Paper detail

Scaling relations between black holes and their host galaxies: comparing theoretical and observational measurements, and the impact of selection effects

We use the high-resolution simulation MassiveBlackII to examine scaling relations between black hole mass (MBH) and host galaxy properties (sigma, M*, and LV), finding good agreement with observational data, especially at the high-mass end. The simulations have less intrinsic scatter than observations, and the MBH-LV correlation has the largest scatter, suggesting it may the the least fundamental of the three relations. We find Gaussian scatter about all three relations, except among the highest mass galaxies, which host more massive black holes. Below z~2 the slopes for the full population remain roughly z-independent, and only steepen by 50% by z~4. The normalization of the sigma, LV relations evolve by 0.3, 0.43 dex, while the MBH correlation does not evolve to at least z~2. Testing for selection biases, we find samples selected by MBH or M* have steeper slopes than randomly selected samples. If unaccounted for, such a selection function would find faster evolution than inferred from a randomly selected sample, as objects at the highend of the relation tend to evolve more rapidly. We find a potential bias among high-LBH subsamples (tending to reside in higher mass galaxies), but these bright-AGN exhibit no intrinsic bias relative to fainter ones in equivalent-mass hosts, nor is there a significant difference between active- and inactive-samples. Finally we characterize the evolution of individual black holes along the scaling planes. Below the local relation, black holes grow faster than their host (72% of black holes 0.3 dex below the mean relation have a MBH-M* trajectory steeper than the local relation), while those above have shallower trajectories (only 14% are steeper than local). Black holes tend to grow faster than their hosts until surpassing the local relation, at which point their growth is suppressed while their hosts continue to grow, returning them to the mean relation.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors2 topics

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.