1: \documentclass[12pt, preprint]{aastex}

2: %\documentclass{emulateapj}

3: \usepackage{epsf}

4: \usepackage{times}

5: \newcommand{\etal}{{et al}\/.}

6: \newcommand{\hh}{^{\rm h}}

7: \newcommand{\mm}{^{\rm m}}

8: \begin{document}

9: \slugcomment{Draft of \today}

10: \shorttitle{Multiple hotspots in radio galaxies}

11: \shortauthors{M.J.\ Hardcastle \etal}

12: \title{A {\it Chandra} study of particle acceleration in the multiple

13:   hotspots of nearby radio galaxies}

14: \author{M.J.\ Hardcastle and J.H. Croston}

15: \affil{School of Physics, Astronomy \& Mathematics, University of

16:   Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield AL10 9AB, UK}

17: \and

18: \author{R.P. Kraft}

19: \affil{Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA~02138, USA}

20: \begin{abstract}

21: \noindent We present {\it Chandra} observations of a small sample of

22: nearby classical double radio galaxies which have more than one radio

23: hotspot in at least one of their lobes. The X-ray emission from the

24: hotspots of these comparatively low-power objects is expected to be

25: synchrotron in origin, and therefore to provide information about the

26: locations of high-energy particle acceleration. In some models of the

27: relationship between the jet and hotspot the hotspots that are not the

28: current jet termination point should be detached from the energy

29: supply from the active nucleus and therefore not capable of

30: accelerating particles to high energies. We find that in fact some

31: secondary hotspots are X-ray sources, and thus probably locations for

32: high-energy particle acceleration after the initial jet termination

33: shock. In detail, though, we show that the spatial structures seen in

34: X-ray are not consistent with na\"\i ve expectations from a simple

35: shock model: the current locations of the acceleration of the

36: highest-energy observable particles in powerful radio galaxies need

37: not be coincident with the peaks of radio or even optical emission.

38: \end{abstract}

39: \keywords{galaxies: active -- X-rays: galaxies}

40: 

41: \section{Introduction}

42: \label{intro}

43: 

44: In the standard model for powerful extragalactic double radio sources

45: (also known as classical double or FRII [\citealt{fr74}]

46: sources), hotspots, the bright compact regions at the ends of the

47: source, are the visible manifestation of a strong shock as the

48: relativistic beam of energetic particles is suddenly

49: decelerated by interaction with the slow-moving or stationary plasma

50: within the radio lobes \citep[e.g.,][]{br74}. The particle

51: acceleration at these shocks determines the energy distribution of the

52: electrons (and, possibly, protons) that go on to form the large-scale

53: lobes and expand into the external medium, and so an understanding of

54: how and where it happens is essential to an understanding of the

55: dynamics and environmental impact of radio sources; in addition, the

56: strong shocks in FRIIs are often invoked as a possible region of

57: acceleration for the high-energy cosmic ray population, so that it is

58: important to understand where (and if) high-energy particles are

59: accelerated in these systems.

60: 

61: The best evidence for this shock model comes from the radio through

62: optical spectra of hotspots, which have been shown

63: \citep[e.g.,][]{mrhy89} to be commonly consistent with the predictions

64: of a simple model for shock particle acceleration and downstream

65: losses \citep{hm87}. However, the idea that the hotspots always trace

66: the shock at the jet termination is challenged by the observation that

67: the lobes of radio galaxies and quasars very frequently have more than

68: one compact bright radio feature that meets whatever definition of a

69: hotspot is in use \citep[e.g.,][]{lbdh97}. Where these appear in the

70: jet or embedded deep in the lobe they are usually interpreted as `jet

71: knots' --- the assumption encoded in this terminology is that they are

72: telling us about internal dissipation in the jet rather than

73: disruption and that they are not relevant to the particle acceleration

74: history of the source. But in many systems there are multiple hotspots

75: at the far end of the lobe, and in these the configuration of the

76: hotspots relative to the jet flow often suggests that more than one is

77: associated with the beam termination. Models to explain this

78: observation include those in which the beam end-point moves about from

79: place to place in the lobe (the `dentist's drill' model of

80: \citealt{s82}) or in which material flows out from the initial impact

81: point of the beam to impact elsewhere on the lobe edge (the

82: `splatter-spot' model of \citealt{wg85} or the jet-deflection

83: model of \citealt{lb86}). All these models predict that

84: one of the hotspots, the one associated with the first or current

85: termination of the jet, should be more compact than the other or

86: others; it is in fact observed in the radio that where jets are

87: explicitly seen to terminate, they always do so in the most compact,

88: `primary' hotspot \citep[e.g.,][]{lbdh97,hapr97}.

89: But it is very difficult to distinguish between different models of

90: multiple hot spot formation using radio data alone. The secondary

91: (less compact) hotspots exhibit a wide variety of structures and

92: relationships to the primary hotspots, and, while in some cases radio

93: structure seems to favor one model rather than another, the nature of

94: the secondaries is never unambiguously constrained by single-frequency

95: radio data. One area in which different models {\it do} make different

96: predictions is that of the high-energy particle acceleration in the

97: secondary (less compact) hotspots. If these are relics left behind by

98: the motion of the jet, as in the `dentist's drill' model, then in

99: general we expect shock-driven particle acceleration to have ceased

100: (though the secondary hotspot may continue to be fed for some time if

101: the jet is disconnected some way upstream: \citealt{cgs91}).

102: Synchrotron losses will then deplete the high-energy electrons in the

103: secondary hotspot. If secondary hotspots continue to be fed by outflow

104: from the primary hotspot, then there is still an energy supply and

105: particle acceleration will continue to operate.

106: 

107: High-resolution X-ray observations of synchrotron radiation with {\it

108: Chandra} have provided key insights into the particle acceleration in

109: the jets of low-power, FRI-type radio galaxies, allowing us to locate

110: the sites of particle acceleration and relate them to the dynamics of

111: individual jets \citep[e.g.][]{hwkf03}. X-ray observations are

112: vital in these cases because the synchrotron loss timescale for

113: X-ray-emitting electrons is tens of years, assuming field strengths

114: close to the equipartition values: thus, unlike

115: radio and even optical observations of synchrotron radiation, X-ray

116: synchrotron detections tell us where particle acceleration is

117: happening {\it now}, rather than where it has happened in the past. To

118: date, however, it has been difficult to use X-ray observations to

119: study particle acceleration in the hotspots of the more powerful FRII

120: radio sources, because of the importance in hotspots of a second

121: emission process, inverse-Compton emission. This process, particularly

122: important in bright, compact hotspots, traces the low-energy electrons

123: rather than the high-energy ones, and has been the subject of much

124: work with {\it Chandra} because of its potential to measure physical

125: conditions (magnetic field strengths and energy densities) in hotspots

126: \citep*[see, e.g.,][]{hnpb00,hbw01,bbcp01}. Some hotspots have been known since the {\it ROSAT} epoch to be

127: best described by a synchrotron rather than inverse-Compton model

128: \citep*[e.g.][]{hll98} but until recently it has not been clear

129: what controls the relative dominance of the two processes. Based on

130: new and archival observations of a large sample of FRIIs, we recently

131: showed \citep{hhwb04} that the controlling parameter is

132: related to the overall {\it luminosity} of the hotspot:

133: high-luminosity hotspots never show X-ray synchrotron emission, while

134: low-luminosity hotspots often do. We argued that this is due to the

135: higher magnetic field strengths and photon energy densities found in

136: the more luminous hotspots: these increase the energy loss rate for

137: high-energy electrons and prevent efficient particle acceleration to

138: the energies needed for X-ray synchrotron radiation. In contrast,

139: low-luminosity hotspots can readily accelerate particles to X-ray

140: emitting energies, and the expected inverse-Compton emission is

141: negligible, so that synchrotron radiation is dominant in these

142: systems. It is important to note that this picture, while

143: qualitatively plausible, relies on details of the microphysics, such

144: as the magnetic field configuration and electron diffusion coefficient

145: in the acceleration region \citep[see, e.g.,][]{bmpv03} and so it

146: cannot yet be shown quantitatively to be correct.

147: 

148: If this model is accepted, though, X-ray synchrotron emission can be

149: used to probe high-energy particle acceleration in low-luminosity FRII

150: radio galaxies. An example of this is provided by observations of the

151: low-power FRII 3C\,403 \citep{khwm05}. These observations were

152: important for two reasons. Firstly, as 3C\,403 is a narrow-line radio

153: galaxy, any relativistic beaming effects (of the kind thought to be

154: important in some core-dominated quasars) must be minimal if unified

155: models are correct, as 3C\,403 should lie close to the plane of the

156: sky: thus, models for anomalous X-ray emission involving beaming, like

157: those of \citet{gk03}, need not be considered. Secondly, 3C\,403's E

158: lobe is a multiple-hotspot system, and the observations show a clear

159: difference between features of the jet and the primary hotspot, on the

160: one hand, and the secondary hotspot (much brighter in the radio), on

161: the other: we found that the upper limit on the X-ray emission from

162: the secondary was an order of magnitude below what would have been

163: detected if its X-ray to radio ratio had been the same as that in the

164: primary. This strongly suggests that, in this source at least, the

165: secondary hotspot is unable to accelerate particles to the highest

166: observable energies.

167: 

168: The results of our work on 3C\,403 motivated us to carry out further

169: observations of nearby sources with multiple hotspots, and to examine

170: data available in the {\it Chandra} archive, with the aim of seeing

171: whether, and in what circumstances, the different hotspot components

172: can give rise to high-energy particle acceleration, and so

173: constraining the nature of multiple hotspots. In this paper we report

174: on our results.

175: 

176: Throughout the paper we use a cosmology with $H_0 = 70$ km s$^{-1}$

177: Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_{\rm m} = 0.3$ and $\Omega_\Lambda = 0.7$. The

178: spectral index $\alpha$ is defined in the sense that flux density

179: $\propto \nu^{-\alpha}$: the relationship between the spectral index

180: $\alpha$ and the photon index $\Gamma$ is thus $\Gamma = \alpha + 1$.

181: 

182: \section{Observations}

183: 

184: \subsection{Sample}

185: 

186: We selected our targets from the sample of Leahy \etal\ (1997:

187: hereafter L97). This sample consists of FRII radio galaxies with

188: $z<0.15$ taken from the 3CR sample (\citealt{sdma85}: see L97 for

189: details of the selection). We chose this parent sample because of its

190: low redshift (and therefore, in general, low luminosity, implying

191: negligible X-ray inverse-Compton radiation from the hotspots in the

192: picture of \citealt{hhwb04}) and because of the availability of

193: excellent radio data, with resolution matched to or exceeding that of

194: {\it Chandra}, for almost all members of the sample. From the L97

195: sample, we selected the sources with clear, well separated, bright

196: multiple hotspots as seen in the radio maps. Two of these, 3C\,390.3

197: and 3C\,403, had already been observed with {\it Chandra} (as

198: discussed in \citealt{hc05} and \citealt{khwm05}

199: respectively). We were awarded time for two more, 3C\,227 and 3C\,327,

200: giving us two broad-line and two narrow-line radio galaxies in total.

201: Basic properties of the sample objects are given in Table

202: \ref{sample}. We discuss the radio and X-ray data for these objects in

203: the following two sections.

204: 

205: \begin{table}

206: \caption{Properties of the sample of FRII sources}

207: \label{sample}

208: \begin{tabular}{lrlrrrr}

209: \hline

210: Name&$z$&Emission-line&$L_{178}$&Angular scale&Largest hotspot&$N_{\rm H}$\\

211: &&type&(W Hz$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$)&(kpc arcsec$^{-1}$)&separation (kpc)&(cm$^{-2}$)\\

212: \hline

213: 3C\,227&0.0861&BLRG&$4.7 \times 10^{25}$&1.61&17&$2.08 \times 10^{20}$\\

214: 3C\,327&0.1039&NLRG&$8.1 \times 10^{25}$&1.91&5&$6.49 \times 10^{20}$\\

215: 3C\,390.3&0.0561&BLRG&$3.1 \times 10^{25}$&1.09&28&$3.68 \times 10^{20}$\\

216: 3C\,403&0.059&NLRG&$1.9 \times 10^{25}$&1.14&4&$1.54\times 10^{21}$\\

217: \hline

218: \end{tabular}

219: \vskip 5pt

220: \begin{minipage}{15cm}

221: References for Galactic column densities used are as follows: 3C\,227,

222: \citet{jmdl85}; 3C\,327, interpolated from results of \citet{sgwb92};

223: 3C\,390.3, \citet{mlle96}; 3C\,403, from \citet{khwm05}.

224: \end{minipage}

225: \end{table}

226: 

227: \subsection{Chandra observations}

228: 

229: Details of the {\it Chandra} observations of our targets are given in

230: Table \ref{chandra-obs}.

231: 

232: All {\it Chandra} observations were taken with the ACIS-S array with

233: the aimpoint, as standard, on the S3 chip. For 3C\,403 and 3C\,390.3

234: the nucleus was positioned near the aimpoint. However, for 3C\,227 and

235: 3C\,327, our new targets, the (brighter) double hotspots were placed

236: near the aimpoint. This had the effect that the sources spanned

237: multiple {\it Chandra} chips. 3C\,227 and 3C\,327 were also observed

238: in Very Faint (VF) mode to reduce the background levels, while

239: 3C\,390.3 and 3C\,403 were observed in Faint (F) mode. The

240: observations of 3C\,227 were split into two segments for scheduling

241: reasons.

242: 

243: \begin{table}

244: \caption{{\it Chandra} observations used in this paper}

245: \label{chandra-obs}

246: \begin{tabular}{lrlrrl}

247: \hline

248: Source&Obs. ID&Date&Obs. time (ks)&Filtered livetime (ks)&Obs. mode\\

249: \hline

250: 3C\,390.3&830&2000 Apr 17&36.2&29.4&F\\

251: 3C\,403&2968&2002 Dec 07&50.5&44.8&F\\

252: 3C\,227&7265&2006 Jan 11&21.8&21.8&VF\\

253:        &6842&2006 Jan 15&31.2&31.2&VF\\

254: 3C\,327&6841&2006 Apr 26&40.2&40.2&VF\\

255: \hline

256: \end{tabular}

257: \end{table}

258: 

259: We did not re-analyse the data for 3C\,403, as all the relevant

260: measurements had already been made \citep{khwm05}. For the other

261: three sources we re-processed the {\it Chandra} data with the latest

262: versions of {\sc ciao} and {\sc caldb} at the time of writing

263: (versions 3.3 and 3.2.3 respectively), following the standard {\sc

264: ciao} procedures. We removed the 0.5-pixel event position

265: randomization (since high spatial resolution is important to us) and

266: applied VF mode cleaning to the data for 3C\,227 and 3C\,327 to

267: improve the background. Intervals of high background count rate were

268: detected in the data for 3C\,390.3 using the {\it analyze\_ltcrv.sl}

269: script, and we removed these by time filtering the data.

270: 

271: The subsequent data analysis was carried out in {\sc ciao} and {\sc

272: xspec}. In what follows we present images in the 0.5--5.0 keV

273: passband, and carry out spectroscopy in the 0.4--7.0 keV band, unless

274: otherwise stated. The {\it specextract} script was used for spectral

275: extraction for extended sources, and the {\it psextract} script for

276: point sources. Spectral fits quoted for 3C\,227 are the results of

277: joint fitting to the data from both observations unless otherwise

278: stated. All errors quoted are $1\sigma$ for one interesting parameter.

279: The effects of the Galactic column density quoted in Table

280: \ref{sample} are included in all X-ray spectral fits.

281: 

282: \subsection{Radio data}

283: 

284: We have access to electronic versions of the maps of these sources

285: from \citet{bblp92} and \citet{lbdh97}. We made

286: radio maps using archival data at other frequencies where the existing

287: images were not adequate for our purposes. We also re-reduced the

288: 8-GHz A-configuration data used by \citeauthor{bblp92} for imaging of

289: 3C\,227, as the high-resolution maps available to us were sub-images

290: that did not show the core. Details of the radio data

291: we used are given in Table \ref{vlaobs}. All of the radio data was

292: reduced in {\sc aips} in the standard manner: individual datasets were

293: first self-calibrated and then cross-calibrated and merged with

294: appropriate weights to give a final multi-source dataset that was used

295: for imaging. Where maps at more than one resolution were required, we

296: applied appropriate tapering to the $uv$ plane in the imaging process.

297: Except where otherwise stated, maps used in the figures were made for

298: this paper.

299: 

300: \begin{table}

301: \caption{VLA data reduced for this paper}

302: \label{vlaobs}

303: \begin{tabular}{lrlllr}

304: \hline

305: Source&Frequency&VLA obs. id.&Configuration&Obs. date&Time on source\\

306: &(GHz)&&&&(h)\\

307: \hline

308: 3C\,227&8.3&AB534&A&1990 May 25&3.0\\

309: &1.5&AS659&A&1999 Jul 10&1.1\\

310: &1.5&AS677&B&2000 Jan 29&1.5\\

311: &1.5&AZ28&C&1985 Sep 16&0.4\\[4pt]

312: 3C\,327&1.5&AB376&A&1986 Mar 11&0.2\\

313: &1.5&AB376&B&1986 Aug 18&0.2\\

314: &1.5&AP77&C&1984 Apr 23&0.4\\[4pt]

315: 3C\,390.3&5.0&VP88G&B&1989 Apr 17&10.4\\

316: &5.0&AS542&C&1994 Nov 27&0.9\\

317: \hline

318: \end{tabular}

319: \end{table}

320: 

321: As detailed comparison between the radio and X-ray spatial structures

322: of the hotspots is important to us, we aligned the radio and X-ray

323: frames for all the sources by shifting the X-ray nuclear position to

324: match the best available radio position. Where there were significant

325: offsets between the radio core positions at different frequencies, we

326: shifted the low-frequency positions to match the high-frequency ones.

327: We expect the relative astrometry of the radio and X-ray frames to be

328: limited by the accuracy of X-ray centroiding, but in all cases it

329: should be better than $\sim 0.1''$. 3C\,390.3 is a special case, as

330: extreme pileup has removed all counts from the center of the nuclear

331: X-ray emission: we still believe that we have been able to determine

332: the X-ray position to the required level of accuracy, and in this case

333: the default astrometry of the {\it Chandra} data appears to be correct.

334: 

335: For radio data, resolutions are quoted as the major $\times$ minor

336: axis (FWHM) of the elliptical restoring Gaussian: where only one

337: dimension is quoted the restoring beam used was constrained to be

338: circular.

339: 

340: \section{Results}

341: 

342: \subsection{Non-hotspot X-rays in 3C\,227 and 3C\,327}

343: 

344: In this subsection we briefly comment on the features of the new {\it

345: Chandra} observations of 3C\,227 and 3C\,327 unrelated to the

346: hotspots. The {\it Chandra} observations of the other sample sources

347: have been discussed elsewhere \citep[see][]{khwm05,hhwb04,hc05,ewhk06}.

348: 

349: Images showing the large-scale X-ray emission from the two objects are

350: shown in Figs \ref{227-l} and \ref{327-l}.

351: 

352: \begin{figure}

353: \epsfxsize 16cm

354: \epsfbox{f1.eps}

355: \caption{Large-scale X-ray emission from 3C\,227. Background point

356:   sources and the central bright core (but not the hotspots) have been

357:   masked out and the resulting exposure-corrected image in the 0.5-5.0 keV passband

358:   smoothed with a Gaussian with FWHM $18\farcs5$. Overlaid are

359:   contours from our $4''$-resolution radio map at 1.5 GHz at $1 \times

360:   (1,2,4\dots)$ mJy beam$^{-1}$.}

361: \label{227-l}

362: \end{figure}

363: 

364: \begin{figure}

365: \epsfxsize 16cm

366: \epsfbox{f2.eps}

367: \caption{Large-scale X-ray emission from 3C\,327. Background point

368:   sources and the central bright core (but not the hotspots) have been

369:   masked out and the resulting exposure-corrected image in the 0.5-5.0 keV passband

370:   smoothed with a Gaussian with FWHM $18\farcs5$. Overlaid are

371:   contours from our $6''$-resolution radio map at 1.5 GHz at $2 \times

372:   (1,2,4\dots)$ mJy beam$^{-1}$.}

373: \label{327-l}

374: \end{figure}

375: 

376: \subsubsection{Cores}

377: 

378: The raw {\it Chandra} count rate from the core of the BLRG 3C\,227 is

379: roughly 0.14 s$^{-1}$: with a frame time of 3.1 s, this means that we

380: might expect it to be affected by pileup at a significant

381: level\footnote{http://cxc.harvard.edu/proposer/POG/html/ACIS.html}.

382: Fitting to the total spectrum of the nucleus within 15 {\it Chandra}

383: pixels (7 arcsec), using a concentric adjacent background annulus, we

384: found a good fit ($\chi^2 = 228$ for 213 d.o.f.) to a model consisting

385: of two power laws, one with Galactic absorption only and one with

386: additional intrinsic absorption at the redshift of the source. The

387: power-law component without intrinsic absorption had a steep

388: best-fitting photon index ($\Gamma = 3.4_{-0.2}^{+0.6}$) while the

389: absorbed component, with $N_{\rm H,int} = (1.4 \pm 0.1) \times

390: 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$, had a very flat photon index, $\Gamma = 0.73 \pm

391: 0.06$. The data are almost equally well fitted ($\chi^2 = 231/214$)

392: with an ionized absorber model ({\sc absori}) but this has clear

393: residuals at soft energies, suggesting that in any event some of the

394: soft X-ray emission must come from a second nuclear X-ray component,

395: or from soft thermal X-ray emission close to the nucleus. This is

396: unsurprising as we know that in general radio-loud AGN have a soft

397: X-ray component which is probably related to the jet

398: \citep*[e.g.,][]{hec06}. The significant intrinsic absorption seen

399: here, although unusual for a broad-line object, is consistent with

400: what is seen in some other BLRG or quasars (e.g. 3C\,109,

401: \citealt{afii97}, \citealt{hec06}; 3C\,351, \citealt{nfpe99},

402: \citealt{hbch02}). From optical spectropolarimetry \citet{cotg99}

403: estimate that the optical broad lines and continuum may be obscured by

404: 1-2 magnitudes in the $V$ band. Although our column density would

405: imply substantially higher extinction, $A_V \sim 6$ for Galactic

406: gas/dust ratios, the optical results, including the detection of

407: polarized broad emission lines, give us some additional reason for

408: believing that there might be intrinsic X-ray absorption in this

409: source.

410: 

411: The very flat photon index of the absorbed component is likely to be

412: partly the result of pileup, and to investigate this we also extracted

413: a spectrum for an annular region between 2 and 15 {\it Chandra}

414: pixels, with the same background region. This excludes the region

415: where pileup is likely to be significant. We applied energy-dependent

416: corrections to the ARF using the algorithm of the {\sc arfcorr}

417: software\footnote{http://agyo.rikkyo.ac.jp/$\sim$tsujimot/arfcorr.html}

418: implemented using the {\sc funtools} package. Fitting the same double

419: power-law spectrum, we find similar parameters --- the slightly larger

420: intrinsic absorbing column ($1.7_{-0.3}^{+0.5} \times 10^{22}$

421: cm$^{-2}$) is consistent within the errors --- and only a slightly

422: steeper photon index for the absorbed component, $0.91 \pm 0.18$.

423: However, the 99\% confidence upper limit on the photon index in this

424: extraction region (which obviously contains only a small fraction of

425: the total counts) is 2.4, so more typical photon indices are certainly

426: not excluded by the non-piled up data.

427: \label{227-core}

428: 

429: \citet{cf95}, who discuss observations of 3C\,227 with

430: the {\it ROSAT} PSPC , found that the nuclear spectrum was well fitted

431: by a power-law model with $\Gamma \sim 1.5$. With the limited signal

432: to noise of their {\it ROSAT} data and the restricted energy range of

433: the PSPC it is not clear that they could have identified the

434: absorption features seen in our spectrum.

435: 

436: For 3C\,327, which has a much fainter X-ray nucleus, we extracted a spectrum

437: from a source circle of radius 4 {\it Chandra} pixels (2 arcsec) with

438: an adjacent concentric background annulus. The best-fitting spectrum

439: ($\chi^2 = 35$ for 21 d.o.f.) again requires multiple components: at

440: soft energies the source is dominated by an unabsorbed power law with

441: $\Gamma = 3.07 \pm 0.15$, while the residuals at high energy require

442: an additional heavily absorbed power law, with the poorly constrained

443: $\Gamma$ fixed at 1.7 \citep[following][]{hec06} and $N_{\rm

444: H,int} = (6_{-2}^{+5}) \times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$, together with a strong

445: line-like feature modeled as a Gaussian with $E = 6.42 \pm 0.05$ keV

446: and $\sigma = 0.19 \pm 0.08$ keV. Except for the 

447: steep power law index for the unabsorbed component, this is a typical spectrum

448: for a narrow-line radio galaxy: iron features around 6.4 keV are often

449: found in these objects (\citealt*{sem99}; \citealt{ewhk06}; \citealt{hec06}). 

450: 

451: \subsubsection{Lobes}

452: 

453: The lobes of 3C\,227 are both clearly detected in the {\it Chandra}

454: observations (Fig. \ref{227-l}). Extended X-ray emission from lobes of

455: radio sources is generally attributed to inverse-Compton scattering

456: from the microwave background radiation (CMB)

457: \citep{hbch02,ks05,chhb05}. We extracted a spectrum for the W lobe, as

458: the E lobe spans a chip boundary, using a polygonal extraction region

459: defined by the radio emission but excluding the central part of the

460: lobe where the nucleus and central extended X-ray emission might

461: contribute, as well as compact sources, including the hotspots. The

462: spectrum was well fitted ($\chi^2 = 10.6$ for 10 d.o.f.) with a

463: power-law model with $\Gamma = 1.77 \pm 0.26$ and 1-keV unabsorbed

464: flux density of $4.8 \pm 0.5$ nJy. We used the code of \citet*{hbw98}

465: to calculate the predicted inverse-Compton emission from the whole

466: lobe, modeling the lobe crudely as a uniform cylinder with length

467: $98''$ and radius $26''$, assuming equipartition, and using the same

468: electron spectral assumptions as \citet{chhb05}, with a low-energy

469: electron energy index (`injection index'), $p$, of 2. The

470: equipartition magnetic field strength is 0.58 nT; the predicted

471: emission corresponds to a 1-keV flux density of 1.4 nJy, i.e. about a

472: factor 3.5 below what is observed. Reducing the field strength to 0.29

473: nT is required to produce all the observed X-ray emission by the

474: inverse-Compton process.

475: 

476: For 3C\,327 there is a clear detection of the E lobe and a weaker but

477: still significant detection of the W lobe. Again, we extracted a

478: spectrum for the lobe that does not span a chip boundary, in this case

479: the E lobe, excluding point sources and the components near the

480: hotspots. This was well fitted ($\chi^2 = 6.9$ for 6 d.o.f.) with a

481: power-law model with $\Gamma = 1.55 \pm 0.30$ and unabsorbed 1-keV

482: flux density of $6.4 \pm 1.1$ nJy. The inverse-Compton prediction here

483: on the same assumptions (modeling the lobe as a cylinder with length

484: $90''$ and radius $27''$) is 1.5 nJy, so again the observations exceed

485: the equipartition prediction by a factor $\sim 4$. The equipartition

486: field here is 0.73 nT and the field required to produce the observed

487: X-rays by inverse-Compton processes is 0.34 nT.

488: 

489: Both objects are thus consistent with the trend seen in many other

490: sources for the observed inverse-Compton emission to lie somewhat

491: above the equipartition, $p=2$ prediction \citep{chhb05}. We

492: know that 3C\,227's lobes are likely to make a relatively small angle

493: to the line of sight, but this makes only a small difference to the

494: inverse-Compton prediction for $\theta = 45^\circ$.

495: 

496: %\subsubsection{Extended emission}

497: %

498: %3C\,227 has a well-known large extended emission-line region (Prieto

499: %et al 1993). Such regions in more powerful objects are often

500: %associated with extended X-ray emission (Crawford \etal\ ...).

501: 

502: \section{Hotspot observations}

503: 

504: In this section we discuss the X-ray, radio and (where possible)

505: optical properties of the hotspots in our target systems. Table

506: \ref{hstable} gives a summary of the properties discussed below for

507: ease of reference.

508: 

509: \begin{deluxetable}{llllrrrrlll}

510: \tablewidth{21cm}

511: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}

512: \rotate

513: \tablecaption{Properties of the hot spot components discussed in the

514:   paper}

515: \label{hstable}

516: \tablehead{\colhead{Source}&\colhead{Lobe}&\colhead{X-ray}&\colhead{Radio}&\colhead{Offset}&\colhead{Counts}&\colhead{Photon}&\colhead{1-keV

517:   flux}&\colhead{Optical?}&\colhead{Type}&\colhead{Morphology}\\\colhead{name}&&\colhead{name}&\colhead{name}&&\colhead{(0.5-5.0

518:   keV)}&\colhead{index}&\colhead{density (nJy)}}

519: 

520: \startdata

521: 3C\,227&W&--&P1/2&$0\farcs8 \pm 0\farcs1$&$84\pm 9$&$1.63 \pm 0.22$&$1.5 \pm

522: 0.2$&Y&Primary&Resolved, flattened\\

523: &&--&P3&$2\farcs3 \pm 0\farcs2$&$19 \pm 5$&1.63&$0.3 \pm 0.1$&Y&Secondary&Resolved\\

524: &&--&P4&$0\farcs15

525: \pm 0\farcs1$&$22 \pm 5$&1.63&$0.4 \pm 0.1$&N&Jet knot?&Slightly resolved\\

526: &E&--&F1&$0\farcs5 \pm 0\farcs5$&$10\pm 3$&1.63&$0.3 \pm 0.1$&Y&Primary&Compact + diffuse\\[4pt]

527: 3C\,327&E&SX1&S1?&$2\farcs4 \pm 0\farcs1$&$12 \pm 3$&1.7&$0.27 \pm 0.07$&?&Primary&Compact\\

528: &&SX2&S2?&$0\farcs8 \pm 0\farcs1$&$12 \pm 3$&1.7&$0.27 \pm 0.07$&?&Secondary&Compact\\[4pt]

529: 3C\,390.3&N&NX1&B&$0\farcs4 \pm 0\farcs1$&$164 \pm 13$&$1.95 \pm 0.15$&$4.2 \pm 0.3$&Y&Primary&2 sub-components\\

530: &&NX2&--&--&$72 \pm 9$&$2.13 \pm 0.24$&$1.9 \pm 0.2$&Y&?&Point-like\\

531: &&--&F&--&$<8$&1.95&$<0.2$&N&Secondary&No X-ray detection\\

532: &S&SX1&G$'$&$1\farcs0 \pm 0\farcs2$&$14 \pm 4$&1.4&$0.4 \pm 0.1$&N?&Primary?&Compact\\

533: &S&Diffuse&G,E,D?&--&$96 \pm 11$&$1.4 \pm 0.2$&$2.7 \pm 0.3$&Y?&Secondary&Diffuse\\[4pt]

534: 3C\,403&E&--&F1&--&$34 \pm 6$&$1.75_{-0.3}^{+0.4}$&$0.9 \pm 0.2$&Y&Primary&Resolved\\

535: &&--&F1b&--&$15 \pm 4$&2.0&$0.5\pm 0.1$&N&Jet knot?&Compact\\

536: &&--&F2&--&$<4$&2.0&$<0.13$&N&Secondary&No X-ray detection\\

537: &&--&F6&--&$83 \pm 9$&$1.7_{-0.2}^{+0.3}$&$2.3 \pm 0.2$&Y&Jet knot&Elongated\\

538: \enddata

539: \tablecomments{Column 3 gives the name we have associated with the X-ray

540:   feature. Where none is given no specific name has

541:   been assigned in the text. Column 5 gives the offset between the

542:   peak of the radio counterpart named in column 4 and the centroid of

543:   the X-ray emission: it is blank if no radio counterpart is known.

544:   The photon index in column 7 is derived from the data if an error is

545:   quoted and is the value assumed in the text otherwise. Column 8 is

546:   the 1-keV flux density, determined from the spectral fit if

547:   possible, and otherwise from the count rate using the spectral

548:   assumption specified in column 7. Column 8 describes the nature of

549:   the radio hotspot, if known. Column 9 indicates whether there

550:   is an optical counterpart to the hotspot: Y = yes, N = no, ? = not

551:   known. Column 10 describes the X-ray structure: `compact' here

552:   indicates a weak source which is consistent with being $<0\farcs5$ in

553:   extent, and may be point-like. Measured parameters

554:   for 3C\,403 are taken from \citet{khwm05}: as no significant

555:   offsets are described in that paper no values are tabulated here.}

556: \end{deluxetable}

557: 

558: 

559: \subsection{3C\,227}

560: 

561: Optical counterparts of 3C\,227's hotspots have recently been

562: discovered using ground-based observations \citep*{bmpv03,mpb03}. The

563: two components of the double W hotspot and the more compact E hotspot

564: all emit in the near-infrared. In the X-ray, similarly, emission is

565: detected from both hotspot regions, as shown in Figs \ref{227-hswl}

566: and \ref{227-hsel}. In the W hotspot X-ray emission is clearly

567: detected from the three compact components P1/2, P3 and P4, while

568: there is weak emission not just from the compact E component F1 but

569: also from the region around it. In the standard multiple hotspot

570: picture P4 would probably be designated a jet knot (cf knot F6 of

571: 3C\,403, below), P1/2 would be the primary hotspot and P3 a secondary

572: hotspot. Thus 3C\,227 is an example of a system where the secondary

573: hotspot clearly is an X-ray source. What is most striking in the W

574: hotspot region is the offsets between the peak of the radio and the

575: peak of the X-ray in the X-ray detected components. This is most

576: clearly seen in Fig.\ \ref{227-hswx}, where the X-ray emission is

577: compared with the high-resolution radio data used by \citep{bblp92}.

578: At this resolution the brightest hotspot is resolved into two

579: components (P1 and P2), and both of these are associated with some

580: X-ray emission, but the brightest X-ray emission comes from a resolved

581: structure which is comparable in size to P2 (with a long axis of $3''$

582: or 5 kpc) and the X-ray centroid of this structure is displaced

583: $0\farcs8 \pm 0\farcs1$ (1.3 kpc) in the direction of the nucleus from

584: the peak of P1. The centroid of the X-ray emission from P3 is

585: displaced by $2\farcs3\pm 0\farcs2$ (3.6 kpc) from the peak of the

586: radio emisission in the direction of P1/2. Finally, the X-ray emission

587: from P4 appears slightly displaced ($0\farcs15 \pm 0\farcs11$) from

588: the peak of the radio in the direction of P1/2, but the statistics are

589: not good enough to claim a definite offset. In contrast, the centroid

590: of the emission from F1 and its surroundings is consistent with the

591: position of the radio peak within the large errors.

592: 

593: The X-ray counterpart of P1/2 contained enough counts ($84 \pm 9$ in

594: the 0.5--5.0 keV energy range) for us to extract a spectrum, which we

595: took from a circular region with radius 6 {\it Chandra} pixels (3

596: arcsec) with background from a concentric annular region. We find a

597: good fit ($\chi^2 = 0.5$ for 3 d.o.f.) with a power-law model with

598: $\Gamma = 1.63 \pm 0.22$ and 1-keV unabsorbed flux density $1.5 \pm

599: 0.2$ nJy. The fainter hotspots P3 and P4 contain $19 \pm 5$ and $22

600: \pm 5$ net 0.5--5.0 keV counts respectively, which for the same

601: spectrum would correspond to flux densities of $0.3 \pm 0.1$ and $0.4

602: \pm 0.1$ nJy. The counterpart of the F1 hotspot, which lies on the S1

603: chip, contains $10\pm 3$ counts in a similarly sized extraction

604: region, which corresponds to $0.3\pm 0.1$ nJy if again we assume the

605: same spectrum as seen in P1/2. 

606: 

607: \begin{figure}

608: \epsfxsize 14cm

609: \epsfbox{f3.eps}

610: \caption{The W hotspot of 3C\,227. The grayscale shows the merged

611:   0.5--5.0 keV {\it Chandra} data binned in $0\farcs246$ pixels and

612:   smoothed with a FWHM = $0\farcs5$ Gaussian. Contours are from our

613:   1.5-GHz radio map with $1\farcs5$ resolution, at $1 \times

614:   (1,2,4\dots)$ mJy beam$^{-1}$. Labels show the names of compact

615:   features in the notation of \citet{bblp92}.}

616: \label{227-hswl}

617: \end{figure}

618: 

619: \begin{figure}

620: \epsfxsize 14cm

621: \epsfbox{f4.eps}

622: \caption{The E hotspot of 3C\,227. The grayscale shows the merged

623:   0.5--5.0 keV {\it Chandra} data binned in $0\farcs246$ pixels and

624:   smoothed with a FWHM = $0\farcs5$ Gaussian. Contours are from our

625:   1.5-GHz radio map with $1\farcs5$ resolution, at $1 \times

626:   (1,2,4\dots)$ mJy beam$^{-1}$. Labels show the names of compact

627:   features in the notation of \citet{bblp92}.}

628: \label{227-hsel}

629: \end{figure}

630: 

631: \begin{figure}

632: \epsfxsize 14cm

633: \epsfbox{f5.eps}

634: \caption{The W hotspot of 3C\,227. The grayscale shows the X-ray data

635:   as in Fig.\ \ref{227-hswl}. Contours are from our 8.3-GHz radio map

636:   with $0\farcs37 \times 0\farcs22$ resolution, at $0.1 \times

637:   (1,2,4\dots)$ mJy beam$^{-1}$. Labels show the names of compact

638:   features in the notation of \citet{bblp92}.}

639: \label{227-hswx}

640: \end{figure}

641: 

642: K.-H. Mack kindly provided us with electronic versions of

643: ground-based near-infrared (NIR) images (\citealt{mpb03}, and in

644: preparation). When shifted to our radio-based co-ordinate system by

645: alignment at the peak of the optical emission from the galaxy these

646: show that the optical emission from the P1/2 region extends over both

647: the radio and X-ray peaks. In detail, though, the brightest regions of

648: NIR emission are not coincident with either radio or X-ray peaks. The

649: NIR emission disappears in between the peak of the X-ray and the peak

650: of the radio emission at P2. Similarly, the peak of the NIR emission

651: coincident with P3 agrees neither with the radio nor the X-ray peak

652: positions, though it is roughly coincident with the X-ray centroid.

653: There is no NIR counterpart of the radio/X-ray knot P4.

654: 

655: \subsection{3C\,327}

656: 

657: 3C\,327 is the only object in our sample to have no optical hotspot

658: detection: as pointed out by \citet{mpb03}, a nearby bright disk

659: galaxy makes it hard to detect potentially faint counterparts to the

660: bright double eastern radio hotspots. In the new {\it Chandra} data,

661: although there is nearby X-ray emission (Fig.\ \ref{327-l}) there is

662: no detection of a compact component corresponding to the W hotspot.

663: There is, however, a clear detection of compact components near the

664: double E hotspots (Fig. \ref{327-hsex}). Neither of the two X-ray

665: components detected bears a very obvious relation to the radio

666: structure. The component (denoted SX1) closest to the primary hotspot

667: (S1) is separated from it by $2\farcs4\pm0\farcs1$ (4.5 kpc) along the

668: line connecting S1 and the core, while the other X-ray component (SX2)

669: is at $0\farcs8 \pm 0\farcs1$ (1.5 kpc) from the nearest peak of the

670: radio emission in the S2 region, and considerably further from its

671: center, in the sense of being further away from the primary hotspot

672: than the peak of the radio emission. In DSS2 and 2MASS images SX2 is

673: close to the nearby disk galaxy, but not at its nucleus. We cannot

674: rule out the possibility that SX2 is associated with this galaxy

675: rather than with the 3C\,327 hotspot system. SX1 is further away from

676: the galaxy than SX2.

677: 

678: The two compact X-ray components each contain $12 \pm 3$ net 0.5--5.0

679: keV counts so that spectral fitting is not possible. If we assume a

680: power-law spectrum with $\Gamma = 1.7$, the observed net counts

681: correspond to flux densities of $0.27 \pm 0.07$ nJy in each component.

682: We estimated the hardness ratios of the two components (defining the

683: soft band as 0.5-2.0 keV and the hard band as 2.0-5.0 keV) and

684: compared them to the hardness ratio expected for a $\Gamma = 1.5$

685: power law with Galactic absorption (this model was chosen because the

686: spectral index is unlikely to be flatter than $\Gamma = 1.5$). We found

687: that SX2 is significantly harder (at the 99\% confidence level on a

688: binomial test) than would be expected for such a model, while SX1 is

689: not inconsistent with it. This suggests either that SX2 is not related

690: to the hotspot (e.g. that it is a background type 2 AGN) or that there

691: is some additional source of absorption, conceivably in the disk

692: galaxy, that affects SX2 but not SX1. We cannot distinguish between

693: these models with the available data.

694: 

695: \begin{figure}

696: \epsfxsize 14cm

697: \epsfbox{f6.eps}

698: \caption{The E hotspot of 3C\,327. The grayscale shows the

699:   0.5--5.0 keV {\it Chandra} data binned in $0\farcs246$ pixels and

700:   smoothed with a FWHM = $0\farcs5$ Gaussian. Contours are from the

701:   8.2-GHz radio map of \citet{lbdh97}

702:   with $0\farcs29$ resolution, at $0.2 \times

703:   (1,2,4\dots)$ mJy beam$^{-1}$. Labels show the names of compact

704:   radio features in the notation of \citet{lbdh97} and

705:   their (possibly) corresponding X-ray features.}

706: \label{327-hsex}

707: \end{figure}

708: 

709: \subsection{3C\,390.3}

710: 

711: \begin{figure}

712: \epsfxsize 14cm

713: \epsfbox{f7.eps}

714: \caption{The N hotspot of 3C\,390.3. The grayscale shows the 0.5--5.0 keV {\it Chandra} data binned in $0\farcs246$ pixels and

715:   smoothed with a FWHM = $2\farcs0$ Gaussian. Contours are from our

716:   5.0-GHz radio map, with $1\farcs0$ resolution, at $0.4 \times

717:   (1,2,4\dots)$ mJy beam$^{-1}$. Labels show the names of compact

718:   radio features in the notation of \citet{lp95} and the two

719:   compact X-ray features. The inset shows the same radio contours

720:   overlaid on the {\it Chandra} image of NX1 (the counterpart to knot

721:   B) smoothed with a FWHM = $0\farcs5$ Gaussian, showing that the

722:   X-ray source is resolved into two distinct knots.}

723: \label{390.3hsn}

724: \end{figure}

725: 

726: \begin{figure}

727: \epsfxsize 15cm

728: \epsfbox{f8.eps}

729: \caption{The S hotspot of 3C\,390.3. The grayscale shows the 0.5--5.0 keV {\it Chandra} data binned in $0\farcs246$ pixels and

730:   smoothed with a FWHM = $2\farcs0$ Gaussian. Contours are from our

731:   5.0-GHz radio map, with $1\farcs0$ resolution, at $0.4 \times

732:   (1,2,4\dots)$ mJy beam$^{-1}$. Labels show the names of

733:   radio features in the notation of \citet{lp95} and of the

734:   one compact X-ray feature.}

735: \label{390.3hss}

736: \end{figure}

737: 

738: The northern compact hotspot of 3C\,390 is a well-known X-ray source

739: \citep{p97,hll98,hhwb04}. Diffuse X-ray emission from the large

740: hotspot region of the S lobe was discussed by \citet{hc05}. A detailed

741: examination of the {\it Chandra} data shows that several components of

742: the N hotspot complex are X-ray sources (Fig.\ \ref{390.3hsn}). The

743: radio jet, which is detectable throughout the N lobe \citep{lp95}

744: brightens strongly in the area shown by our image, and there is faint

745: but clear X-ray emission associated with this section of the jet. The

746: strongest X-ray `source' is the known X-ray counterpart of the primary

747: hotspot \citep{lp95}, knot B, here denoted NX1. The centroid of this

748: region is only slightly ($0\farcs4 \pm 0\farcs1$, 0.4 kpc) offset to

749: the S of the peak of the radio emission, but the resolution of Chandra

750: shows that the X-ray feature is actually resolved into two components,

751: separated by 1.5 arcsec (1.6 kpc) and placed symmetrically on either

752: side of the radio peak. This is a much smaller distance than that of

753: the nearby galaxy, possibly interacting with the jet, described by

754: \citet{hll98}, which is $5\farcs8$ to the NE. At higher radio

755: resolutions (e.g., in Figure 5 of \citealt{lp95}) knot B is resolved

756: into a linear structure which lies between the two X-ray peaks --

757: there is no sign of any double structure in the radio. Nor is there

758: any evidence in the optical image of \citet{pk97} or in the archival

759: {\it Spitzer} data for resolution of the hotspot in the E-W direction:

760: \citeauthor{pk97} show that the optical hotspot is in fact extended in

761: the same direction as the radio. Another bright X-ray source in the

762: hotspot region is the object we denote NX2. This has no radio

763: counterpart and is well separated from any compact structure in the

764: radio, so it seems most likely to be a chance superposition with a

765: background object, although it is detected in the optical and infrared

766: and its properties at these wavelengths are consistent with it being

767: similar to knot B (its infrared colors mean that it is certainly not

768: a background normal galaxy). Radial profile analysis shows that it is

769: consistent with being a point source. Finally, the secondary hotspot

770: (knots F and A) shows no significant X-ray emission, even though in

771: 3C\,390.3 there is clear evidence (in the form of the continued

772: collimated outflow from knot B, features N1--4 in Fig.\

773: \ref{390.3hsn}) that this hotspot is connected to the jet. The

774: radio/X-ray ratio in the secondary hotspot region is a factor $\ga 50$

775: greater than in knot B. There is no optical detection of the secondary

776: \citep{pk97}, nor is it detected in the archival {\it

777: Spitzer} data.

778: \label{nx2}

779: We extracted spectra for the jet, for the counterpart to knot B (NX1)

780: as a whole, for its two subcomponents (denoted NX1E and NX1W) and for

781: the possibly unrelated source NX2, taking background from a nearby

782: blank-sky region. The overall spectrum of NX1 is not particularly well

783: fitted with a single power-law model ($\chi^2 = 15.9/8$; $\Gamma =

784: 1.95 \pm 0.15$). The E component of the X-ray source is well fitted

785: with a power-law model ($\chi^2 = 1.8/3$, $\Gamma = 2.23 \pm 0.23$)

786: but the W component is not ($\chi^2 = 10.5/3$, $\Gamma = 1.7 \pm

787: 0.2$), the poor fit being the result of one high bin at soft energies.

788: Neither component is acceptably fitted with a thermal model. Within

789: the limited statistics, it seems likely that the two components of

790: knot B have significantly different X-ray spectra. The total 1-keV

791: unabsorbed flux density of knot B in our extraction is $4.2 \pm 0.3$

792: nJy, with the two sub-components being roughly equal in flux. The few

793: counts in the jet are well fitted ($\chi^2 = 0.4/1$) with a power-law

794: model with $\Gamma = 1.4 \pm 0.4$, and a flux density $1 \pm 0.2$ nJy.

795: Finally, NX2 is well fitted ($\chi^2 = 1.5/2$) with a power-law model

796: with $\Gamma = 2.13 \pm 0.24$ --- comparable to the spectral indices

797: of NX1 or its components --- and has a 1-keV flux density of $1.9 \pm

798: 0.2$ nJy.

799: 

800: Fig.\ \ref{390.3hss} shows the X-ray emission from the southern

801: hotspot. The brighest compact feature, denoted SX1 in the figure, is

802: not coincident with any named radio feature, but appears at the N end

803: of the bright `rim' of the hotspot discussed by \citet{lp95}. The

804: nearest discrete compact feature, $1\farcs0 \pm 0\farcs2$ further

805: around the rim, is a weak radio knot (which we denote G$'$) visible in

806: the high-resolution radio map of \citet{lp95}. This feature

807: may be considered the primary hotspot or may just be a jet knot.

808: Otherwise there is no particular association between the detected

809: X-ray emission and the radio: none of the bright knots G, E, D clearly

810: has a compact associated X-ray source, though all have X-ray emission

811: coincident with them, and the X-rays from the `tail' region bear no

812: relation to the radio structure seen here. Archival {\it Spitzer}

813: images show that the S hotspot has a 24-$\mu$m infrared counterpart,

814: which appears to be peaked where the radio is brightest (i.e. in

815: hotspots E and D), but the low resolution of {\it Spitzer} at this

816: wavelength prevents us from examining this in detail. Taking a single

817: spectrum of all the detectable X-ray structure in Fig.\

818: \ref{390.3hss}, we find it to be poorly fitted ($\chi^2 = 11/5$) with

819: a single power law with $\Gamma = 1.4 \pm 0.2$ and a total 1-keV flux

820: density of $2.7 \pm 0.3$ nJy. The poor fit probably indicates that

821: more than one spectral component is present, but there are too few

822: counts to try to separate these spatially. Using the parameters of

823: this fit, the compact component SX1 would have a flux density $\sim

824: 0.4$ nJy.

825: 

826: \subsection{3C\,403}

827: 

828: The hotspots of 3C\,403 were discussed extensively by \citet{khwm05},

829: and so we do not present images or spectral fits here. To summarize

830: the results that are most important for this paper, the hotspots F1

831: and F6 in the E lobe have clear X-ray detections, with measured photon

832: indices $\sim 1.7$. F6 may be a jet knot, consistent with the

833: detection of jet-related X-ray emission in the same lobe, and if so F1

834: is the primary hotspot. The peaks of the X-ray emission from F1 and F6

835: are clearly coincident with the peaks in the radio, unlike several of

836: the other hotspots considered in this paper, but both have X-ray

837: extensions back towards the nucleus that are not present (or at least

838: not nearly as prominent) in the radio. There is no detection of the

839: radio-bright secondary hotspots F2 and F3 and there is no diffuse

840: X-ray emission from the hotspot region.

841: 

842: \section{Discussion}

843: 

844: \subsection{Offsets and emission mechanisms}

845: 

846: The observations of 3C\,227, 327 and 390.3 almost all show differences

847: between the structure observed in the radio and that observed in the

848: X-ray. To summarize, the only `simple' hotspots seen in these three

849: objects are the weak compact components in the E hotspot of 3C\,227 and

850: (probably) the S hotspot of 3C\,390.3, SX1. 3C\,227 shows a striking 1.5-kpc

851: offset between the radio emission from the primary W hotspot and its

852: X-ray counterpart, in the sense that the X-ray emission is nearer the

853: nucleus, while having similar structure in the radio and X-ray. The

854: well-known counterpart to 3C\,390.3's hotspot B turns out to have two

855: components, neither of which is coincident with the radio or optical

856: detection, and which are displaced from it in a direction

857: perpendicular to the jet axis. Neither of the two features most

858: obviously related to the E hotspots of 3C\,327 is coincident with the

859: peak of the radio: one is 4 kpc along the jet axis from the primary

860: hotspot, the other at least 1 kpc away from the secondary along the

861: primary-secondary axis.

862: 

863: What physical processes can account for these diverse behaviors? One

864: possibility is of course that the compact components are nothing to do

865: with the radio sources. This is our preferred explanation for the

866: compact feature NX2 in 3C\,390.3 N (\S\ref{nx2}): it may also explain

867: one or, at a stretch, both of the features we see in 3C\,327 E, where

868: we have no deep optical information to constrain whether a background

869: object could be responsible. It seems very unlikely that it could

870: account for the observations of 3C\,390.3 NX1 or 3C\,227, where the

871: X-ray features are clearly resolved. We therefore consider the

872: possible emission processes that could be responsible for producing

873: the observed X-rays from the sources themselves. As the available

874: X-ray data suggest power-law spectra and thus non-thermal emission, we

875: focus on inverse-Compton and synchrotron processes.

876: 

877: As discussed by \citet{hbch02} in the context of the more distant

878: double-hotspot source 3C\,351 (where inverse-Compton emission almost

879: certainly plays some role in the complex X-ray structures seen),

880: synchrotron self-Compton emission (SSC) or inverse-Compton scattering

881: of the CMB (CMBIC) cannot produce offsets between the radio and X-ray

882: unless there is very strong spatial variation in the positions of the

883: low-energy electrons and/or important beaming effects. We first

884: consider a model in which there are strong point-to-point variations

885: in the number density of low-energy electrons. To produce offset X-ray

886: emission via inverse-Compton processes, we require a large population

887: of low-energy ($\gamma \la 10^3$) electrons at the location of the

888: X-ray emission, while either the electron spectrum or the magnetic

889: field strength must be tuned so as to avoid significant emission from

890: this population of electrons at radio frequencies. We used the code of

891: \citet{hbch02} to calculate the expected inverse-Compton emission from

892: components matching P1, P2 and the X-ray source in 3C\,227, using an

893: upper limit on the radio flux density of the X-ray component of 2 mJy

894: to normalize the radio spectrum and using the observed sizes in the

895: radio and X-ray to choose component sizes. We modeled the three

896: components for simplicity as uniformly filled ellipsoids in the plane

897: of the sky. We found that for standard broken power-law spectra for

898: the three components we require the X-ray source to have a departure

899: from equipartition of a factor $\ga 60$ in magnetic field strength,

900: and an electron energy density that is $\ga 10^3$ times greater than

901: that in P2, in order to produce the observed X-rays by inverse-Compton

902: processes (where the upper limits come from the fact that we have no

903: unambiguous detection of a radio counterpart of the X-ray source). In

904: this situation we find that the dominant photon field is the CMB, and

905: so the conclusions are robust against uncertainties in the geometry,

906: which affect only the number density of synchrotron photons from P1/2.

907: Such an electron distribution seems highly unlikely simply on

908: energetic grounds, since it requires essentially all the energy in the

909: hotspot to be concentrated in an offset, radio-invisible region. A

910: similarly implausible electron distribution would be required for

911: 3C\,327 and 3C\,390.3. In addition, we show in Table \ref{hsic} that

912: the parameters of all detected and non-detected hotspots predict

913: inverse-Compton flux densities (derived using the code of

914: \citealt{hbw98}) for equipartition magnetic fields that are much less

915: than the observed values or limits, as was shown previously in some

916: cases by \citet{hhwb04}. We therefore rule out simple inverse-Compton

917: models in what follows.

918: 

919: \begin{deluxetable}{lllrrrrrrl}

920: \tablewidth{21cm}

921: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}

922: \rotate

923: \tablecaption{Inverse-Compton flux densities and radio/X-ray ratios

924:   for the hotspots}

925: \label{hsic}

926: \tablehead{\colhead{Source}&\colhead{Lobe}&\colhead{Radio}&\colhead{Size}&

927: \colhead{Radio frequency}&\colhead{Radio flux}&\colhead{1-keV

928:   flux}&\colhead{Predicted IC flux}&\colhead{X-ray/radio}&\colhead{Notes}\\

929: &&\colhead{name}&\colhead{(arcsec)}&\colhead{(GHz)}&\colhead{(mJy)}&

930:   \colhead{(nJy)}&\colhead{(nJy)}&\colhead{($\times 10^{6}$)}\\

931: }

932: \startdata

933: 3C\,227&W&P1&$1.5 \times 0.5$&8.35&16&$1.5 \pm 0.2$&0.0010&0.09&Offset X-ray\\

934: &&P2&$3.5 \times 0.5$&8.35&25&$1.5 \pm 0.2$&0.0019&0.06&Offset X-ray\\

935: &&P3&$3.7 \times 0.6$&8.35&13&$0.3 \pm 0.1$&0.0014&0.02&Offset X-ray\\

936: &&P4&$1.4 \times 0.25$&8.35&1.2&$0.4 \pm 0.1$&$1.0 \times 10^{-4}$&0.3&Jet knot?\\

937: &E&F1&$1.2 \times 0.25$&8.35&5.3&$0.3 \pm 0.1$&$2.7 \times 10^{-4}$&0.06\\[4pt]

938: 3C\,327&E&S1&$1.9 \times 0.25$&8.35&15&$0.27 \pm 0.07$&$6.4 \times 10^{-4}$&0.02&Offset X-ray\\

939: &&S2&0.32&8.35&3.2&$0.27 \pm 0.07$&$1.2 \times 10^{-4}$&0.09&Offset X-ray\\[4pt]

940: 3C\,390.3&N&B&$1.3 \times 0.5$&4.99&66&$4.2 \pm 0.3$&0.003&0.08&2 sub-components\\

941: &&F&3.7&4.99&190&$<0.2$&0.009&$<0.001$&Upper limit\\

942: &S&G$'$&0.5&4.99&20&$0.4 \pm 0.1$&$6 \times 10^{-4}$&0.02&Offset X-ray\\

943: &S&G&0.5&4.99&36&$<0.1$&0.0013&$<0.004$&Upper limit\\

944: &S&E&0.7&4.99&106&$<0.1$&0.0056&$<0.001$&Upper limit\\

945: &S&D&1.2&4.99&206&$<0.2$&0.011&$<0.001$&Upper limit\\[4pt]

946: 3C\,403&E&F1&0.275&8.35&16&$0.9 \pm 0.2$&$5 \times 10^{-4}$&0.04\\

947: &&F1b&0.256&8.35&7.7&$0.5\pm 0.1$&$2 \times 10^{-4}$&0.06&Jet knot?\\

948: &&F2&$1.8 \times 0.25$&8.35&27&$<0.13$&0.0011&$<0.004$&Upper limit\\

949: &&F6&0.272&8.35&27&$2.3 \pm 0.2$&0.0014&0.06&Jet knot\\

950: \enddata

951: \tablecomments{\scriptsize Columns 1, 2 and 3 are as in Table \ref{hstable}.

952:   Column 4 gives the size used in modeling, derived from fits to the

953:   high-resolution radio data. The angular sizes used are the radii of

954:   homogenous sphere models fitted to the data, as described by

955:   \citet{hhwb04}, except where two numbers are quoted, in which case

956:   they are the length and radius of a cylinder. Columns 5 and 6 give

957:   the frequency and flux of the radio data used to normalize the

958:   inverse-Compton models. Column 7 is the 1-keV X-ray flux density of the X-ray

959:   counterpart, where present, taken from or derived as in Table

960:   \ref{hstable}. Column 8 gives the 1-keV inverse-Compton prediction (SSC+CMBIC). Column 9 gives the ratio of the X-ray and

961:   radio flux densities, corrected to 8.35 GHz assuming $\alpha = 0.5$. Column 10 gives any comments on the

962:   relationship between the X-ray flux quoted and the radio hotspot for

963:   which the inverse-Compton calculation was made. Data for 3C\,403 are

964: taken from \citet{khwm05}.}

965: \end{deluxetable}

966: 

967: \citet{gk03} (hereafter GK03) proposed to explain the X-ray properties

968: of hotspots in objects aligned close to the line of sight using a

969: model involving emission from the decelerating relativistic jet. At

970: the time they were writing, there was an apparent correlation between

971: observations of hotspots with X-ray emission too bright to be SSC in

972: origin and the jet side of broad-line objects, such as broad-line

973: radio galaxies and radio-loud quasars, that are expected to lie at

974: small angles to the line of sight in unified models. Since then,

975: further observations have established that these non-SSC hotspots can

976: occur in objects in all orientations \citep{hhwb04}. However, the GK03

977: model is still interesting because it predicts spatial offsets between

978: the peak of the X-ray and that of the radio. They proposed that the

979: jet decelerates on kpc scales and that X-ray emission from the

980: fast-moving component can be produced by inverse-Compton scattering of

981: the synchrotron photons from the slower, downstream component. This

982: external inverse-Compton process is strongly directional and can only

983: be seen if the jet is aligned close to the line of sight (and, of

984: course, is approaching rather than receding). The GK03 model should

985: not be confused with the process of inverse-Compton scattering of the

986: CMB that has been proposed to explain the X-ray jets in core-dominated

987: quasars \citep[e.g.,][]{tmsu00}: in the GK03 model the photon energy

988: density is dominated by synchrotron photons from the upstream hotspot,

989: and as a consequence the beaming factors required (for given jet

990: properties) are less extreme and the range of plausible angles to the

991: line of sight can be greater. In the beamed CMB models the X-ray

992: emission should have no particular relationship to the radio hotspot,

993: and the angle to the line of sight of the jet is required to be small:

994: we therefore do not consider these models further.

995: 

996: The GK03 model might be applied to the offset between the primary

997: hotspot of 3C\,227, P1/2, and its X-ray counterpart. 3C\,227 is a

998: broad-line object, so that the lobes make a relatively small angle to

999: the line of sight ($\la 45^\circ$) and, if we take P4 to be a jet

1000: knot, the only evidence that we have suggests that the W lobe is

1001: likely to contain the jet pointing towards us, though the

1002: comparatively weak radio core, the non-detection of any other

1003: components of the jet, and the presence of intrinsic absorption in the

1004: X-ray spectrum (\S\ref{227-core}) suggest that it is not at a very

1005: small angle to the line of sight (compared to, say, 3C\,390.3, with

1006: its bright radio core, unabsorbed nuclear X-ray emission and

1007: well-detected kpc-scale jet). The flat X-ray spectrum of the X-ray

1008: counterpart of P1/2 is consistent with an inverse-Compton model. If we

1009: suppose that the jet decelerates on scales of a few kpc (set by the

1010: observed projected size of the offset between radio and X-ray) from

1011: relativistic to sub-relativistic speeds, is it possible that the GK03

1012: model could explain the observed offset in 3C\,227? In principle the

1013: answer is `yes' since the GK03 model can explain {\it any} observation

1014: with a suitable choice of the (observationally unconstrained)

1015: parameters of the position-dependent bulk flow speed and electron

1016: energy spectrum of the jet. The jet would have to be quite wide at the

1017: position of P1/2 to produce the observed X-ray morphology, but not

1018: impossibly so: the distribution of emitting particles and jet

1019: velocities would also require some fine tuning in order to produce an

1020: offset X-ray peak rather than some more jet-like X-ray structure.

1021: However, we consider an explanation in terms of the GK03 model to be

1022: hard to sustain when all the observations of our sample are considered

1023: together. The secondary hotspot of 3C\,227 shows a similar offset, yet

1024: the bulk flow clearly cannot decelerate to sub-relativistic speeds

1025: twice --- and the direction of any flow between the primary and

1026: secondary is not the same as the direction between P4 and P1/2. A

1027: series of coincidences is required to explain the similarity between

1028: the primary and secondary hotspots in 3C\,227, therefore. The model

1029: clearly cannot explain the offsets between radio and X-ray peaks in

1030: 3C\,390.3 (not in the direction of the jet) or the offsets and

1031: variations in radio/X-ray ratio seen in 3C\,327 and 3C\,403 (too large

1032: an angle to the line of sight). We conclude that the GK03 model, while

1033: not ruled out by the data for the primary hotspot of 3C\,227, is of

1034: little use in providing a general explanation of the problems posed by

1035: our observations.

1036: 

1037: Since inverse-Compton explanations seem difficult to accept, we next

1038: consider synchrotron emission. Synchrotron explanations also require

1039: point-to-point electron spectrum (or possibly magnetic field strength)

1040: variations to account for offsets between the radio and X-ray

1041: emission. However, the magnitude of the variation is comparatively

1042: very small: the high-energy tail of the electron population

1043: responsible for the X-ray emission is energetically, and a fortiori

1044: numerically, a negligible fraction of the total, whereas for the

1045: inverse-Compton process a doubling of the emissivity by adjusting the

1046: electron spectrum requires a doubling of the number density of

1047: low-energy electrons, and so effectively a doubling of the energy

1048: density of the system. Energetically, therefore, it is not difficult

1049: to produce what we see via synchrotron radiation. Since the electron

1050: energy loss timescale is likely to be very short (for field strengths

1051: close to the equipartition value) what is required to produce the

1052: observed X-ray structures is some process that can accelerate

1053: particles wherever we observe X-ray emission. As we discussed in

1054: \S\ref{intro}, there is strong evidence from radio and optical data

1055: that hotspots are sites of particle acceleration, and their spectra

1056: are consistent with models involving a single shock followed by

1057: downstream losses. In some cases the X-ray emission from hotspots lies

1058: on an extrapolation of these models \citep{khwm05}. But observations

1059: of {\it diffuse} X-ray emission, often poorly matched to the observed

1060: radio structures (e.g. in Pictor A, \citealt{hc05}; 3C\,33,

1061: \citealt{kbhe07}; 3C\,390.3 S, this paper) make it hard to sustain a

1062: model in which the particle acceleration at the hotspots is {\it only}

1063: occurring at jet termination shocks. Similar conclusions have been

1064: reached by other authors based on optical data \citep[e.g.,][]{rm87,pbm02}.

1065: 

1066: Observations of compact but offset X-ray emission, as in 3C\,227,

1067: present a different problem. Here it seems possible that there is a

1068: discrete acceleration region that is related to the jet termination

1069: shock, but, if so, the shock is not where we would have inferred it to

1070: be from radio observations. For 3C\,227 we could imagine a picture in

1071: which the X-ray emission in both primary and secondary hotspots tells

1072: us where the shock is now, while the radio traces material that has

1073: passed through this shock region, expanded and decelerated. This would

1074: imply that the X-ray emission should have a radio/optical counterpart,

1075: but for a flat synchrotron spectrum ($\alpha \sim 0.5$) extending

1076: between radio and X-ray the emission at other wavebands could be

1077: undetectably faint, at the 10 $\mu$Jy level in the radio (i.e.,

1078: substantially below the upper limit of $\sim 2$ mJy on the flux

1079: density of this component from radio maps). Such a flat

1080: synchrotron spectrum extending all the way to the X-ray has never been

1081: observed (precisely because of the difficulty of detecting the radio

1082: counterparts) but might be expected in models of shock acceleration.

1083: The bulk of the optical emission in 3C\,227 P1/2 seems to lie in

1084: between the X-ray and radio peaks, which is qualitatively consistent

1085: with this picture. The questions to be asked are then why other

1086: hotspots seen with similar spatial resolution, such as those in

1087: 3C\,403, do not show the same radio/X-ray offsets; why the offsets in

1088: 3C\,327, if they have the same origin, are so much larger; and what

1089: the origin is of the compact structure transverse to the jet direction

1090: in the hotspot of 3C\,390.3.

1091: 

1092: Recent numerical simulations suggest that the picture of particle

1093: acceleration in the lobes of FRII sources may be less simple than in

1094: the traditional model of acceleration at strong shocks in one or more

1095: hotspots. \citet*{tjr01} carried out three-dimensional

1096: MHD simulations that modeled the transport of relativistic electrons

1097: and of particle acceleration at shocks. They found that the

1098: interaction of the jet and the backflowing plasma at the head of the

1099: jet produced what they called a `shock-web complex', ``a region of

1100: shocks of varying strengths and sizes spread throughout the source''.

1101: Even when there was a simple terminal shock, not all the jet material

1102: necessarily passed through it, and the terminal shock was not always

1103: the strongest shock in the system. While it is not clear that their

1104: simulations are perfectly matched to real radio sources, they are

1105: capable of producing simulated synchrotron images that show apparent

1106: clear discrete multiple hotspots \citep{tjrp02} and in these

1107: cases the particle acceleration is not necessarily well matched to the

1108: locations of the hotspots: hotspot locations in their model can have

1109: more to do with magnetic field amplification than with particle

1110: acceleration. The notion of a `shock-web complex' at the head of the

1111: jet could help to explain the diffuse X-ray emission now seen in the

1112: radio-bright but non-compact source head regions of a number of

1113: objects, as discussed above, while the idea that the particle

1114: acceleration region may not always be co-spatial with the observed

1115: radio hotspot might help to explain observed offsets. It should be

1116: possible to carry out numerical simulations that allow synthetic maps

1117: of the location of high-energy synchrotron-emitting particles to be

1118: generated for qualitative comparison with the range of structures seen

1119: in X-ray observations.

1120: 

1121: We can also compare the X-ray observations of hotspots with

1122: observations of systems in which the X-ray emission is almost

1123: certain to be synchrotron in origin, the FRI jets (\S\ref{intro}). In

1124: the nearest FRI jet, Centaurus A \citep{hwkf03} there is

1125: direct dynamical evidence for shock-acceleration of particles, as we

1126: believe is going on in FRII hotspots. There are also offsets, albeit

1127: on scales of only tens of pc rather than kpc, between the peak of the

1128: X-ray emission and the brightest radio emission, in the sense that the

1129: radio emission peaks downstream of the X-ray. And there is diffuse

1130: X-ray emission, not associated with any compact radio source or

1131: dynamical feature of the jet, which in some cases has a diffuse optical

1132: counterpart \citep{hkw06}. Other FRI jets show

1133: similar features. At present we do not understand the nature of the

1134: radio/X-ray peak offsets in FRI jets or the distributed particle acceleration

1135: process responsible for the diffuse X-ray emission, but the

1136: qualitative similarity between the Cen A jet and a jet termination

1137: region like 3C\,390.3 S or 3C\,33 S means that we might hope to gain

1138: some insight into one problem by studying the other. In both cases the

1139: observational requirement is sensitive, multi-frequency observations

1140: that allow us to construct a detailed map of the synchrotron SED as a

1141: function of position. 

1142: 

1143: \subsection{The nature of multiple hotspots}

1144: 

1145: Our two new targets, 3C\,227 and 3C\,327, provide at least one clear

1146: example (3C\,227 W), and possibly two, of an object where the primary

1147: and secondary hotspot are both detected in the X-ray, setting aside

1148: the problem of offsets between the components. 3C\,33 N \citep{kbhe07}

1149: is another example of a source with multiple X-ray hotspots. 3C\,390.3

1150: N, on the other hand, behaves more similarly to 3C\,403 E: the bright

1151: secondary hotspot is not an X-ray (or optical) synchrotron source even

1152: though there is an apparently clear connection between the primary and

1153: secondary hotspot indicative of continuing energy supply (but cf.\ the

1154: discussion of this point in \citealt{lp95}). Taking SX1 and its radio

1155: counterpart G$'$ to be the primary hotspot of the southern hotspot

1156: complex, a similar statement can be made for this system too. In both

1157: these cases, the upper limit on the X-ray to radio flux ratio in the

1158: non-detected hotspots, which are generally brighter in the radio, is

1159: 1--2 orders of magnitude below the measured value for the primary

1160: hotspots (Table \ref{hsic}). If we assume, as discussed in the

1161: previous section, that the X-ray emission mechanism is synchrotron,

1162: then this tells us that secondary hotspots can be different: some, at

1163: least, are able to accelerate particles to the highest observable

1164: energies, but others are at least an order of magnitude less efficient

1165: than the primaries in producing X-ray emission for a given radio

1166: emissivity. This conclusion would be stronger if the nature of the

1167: X-ray emission in the secondary hotspots were more obvious.

1168: 

1169: If some secondary hotspots can accelerate particles to high energies

1170: and some do not, what is the difference between them? Relic hotspots

1171: left behind by a jet that has moved (`dentist's-drill' model) would

1172: certainly not be expected to have high-energy particle acceleration.

1173: But in our observations one secondary that apparently is connected to

1174: the jet (3C\,390.3 N) does not have high-energy particle acceleration,

1175: while one that has no apparent connection in sensitive radio

1176: observations (3C\,227 W) does. Radio morphology is therefore not a

1177: good guide to a hotspot's ability to accelerate particles, or to its

1178: relationship to the energy supply. Nor is the radio brightness of the hotspot.

1179: 

1180: One trend that is apparent in the data is that a hotspot is more

1181: likely to be an X-ray emitter (and therefore a privileged site for

1182: high-energy particle acceleration?) if it is compact. The secondary

1183: hotspots in 3C\,227 and 3C\,327 are similar in size to the primaries.

1184: Those in 3C\,390.3 and 3C\,403 are several times larger. `Compact'

1185: here appears to mean less than a few kpc in size. However, though this

1186: may be a necessary condition, it is not a sufficient one, as the

1187: non-detection of relatively compact hotspots in e.g. 3C\,390.3 S

1188: shows. Secondary hotspot compactness could thus be an indicator of

1189: relatively well-collimated continued outflow from the primary hotspot

1190: to the secondary (or, in the case of the \citealt{cgs91} model, of a

1191: well-collimated disconnected jet); this makes sense, since (for a

1192: given luminosity) a more compact hotspot is more overpressured with

1193: respect to the lobe material and will have a shorter timescale for

1194: disappearance via adiabatic expansion in the absence of the energy

1195: supply. But the lack of a one-to-one correlation reinforces what we

1196: already know from observations of single hotspots: the ability of even

1197: low-luminosity, low-$B$-field hotspots, even when clearly connected to

1198: the energy supply, to produce X-ray emission is very variable and must

1199: depend on details of the microphysics that are not yet accessible to

1200: us.

1201: 

1202: \section{Conclusions}

1203: 

1204: We have looked with very high spatial resolution at the hotspot X-ray

1205: emission from a small sample of radio galaxies that show multiple

1206: radio hotspots. As in earlier work, we argue that the X-ray

1207: emission from the hotspots comes predominantly from the synchrotron

1208: process, and so traces high-energy particle acceleration. To our

1209: knowledge this paper represents the first attempt to use synchrotron

1210: emission to probe the particle acceleration properties in a sample of

1211: FRII sources, though several individual objects have previously been

1212: studied in detail.

1213: 

1214: Our principal results can be summarized as follows:

1215: 

1216: \begin{itemize}

1217: \item The cores and lobes of the two new sources in our sample have

1218:   X-ray properties that are entirely consistent with expectations and

1219:   with the sources' places in unified models. There is evidence for

1220:   intrinsic absorption in the spectrum of the BLRG 3C\,227.

1221: 

1222: \item All the target sources exhibit structure in the X-ray images of

1223:   their hotspots that would not have been predicted in a simple model

1224:   in which particle acceleration occurs only at the jet termination as

1225:   traced by the bright radio hotspot. This structure ranges from

1226:   small-scale offsets in the radio and X-ray peaks (e.g. in 3C\,227 W

1227:   or 3C\,390.3 N) through diffuse X-ray emission that is not well

1228:   correlated with compact radio structure (e.g. 3C\,390.3 S: see also

1229:   3C\,33 S, \citealt{kbhe07}; Pictor A E, \citealt{hc05}) to

1230:   point-like sources in the jet termination region that bear little

1231:   obvious relationship to the current radio hotspots (3C\,327 E). If

1232:   most or all of these structures can be taken to indicate the

1233:   location of particle acceleration in these sources, then our

1234:   observations support models in which the particle acceleration

1235:   history in FRIIs can be complicated, non-localized, and not well

1236:   traced by radio observations.

1237: 

1238: \item Our observations were obtained to investigate the nature of

1239:   multiple hotspots, and we have found some evidence that some

1240:   secondary hotspots are indeed associated with acceleration of

1241:   particles to the highest observable energies, while others (as we

1242:   had found previously) are not. This implies that at least some

1243:   secondary hotspots have ongoing access to a supply of energy. All

1244:   X-ray-synchrotron emitting hotspots appear to be compact, but not

1245:   all compact hotspots are detected in X-rays. We cannot at present

1246:   say whether this is because some of these compact hotspots are true

1247:   relics, disconnected from the energy supply, or whether they are

1248:   X-ray faint for some other reason related to the microphysics of

1249:   their particle acceleration. Sensitive multi-wavelength observations

1250:   in radio and optical will be required to make further progress.

1251: \end{itemize}

1252: 

1253: \acknowledgements

1254: 

1255: We are very grateful to Karl-Heinz Mack for providing us with optical

1256: images of the hotspots of 3C\,227 prior to publication and for helpful

1257: discussion of the radio-optical alignment. We thank an anonymous

1258: referee for constructive comments that helped us to improve the paper.

1259: We also gratefully acknowledge financial support for this work from

1260: the Royal Society (research fellowship for MJH) and NASA (grant

1261: GO6-7094X to RPK).

1262: 

1263: The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is a facility of

1264: the National Science Foundation operated under cooperative agreement

1265: by Associated Universities, Inc.

1266: 

1267: \begin{thebibliography}{}

1268: \bibitem[Allen et al.(1997)]{afii97}Allen, S.W., Fabian, A.C., Idesawa, E., Inoue, H., Kii, T., \& Otani, C., 1997, \mnras, 286, 765

1269: \bibitem[Black et al.(1992)]{bblp92}Black, A.R.S., Baum, S.A., Leahy, J.P., Perley, R.A., Riley, J.M., \& Scheuer, P.A.G., 1992, \mnras, 256, 186

1270: \bibitem[Blandford \& Rees(1974)]{br74}Blandford, R.D., \& Rees, M.J., 1974, \mnras, 169, 395

1271: \bibitem[Brunetti et al.(2001)]{bbcp01}Brunetti, G., Bondi, M., Comastri, A., Pedani, M., Varano, S., Setti, G., \& Hardcastle, M.J., 2001, \apj, 561, L157

1272: \bibitem[Brunetti et al.(2003)]{bmpv03}Brunetti, G., Mack, K.H., Prieto, M.A., \& Varano, S., 2003, \mnras, 345, L40

1273: \bibitem[Cohen et al.(1999)]{cotg99}Cohen, M.H., Ogle, P.M., Tran, H.D., Goodrich, R.W., \& Miller, J.S., 1999, \aj, 118, 1963

1274: \bibitem[Cox et al.(1991)Cox, Gull \& Scheuer]{cgs91}Cox, C.I., Gull, S.F., \& Scheuer, P.A.G., 1991, \mnras, 252, 588

1275: \bibitem[Crawford \& Fabian(1995)]{cf95}Crawford, C.S., \& Fabian, A.C., 1995, \mnras, 273, 827

1276: \bibitem[Croston et al.(2005)]{chhb05}Croston, J.H., Hardcastle, M.J., Harris, D.E., Belsole, E., Birkinshaw, M., \& Worrall, D.M., 2005, \apj, 626, 733

1277: \bibitem[Evans et al.(2006)]{ewhk06}Evans, D.A., Worrall, D.M., Hardcastle, M.J., Kraft, R.P., \& Birkinshaw, M., 2006, \apj, 642, 96

1278: \bibitem[Fanaroff \& Riley(1974)]{fr74}Fanaroff, B.L., \& Riley, J.M., 1974, \mnras, 167, 31P

1279: \bibitem[Georganopoulos \& Kazanas(2003)]{gk03}Georganopoulos, M., \& Kazanas, D., 2003, \apj, 589, L5 [GK03]

1280: \bibitem[Hardcastle \& Croston(2005)]{hc05}Hardcastle, M.J., \& Croston, J.H., 2005, \mnras, 363, 649

1281: \bibitem[Hardcastle et al.(1997)]{hapr97}Hardcastle, M.J., Alexander, P., Pooley, G.G., \& Riley, J.M., 1997, \mnras, 288, 859

1282: \bibitem[Hardcastle et al.(1998)Hardcastle, Birkinshaw \& Worrall]{hbw98}Hardcastle, M.J., Birkinshaw, M., \& Worrall, D.M., 1998, \mnras, 294, 615

1283: \bibitem[Hardcastle et al.(2001)Hardcastle, Birkinshaw \& Worrall]{hbw01}Hardcastle, M.J., Birkinshaw, M., \& Worrall, D.M., 2001, \mnras, 323, L17

1284: \bibitem[Hardcastle et al.(2002)]{hbch02}Hardcastle, M.J., Birkinshaw, M., Cameron, R., Harris, D.E., Looney, L.W., \& Worrall, D.M., 2002, \apj, 581, 948

1285: \bibitem[Hardcastle et al.(2006)Hardcastle, Evans \& Croston]{hec06}Hardcastle, M.J., Evans, D.A., \& Croston, J.H., 2006, \mnras, 370, 1893

1286: \bibitem[Hardcastle et al.(2004)]{hhwb04}Hardcastle, M.J., Harris, D.E., Worrall, D.M., \& Birkinshaw, M., 2004, \apj, 612, 729

1287: \bibitem[Hardcastle et al.(2006)Hardcastle, Kraft \& Worrall]{hkw06}Hardcastle, M.J., Kraft, R.P., \& Worrall, D.M., 2006, \mnras, 368, L15

1288: \bibitem[Hardcastle et al.(2003)]{hwkf03}Hardcastle, M.J., Worrall, D.M., Kraft, R.P., Forman, W.R., Jones, C., \& Murray, S.S., 2003, \apj, 593, 169

1289: \bibitem[Harris et al.(1998)Harris, Leighly \& Leahy]{hll98}Harris, D.E., Leighly, K.M., \& Leahy, J.P., 1998, \apj, 499, L149

1290: \bibitem[Harris et al.(2000)]{hnpb00}Harris, D.E., et al., 2000, \apj, 530, L81

1291: \bibitem[Heavens \& Meisenheimer(1987)]{hm87}Heavens, A.F., \& Meisenheimer, K., 1987, \mnras, 225, 335

1292: \bibitem[Jahoda et al.(1985)]{jmdl85}Jahoda, K., McCammon, D., Dickey, J.M., \& Lockman, F.J., 1985, \apj, 290, 229

1293: \bibitem[Kataoka \& Stawarz(2005)]{ks05}Kataoka, J., \& Stawarz, L., 2005, \apj, 622, 797

1294: \bibitem[Kraft et al.(2005)]{khwm05}Kraft, R.P., Hardcastle, M.J., Worrall, D.M., \& Murray, S.S., 2005, \apj, 622, 149

1295: \bibitem[Kraft et al.(2007)]{kbhe07}Kraft, R.P., Birkinshaw, M., Hardcastle, M.J., Evans, D.A., Croston, J.H., Worrall, D.M., \& Murray, S.S., 2007, \apj ~in press (astro-ph/0701458)

1296: \bibitem[Leahy et al.(1997)]{lbdh97}Leahy, J.P., Black, A.R.S., Dennett-Thorpe, J., Hardcastle, M.J., Komissarov, S., Perley, R.A., Riley, J.M., \& Scheuer, P.A.G., 1997, \mnras, 291, 20

1297: \bibitem[Leahy \& Perley(1995)]{lp95}Leahy, J.P., \& Perley, R.A., 1995, \mnras, 277, 1097

1298: \bibitem[Lonsdale \& Barthel(1986)]{lb86}Lonsdale, C.J., \& Barthel, P.D., 1986, \aj, 92, 12

1299: \bibitem[Mack et al.(2003)Mack, Prieto \& Brunetti]{mpb03}Mack, K.-H., Prieto, M.A., \& Brunetti, G., 2003, NewAR 47 501

1300: \bibitem[Meisenheimer et al.(1989)]{mrhy89}Meisenheimer, K., R\"oser, H.-J., Hiltner, P.R., Yates, M.G., Longair, M.S., Chini, R., \& Perley, R.A., 1989, \aap, 219, 63 

1301: \bibitem[Murphy et al.(1996)]{mlle96}Murphy, E.M., Lockman, F.J., Laor, A., \& Elvis, M., 1996, \apjs, 105, 369

1302: \bibitem[Nicastro et al.(1999)]{nfpe99}Nicastro, F., Fiore, F., Perola, G.C., \& Elvis, M., 1999, \apj, 512, 136

1303: \bibitem[Prieto(1997)]{p97}Prieto, M.A., 1997, \mnras, 284, 627

1304: \bibitem[Prieto \& Kotilainen(1997)]{pk97}Prieto, M.A., \& Kotilainen, J.K., 1997, \apj, 491, L77

1305: \bibitem[Prieto et al.(2002)Prieto, Brunetti \& Mack]{pbm02}Prieto, M.A., Brunetti, G., \& Mack, K.H., 2002, Sci 298 193

1306: \bibitem[R\"oser \& Meisenheimer(1987)]{rm87}R\"oser, H.-J., \& Meisenheimer, K., 1987, \apj, 314, 70

1307: \bibitem[Sambruna et al.(1999)Sambruna, Eracleous \& Mushotzky]{sem99}Sambruna, R.M., Eracleous, M., \& Mushotzky, R.F., 1999, \apj, 526, 60

1308: \bibitem[Saslaw et al.(1978)Saslaw, Tyson \& Crane]{stc78}Saslaw, W.C., Tyson, J.A., \& Crane, P., 1978, \apj, 222, 435

1309: \bibitem[Scheuer(1982)]{s82}Scheuer, P.A.G., 1982, in Heeschen, D.S., Wade C.M., eds, Extragalactic Radio Sources, IAU Symposium 97, Reidel, Dordrecht, p.~163

1310: \bibitem[Spinrad et al.(1985)]{sdma85}Spinrad, H., Djorgovski, S., Marr, J., \& Aguilar, L., 1985, \pasp, 97, 932

1311: \bibitem[Stark et al.(1992)]{sgwb92}Stark, A.A., Gammie, C.F., Wilson, R.W., Bally, J., Linke, R.A., Heiles, C., \& Hurwitz, M., 1992, \apjs, 79, 77

1312: \bibitem[Tavecchio et al.(2000)]{tmsu00}Tavecchio, F., Maraschi, L., Sambruna, R.M., \& Urry, C.M., 2000, \apj, 544, L23

1313: \bibitem[Tregillis et al.(2001)Tregillis, Jones \& Ryu]{tjr01}Tregillis, I.L., Jones, T.W., \& Ryu, D., 2001, \apj, 557, 475

1314: \bibitem[Tregillis et al.(2002)]{tjrp02}Tregillis, I.L., Jones, T.W., Ryu, D., \& Park, C., 2002, NewAR 46 387

1315: \bibitem[Williams \& Gull(1985)]{wg85}Williams, A.G., \& Gull, S.F., 1985, \nat, 313, 34

1316: \end{thebibliography}

1317: 

1318: 

1319: \end{document}

1320: 

1321: