UVOptical Detections of Candidate Tidal Disruption Events by

UV/Optical Detections of Candidate Tidal Disruption Events by GALEX and CFHTLS GEZARIET AL. 2007

SMBH Mass Function § How are SMBH masses derived? § § § OIII kinematics – M-σ* Relations with bulge mass / luminosity – M-L* Reverberation mapping Only good for nearby (or bright) stuff Only good if active § Outstanding questions § § How do they coevolve with their hosts? How does mass scale with redshift?

Tidal Disruption § § Magorrian & Tremaine predict 103 -105 yrs between events For too large a mass, RT < RS § Can use t. D to constrain MBH § § Aquire t. D from power-law decay in consumption rate (n=5/3)

Previous Candidates § NGC 4552 has a “mini-AGN” § In 1995 experienced UV flare L ~ 1039 ergs/s § ROSAT (1990 -91) detected several soft X-ray flares § § § L ~ 1042 – 1044 ergs/s No previous AGN activities in hosts Derived rate of 10 -5 yr-1 per galaxy § Agrees with Magorrian & Tremaine rate

Searching for New Candidates § GALEX DIS § § Optical counterparts in CFHTLS 80 deg 2 coverage (0. 02 sr) § Rule out hard X-ray emitters (AGNs) § Must rule out type II SNe § Fit to power law decay (n=5/3, monotonic) § Find t. D => MBH

Ruled Out UV Outbursts

Ruled Out Type II SNe

Candidate D 1 -9 § BC 03 fits early-type galaxy at z=0. 326

Candidate D 1 -9

Candidate D 3 -13

Candidate D 3 -13

Black Hole Masses

Spectral Energy Densities

Things I Did Not Cover § The full energy argument getting to MBH § Expected detection rates