2009
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/200911639
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

X-ray narrow line region variability as a geometry probe

Abstract: We study the long time scale variability of the gas responsible for the X-ray narrow emission lines in the Seyfert 1 galaxy NGC 5548, in order to constrain the location and geometry of the emitting gas. Using X-ray spectra taken with the Chandra−LETGS and HETGS instruments and with XMM−Newton RGS and combining them with long-term monitoring observations of the Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (RXTE), we perform a correlation analysis in order to try to constrain the time scale on which the narrow line emitting gas … 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

11
31
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

4
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
11
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, Peterson et al (2013) measure a size for the [O III]-emitting region of 1−3 pc based on emission-line variability, consistent with the photoionization prediction of Kraemer et al (1998). Similarly, Detmers et al (2009) estimate a radius of 1−15 pc for the X-ray NLR.…”
Section: Agn Emission Featuressupporting
confidence: 61%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…However, Peterson et al (2013) measure a size for the [O III]-emitting region of 1−3 pc based on emission-line variability, consistent with the photoionization prediction of Kraemer et al (1998). Similarly, Detmers et al (2009) estimate a radius of 1−15 pc for the X-ray NLR.…”
Section: Agn Emission Featuressupporting
confidence: 61%
“…The rest wavelengths were all taken from the internal  line list. Table 6 also shows which of these narrow lines have been previously detected in NGC 5548 (Kaastra et al 2002;Steenbrugge et al 2005;Detmers et al 2009). …”
Section: Narrow Emission Line Parametersmentioning
confidence: 84%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…This is both because of cross-calibration issues between the instruments and of differences in the analysis. In particular, as noticed also in U15, RGS and EPIC-pn are mismatched in flux in the overlapping band as a function of energy (e.g., Detmers et al 2009). On the other hand, NuSTAR spectra are systematically steeper than EPIC-pn spectra (∆Γ ∼ 0.1 see Cappi et al, in prep).…”
Section: The Short-term Variabilitymentioning
confidence: 59%