4.7 Article

ARE THE VARIATIONS IN QUASAR OPTICAL FLUX DRIVEN BY THERMAL FLUCTUATIONS?

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 698, 期 1, 页码 895-910

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/698/1/895

关键词

accretion, accretion disks; galaxies: active; methods: data analysis; quasars: general

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We analyze a sample of optical light curves for 100 quasars, 70 of which have black hole mass estimates. Our sample is the largest and broadest used yet for modeling quasar variability. The sources in our sample have z < 2.8, 10(42) less than or similar to lambda L-lambda (5100 angstrom) less than or similar to 10(46), and 10(6) less than or similar to M-BH/M-circle dot less than or similar to 10(10). We model the light curves as a continuous time stochastic process, providing a natural means of estimating the characteristic timescale and amplitude of quasar variations. We employ a Bayesian approach to estimate the characteristic timescale and amplitude of flux variations; our approach is not affected by biases introduced from discrete sampling effects. We find that the characteristic timescales strongly correlate with black hole mass and luminosity, and are consistent with disk orbital or thermal timescales. In addition, the amplitude of short-timescale variations is significantly anticorrelated with black hole mass and luminosity. We interpret the optical flux fluctuations as resulting from thermal fluctuations that are driven by an underlying stochastic process, such as a turbulent magnetic field. In addition, the intranight variations in optical flux implied by our empirical model are less than or similar to 0.02 mag, consistent with current microvariability observations of radio-quiet quasars. Our stochastic model is therefore able to unify both long-and short-timescale optical variations in radio-quiet quasars as resulting from the same underlying process, while radio-loud quasars have an additional variability component that operates on timescales less than or similar to 1 day.

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

4.7
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