4.7 Article

SUPERMASSIVE BLACK HOLES AND THEIR HOST GALAXIES. II. THE CORRELATION WITH NEAR-INFRARED LUMINOSITY REVISITED

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 780, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/780/1/70

Keywords

black hole physics; galaxies: evolution

Funding

  1. Marie Curie grant
  2. National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present an investigation of the scaling relations between supermassive black hole (SMBH) masses, M-lozenge, and their host galaxies' K-band bulge (L-bul) and total (L-tot) luminosities. The wide-field WIRCam imager at the Canada-France-Hawaii-Telescope was used to obtain the deepest and highest resolution near-infrared images available for a sample of 35 galaxies with securely measured M-lozenge, selected irrespective of Hubble type. For each galaxy, we derive bulge and total magnitudes using a two-dimensional image decomposition code that allows us to account, if necessary, for large-and small-scale disks, cores, bars, nuclei, rings, envelopes, and spiral arms. We find that the present-day M-lozenge-L-bul and M-lozenge-L-tot relations have consistent intrinsic scatter, suggesting that M-lozenge correlates equally well with bulge and total luminosity of the host. Our analysis provides only mild evidence of a decreased scatter if the fit is restricted to elliptical galaxies. The log-slopes of the M-lozenge-L-bul and M-lozenge-L-tot relations are 0.75 +/- 0.10 and 0.92 +/- 0.14, respectively. However, while the slope of the M-lozenge-L-bul relation depends on the detail of the image decomposition, the characterization of M-lozenge-L-tot does not. Given the difficulties and ambiguities of decomposing galaxy images into separate components, our results indicate that L-tot is more suitable as a tracer of SMBH mass than L-bul, and that the M-lozenge-L-tot relation should be used when studying the co-evolution of SMBHs and galaxies.

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