4.7 Article

A Hard Look at Relativistic Reverberation in MCG-5-23-16 and SWIFT J2127.4+5654: Testing the Lamppost Model

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 912, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/abebd9

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration [80NSSC18K1604]
  2. National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Ask authors/readers for more resources

X-ray reverberation mapping is a new tool to study accretion in AGN, but recent observations of Seyfert Galaxies show that the data does not match predictions from the relativistic reverberation model.
X-ray reverberation mapping has emerged as a new tool to probe accretion in active galactic nuclei (AGN), providing a potentially powerful probe of accretion at the black hole scale. The lags, along with relativistic spectral signatures are often interpreted in light of the lamppost model. Focusing specifically on testing the prediction of the relativistic reverberation model, we have targeted several of the brightest Seyfert Galaxies in X-rays with different observing programs. Here, we report the results from two large campaigns with NuSTAR targeting MCG-5-23-16 and SWIFT J2127.4+5654 to test the model predictions in the 3-50 keV band. These are two of three sources that showed indications of a delayed Compton hump in early data. With triple the previously analyzed exposures, we find no evidence for relativistic reverberation in MCG-5-23-16, and the energy-dependent lags are consistent with a log-linear continuum. In SWIFT J2127.4+5654, although a continuum-only model explains the data, the relativistic reverberation model provides a significant improvement to the energy and frequency-dependent lags, but with parameters that are not consistent with the time-averaged spectrum. This adds to mounting evidence showing that the lag data is not consistent with a static lamppost model.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available