4.7 Article

THE SIZES OF THE X-RAY AND OPTICAL EMISSION REGIONS OF RXJ 1131-1231

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 709, Issue 1, Pages 278-285

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/709/1/278

Keywords

accretion, accretion disks; black hole physics; gravitational lensing; quasars: individual (RXJ 1131-1231)

Funding

  1. NASA [GTO-07700072]
  2. NSF [AST 0708082]
  3. SAO [SV4-74018]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We use gravitational microlensing of the four images of the z = 0.658 quasar RXJ 1131-1231 to measure the sizes of the optical and X-ray emission regions of the quasar. The (face-on) scale length of the optical disk at rest frame 400 nm is R-lambda,R-O = 1.3 x 10(15) cm, while the half-light radius of the rest frame 0.3-17 keV X-ray emission is R-1/2,R-X = 2.3 x 10(14) cm. The formal uncertainties are factors of 1.6 and 2.0, respectively. With the exception of the lower limit on the X-ray size, the results are very stable against any changes in the priors used in the analysis. Based on the H beta line width, we estimate that the black hole mass is M-1131 similar or equal to 10(8) M-circle dot, which corresponds to a gravitational radius of r(g) similar or equal to 2 x 10(13) cm. Thus, the X-ray emission is emerging on scales of similar to 10r(g) and the 400 nm emission on scales of similar to 70r(g). A standard thin disk of this size should be significantly brighter than observed. Possible solutions are to have a flatter temperature profile or to scatter a large fraction of the optical flux on larger scales after it is emitted. While our calculations were not optimized to constrain the dark matter fraction in the lens galaxy, dark matter-dominated models are favored. With well-sampled optical and X-ray light curves over a broad range of frequencies, there will be no difficulty in extending our analysis to completely map the structure of the accretion disk as a function of wavelength.

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