Exploring Supermassive BH growth with ALMA & TMT

Nozomu Kawakatu (Univ. of Tsukuba⇒Kure National College of Technology)

Collaborator: Keiichi Wada (Kagoshima University)

ALMA時代の宇宙構造形成理論研究会@北海道大学 （1/26-1/28）

A Scenario of SMBH Formation (e.g., Rees Diagram 1984)

2~ 10BH,seedM M

4 5~ 10BH,seedM M−

e.g, Omukai+2008, Inayoshi & Omukai 2011

e.g., Yoshida 2006;Hosokawa+2011

Greene 2012

7

9

10

10BH

BH

M MM M

=

⇒ =

Mainly gas accretion X-ray/optical observations

Gas accretion and/or

BH mergers

710BH,seed BHM M M⇒ =

No constrain from observations

e.g., Tanikawa & Umemura 2011

Accretion disk （< sub-pc）

Ohsuga+09

Slim disk (L/LE >1)

Standard disk (L/LE <1)

RIAF (L/LE <<1)

Three accretion mode

Super-Eddington can be possible since both the radiation field and mass inflow around BH is non-spherical. Q. Does super-Eddington phase last for long times ? Large perturbation is required for super-Eddigton flow.

e.g., Saitoh & Wada 2004; Saitoh+2010, Matsui+2012

Evolution

Tidal torque driven by major mergers

Host galaxy ( > kpc)

The accumulated gas cannot directly accrete onto BHs.

©4D2U (Saitoh-san)

・Disk has complicated internal structure and velocity fields is turbulent-like. ・Global shape is determined by energy balance between turbulent dissipation and SN heating under the influence of the central massive black hole. ・The mechanism to transport the angular momentum is the turbulent viscosity.

64 pc density

(Wada & Norman 02, Wada +09, Wada 12) pc Starburst driven “torus” around SMBH (~100pc)

Circumuclear disk

rin (~ 1 pc) rout (~ 50 pc)

Host galaxy gMBHM

Black Hole

BH

Galactic bulge Galactic disk

tv

AGNLaccM

Modeling growth of SMBH and circumnuclear disk

Gas accretion driven by turbulent viscosity

NK & Wada 2008, ApJ, 681, 73 100pc ⇒1pc

fueling from host galaxy

( )sup

sup

M tt

　

“Turbulent pressure-supported” circumnuclear disk

)1()()()()()( 2 　　rhrgrrvr gtg ρ=ρ

)2()()()(

*

2

　　SNdis

tg ErSt

rvrη≈

ρ

Energy balance (Turbulent Energy dissipation =Energy input from SNe)

Hydrodynamical equilibrium (Turbulent pressure = gravity in vertical direction)

h

CND

tv

tv :turbulent velocity h: scale height of disk

:SNE

)()( ** rCrS gρ=

total energy (1051 erg) injected by an SN

:star formation rate per unit volume

gρ :gas density

SMBH

:η heating efficiency

(1)+(2) ⇒ turbulent velocity and scale height

(see also Wada & Norman 02; Vollmer & Beckert 03; Vollmer +08; Collin & Zhan 08)

gravity

( )( ) 2 ( )BH g ln

ln td rM r r

d rπν Ω

= Σ

　　

t SN tv hν α= :viscous parameter

gg 2 ρh=Σ :surface density of gaseous matter Ω :angular velocity

Gas accretion rate in a turbulent nuclear disk

17

33

* *,( ) 3 ( ) 0.13 [ ]inBH in SN SN g in SN,1 in,3

Bg,1 7

HBH, yrrM r E C r r

MC MM

Gπα η α −

−

= Σ =

Σ /

Eddington mass accretion rate 2

2 2 10 [ / ]EddEdd BH,7 yrLM M M

c−≡ = ×

Gcrr

πκ s

crit)()( =Σ :epicyclic frequency )(rκ

Critical mass accretion rate

*, 70.01 [ ]crit SN,1 s,1 yrM c MCα −⇒

/Minimum accretion rate for turbulent nuclear disk

Toomre’s stability criterion

Result 1: Mass accretion rate vs. Black hole mass

110

23 10−×

Slim disk Super-Ediington

RIAF

Standard disk

5 2 6 1*10 , 10g pc yrM C− − −Σ = =　 　

4 2 7 1*10 , 10g pc yrM C− − −Σ = =　 　

3 2 7 1*10 , 10g pc yrM C− − −Σ = =　 　

*( ) &g inr CΣ

critM

/ EddM M

NLS1 (red dots) s & BLS1s Collin & Kawaguchi 2004

*( ) &g inr CΣ

Prediction (red lines)

Comparison with observations: 1

max ~ 3M M

1BH BHM M −∝

Result 2: Eddington ratio vs. Black hole mass

*( ) &g inr CΣ

*2/ ( )Edd g in BHL L C r M −∝ Σ

Super-Ediington

Critical

Critical

5 2 6 1*10 , 10g pc yrM C− − −Σ = =　 　

4 2 7 1*10 , 10g pc yrM C− − −Σ = =　 　

3 2 7 1*10 , 10g pc yrM C− − −Σ = =　 　

Nobuta, Akiyama+2012

Prediction (red lines)

*( ) &g inr CΣ

Super-Ediington

SDSS

BLAGNs @z~2

Comparison with observations: 2

2/ Edd BHL L M −∝

~ Short Summary~ • Mass accretion rate due to turbulent viscosity Larger SFE & higher surface density ⇒ higher mass accretion rate • Super-Eddington flow is common even in CND scale (~pc), if BH mass is small enough, i.e., MBH <107M . • CNDs with higher surface density ⇒ More massive SMBH Theory: Size, Mass & SFE of CND (<100pc) are key properties. Observation: Eddington ratio (or mass accretion rate onto BHs) vs. dependence of Surface density &SFE “ALMA (cold gas) & TMT (star)”

1* ( )BH g in BHM C r M −∝ Σ

tdtMtMtMtMt

′′−′−′= ∫0)]()()([)( BH*supg

Mass conservation （without mass loss from CNDs due to starburst wind）

Evolution of SMBH and CND

( )sup

sup

M tt

)(tMg

CND

)(BH tM

)(tMBH time

Mass supply rate （step function）

supM

tsup

：Gas mass

)(tM*

SFR

rin :dust sublimation radius

Angular momentum transfer due to turbulent viscosity

( ) ( , )BH acc in tM t M r t v= ∝

1/2(t t SFR)v hν ≈ ∝“viscous parameter”

h tv

SMBH

High -accretion phase

Toomre Q < 1

turbulent pressure supported thick disk

Low-accretion phase

Toomre Q > 1

gas pressure supported thin disk

*MsupM

BHMHigh-accretion

phase Low-accretion

phase

The growth of SMBHs is changed from high accretion phase to low one.

MM 8sup 10= 18

* 103, −−×= yrC

supt

The growth rate of SMBH and SFR

Observable properties of Proto-QSOs

CND+MBH

Bulge

evolution

Massive CNDs

Massive CNDs

critg⇒ Σ < Σ8sup 10 MM ≤

10g BHM M >

7sup 10 MM = 810 M

910 M1010 M

Discussion: Host morphology vs. CND property Hypothesis: (i) Major merger driven accretion in bulge dominated galaxies ⇒ “Compact & massive CNDs ⇒Massive SMBHs” (ii) Bar driven accretion in disk dominated galaxies ⇒ “Extended & less massive CNDs ⇒ less Massive SMBHs”

critM

“ALMA issue “

(i)

(ii) Saitoh+, Matsui+

Baba+, Namekata+

Bulge dominated galaxies (Magorrian relation)

Disk dominated galaxies

Greene 2012

Conclusions • Mass accretion rate due to turbulent viscosity Larger SFE & higher surface density ⇒ higher mass accretion rate • Super-Eddington flow is common even in CND scale (~pc), if BH mass is small enough, i.e., MBH <107M . • CNDs with higher surface density ⇒ More massive SMBH • Proto-QSOs : massive CNDs, i.e, Theory: - Size, Mass & SFE of CNDs are key properties. - CND formation via major merger driven/bar driven accretion - Enoki-san’s SA model including KW model Observation: - Eddington ratio vs. dependence of CND properties (surface density &SFE) - CND properties (surface density & SFE) vs. Host morphologies “ALMA (cold gas) & TMT (star)”

1* ( )BH g in BHM C r M −∝ Σ

10g BHM M >

z

Φ

[ Mpc

-3 m

ag-1

]

model (M1450) -22 -23 -24 -25

obs. (M1450) -22 -23 -24 -25

2SLAQ & SDSS COSMOS GOODS

0 1 2 3 4 510-8

10-7

10-6

10-5

Discussion: SA model vs. Observational data

< Overestimate > - Some fraction of gas supplied from hosts turns to stars,

but this effect is more efficient for massive BHs. - Msup (gas)/MBH is getting smaller at lower z.

Enoki+2013