Paper detail

Do the Most Massive Black Holes at $z=2$ Grow via Major Mergers?

The most frequently proposed model for the origin of quasars holds that the high accretion rates seen in luminous active galactic nuclei are primarily triggered during major mergers between gas-rich galaxies. While plausible for decades, this model has only begun to be tested with statistical rigor in the past few years. Here we report on a Hubble Space Telescope study to test this hypothesis for $z=2$ quasars with high super-massive black hole masses ($M_\mathrm{BH}=10^9-10^{10}~M_\odot{}$), which dominate cosmic black hole growth at this redshift. We compare Wide Field Camera 3 $F160W$ (rest-frame $V$-band) imaging of 19 point source-subtracted quasar hosts to a matched sample of 84 inactive galaxies, testing whether the quasar hosts have greater evidence for strong gravitational interactions. Using an expert ranking procedure, we find that the quasar hosts are uniformly distributed within the merger sequence of inactive galaxies, with no preference for quasars in high-distortion hosts. Using a merger/non-merger cutoff approach, we recover distortion fractions of $f_\mathrm{m,qso}=0.39\pm{}0.11$ for quasar hosts and $f_\mathrm{m,gal}=0.30\pm{}0.05$ for inactive galaxies (distribution modes, 68% confidence intervals), with both measurements subjected to the same observational conditions and limitations. The slight enhancement in distorted fraction for quasar hosts over inactive galaxies is not significant, with a probability that the quasar fraction is higher of $P(f_\mathrm{m,qso}>f_\mathrm{m,gal}) = 0.78$ ($0.78\,σ$), in line with results for lower mass and lower $z$ AGN. We find no evidence that major mergers are the primary triggering mechanism for the massive quasars that dominate accretion at the peak of cosmic quasar activity.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access14 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.