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

2. AGN=Accretion onto Super Massive BH
Huge Amount of Emission (L= erg/s) from Small Region
1Rs=3x(M/MQ) km= (M/106Mo) pc
(H0=75)
Radio Observation->1marcsec
(X-ray) Variabiliuty v=R/t .. R<ct

3. Time Scale vs BH Mass

4. Mass of Black Hole
Steller BH Mass in Binary System => Mass Function + Inclination
BH Mass in AGNs
Dynamical Mass (e.g. BLR M=v2r/G)
Blue Bump = Accretion Disk Spectrum
X-ray Variability

5. Significance of BH Mass
Emission Mechanisim
Eddington Luminosity LEdd= 1.3x1038 (M/Mo) erg/s
Cosmological Evolution
dM/dt=L/e c2={(L/Ledd) /e} (M/Mo)x1.3x1038
M/(dM/dt)=4.5x107 (e/0.1) / (L/Ledd) yr

6. Mass Estimation from X-ray Variability
From Normalized Power Spectrum
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

7. ASCA Light Curves of BLS1

8. How to make a Normalized Power Spectral Density(NPSD)
Two BGD Subtracted Light Curves
Short: bin size=16-256s
Long: bin size=5760sec
Short->NPSD for High Freq Long->NPSD for Low Freq.
Normalized by Average Intensity^2
Combine Two NPSDs
NPSD points are missed around 2x104 Hz.

9. Time Scale and NPSD (1/2)

10. Time Scale and NPSD (2/2) Source B Source A fp(f)-plot : Power per
Log Frequency

11. fP(f)-Plot: BLS1 + Cyg X-1

12. Lx vs Mvar for BLS1s

13. Motivations/Supports
Similarity between AGN and SBHC (White, et al., 1984, Inoue, 1989)
NPSD of Cyg X-1 is stable at higher frequency part (Knee Frequency shifts.) (Belloni and Hasinger, 1990.)
NPSD of GBHCs coincide at higher frequency parts. (Miyamoto et al., 1992)
NPSD of X1608

14. Constancy of NPSD

15. Application/Extension
NGC4258(Ishisaki et al.)
M81 (Iyomoto et al., 1999)
LLAGN and Sy2 (Awaki et al.1999)
NGC4395 (Iwasawa et al., 1999)

16. Narrow Line Seyfert 1 (NLS1)
Seyfert Type 1 whose Broad Emission Line Width is Narrow. (???)
2019/5/23

17. X-ray Studies with ROSAT
Prototype=IRAS
Steep Soft X-ray Index G=4.4±0.2
Rapid & Large Amplitude Variability
Boller et al., 1997
Common for NLS1
at Some Level

18. ASCA Studies Two Components Spectrum :
Soft Component ~BB kT= keV
Hard Tail above 2 keV

19. Statistical Properties
(Strong FeII Line)
Narrow Hb FWHM
Steep Soft X-ray Spectrum
Rapid / Large Amplitude
X-ray Variability
(Steep Hard X-ray Index)
(Spectral Feature at 1keV)
See Boller et al., 1996, Leighly, K., 1999, Turner et al., 1999 and reference therein.

20. BH Mass Estimation of NLS1
X-ray Variability
Application of the Method developed in Hayashida et al., 1998.
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 Research).

21. NLS1 From ASCA Archive
14NLS1 Zw1, Ton S180, PHL1092, PKS , 1H , RE , NGC4051, PG , Mrk766, PG , IRAS , PG , Mrk478, Ark564.
6BLS1 s(MCG , NGC5548, Mrk841, Mkn509, 3C120, NGC3227) were also analyzed for their X-ray variability.

22. ASCA Light Curves of NLS1

23. NPSDs of NLS1s

24. 1H Case (1995Mar->1998May)
Regardless of Intensity Drop by factor of 6,NPSDs agree well.
Supporting its use for the Scale Measure.

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

26. Lx vs Mvar (NLS1)

27. FWHM vs Mvar
BLS1: Mo
NLS1: Mo

28. Calibration of Mvar to Mass from BL width
Mrev and Mph from Wandel, A. et al., 1999 (astro-ph/ )
19 AGNs
*)Mrev for NGC4051 is preliminary (ct=6.5days).
2019/5/23

29. Mvar v.s. Excess Variance
Normalized Excess variance
(Nandra et al., 1997)
= Integration of NPSD
=(Variability Coefficient)^2
(Ogwara et al., 1977)
2019/5/23
(Excess Variance from Turner et al., 1999)

30. Summary-1
We estimated central BH masses of NLS1s from X-ray Variabiliy.
Mass from X-ray variability distributes from 105 to 107 Mo, contrasting the those for BLS1 ranges Mo.
*) Calibrations/Supports were Shown, supporting the Mvar gives (at least) order ofmagnitude estimation.

31. Intermission

32. X-ray Spectrum of NLS1s

33. Problems on BB Fitting How perfect is the underlying Power Law ?
Spectral Features / Warm Absorber / 1keV Feature.
Is Blackbody fit perfect ? (Color Temp/Effective Temp)
Calibration Uncertainty of ASCA (excess NH?)
SIS-CCD Degradation Effect (Dark Frame Error etc.)
2019/5/23

34. kTBB vs Soft Excess Ratio

35. BB Fit ->Area->BH Size

36. BB area size ->BH size = around 105-106Mo
The soft component of NLS1s have simiar Emission Region Size & BB luminosity.
The soft component of the BLS1s (if they have similar one) are difficult to be detected.
Does the BB area really correspond to the central BH ?

37. MBBfit vs Mvar

38. MBBfit(0.5Rs) vs Mvar

39. Can we reconcile the Contradiction ?
For MBBfit < Mvar
Geometry Effect
cos Factor … MBBfit gives under-estimate
Tc > Te Effect
MBBfit gives under-estimate, too.
2019/5/23

40. Extreme NLS1 Class/State ?
For MBBfit >Mvar
X-ray Variability of Extremely Enhanced Soft Components => Variability Amplitude is Also Enhanced ?
Break in Variability Scaling ?
c.f. SBHC High/Low State
Dopper Boosting with large q

41. 0.5Rs <-> Kerr BH <-> Slim Disk Solution
ADAF (Slim Disk)
Standard Disk
ADAF
From Mineshige et al., 1999
see also Abramowicz 1995.
2019/5/23

42. Summary-2 Soft Component of NLS1s can be fitted with BB model.
BB Temperature distributes keV
BH mass estimated with the assumption r=3Rs yields super Eddington luminosity, r=0.5Rs does not.
MBBfit was compared with Mvar; Contradiction of 2 order of magnitudes was found in some sources. Possible reconciliation was discussed.

43. Long Term Variability of NLS1s(1/2)

44. Long Term Variability of NLS1s(2/2)
0.5-2keV Flux
2-10keV Flux

45. NLS1s : Tentative Hypothesis
NLS1s have smaller BH of Mo.
In some of NLS1s, high mass flow rate makes near or super Eddington accretion.
In the extreme high accretion rate
Variability is enhanced.
Hard X-ray emission is suppressed
Mass flow rate (compared to critical rate) changes with time scales of years, reflecting the smallness of MBH.
NLS1=Evolving Stage of AGNs to BLS1