4.6 Article

Swift detection of all previously undetected blazars in a micro-wave flux-limited sample of WMAP foreground sources

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 468, 期 2, 页码 571-579

出版社

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054160

关键词

quasars : general; cosmology : cosmic microwave background; radiation mechanisms : non-thermal

资金

  1. STFC [PP/D001013/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  2. Science and Technology Facilities Council [PP/D001013/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Almost the totality of the bright foreground sources in the WMAP Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) maps are blazars, a class of sources that show usually also X-ray emission. However, 23 objects in a flux-limited sample of 140 blazars of the WMAP catalog (first year) were never reported before as X-ray sources. We present here the results of 41 Swift observations which led to the detection of all these 23 blazars in the 0.3-10 keV band. We conclude that all micro-wave selected blazars are X-ray emitters and that the distribution of the micro-wave to X-ray spectral slope (alpha(mu x)) of LBL blazars is very narrow, confirming that the X-ray flux of most blazars is a very good estimator of their micro-wave emission. The X-ray spectral shape of all the objects that were observed long enough to allow spectral analysis is flat and consistent with inverse Compton emission within the commonly accepted view where the radiation from blazars is emitted in a Sychrotron-Inverse-Compton scenario. We predict that all blazars and most radio galaxies above the sensitivity limit of the WMAP and of the Planck CMB missions are X-ray sources detectable by the present generation of X-ray satellites. An hypothetical all-sky soft X-ray survey with sensitivity of approximately 10(-15) erg cm(-2) s(-1) would be crucial to locate and remove over 100 000 blazars from CMB temperature and polarization maps and therefore accurately clean the primordial CMB signal from the largest population of extragalactic foreground contaminants.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据