2010
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15764.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The relative growth of optical and radio quasars in SDSS

Abstract: We cross‐correlate the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release 3 quasar sample with Faint Images of the Radio Sky at Twenty centimetres (FIRST) and the Vestergaard et al. black hole (BH) mass sample to compare the mean accretion histories of optical and radio quasars. We find significant statistical evidence that radio quasars have a higher mean Eddington ratio λ at z > 2 with respect to optical quasars, while the situation is clearly reverse at z < 1. At z > 2, radio quasars happen to be less massive than optic… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
24
3

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 127 publications
(272 reference statements)
3
24
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Our results (Figures 23-25) lead us to a very different conclusion than that of Shankar et al (2010; using much of the same data), who find that high-redshift RL quasars have high L L Edd , while low-redshift RL quasars have low L L Edd . We would argue instead that to reconcile the low-redshift and highredshift quasars the RL quasar masses at high-z are too low by as much 0.5 dex or more and not simply by~0.2-0.3 dex as is usually assumed.…”
Section: Mass Accretion Rate and Spincontrasting
confidence: 80%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our results (Figures 23-25) lead us to a very different conclusion than that of Shankar et al (2010; using much of the same data), who find that high-redshift RL quasars have high L L Edd , while low-redshift RL quasars have low L L Edd . We would argue instead that to reconcile the low-redshift and highredshift quasars the RL quasar masses at high-z are too low by as much 0.5 dex or more and not simply by~0.2-0.3 dex as is usually assumed.…”
Section: Mass Accretion Rate and Spincontrasting
confidence: 80%
“…Otherwise, these trends would suggest an unlikely situation whereby high-redshift and low-redshift quasars have their radio properties governed by two different process, where the switch just happens to occur at redshifts where the BH mass estimates transition from using Mg II to using C IV. Specifically, high-redshift RL quasars would have to have high L L Edd , while low-redshift RL quasars have low L L Edd (see, Shankar et al 2010). Thus, this issue is not just a matter for our analysis but speaks to the broader problem of the use of BH masses estimated from C IV emission lines.…”
Section: Bh Mass and Accretion Ratementioning
confidence: 99%
“…These parameters of FBQS 1312 + 23, viz. the BH mass and the Eddington luminosity ratio, are within the distributions found for radioloud quasars at z = 1.5 (Shankar et al 2010). However, the Eddington luminosity ratio of the source is significantly higher than the mean log λ = −0.4 (or λ ≈ 0.4) for the corresponding BH mass, or the mean log λ = −0.9 (or λ ≈ 0.125) for the corresponding redshift (Shankar et al 2010, their Figure 4).…”
Section: Bh Mass and Eddington Luminosity Ratiosupporting
confidence: 82%
“…Further increasing the local mass density by a factor of a few, as suggested by the current estimates of the local M bh -M bulge relation, would imply a radiative efficiency proportionally lower (Novak 2013), forcing the accretion models towards somewhat extreme scenarios such as frequent radiatively inefficient accretion and/or large fractions of heavily obscured, Compton-thick active galaxies (Comastri et al 2015). In contrast, a high radiative efficiency would imply that most of the local black holes are spinning rapidly, suggesting that spin may not be the only parameter controlling radio loudness in AGN, in line with many other, independent lines of evidence (e.g., Sikora et al 2007;Shankar et al 2008Shankar et al , 2010bShankar et al , 2016.…”
Section: Direct Implications Of the Bias In The Observed Scaling Relamentioning
confidence: 81%