Log Frequency (Hz)
Power per
Log Frequency
Time
Ix(t)/<I>
1.0
0.0
Light Curve
AGNs
SBHC(CygX-1)
Assumptions
X-ray Variability of BHs (from SBHC to AGNs) is Similar to Each Other.
Variability Time Scale is Proportional to System Size, i.e., BH Mass.
Cyg X-1 BH = 10 Mo
Use Normalized Power Spectrum Density (NPSD)

6. NLS1 ASCA Sample 14NLS1 9BLS1 s for Comparison
Zw1, Ton S180, PHL1092, PKS , 1H , RE , NGC4051, PG , Mrk766, PG , IRAS , PG , Mrk478, Ark564.
9BLS1 s for Comparison
MCG , NGC5548, Mrk841, Mkn509, 3C120, NGC3227) from ASCA
MCG , NGC4151,NGC5506,ESO-G103,NGC5548 from Ginga

7. ASCA Light Curves of NLS1

8. NPSDs of NLS1s

9. f P(f) Plot : NLS1 (ASCA)

10. Lx vs Mvar (NLS1)

11. Hb FWHM vs Mvar
BLS1: Mo
NLS1: Mo

12. Calibration : Mass from BL width vs Mvar
Mrev and Mph from Wandel, A. et al., 1999 (astro-ph/ )
*)Mrev for NGC4051 is preliminary (ct=6.5days).
2019/5/12

13. Summary-1 We estimated BH masses of NLS1s from X-ray Variabiliy.
BH Masses in NLS1s from X-ray variability distribute from 105 to 107 Mo, while those in BLS1 range Mo.
Calibration to Mrev were Shown.

14. 2nd Method
X-ray Spectrum of NLS1s

15. kTBB vs Soft Excess Ratio

16. BB Fit ->Area->BH Size

17. 1st vs 2nd
MBBfit vs Mvar

18. MBBfit(0.5Rs) vs Mvar

19. Can we reconcile the Contradiction ?
For MBBfit < Mvar
Inclination Effect
cos Factor … MBBfit gives under-estimate
Tc > Te Effect
MBBfit gives under-estimate, too.
2019/5/12

20. Extreme NLS1 Class/State ?
Time
f * P(f)
NPSD * Frequency
Frequency (Hz)
Ix(t)/<I>
1.0
0.0
Light Curve
Extreme NLS1 Class/State ?
(IRAS13, H0707, etc)
Cyg X-1
For MBBfit >Mvar
X-ray Variability of Extremely Enhanced Soft Components => Variability Amplitude is Also Enhanced ?
Mvar underestimation

21. 0.5Rs <-> Kerr BH <-> Slim Disk Solution
ADAF (Slim Disk)
Standard Disk
ADAF
From Mineshige et al., 1999
see also Abramowicz 1995.
2019/5/12

22. Summary-2
Soft Component of NLS1s was fitted with a BB model with kT of keV.
BH mass estimated about 105Mo (r=3Rs) or Mo (r=0.5Rs) .
Lbb exceeds LEdd for r=3Rs, but not for r=0.5Rs.
MBBfit was compared with Mvar; Contradiction of 2 order of magnitudes was found. Possible reconciliation was discussed.

23. NLS1s : Personal View NLS1s have smaller BH of 105-107 Mo.
In some of NLS1s, high mass flow rate makes near or super Eddington accretion.
In the extreme high accretion rate
Variability Amplitude is enhanced.
Hard X-ray emission is suppressed.
Mass flow rate changes with time scales of years, reflecting the smallness of system.
NLS1=Evolving Stage of Seyferts to BLS1.