alphaFeedback

WorksPhysics and Astronomy

Black Hole Mass Estimation of a Background Quasar in the Vicinity of the cD Galaxy Holm 15A

AI contributions
Not recorded for this paper
View details

Abstract

This study analyzes spectra from the central region of the galaxy cluster Abell 85 observed with GTC/OSIRIS, focusing on the cD galaxy Holm 15A and the point-like X-ray source SDSS J004150.75-091824.3, projected 13.74\arcsec from Holm 15A. For the latter, we found it is a background quasar with a redshift of 1.56386±0.003971.56386 \pm 0.00397, ruling out the possibility of it being a rogue BH gravitationally bound to Holm 15A. In addition, using single-epoch spectroscopy, we report that the quasar J004150 hosts a Supermassive Black Hole (SMBH) with a mass of log⁡(MBH/M⊙)=8.72±0.26\log(M_{\text{BH}}/\mathrm{M_{\odot}}) = 8.72 \pm 0.26.

INTRODUCTION

We present observations of the central region of the galaxy cluster Abell 85: the cD galaxy Holm 15A and SDSS J004150.75-091824.3 (hereafter, J004150). Holm 15A was reported by O. López-Cruz et al. [3] as the galaxy with the largest core (rγ=4.57±0.06r_{\gamma} = 4.57 \pm0.06 kpc) and that could host an Ultramassive Black Hole (UMBH) with MBH∼1010 M⊙M_{\mathrm{BH}} \sim10^{10}\ M_{\odot} (even MBH∼1011 M⊙M_{\mathrm{BH}} \sim10^{11}\ M_{\odot} with some scaling relations). But K. Mehrgan et al. [5] reported MBH=4.0±0.01×1010 M⊙M_{\mathrm{BH}} = 4.0 \pm0.01 \times10^{10}\ M_{\odot} using the stellar velocity field.

J004150, with zphot∼0.9z_{\mathrm{phot}} \sim0.9 (G. T. Richards et al. [8]), lies within the halo of Holm 15A. Then, O. López-Cruz et al. proposed that J004150 may be a rogue SMBH ejected from the nucleus of Holm 15A (z=0.05536±0.00002z = 0.05536 \pm0.00002) due to the scouring action of SMBH triples (e.g., L. Hoffman & A. Loeb [2]; Y. Ni et al. 2022). Also, the present study estimates the SMBH mass of J004150 using single-epoch virial mass estimators based on broad emission lines of active galactic nucleus.

Data and Methodology

We observed the central region of Abell 85 (top-left panel of Figure 1) using the Gran Telescopio Canarias (GTC) equipped with the OSIRIS Multi-Object Spectrograph (MOS) under the programme GTC5-17AMEX (PI: ERL). We carried out the observations in service mode using the R1000B grism, slit width of 1.2″, covering a spectral range from ∼3700-7500 Å, with a spectral resolution of ∼11 Å.

Top-left: FoV of GTC/OSIRIS showing Holm 15A, J004150 and slit positions; 1D spectra of Holm 15A and J004150; spectral decomposition for the Mg II line of J004150

Figure 1. Top-left: FoV of GTC/OSIRIS showing Holm 15A (blue circle), J004150 (red circle) and slit positions in green rectangles. 1D spectra of Holm 15A (top-right) and J004150 (bottom-left). Bottom-right: Spectral decomposition for the Mg II line of J004150 (top subpanel): original data in black, power-law continuum in blue and combined best-fit model (continuum + UV Fe II template + narrow-line component + broad-line component) in red. Individual broad-line Gaussians are the orange dashed lines and the total broad component is the orange solid line; individual narrow-line Gaussians are the green dashed lines and the total narrow component is the cyan line; Fe II template is the magenta line; lower subpanel shows residuals (gray) between the combined best-fit model and original data.

To estimate the BH mass of J004150, we used the BH virial mass estimator based on the Mg II λ2798\lambda2798 emission line:

log⁡(MBHM⊙)=a+blog⁡[L1044 erg s−1]+clog⁡[FWHM(Mg II)km s−1],(1)\log\left(\frac{M_{\mathrm{BH}}}{M_{\odot}}\right) = a + b\log\left[\frac{L}{10^{44}\ \mathrm{erg\ s}^{-1}}\right] + c\log\left[\frac{\mathrm{FWHM}(\mathrm{Mg\ II})}{\mathrm{km\ s}^{-1}}\right], \tag*{(1)}

where LL represents the continuum luminosity at λ=3000\lambda= 3000 Å, λLλ\lambda L_{\lambda}, or Mg II line luminosity, L(Mg II); FWHM is the full width at half maximum of the MgII line; coefficients values are a=1.933a = 1.933, b=0.63b = 0.63 and c=2.0c = 2.0 for L(Mg II) (Y. Shen & X. Liu [9]), and a=0.86a = 0.86, b=0.5b = 0.5 and c=2.0c = 2.0 for λLλ\lambda L_{\lambda} (M. Vestergaard & P. S. Osmer [11]). To find these parameters, we performed the spectral decomposition of the Mg II line (bottom-right panel of Figure 1) similarly to D. Zhu et al. [13]. We fit a pseudo-continuum model consisting of a power-law and the UV Fe II template (M. Vestergaard & B. M. Peterson [12]). We subtracted the pseudo-continuum from the spectrum and fitted the Mg II line with broad and narrow components in the [2690,2910][2690,2910] Å range. We modeled the broad component with multiple Gaussians, using three Gaussians (each with FWHM ≥900\ge900 km/s); for the narrow component, we used two Gaussians and checked both possibilities of doublet ratio, (2:1) for optically thin and (1:1) for optically thick. We used Astropy (A. M. Price-Whelan et al. [7]) to fit the continuum and the Mg II line profile.

To estimate the uncertainties in the parameters of Eq. (1), we performed a Monte Carlo analysis in which we randomly perturbed the original spectrum to generate 50 mock spectra. The resulting values are λLλ=0.9097±0.0072×1045\lambda L_{\lambda} = 0.9097 \pm0.0072 \times10^{45} erg/s, L(Mg II)=8.720±0.069×1042L(\mathrm{Mg\ II}) = 8.720 \pm0.069 \times10^{42} erg/s and FWHM (Mg II)=4896.9±452.9\mathrm{FWHM}\,(\mathrm{Mg\ II}) = 4896.9 \pm452.9 km/s. To estimate the uncertainty of the BH mass, we propagated the errors using Eq. (1) as:

σlog⁡MBH=(σint)2+(c σlog⁡FWHM)2+(b σlog⁡L)2(2)\sigma_{\log M_{\mathrm{BH}}} = \sqrt{(\sigma_{\mathrm{int}})^2 + (c\,\sigma_{\log\mathrm{FWHM}})^2 + (b\,\sigma_{\log L})^2} \tag*{(2)}

where σint=0.25\sigma_{\mathrm{int}} = 0.25 or 0.33 dex is the intrinsic scatter of the calibration from M. Vestergaard & P. S. Osmer [11] or Y. Shen & X. Liu [9], respectively; σlog⁡L\sigma_{\log L} is the uncertainty in λLλ\lambda L_{\lambda} or L(Mg II)L(\mathrm{Mg\ II}) and σlog⁡FWHM\sigma_{\log\mathrm{FWHM}} is the FWHM(Mg II) uncertainty.

Results and Discussion

We found that J004140 is a background quasar at z=1.56386±0.00397z = 1.56386 \pm0.003972, measured using CIV λ1549\lambda1549, HeII λ1640\lambda1640, CIII] λ1909\lambda1909 and MgII λ2798\lambda2798 lines (bottom-left panel of Figure 1); our redshift results improved over J. P. Madrid [4].

For Holm 15A, we report z=0.05565±0.00052z = 0.05565 \pm0.00052 using HαH_{\alpha}, HβH_{\beta}, Mg, and Na D lines (top-right panel of Figure 1), in agreement with O. López-Cruz et al. [3]. These results clearly rule out O. López-Cruz et al. suggestion that J004140 is a BH ejected from the nucleus of Holm 15A.

We obtained a SMBH mass for J004150 of log⁡(MBH/M⊙)=8.72±0.26\log(M_{\mathrm{BH}}/M_{\odot}) = 8.72 \pm0.26 utilizing the M. Vestergaard & P. S. Osmer [11] calibration. Since our spectrum ends at λrest∼2930\lambda_{\mathrm{rest}} \sim2930 Å, which prevented a direct measurement of the continuum at 3000Å, we implemented an extrapolation according to Y. Shen et al. [10]; thus, we independently calculated the mass using the Y. Shen & X. Liu [9] relation, obtaining log⁡(MBH/M⊙)=8.65±0.34\log(M_{\mathrm{BH}}/M_{\odot}) = 8.65 \pm0.34. The agreement between both estimates confirms the consistency in the SMBH masses.

Given recent observations reporting overmassive BHs at high redshift (e.g., [e.g. 1]), BH mass estimates in quasars at intermediate redshift become relevant for constraining evolution models of galaxies.

Acknowledgments

This work is based on observations using GTC at the Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos of the IAC.

References

  1. [1]Chon, S., Hirano, S., Ishiyama, T., Chang, S.-J., & Springel, V. 2026, Nature, 657, 621, doi: 10.1038/s41586-026-10985-8DOI
  2. [2]Hoffman, L., & Loeb, A. 2007, MNRAS, 377, 957, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11694.xDOI
  3. [3]López-Cruz, O., Añorve, C., Birkinshaw, M., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 795, L31, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/795/2/L31
  4. [4]Madrid, J. P. 2021, PASP, 133, 014101, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/abc901DOI
  5. [5]Mehrgan, K., Thomas, J., Saglia, R., et al. 2019, ApJ, 887, 195, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5856DOI
  6. [7]Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., Earl, N., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74
  7. [8]Richards, G. T., Myers, A. D., Gray, A. G., et al. 2009, ApJS, 180, 67, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/180/1/67DOI
  8. [9]Shen, Y., & Liu, X. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 753, 125, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/753/2/125DOI
  9. [10]Shen, Y., Richards, G. T., Strauss, M. A., & et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 194, 45, doi: 10.1088/0067-0032/194/2/45
  10. [11]Vestergaard, M., & Osmer, P. S. 2009, ApJ, 699, 800, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/699/1/800DOI
  11. [12]Vestergaard, M., & Peterson, B. M. 2005, ApJ, 625, 688, doi: 10.1086/429791DOI
  12. [13]Zhu, D., Sun, M., & Wang, T. 2017, ApJ, 843, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa76e7DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_jfptn5me
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 10

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Physics and Astronomy

Not recorded for this paper · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents