Paper detail

Large-scale outflows in luminous QSOs revisited: The impact of beam smearing on AGN feedback efficiencies

[Abridged] Enormous observational efforts have been made to constrain the energetics of AGN feedback by mapping the kinematics of the ionized gas on kpc scale. We study how the observed kinematics and inferred energetics are affected by beam smearing of a bright unresolved NLR due to seeing. We analyse IFU spectroscopy of a sample of twelve QSOs initially presented by Liu et al. (2014). The PSF for the observations is directly obtained from the light distribution of the broad Hb line component. We are able to compare the ionized gas kinematics and derived energetics of the total, spatially extended, and unresolved [OIII] emission. We find that the spatially resolved [OIII] line width on kpc scales is significantly narrower than the one before PSF deblending. The ENLRs appear offset from the QSO position or more elongated which can be interpreted in favour of a conical outflow on large scales while a spherical geometry cannot be excluded for the unresolved NLR. We find that the kinetic power at 5kpc distance from the spherical model by Liu et al. (2013) is reduced by two magnitudes for a conical outflow and one magnitude for the unresolved NLR after PSF deblending. This reduced kinetic power corresponds to 0.01-0.1% of the bolometric AGN luminosity. This is smaller than the 5-10% feedback efficiency required by some simulations to reproduce the massive galaxy population. The injected momentum fluxes are close or below the simple radiation-pressure limit Lbol/c for the conical outflow model for the NLR and ENLR when beam smearing is considered. IFU spectroscopy is a powerful tool to investigate the energetics of AGN outflows, but the impact of beam smearing has to be taken into account. For the majority of observations in the literature, this has not been addressed carefully so that the incidence and energetics of presumed kpc-scale AGN-driven outflows still remain an unsolved issue.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.

Institutions

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.