1. AGN Unification in COSMOS Jonathan Trump Chris Impey (Arizona), Martin Elvis, Brandon Kelly, Francesca Civano (CfA), Yoshi Taniguchi, Tohru Nagao (Ehime), Knud Jahnke, Marcella Brusa, Mara Salvato (Max-Planck), Pat McCarthy (Carnegie), Anton Koekemoer (STScI)

2. A Paradigm for SMBH Activity What ignites the AGN phase? –Galaxy mergers? (Taniguchi 1999, di Matteo et al. 2005) –Disk galaxy star formation? (Hopkins & Hernquist 2006) Why do AGNs look so different? –Broad / narrow emission lines, luminosity, SED vary widely –Caused by different obscuration, or accretion physics? Is there an AGN Unified Model???

3. COSMOS AGN survey Four years of Magellan/IMACS & MMT/Hectospec spectroscopy over 2 deg 2 –4 magnitudes fainter than SDSS –Type 1 AGN masses from virial scaling relations –Faint and obscured AGNs to z~1 HST/ACS data for host morphologies to z~1 –Type 2 AGN masses from host-SMBH relations Complete SEDs –Deep radio, IR, optical, UV, X-ray photometry –Bolometric luminosities Bolometric luminosity + Mass = Accretion Rate

4. COSMOS Sensitivity to AGN SEDs ~40 times fainter than the typical SDSS quasar Sensitive to QSO/Seyfert boundary at z~2 Multiwavelength, for full SED X-ray selection for varied AGN types SDSS SED, z~1.5 (Richards et al. 2007) Arp 220, z~1.5 (Silva 1998)

5. Accurate bolometric luminosities Model SED as accretion disk + X-ray corona Top: BL Bottom: NL (with host galaxy) Ignore extra reprocessed IR emission

6. Broad-Line AGN Masses M BH ~ L 0.5 × v fwhm 2, scatter of ~0.4 dex Calibrated from reverberation mapping of ~30 local AGN Virial theorem: M BH ~ R BLR v BLR 2 R BLR ~L 0.5 (Kaspi et al. 2000, 07): scaling relations

7. Masses for Narrow-Line and Lineless AGNs No broad emission lines... host – M BH relations instead log(M BH /M ⊙ ) ~ 0.9 log(L K,bulge ) − 31 ~ 0.35 dex scatter Bulge luminosities from HST/ACS decompositions (Gabor+09) Graham 2007

8. AGN Fueling L I /L Edd : accretion rate With L disk /L X, E peak of disk, X-ray slope

9. AGN Fueling Broad-Line AGN Obscured Narrow-Line AGN Unobscured Narrow-Line & Lineless AGN

10. AGN Fueling Broad-line and Obscured Narrow-Line AGN limited by L/L Edd > 0.01

11. AGN Fueling (unobscured only) Disk gets brighter & hotter as accretion rate increases (at >3σ significance)

12. Accretion Rate and Radio Jets Weakly accreting AGNs are more radio-loud! Weak AGNs may be important for radio-mode feedback (e.g. heating cluster cores, IGM enrichment)

13. Accretion Rate and the IR “Torus” Hot “torus” dust will have IR signature from 1-10μm with α IR <0.5 Weak AGNs lack this IR signature Can be explained by disk wind of both BLR & clumpy dust

14. AGN Fueling With increasing accretion rate (L I /L Edd )… –Disk luminosity increases compared to X-rays –Disk becomes hotter –Weaker radio outflows –More likely to have IR “torus” signature –Broad emission lines appear (at L I /L edd >0.01) Accretion rate is an “axis” of AGN unification –At low accretion rates, theory predicts a radiatively inefficient accretion flow (RIAF) which can produce these effects (Narayan & McClintock 2008)

15. Accretion in AGN Unification L I /L Edd < 0.01 L I /L Edd > 0.01

16. Reverberation Mapping Measure time delay between variability in the broad lines and the continuum Virial theorem: M BH ~ R BLR v BLR 2 R BLR =ct lag v BLR =v FWHM Calibrator for all non- local M BH !!!

17. Previous AGN RM Typical t lag ~ 5-100 days Previous work has been mostly single- target spectra on small telescopes –~45 AGNs, all but 1 at z<0.4 –Almost all Hβ (1 with MgII, 3 with CIV) This work: the first multi-object RM study –37 AGNs, with 31 at 0.4 < z < 2.8 –12 with Hβ, 26 with MgII, 13 with CIV Double total sample, 10x more at high-z!

18. Evolution in M BH -M Host ? Weak evidence for more massive BH compared to host with redshift Relies on M BH uncertain to >0.4 dex from “scaling relations” RM at z>1 could give M BH to ~0.2 dex! from Merloni et al. 2010

19. Spectral variability with Hecto Need accurate differential spectrophotometry –Fiber throughput differences: same rotator angle Feb–May, always same fiber–target –Weather variation: stars in target slits as standards –Fiber flexure: ancillary photometry (Bok/90’) –Sky variations within the 1° field: 4+ sky fibers per target in same mask region Queue mode: 1 hr/night, total of 5 nights

20. What we got… Weather & scheduling: gaps in Jan/Mar/Jun Actual variability Simulated continuum flux (+) Simulated line fluxes Time lags using cross- correlation functions

21. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

22. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

23. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

24. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

25. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

26. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

27. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

28. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

29. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

30. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

31. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

32. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

33. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

34. Time Series Spectra CIV MgII HβHβ

35. Summary Accretion Rate: new axis in AGN Unification –Low accretion rate: RIAF at inner radii –RIAF: radio-loud, cooler + weaker disk –BLR disappears at L/L Edd < 0.01 –Torus weakens at low accretion rate? Only possible with COSMOS!!! Reverberation mapping for more accurate M BH in progress