HST/WFPC2 Survey of Extended [OIII] Emission in Seyfert GalaxiesHenrique R. Schmitt – NRAO Robert Antonucci – UCSB Cathie Clarke - Cambridge Jennifer Donley – University of Arizona John Hutchings – DAO Anne L. Kinney – NASA Jim Pringle - Cambridge Jim Ulvestad – NRAO
HST/WFPC2 Survey of Extended [OIII] Emission in Seyfert Galaxies
Henrique R. Schmitt – NRAO Robert Antonucci – UCSB Cathie Clarke - Cambridge Jennifer Donley – University of Arizona John Hutchings – DAO Anne L. Kinney – NASA Jim Pringle - Cambridge Jim Ulvestad – NRAO
Urry & Padovani (1995)
Unification Issues
The Unified Models have already passed several tests and it is now accepted to be correct, at least to 1st order, but may require a few changes. Several contradictory results challenged this model, like the detection of higher radio luminosities and molecular CO in Seyfert 2's than in Seyfert 1's. Another contradictory result was the detection of a higher percentage of Seyfert 2's with nuclear dust lanes. However, when analysed in detail, we find that these results were due to selection effects, which emphasizes the importance of using a sample selected based on isotropic properties when comparing the properties of Seyfert 1's and 2's.
Comparing Luminosities and Morphological type of Seyferts
We find no difference in the distribution of 60m and 3.6cm luminosities of Seyfert 1's and 2's. They also have similar distributions of morphological types.
Schmitt & Kinney (1996)
According to this simple picture, the Narrow Line Region of Seyfert 1’s should be halo like, while Seyfert 2’s should look like cones.
Disk distribution with observer seeing inside cone (Sy 1) outside cone (Sy 2)
The 60m Sample
In a series of papers (Schmitt et al. 2000,2001,2003, Kinney et al. 2000), we addressed several of these issues, using a sample of Seyferts selected based on a mostly isotropic property, the 60m luminosity. We used the warm infrared sample from de Grijp et al. (1987, 1992), which was selected by m luminosity and is mostly unbiased to orientation (29 Sy 1 and 59 Sy 2 with z<0.031). We obtained homogeneous optical, radio and [OIII] images for these galaxies and used these dataset to analyse some of the contradictory results found in the literature.
HST [OIII] Observations
Used the HST WFPC2 Linear Ramp Filter to obtain [OIII] images for 45 galaxies in the de Grijp et al. (1987) sample. Combined these observations with another 15 galaxies available in the HST archive, observed in a similar way. The Linear Ramp Filter gives a resolution of 0.1" and a field of view of 13". Observations were done in snapshot mode, which resulted in integration times of 10 to 15 minutes on the line and ~1 minute in the continuum. Solved the problem of the small number of Sy 1’s with [OIII] data in the HST archive. Also, both Seyfert types have similar properties and detection limits, the observed galaxies are indistinguishable from the parent sample.
IC5063 IRAS03106-0254
Seyfert 2’s
MRK590 MRK79
Seyfert 1’s
MCG+8-11-11 Before and After COSTAR
WFPC2 WF/PCI
NLR Size and Shape
KS test prob. of 90% and 2.3% of being drawn from same population Sy2 Sy1 Sy2 Sy1
Opening angle
NLR Concentration
KS test prob. of 0.1% and 0.5% of being drawn from same population Sy2 Sy1 Sy2 Sy1 Sy2 Sy1
NLR Radius-Luminosity Relation
Photoionization by a central source should produce such a relation. Use the [OIII] luminosity as a tracer of the AGN luminosity. Bennert et al. (2002) find that Rmaj L([OIII])0.5, which implies that the NLR can be modeled by a single ionization parameter (rate of ionizing photons at a certain distance from the central source). Contradicts other results which show that the NLR is much more complex.
Comments