1: \documentclass[apj]{emulateapj}
2: \usepackage{apjfonts}
3: \usepackage{epsfig}
4: \usepackage{amsmath}
5: \usepackage{amssymb}
6: \usepackage{amsfonts}
7: \usepackage{lscape}
8: \usepackage{natbib} % This is required to use the apj.bst
9: \citestyle{aa} % and be able to use the AASTEX 5.x
10: % citations (\citep, \citet, etc.) - bph
11: \bibliographystyle{apj}
12:
13: \shorttitle{DEEP OBSERVATIONS OF LMXBS IN NGC~4697}
14: \shortauthors{SIVAKOFF ET AL.}
15:
16: \defcitealias{JCF+2004}{J2004}
17: \defcitealias{BIS+2006}{B2006}
18: \defcitealias{SJS+2007}{S2007}
19:
20: \defcitealias{ISB2000}{I2000}
21: \defcitealias{SIB2000}{Paper~I}
22: \defcitealias{SIB2001}{Paper~II}
23: \defcitealias{SSJ2005}{Paper~III}
24: \defcitealias{SJJ+2008a}{Paper~IV} % THIS PAPER
25: \defcitealias{SJJ+2008b}{Paper~V}
26:
27: \newcommand\cennodata{\multicolumn{1}{c}{\nodata}}
28:
29: \begin{document}
30:
31: \title{Deep Chandra X-ray Observations of Low Mass X-ray Binary Candidates
32: in the Early-Type Galaxy NGC~4697}
33: \author{
34: Gregory R. Sivakoff\altaffilmark{1,2},
35: Andr\'{e}s Jord\'{a}n\altaffilmark{3,4},
36: Adrienne M. Juett\altaffilmark{5},
37: Craig L. Sarazin\altaffilmark{1},
38: Jimmy A. Irwin\altaffilmark{6}
39: }
40:
41: \altaffiltext{1}{
42: Department of Astronomy,
43: University of Virginia,
44: P. O. Box 400325,
45: Charlottesville, VA 22904-4325, USA;
46: sarazin@virginia.edu}
47: \altaffiltext{2}{
48: Current Address:
49: Department of Astronomy,
50: The Ohio State University,
51: 4055 McPherson Laboratory
52: 140 W. 18th Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210-1173, USA;
53: sivakoff@astronomy.ohio-state.edu}
54: \altaffiltext{3}{%
55: Clay Fellow,
56: Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics,
57: 60 Garden Street,
58: MS-67, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA;
59: ajordan@cfa.harvard.edu}
60: \altaffiltext{4}{%
61: Departamento de Astronom\'{\i}a y Astrof\'{\i}sica,
62: Pontificia Universidad Cat\'olica de Chile,
63: Casilla 306, Santiago 22, Chile}
64: \altaffiltext{5}{%
65: NASA Postdoctoral Fellow,
66: Laboratory for X-ray Astrophysics,
67: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center,
68: Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA;
69: adrienne.m.juett@nasa.gov}
70: \altaffiltext{6}{
71: Department of Astronomy,
72: 909 Dennison Building,
73: University of Michigan,
74: Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1042, USA;
75: jairwin@umich.edu}
76:
77: \begin{abstract}
78: {\it Chandra} X-ray observations routinely resolve tens to hundreds of low-mass
79: X-ray binaries (LMXBs) per galaxy in nearby massive early-type galaxies. These
80: studies have raised important issues regarding the behavior of this population
81: of remnants of the once massive stars in early-type galaxies, namely the
82: connection between LMXBs and globular clusters (GCs) and the nature of the LMXB
83: luminosity function (LF). In this paper, we combine five epochs of {\it Chandra}
84: observations and one central field {\it Hubble Space Telescope} Advance Camera
85: for Surveys observation of NGC~4697, one of the nearest, optically luminous
86: elliptical (E6) galaxies, to probe the GC-LMXB connection and LMXB-LF down to a
87: detection/completeness limit of $0.6/1.4\times 10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$.
88: We detect 158 sources, present their luminosities and hardness ratios, and
89: associate 34 LMXBs with GCs. We confirm that GCs with higher encounter rates
90: ($\Gamma_h$) and redder colors (higher metallicity $Z$) are more likely to
91: contain GCs, and find that the expected number of LMXBs per GC is proportional
92: to $\Gamma_{h}^{0.79^{+0.18}_{-0.15}} \, (Z/Z_\odot)^{0.50^{+0.20}_{-0.18}}$,
93: consistent with fainter X-ray sources in Galactic GCs and LMXBs in Virgo
94: early-type galaxies. Approximately $11\pm2/8\pm2$\% of GCs in NGC~4697 contain
95: an LMXB at the detection/completeness limit. We propose that the larger
96: proportion of metal-rich GCs in NGC~4697 compared to the Milky Way explains why
97: these fractions are much higher than those of the Milky Way at similar
98: luminosities. We confirm that a broken power-law is the best fit to the LMXB-LF,
99: although we cannot rule out a cutoff power-law, and argue that this raises the
100: possibility that there is no universal form for the LMXB-LF in early-type
101: galaxies. We find marginal evidence for different LFs of LMXBs in GCs and the
102: field and different spectra of GC-LMXBs and Field-LMXBs.
103: \end{abstract}
104: \keywords{
105: binaries: close ---
106: galaxies: elliptical and lenticular, cD ---
107: galaxies: star clusters ---
108: globular clusters: general ---
109: X-rays: binaries ---
110: X-rays: galaxies
111: }
112:
113: \section{Introduction}
114: \label{sec:n4697x_intro}
115:
116: Observations with the {\it Einstein Observatory} revealed that early-type
117: galaxies can be luminous X-ray sources \citep{FJT1985}. Prior to the launch of
118: the {\it Chandra X-ray Observatory}, observations of X-ray faint galaxies,
119: galaxies with relatively low X-ray-to-optical luminosity ratios, indicated the
120: presence of two distinct spectral components: a soft ($\sim 0.2 {\rm \, keV}$)
121: component \citep{FKT1994,P1994,KFM+1996} and a hard ($\sim 5$--$10 {\rm \,
122: keV}$) component \citep{MKA+1997}. The soft component was attributed to
123: hot interstellar gas and the hard component to low-mass X-ray binaries (LMXBs;
124: \citealt{KFT1992}).
125: Starting with the \textit{Chandra X-ray Observatory} observation of the X-ray
126: faint elliptical, \object{NGC 4697}
127: \citep[hereafter Papers I and II]{SIB2000,SIB2001},
128: this picture has been confirmed; the majority of X-ray emission in X-ray
129: faint early-type galaxies has been resolved into X-ray point sources, whose
130: properties are consistent with LMXBs. With its ability to resolve LMXBs and
131: accurately measure their positions, {\it Chandra} has raised at least two major
132: issues regarding the behavior of the LMXBs as a population, namely the
133: connection between LMXBs and globular clusters (GCs) and the nature of the LMXB
134: luminosity function (LF).
135:
136: From {\it Chandra}, a high percentage $(\sim 20-70\%)$ of LMXBs have
137: positions coincident with globular clusters
138: \citep[GCs,][]{ALM2001,SKI+2003}; only $\sim 10\%$ of Milky Way LMXBs
139: are found in GCs. This raised the question as to where LMXBs in
140: early-type galaxies formed. One early suggestion was that all LMXBs in
141: early-type galaxies formed in GCs, with LMXBs observed to be in the
142: field of the galaxy (Field-LMXBs) having escaped from GCs through
143: supernovae kick velocities, stellar dynamical processes, or the
144: dissolution of the GC due to tidal effects \citep{WSK2002}. Later
145: analyses have suggested that a significant fraction of Field-LMXBs
146: were formed in situ \citep{J2005,I2005}, although there is evidence
147: that more Field-LMXBs in lenticular galaxies, as opposed to elliptical
148: galaxies, may have originated in GCs and later escaped into the
149: field \citep{I2005}. The extent to which LMXBs can be used to probe GC
150: formation and evolution, as well as LMXB formation, depends critically on
151: understanding the GC/LMXB connection. Given that the primary binary
152: formation scenario in GCs is thought to involve dynamical interactions,
153: as opposed to the predominantly primordial nature of binaries formed
154: in the field, these different populations should trace different LMXB
155: formation histories and may trace different star formation histories
156: in early-type galaxies.
157:
158: {\it Chandra} has also explored the LF of LMXBs. At the bright end of
159: the LF of NGC~4697, a possible break near the Eddington
160: limit of a $1.4 \, M_{\sun}$ neutron star (NS) was found in
161: \citetalias{SIB2000}. This break was argued to be due to the presence
162: of two LMXB populations, a black hole (BH) population at the bright end, and a
163: predominantly NS population at the faint end. \citet{BD2004} argued that such a
164: break may be due to ultracompact binaries. Although
165: \citet{KF2003} argue that no break was required in NGC~4697 after
166: correcting for incompleteness, they do find that a break near
167: $5\times10^{38} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$ gives an improved fit compared
168: to a single power-law for a uniformly selected, incompleteness
169: corrected sample of 14 early-type galaxies. At the faint end,
170: \citet{VG2005} found that the LF in \object[NGC 5128]{Cen A}
171: flattens significantly below $5\times10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$ and
172: follows the $dN/dL \propto L^{-1}$ law in agreement with the behavior
173: found for LMXBs in the Milky Way and the bulge of M31. One
174: interpretation of this break in the Milky Way LF is that there are two
175: populations of short $(\lesssim 20 {\rm \, hr})$ period LMXBs: those
176: where magnetized stellar winds dominate mass transfer, and those where
177: gravitational radiation drives the accretion \citep{PK2005}.
178: Measuring and understanding the LF of LMXBs in early-type galaxies has
179: clear implications in our understanding of the number and type of binary
180: systems that make up the zoo of LMXBs.
181:
182: As more LMXBs are detected and characterized, more examples of extragalactic
183: LMXB candidates with extreme behaviors, such as supersoft sources (SSs) and
184: ultraluminous X-ray sources (ULXs) are being identified by {\it Chandra} and
185: studied in
186: greater detail. The SSs have very soft X-ray spectra $(\lesssim 75 {\rm \, eV})$
187: similar to SSs in our Galaxy and M31 that are generally believed to be accreting
188: white dwarfs (WDs); however, the bolometric luminosities of extragalactic SSs
189: can exceed the Eddington luminosity for a Chandrasekhar mass WD. One hypothesis
190: is that these sources contain intermediate-mass ($\sim 10^2$--$10^3 \,
191: M_{\sun}$) accreting BHs \citep{SGS+2002}. A great deal of attention has been
192: spent on ULXs, which we define as $L_{X} > 2 \times 10^{39} {\rm \, ergs \,
193: s}^{-1}$ (0.3--10.0 keV). However, except possibly for LMXB candidates in
194: \object{NGC 720} \citep{JCB+2003},
195: \object{NGC 1399}
196: \citep{ALM2001}, \object{NGC 1600} \citep{SSC2004},
197: and NGC~4482 \citep{MKZ+2007},
198: ULXs are generally not found within old
199: stellar systems beyond the number expected from
200: unrelated foreground or background sources \citep{IBA2004}.
201:
202: By stacking multi-epoch {\it Chandra} observations of an early-type
203: galaxy, more, fainter LMXB candidates can be studied, and brighter
204: LMXB candidates can be studied in greater detail.
205: In this Paper, we report on multi-epoch {\it Chandra} X-ray
206: observations of
207: NGC~4697, one of the nearest
208: \citep[$11.3 {\rm \, Mpc}$; see footnote 18 of][]{JCB+2005}
209: optically luminous ($M_B < -20$) elliptical (E6) galaxy.
210: (There is a weak disk; however, it not comparable to those seen in lenticular
211: galaxies \citep{PDI+1990}).
212: We adopted the 2MASS Point Source
213: Catalog
214: \citep{SCS+2006}
215: position of R.A.\ $= 12^{\rm h} 48^{\rm m} 35\fs90$ and Dec.\
216: $= -5\arcdeg48\arcmin02\farcs6$ as the location of the center of
217: NGC~4697 and the Third Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies (RC3)
218: optical photometry values
219: for the effective radius
220: ($r_{\rm eff}=72\farcs0$),
221: position angle ($PA=70\arcdeg$, measured from north to east), and ellipticity
222: ($e=0.354$), which assumes a de Vaucouleurs profile \citep{VVC+1992}.
223: From these values, we calculate the optical photometry's effective
224: semi-major distance ($a_{\rm eff} = 89\farcs6$).
225: This galaxy lies $\sim 5 {\rm \, Mpc}$
226: in front of the bulk of the galaxies in the Virgo cluster, and
227: is $18\fdg7$ south of \object{M87}, the galaxy at the dynamical
228: center of the Virgo cluster.
229: We also report on the GC/LMXB connection as determined from a joint
230: observation of the central region by the {\it Hubble Space Telescope}
231: Advance Camera for Surveys \citep[{\it HST}-ACS;][]{FBB+1998}.
232:
233: In \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_obs}, we discuss the observations and data
234: reduction of NGC~4697. The X-ray image and the detection of X-ray sources
235: are discussed in \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_image} and
236: \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_detections}. In \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_opt_ids}, we discuss
237: the optical counterparts from ground-based and {\it HST} observations.
238: We examine the GC/LMXB connection in detail in \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_gclmxb}.
239: The analyses of luminosity, hardness ratios, and spectra are considered
240: in \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_src_lum}--\ref{sec:n4697x_src_spectra}.
241: Finally, we summarize our
242: conclusions in \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_conclusion}.
243: We concentrate on the variability of the
244: X-ray sources in our companion paper (Sivakoff et al.\ 2008b, hereafter Paper V).
245: Unless otherwise noted,
246: all errors refer to $1 \sigma $ confidence intervals, count rates are
247: in the $0.3$--$6 {\rm \, keV}$ band, and fluxes and luminosities
248: are in the $0.3$--$10 {\rm \, keV}$ band, with absorption effects removed.
249:
250: \section{Observations and Data Reduction}
251: \label{sec:n4697x_obs}
252:
253: \subsection{\itshape Chandra X-ray Observatory}
254: {\it Chandra} has observed NGC~4697 five times,
255: 2000 January 15, 2003 December 26, 2004 January 06, February 02, and
256: August 18, using the ACIS detector for live exposures of 39260, 39920,
257: 35683, 38103, and $40046\, {\rm s}$
258: (Observations
259: \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/00784]{0784},
260: \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04727]{4727},
261: \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04728]{4728},
262: \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04729]{4729}, and
263: \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04730]{4730}).
264: Observation 0784 was operated at
265: $-110 ^{\circ} \,{\rm C}$ with a frame time of $3.2 {\rm \, s}$, and the
266: ACIS-23678 chips were telemetered and cleaned in Faint mode.
267: Observations 4727, 4728, 4729, 4730 (hereafter the Cycle-5
268: observations) were operated at $-120 ^{\circ} \,{\rm C}$ with frame times
269: of $3.1 {\rm \, s}$, and the ACIS-35678 chips were telemetered and
270: cleaned in Very-Faint mode. Since the X-ray point spread function
271: (PSF) increases with the distance between point sources and the optical
272: axis of {\it Chandra}, the Cycle-5 pointings were determined to
273: maximize field-of-view (FOV) while placing the galaxy center close to
274: the optical axis and away from node boundaries on the S3 chip. The
275: analysis in this Paper is based on data from the S3 chip alone,
276: although a number of serendipitous sources were seen on the other
277: chips. The elliptical area common to all five observations on the S3
278: chip ($a < 220\arcsec$) corresponds to 74\% of the integrated light
279: for a de Vaucouleurs profile. Known aspect offsets were applied to
280: each observation. Our analysis includes only events with ASCA grades
281: of 0, 2, 3, 4, and 6. Photon energies were determined using the gain
282: files acisD1999-09-16gainN0005.fits (Observation 0784) and
283: acisD2000-01-29gain\_ctiN0001.fits (Cycle-5 observations). In the
284: latter cases, we corrected for the time dependence of the gain and the
285: charge-transfer inefficiency. All five observations were corrected for
286: quantum efficiency (QE) degradation and had exposure maps determined
287: at $750 {\rm \, eV}$. We excluded bad pixels, bad columns, and
288: columns adjacent to bad columns or chip node boundaries.
289:
290: Although {\it Chandra} is known to encounter periods of high background
291: (``background flares''), which especially affect the
292: backside-illuminated S1 and S3 chips\footnote{See
293: \url{http://cxc.harvard.edu/contrib/maxim/acisbg/}\label{ftn:4697_bkg}.},
294: the use of local backgrounds and small extraction regions in the point source
295: analysis mitigates the effect of flaring. To avoid periods with extreme flaring
296: we only included times where the blank-sky rate was less than three times the
297: expected blank-sky rate derived from calibrated blank-sky backgrounds. For
298: Observation 0784, the S3 chip itself, excluding regions of emission, was used as
299: the observed blank-sky and checked against Maxim Markevitch's
300: aciss\_B\_7\_bg\_evt\_271103.fits blank-sky
301: background\footnotemark[\ref{ftn:4697_bkg}] using $0.3$--$10.0 {\rm \, keV}$
302: count rates. For the Cycle-5 observations, the other back-illuminated chip,
303: S1, was available. Here, we used this chip, excluding
304: regions of emission, and compared to the blank-sky background in CALDB using
305: $2.5$--$6.0 {\rm \, keV}$ count rates. Minimal time was lost in all observations
306: due to the binning used to check the rates; more extensive time was lost in
307: Observation 4729 due to a large background flare. No periods of data dropout
308: were observed. Final flare-filtered live exposure times for the five
309: observations were 37174, 39919, 35601, 32038, and $40044 {\rm \, s}$.
310:
311: We registered the Cycle-5 observations astrometry against the
312: Observation 0784 astrometry (see \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_detections}).
313: No absolute astrometric correction was necessary (see
314: \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_cat_ids}.). For imaging and source detection only,
315: we created a merged events file and exposure map with a live exposure
316: time of $184775 {\rm \, s}$. In this Paper and Paper V, we analyze the 158
317: sources detected from the merged events file.
318:
319: All {\it Chandra} observations were analyzed using {\sc ciao 3.1}%
320: \footnote{See \url{http://asc.harvard.edu/ciao/}.}
321: with {\sc caldb 2.28} and NASA's {\sc ftools 5.3}%
322: \footnote{See
323: \url{http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/software/lheasoft/}%
324: \label{ftn:heasoft}.}. Source positions and extraction regions were
325: refined using ACIS Extract 3.34%
326: \footnote{See \url{http://www.astro.psu.edu/xray/docs/TARA/%
327: ae\_users\_guide.html}.}. All spectra
328: were fit using {\sc xspec}\footnotemark[\ref{ftn:heasoft}].
329:
330: \subsection{\itshape Hubble Space Telescope}
331:
332: We observed the center of NGC~4697 with the {\it Hubble Space
333: Telescope Advance Camera for Surveys} (HST-ACS), acquiring two $375
334: {\rm \, s}$ exposures in the F475W ($g$) band, two $560 {\rm \,
335: s}$ exposures in the F850LP ($z$) band, and one $90 {\rm \, s}$
336: F850LP exposure. Source detection and characterization were performed
337: similarly to \citet{JBP+2004}, leading to a list of globular clusters
338: (GCs) and other optical sources.
339: We fit PSF convolved \citet{K1966c} models to all
340: detected sources using the code KINGPHOT described in
341: \citet{JCB+2005}.
342: In addition to best-fit magnitudes $g$ and $z$, the code returns the best-fit
343: half-light radius $r_h$ for each source. Details concerning the HST-ACS
344: observation, data analysis, and optical source properties are given in
345: Jord\'{a}n et al.\ (2008, in preparation).
346:
347: \section{X-ray Image}
348: \label{sec:n4697x_image}
349:
350: \begin{figure*}
351: \plotone{f1.eps}
352: \caption[Raw X-ray Greyscale X-ray Image of NGC~4697: S3 FOV]{
353: {\it Chandra} S3 image (0.3--$6 {\rm \, keV}$) of NGC~4697 from all
354: five observations combined.
355: This image has not been corrected for background or exposure, and has
356: not been smoothed.
357: The grey scale varies with the logarithm of the
358: X-ray surface brightness, which ranges from 1 to $25 {\rm \, count
359: \, pixel}^{-1}$. (The ACIS pixels are $0\farcs492$ square.) The
360: optical center of NGC~4697 is marked by ``OC''. The positions of
361: detected sources outside of the central $3\arcmin \times 3 \arcmin$ in
362: the image are indicated by their source numbers from
363: Table~\ref{tab:n4697x_src}; the source numbers are ordered by
364: increasing distance from the center of the galaxy.
365: The FOV of each observation is indicated by a labeled black square
366: and the D25 ellipse is shown.
367: (D25 is the elliptical isophote with a surface brightness of 25 mag
368: per arcsec in the $B$-band.)
369: \label{fig:n4697x_raw_whole}}
370: \end{figure*}
371:
372: \begin{figure*}
373: \plotone{f2.eps}
374: \caption[Raw X-ray Greyscale Image of NGC~4697: Central $3\arcmin \times 3 \arcmin$ FOV]
375: {
376: {\it Chandra} S3 image (0.3--$6 {\rm \, keV}$) of the central
377: $3\arcmin \times 3 \arcmin$ of NGC~4697 from all five observations.
378: The optical center of NGC~4697 lies within the circle for Source 1.
379: The grey scale is the same as in Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_raw_whole}.
380: The positions of detected sources in the image are indicated by their
381: source numbers from Table~\ref{tab:n4697x_src}
382: \label{fig:n4697x_raw_center}}
383: \end{figure*}
384:
385: \begin{figure*}
386: \plotone{f3.eps}
387: \caption[Adaptively Smoothed Representative-Color X-ray Image of NGC~4697: S3 FOV]
388: {
389: Adaptively smoothed {\it Chandra} representative-color S3 image (with red =
390: 0.3--$1 {\rm \, keV}$, green = 1--$2 {\rm \, keV}$, and blue = 2--$6 \, {\rm
391: keV}$) of NGC~4697 (all five observations), corrected for exposure and blank-sky
392: background. The intensity scale for the colors is logarithmic and ranges from $5
393: \times 10^{-7}$ to $1 \times 10^{-5} {\rm \, count \, s}^{-1}{\rm \,
394: arcsec}^{-2}$ in total surface brightness. The D25 ellipse is shown.
395: \label{fig:n4697x_adaptive_whole}}
396: \end{figure*}
397:
398: \begin{figure*}
399: \plotone{f4.eps}
400: \caption[Adaptively Smoothed Representative-Color X-ray Image of NGC~4697: Central $3\arcmin \times 3 \arcmin$ FOV]
401: {
402: Adaptively smoothed {\it Chandra} representative-color S3 image (with red =
403: 0.3--$1 {\rm \, keV}$, green = 1--$2 {\rm \, keV}$, and blue = 2--$6
404: \, {\rm keV}$) of the central $3\arcmin \times 3 \arcmin$ of NGC~4697
405: (all five observations), corrected for exposure and blank-sky
406: background.
407: The color scaling is the same as in
408: Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_adaptive_whole}.
409: \label{fig:n4697x_adaptive_center}}
410: \end{figure*}
411:
412: In \citetalias{SIB2000} and \citetalias{SIB2001}, it was shown
413: that most of the X-ray emission in NGC~4697 is resolved into point
414: sources. We display the raw {\it Chandra} image from the combination
415: of all five observations in the 0.3--$6 {\rm \, keV}$ band in
416: Figures~\ref{fig:n4697x_raw_whole} and
417: \ref{fig:n4697x_raw_center}. These images are roughly consistent with
418: the previously published data; new sources have been detected due to
419: greater sensitivity, source variability, and increased FOV. The FOV of
420: the five observations, as well as a finding chart for the X-ray
421: sources, are overlaid on the raw images.
422:
423: To contrast the detected sources with the diffuse emission, we
424: adaptively smoothed the {\it Chandra} S3 X-ray raw image using a
425: minimum signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) per smoothing beam of 3. We then
426: applied these smoothing scales to background-subtracted,
427: exposure-corrected images in the soft (0.3--$1 {\rm \, keV}$),
428: medium (1--$2 {\rm \, keV}$), and hard (2--$6 {\rm \, keV}$) bands.
429: The background includes the readout artifact in ACIS
430: and the deep blank-sky backgrounds compiled by
431: Maxim Markevitch\footnotemark[\ref{ftn:4697_bkg}].
432: We combined these three bands
433: to create a logarithmically scaled image between $5 \times 10^{-7}$ and
434: $1 \times 10^{-5} {\rm \, count \, s}^{-1}{\rm \, arcsec}^{-2}$
435: in total surface brightness.
436: The resulting representative-color images of the entire galaxy and of the central
437: $3\arcmin \times 3 \arcmin$ region are shown in
438: Figures~\ref{fig:n4697x_adaptive_whole} and
439: \ref{fig:n4697x_adaptive_center}.
440: There is clearly soft (red) diffuse emission near the center of NGC~4697.
441: The majority of the sources stand out clearly in color from the soft
442: diffuse gas, appearing yellow to green.
443: There are some soft sources which appear to
444: be associated with NGC~4697 based on their concentration towards the
445: center of the galaxy, while most of the hardest (blue) sources, which
446: are likely to be absorbed AGNs (see
447: \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_src_colors}), tend to lie in the outer regions of
448: the image.
449:
450: \section{X-ray Source Detection}
451: \label{sec:n4697x_detections}
452:
453: In Table~\ref{tab:n4697x_src}, we list all discrete sources detected
454: by {\sc wavdetect} over the 0.3--6~keV range. We ordered the sources
455: by increasing projected radial distance from the center of the galaxy,
456: $d$. Columns 1--8 provide the source number, IAU name, source position
457: (J2000), projected radial distance, projected semi-major distance from
458: the center of NGC~4697, $a$, photometric count rate with its
459: $1 \sigma$ error, and
460: S/N for the count rate.
461: Photon errors were calculated using the upper
462: Gehrels error approximation of $1+\sqrt{N+0.75}$ \citep{G1986}.
463: For comparison with \citetalias{SIB2001},
464: column 10 lists the source number used there. Notes for each source are
465: listed in column 11. The derived parameters and notes are expanded
466: upon in the text below.
467:
468: To identify the discrete X-ray source population, we applied the
469: wavelet detection algorithm ({\sc ciao wavdetect} program) with
470: $\sqrt{2}$ scales ranging from 1 to 32 pixels with a source detection
471: threshold of $10^{-6}$.
472: Source detection was not done in regions with
473: an exposure of less then 10\% of the total for the observation.
474: We expect $\la 1$
475: false source (due to a statistical fluctuation in the background) for
476: each S3 image.
477: The source detections were first done on each observation separately to
478: create a
479: source list against which to register the astrometry.
480: We detected 97, 78, 87, 77, and 98 sources in Observations 0784, 4727,
481: 4728, 4729, and 4730. We then registered the astrometry of each
482: Cycle-5 observation against Observation 0784. Using 55, 56, 51, and 55
483: sources matched to within $0\farcs5$, the relative astrometry
484: corrections were $0\farcs31$, $0\farcs38$, $0\farcs31$, and
485: $0\farcs48$.
486:
487: To maximize S/N, we analyzed the wavelet detection results from the
488: combination of the five observations
489: (Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_raw_whole}). Since there were five
490: approximately equally sensitive observations, we reduced the exposure
491: threshold of this merged source detection to 2\% of the total.
492: There was a 50\%
493: increase in the FOV compared to a single S3 chip, so we
494: expect $\la 1.5$ false source. We detected 158 sources. All of the
495: detections in Observation 0784 were in the merged detection list. In
496: the Cycle-5 observations, a few weak detections were not found in the
497: merged detection list. None of these detections would have fluxes
498: determined at the $\ge 3 \sigma$ level; detections not in the merged
499: detection list are not discussed further in this Paper.
500:
501: Working from the coordinate list generated by {\sc wavdetect}, we used ACIS
502: Extract to create source extraction and masking regions, as well as refine the
503: source positions. For each observation, we created a source extraction region
504: consistent with the X-ray PSF at the source position. Most of the regions
505: encircled 90\% of the flux in the X-ray PSF at $\approx 1.5 {\rm \, keV}$. For
506: sources whose median photon energy over all five observations was not $\sim
507: 0.6$--$2.6\, {\rm keV}$, we determined the PSF at either $\approx 0.3 {\rm \,
508: keV}$ (Sources 19, 23, 25, 62, and 78) or $\approx 4.5 {\rm \, keV}$ (Sources
509: 96, 119, and 138). We used a lower percentage of the PSF in the case of few
510: sources whose regions would otherwise have overlapped in one of the observations
511: (85\% for Sources 2/5; 80\% for Sources 49/50; 50\% for Sources 72/73).
512: The {\sc wavdetect} source extents were compared to the PSF sizes at the
513: locations of the sources; all were consistent except those for Sources
514: 8, 22, 123, and 158. Thus, these sources may be extended or multiple,
515: and are marked with a note in Table~\ref{tab:n4697x_src}. Masking
516: circular regions around the source at a radius encircling $>97\%$ of
517: the PSF were created for every source.
518:
519: The refined source positions for a majority of the sources came from
520: the average position of 0.3--$6 {\rm \, keV}$ photons in the source
521: extraction regions. For Sources 142, 148, 152, and 154--158, whose
522: average positional offset from the optical axis is more than $5\arcmin$,
523: we correlated the 0.3--$6 {\rm \, keV}$ photons near the {\sc
524: wavdetect} coordinates against the average X-ray PSF of each source to
525: refine their positions.
526:
527: To subtract out overlapping diffuse gas and background emission we
528: used a local background with an area approximately three times that of
529: each source's extraction region. The background region excluded
530: photons in the masking region. In cases where background regions
531: overlapped or fell along node/chip boundaries, we slightly altered
532: these overlapping regions, preserving the ratio of source to
533: background areas and ensuring that the source region and background
534: region had similar mean exposures.
535:
536: The observed net count rates, their errors, and the S/Ns were calculated by
537: stacking the observations, correcting for background photons, and
538: dividing by the sum of the mean exposures over each source region.
539:
540: We list the results of all analyses for all sources in this Paper's
541: tables; however, we restrict discussion of sources, except for
542: identification of possible optical counterparts, to the 126 that have
543: photometric count rates determined at the $\ge 3 \sigma$ level. These
544: significantly detected sources, hereafter the Analysis Sample, all
545: have at least 18 net counts.
546:
547: The minimum detected count rate in the 0.3--$6 {\rm \, keV}$ band for
548: our Analysis Sample sources is $1.0 \times 10^{-4} {\rm \, counts \,
549: s}^{-1}$. This count rate is 2.6 times as deep as the count rate from
550: Observation 0784 alone \citepalias{SIB2001}. Three sources below the
551: Analysis limit (136, 152, 157) but with count rates above $10^{-4}
552: {\rm \, counts \, s}^{-1}$ are not covered by all five
553: observations. The other sources below the Analysis limit reach count
554: rates as low as $\sim 5 \times 10^{-5}{\rm \, counts \, s}^{-1}$.
555:
556: We estimated the completeness of all sources through simulations
557: using {\sc marx 4.0.8}%
558: \footnote{See \url{http://space.mit.edu/CXC/MARX/}.}%
559: . We used the normalized background generated by {\sc wavdetect} and the
560: photometrically determined counts (after PSF corrections) to perform 400
561: simulated runs of our five observations of NGC~4697. The resulting completeness
562: correction factor, $c_{\rm sim}$, the ratio of the number of times a source was
563: simulated to the number of times it was detected, is accurate to $\sim 5\%$ for
564: the majority of sources; however, the uncertainty increases to $\sim 12\%$ for
565: the largest correction factors. All sources with observed count rates $>10^{-4}
566: {\rm \, counts \, ~s}^{-1}$ had correction factors $< 1.1$ except for Sources
567: 72, 102, and 158. In the simulations, Sources 72 and 73 were often confused as
568: one source with a position closer to Source 73. Sources 102 and 158 had $c_{\rm
569: sim}=1.12$. The average completeness correction factor in the Analysis Sample is
570: $\sim 1.01$. For sources not in the Analysis Sample, $c_{\rm sim}$ averaged
571: $\sim 1.99$, and reached as high as 5.71 for the weakest sources. Our
572: completeness results are roughly consistent with \citet{KF2003}.
573:
574: There are objects unrelated to NGC~4697 among the detected sources. Since the
575: FOV sampled by the ChaMP survey \citep{KWG+2004} is larger than the {\it
576: Chandra} deep fields, the source counts from the former should be less
577: susceptible to cosmic variance. Therefore, we chose to use their soft band
578: source counts to estimate the number of foreground or background objects at
579: different flux levels. At the flux limit of our Analysis Sample, $\sim 9 \times
580: 10^{-16} {\rm \, erg \, cm}^{-2} {\rm \, ~s}^{-1}$, we expect $\approx 29$
581: foreground or background objects, including corrections for exposure and
582: completeness. We estimate $\approx 7$ of the sources outside of the Analysis
583: Sample are also unrelated to NGC~4697. Since these sources should be fairly
584: uniform over the FOV, sources close to NGC~4697 are more likely to be associated
585: with the galaxy than sources farther out.
586:
587: \section{Optical Counterpart Identification}
588: \label{sec:n4697x_opt_ids}
589:
590: \subsection{Existing Catalog Identifications}
591: \label{sec:n4697x_cat_ids}
592:
593: The refined source positions of seven X-ray sources from the combined S3 image
594: agreed with positions from the Tycho-2 Catalog
595: \citep{HFM+2000},
596: the 2MASS Point Source and Extended Source Catalogs \citep{SCS+2006},
597: and/or
598: the USNO-B Catalog \citep{MLC+2003}.
599: (When a source appeared in both 2MASS catalogs, the Point Source Catalog
600: positions were used.)
601: In cases where there are counterparts in multiple catalogs,
602: we adopt the positions in the order of the catalogs listed above.
603: These seven sources (15, 55, 84, 117, 149, 155, and 156) were used to
604: check the absolute astrometry.
605: Since the mean positional offset of the
606: sources was $0\farcs07\pm0\farcs30$ in R.A. and
607: $0\farcs10\pm0\farcs27$ in Dec., the ACIS Extract positions are
608: consistent with no required absolute astrometric change. The typical
609: absolute astrometric errors are probably $\sim 0\farcs4$ near the
610: field center, with larger errors for weaker sources with extended
611: PSFs.
612:
613: Having established the absolute astrometry, we conservatively
614: considered all optical sources within $2\arcsec$ as potential optical
615: counterparts. We summarize their optical properties in
616: Table~\ref{tab:n4697xo_gb_src}. The first three columns list the X-ray
617: source number, designation of the optical counterpart, and positional
618: offset between the X-ray and optical catalogs. In the fourth column,
619: we list the photometric properties of the optical counterpart, while
620: we list notes about the optical properties in the fifth column. We
621: classify the counterpart as optically extended or an optical point
622: source. For 2MASS objects, we use its values of the reduced $\chi^2$
623: for fitting PSFs to each source in each
624: band (a reduced $\chi^2 > 2$
625: indicates the optical counterpart is extended, and may be a
626: galaxy). For the USNO-B1 objects, we use their star-galaxy separation
627: class (objects in the lower half of classes are classified as
628: optically extended). We add a question-mark when we are unsure of the
629: classification. Typically this occurs because
630: galaxy light may have contaminated the analysis or because the
631: classification in at least one color differs significantly from the
632: other colors.
633:
634: In addition to the sources used to check astrometry, Sources 1, 8, and
635: 118 have potential optical counterparts. Since Source 1 is $0\farcs5$
636: away from the adopted center of NGC~4697, it may be a central AGN.
637: Since this source could also be an LMXB (or several confused LMXBs)
638: near the center of the galaxy, we did not use this match to check the
639: astrometry. The optical counterparts of Sources 8, 15, 117, 118, and
640: 155 appear to be optically extended. We note that Source 117 is a
641: known AGN \citepalias{SIB2001}. Although Source 118 is associated with
642: \object{2MASX J12483504-0550473} in NED, that source is actually
643: $12\arcsec$ away and its counterpart, USNO-B1 0841-0238567, is clearly
644: different on Digital Sky Survey (DSS) images. Since the extrapolated
645: fiducial radius of \object{2MASX J12483504-0550473} is $6\farcs2$, it
646: is unlikely that Source 118 is associated with that galaxy. Sources
647: 55, 84, 149, and 156 appear point-like from the ground; Source 156 is
648: clearly the bright foreground star \object{BD-05 3573}. Finally, we
649: note that Sources 103, 123, 132, 143 may have uncatalogued
650: counterparts on DSS second generation images. Footnotes in
651: Table~\ref{tab:n4697x_src} indicate X-ray sources with possible
652: optical counterparts.
653:
654: In \citet{SIB2001}, associations with GCs in lists of \citet{H1977} and
655: Kavelaars (2000, private communication) were made. Sources 101 and 117 were
656: previously identified with \citet{H1977} GC candidates; we find no new GC-LMXB
657: candidates among the \citet{H1977} sources and note that Source 117 and its
658: optical counterpart has already been shown to actually be an AGN. Sources 79,
659: 80, 83, 84, 86, 88, 93, 98, 101, 109, 113, and 114 are associated with GC
660: candidates in the Kavelaars data, with Sources 79, 86, 88, 93, and 113
661: representing new detections. Some of the Kavelaars GC candidates with potential
662: X-ray counterparts are also in the HST-ACS FOV discussed in
663: \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_hst_ids} (Sources 79, 80, 83, 84, 86). The measured colors
664: and sizes from the HST-ACS observations allow us to more accurately identify GC
665: candidates. The colors of Source 84 suggest it is not a GC, while the other
666: sources have colors and sizes consistent with GCs. Since the Hanes and Kavelaars
667: GC datasets do not have the same sensitivity or measured properties of the
668: HST-ACS dataset or of our recently obtained flanking field ACS observations, we
669: will not make further use of GC counterparts outside of the HST-ACS central FOV
670: here.
671:
672: We matched the X-ray sources with a previous {\it ROSAT-HRI} X-ray
673: observation of NGC~4697 \citep[][hereafter
674: \citetalias{ISB2000}]{ISB2000}. Twelve sources within $4\arcmin$
675: of NGC~4697 were detected by {\it ROSAT-HRI} with $L_X \gtrsim 2.6
676: \times 10^{38} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$, after correcting for the
677: distance and spectra we use in this Paper. We match
678: \citetalias{ISB2000} Sources 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, and 12 with
679: this Paper's Sources 103, 80, 69, 54, 118, 58, 128, 117,
680: 143. Confusion in the center of NGC~4697 limits matching
681: \citetalias{ISB2000} Source 7 with this Paper's Sources 1, 3, 4, and
682: 6; although it is likely matched to this Paper's Source 1, which is
683: the brightest of the four sources. Similarly, confusion limits
684: matching \citetalias{ISB2000} Source 8 with this Paper's Sources 6, 7,
685: 10, and 11. We clearly do not detect
686: \citetalias{ISB2000} Source 3.
687:
688: We also matched sources with \citetalias{SIB2001}, whose data
689: (Observation 0784) is a subset of the data in this Paper. We list
690: those matches in Table~\ref{tab:n4697x_src}. Only two
691: \citetalias{SIB2001} sources (7 and 87) are undetected in the larger
692: dataset. \citetalias{SIB2001} Sources 7 and 10 are separated by only
693: $1\farcs1$. It is unclear whether they are a single source.
694: \citetalias{SIB2001} Source 87 was near the limit of the S/N in
695: \citetalias{SIB2001}. It was not detected in the individual
696: reanalysis of Observation 0784, even when detections were made in the
697: 0.3--10~keV range to match \citetalias{SIB2001}.
698:
699: \subsection{HST-ACS Identifications}
700: \label{sec:n4697x_hst_ids}
701:
702: In our HST-ACS observation, we placed the center of NGC~4697
703: $\sim 20\arcsec$ from the center of the ACS FOV to avoid a chip
704: boundary. Within this FOV, we can identify optical sources and
705: separate out the GCs using a combination of magnitude, color, and
706: spatial extent. This method is discussed in detail in \citet{PJC+2006}
707: and Jord\'{a}n et al.\ (2008, in preparation). Out of 703 optical
708: sources, there are 298 GC candidates.
709:
710: We registered the HST observation to the Chandra observation using all 703
711: optical sources. Through cross-correlation techniques, we determined that the
712: HST coordinates required astrometric shifts of $-0\farcs27$ in R.A. and
713: $-0\farcs42$ in Dec. Based on singly matched sources within $1\arcsec$, we
714: estimate a relative astrometric error of $0\farcs21$ and $0\farcs25$ in R.A. and
715: Dec., respectively, or $0\farcs32$ in quadrature. Since most of these matches
716: occur close to the X-ray pointing center, it is not surprising that this
717: astrometric error is slightly smaller than the astrometric error derived from
718: ground-based catalogs. After correcting the astrometry, we determined that the
719: ACS FOV covers X-ray Sources 1--67, 69--87, 89, 94, and 108. Due to a prominent
720: elliptical dust feature ($\approx 7.0 \arcsec \times 1.7 \arcsec$ or $\approx
721: 384 {\rm \, pc} \times 93 {\rm \, pc}$), we did not attempt to detect optical
722: sources in the region of X-ray Sources 1--5 and 8. X-ray Source 68 falls in the
723: chip boundary. Adopting a search radius of $1\arcsec$, we find 42 optical
724: counterparts to 39 X-ray sources; three X-ray sources have two candidate optical
725: counterparts within $1\arcsec$. Thirty-three of the X-ray sources are associated
726: with a single GC counterpart, while one X-ray source is likely to be associated
727: with one of two potential GC counterparts. We list the optical properties of the
728: matched sources in Table~\ref{tab:n4697xo_hst_src}.
729:
730: By randomizing the P.A. of a source list, assuming both a circular profile and a
731: profile matching the galaxy's elliptical isophotes, we have determined the
732: percentage of false matches within a given radius. Randomizing the optical
733: source list, we find that $\approx 6.8\%$ of X-ray sources without a physically
734: associated optical source will have a false optical match within $1\arcsec$.
735: This is consistent with only 3/39 of the X-ray/optical matches being false. If
736: one considers only the GCs, $\approx 4.2\%$ of X-ray sources will have a false
737: match. This is consistent with only 2/34 of the X-ray/GC matches being false.
738: Randomizing the X-ray source list, we find that $\approx 0.73\%$ of GC sources
739: without a physically associated X-ray sources will have a false optical match
740: within $1\arcsec$. Finally, randomizing the optical source list and comparing to
741: the unrandomized optical positions suggests that $\approx 1.8$ X-ray sources
742: will be matched to two optical sources within $1\arcsec$ by chance; we find
743: three such matches.
744:
745: \section{GC/LMXB Connection}
746: \label{sec:n4697x_gclmxb}
747:
748: Having identified the LMXBs associated with GCs and determined the percentage of
749: falsely matched sources, we now explore the GC/LMXB connection. The broadest
750: measures of the GC/LMXB connection are the fraction of LMXBs associated with GCs
751: and the fraction of GCs associated with LMXBs. The fraction of LMXBs associated
752: with GCs, $f_{X,{\rm GC}}$, is $38.4^{+6.1}_{-5.7}\%$ and does not appear to
753: depend on X-ray luminosity. On the other hand, the fraction of GCs with an LMXB,
754: $P_{X}$, naturally depends on the limiting X-ray luminosity. The result is shown
755: in Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_frac_gc_w_lmxb}. In NGC~4697, and other early-type
756: galaxies \citep{SKI+2003}, $P_{X} \approx 4\%$ above $10^{38} {\rm \, ergs \,
757: s}^{-1}$. At the limit of our Analysis Sample, $1.4 \times 10^{37} {\rm \, ergs
758: \, s}^{-1}$, $P_{X}$ has increased to $8.1^{+1.9}_{-1.6}\%$ ($\sim 2.7 \times
759: 10^{-7}$ LMXBs per $L_{\odot,z}$ normalizing LMXB detection to GC luminosity in
760: the $z$ band). Among all detected sources ($L_{X} > 0.6 \times 10^{37} {\rm \,
761: ergs \, s}^{-1}$), $P_{X}$ rises to $10.7^{+2.1}_{-1.8}\%$ ($\sim 3.5 \times
762: 10^{-7}$ LMXBs per $L_{\odot,z}$). Since we are incomplete below the limit of
763: our Analysis Sample and active LMXBs have $L_X \gtrsim 10^{36} {\rm \, ergs \,
764: s}^{-1}$, it is likely that the percentage of GCs with an active LMXB is even
765: higher.
766:
767: \begin{figure}
768: \plotone{f5.eps}
769: \caption[Percentage of GCs with an LMXB vs.\ Limiting X-ray Luminosity in NGC~4697]{
770: Percentage of GCs with an LMXB within $1\arcsec$, corrected for random
771: associations, as a function of the limiting X-ray luminosity.
772: The detection limits for all sources and for the Analysis
773: Sample ($3 \sigma$) are indicated.
774: \label{fig:n4697x_frac_gc_w_lmxb}}
775: \end{figure}
776:
777: \begin{figure*}
778: \plottwo{f6a.eps}{f6b.eps}
779: \caption[Color Magnitude Diagram of GCs in NGC~4697]
780: {
781: Color ($g-z$) - magnitude ($M_{Z}$) diagram ({\it left})
782: and color - encounter rate ($\Gamma_{h} \propto M^{3/2} \, r_{h}^{-5/2}$)
783: diagram
784: ({\it right})
785: for GCs in HST-ACS.
786: The larger symbols indicate GCs containing
787: LMXBs.
788: The vertical line indicates the separation of GCs into
789: blue and red GC populations following \citet{PJC+2006}. LMXBs reside
790: more often in GCs with larger optically luminosities, larger encounter
791: rates, and redder colors.
792: \label{fig:n4697x_gc_cmd}}
793: \end{figure*}
794:
795: The optical properties of GCs are known to affect the GC/LMXB connection; LMXBs
796: are found more often in optically bright GCs and in red GCs \citetext{e.g.,
797: \citealt{KMZ+2003}; \citealt{SKI+2003}; \citealt{JCF+2004}; \citealt{KMZ2007};
798: \citealt{SJS+2007}, hereafter \citetalias{SJS+2007}}. The GC/LMXB connection in
799: the center of NGC~4697 clearly follows this now familiar pattern
800: (Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_gc_cmd}, {\it left}). The color dependence is often
801: interpreted as a metallicity dependence \citetext{\citetalias{SJS+2007};
802: \citealt{KMZ2007}}. In addition, the size of a globular cluster also plays a
803: role, with smaller GCs being more likely to host LMXBs
804: \citetext{\citetalias{SJS+2007}; \citealt{JSM+2007}}. Following \citet{SKI+2003}
805: and \citetalias{SJS+2007}, we have compared the distributions of GCs with and
806: without LMXBs using the two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test ($P_{\rm KS}$), which
807: measures the probability that two populations sampled from the same distribution
808: have a maximum difference at least as large as is observed, and the
809: non-parametric Wilcoxon rank-sum test \citep[$\sigma_{\rm WRS}$, equivalent to
810: the Mann-Whitney rank-sum test;][]{MW1947}, which measures the probability that
811: a random sampling of two distributions with the same median would produce at
812: least the observed difference in the sum of the ranks of the two distributions.
813:
814: First, we compared the optical luminosities of GCs (represented by their $M_z$)
815: with and without LMXBs. The mean optical magnitude of GCs with LMXBs is $1.1
816: {\rm \, mag}$ brighter then GCs without LMXBs, and we found $P_{\rm KS} = 2.6
817: \times 10^{-4}$ and $\sigma_{\rm WRS}=4.5$. That is, LMXBs are preferentially
818: associated with optically luminous GCs at high statistical significance. Next,
819: we compared the $g-z$ color distributions of GCs with and without LMXBs. The
820: mean color of GCs containing LMXBs is nearly 0.2 magnitudes redder and the
821: distributions are clearly different ($P_{\rm KS} = 3.6 \times 10^{-4}$ and
822: $\sigma_{\rm WRS}=3.0$). These results are illustrated in
823: Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_gc_cmd} ({\it left}). Quantifying the probabilities that
824: GC contain LMXBs, we find LMXBs in $4.8^{+2.7}_{-1.9}\%$ of the blue GCs ($\sim
825: 2.1 \times 10^{-7}$ LMXBs per $L_{\odot,Z}$) and $15.1^{+3.2}_{-2.8}\%$ of the
826: red GCs ($\sim 4.9 \times 10^{-7}$ LMXBs per $L_{\odot,Z}$). The relative ratio
827: of the specific frequencies for GC-LMXBs in red-GCs versus blue-GCs is smaller
828: than the ratio of the probabilities a red-GC versus a blue-GC contains an LMXB.
829: Although KS tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum test indicate the optical luminosities
830: of red and blue GCs are likely to be drawn from the same parent distribution,
831: the mean luminosity of the red-GCs is larger than the blue-GCs. We note that the
832: mean luminosities of the GCs are strongly affected by the numbers of the most
833: luminous GCs.
834:
835: \citet{JCF+2004} used HST-ACS data from M87 to compare the GC/LMXB
836: connection with the encounter rates due to tidal capture and exchange
837: interactions. The encounter rates are proportional to $\Gamma \equiv
838: \rho_0^{1.5} \, r_{\rm c}^2$, where $\rho_0$ is the central density, and $r_{\rm
839: c}$ is the core radius. These values were estimated from fitting King profiles
840: to the GC light and applying the Virial Theorem to relate the velocity of stars
841: to the core radius. They found a strong indication that dynamical processes play
842: a key role; however, the somewhat large uncertainties in the concentrations (the
843: ratio of the tidal radius to the core radius, which is uniquely related to the
844: ratio of the half-light radius to the core radius for King models) make
845: estimates of $\Gamma$ less attractive observationally as a measure of encounter
846: rates. Since the half-light radii, $r_{h}$, and surface brightnesses of GCs,
847: $\sigma_{h} \propto M \, ( r_{h})^{-2}$, are better constrained, we choose to
848: use an alternate measure of the encounter rate, $\Gamma_{h} \equiv
849: \sigma_{h}^{3/2} r_{h}^{1/2} \propto M^{3/2} r_{h}^{-5/2}$. In recent
850: observations of Centaurus A, a much closer elliptical galaxy, \citet{JSM+2007}
851: showed that concentration does not seem to be a fundamental variable in
852: determining the presence of LMXBs in GCs, with the more fundamental parameters
853: being related to central density and size. While this implies that the LMXB-GC
854: connection should be stronger for $\Gamma$ than $\Gamma_h$, results for
855: $\Gamma_h$ can be taken as representative of the more fundamental parameters of
856: central density and size. Mass segregation of GCs with the same half-mass radius
857: \citep{J2004} has been suggested as a possible explanation for a correlation
858: typically observed between half-light radius and color
859: \citep[e.g.,][]{KW2001,JCB+2005}, with redder GCs being smaller. However, that
860: correlation may also represent the convolution of an underlying
861: size-galactocentric distance relation and the different spatial distribution of
862: the metal-poor and metal-rich subpopulations of GCs \citep{LB2003,SLS+2006};
863: this is the so-called ``projection effect''. Given that the observed correlation
864: of half-light radii with color might not reflect a corresponding correlation for
865: half-mass radii, we consider an alternative to the directly measured half-light
866: radii that corrects for the empirical size-color correlation; we call this
867: corrected radii ``half-mass'' radii, $r_{h}^{\prime}$. We follow equations 1, 2,
868: 5 , and 12 of \citetalias{SJS+2007} to calculate the mass, half-mass radius,
869: encounter rate proxy $\Gamma_{h}$, and metallicity $Z$ of our GCs. We note here,
870: and throughout this section, that the choice of which radius to use ($r_h$ or
871: $r_{h}^{\prime}$) mainly alters results for the metallicity, as opposed to the
872: size.
873:
874: In Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_gc_cmd} ({\it right}), we display the color -
875: encounter rate diagram. Globular clusters with larger encounter rates are more
876: likely to contain LMXBs; the hypothesis that the distributions of encounter
877: rates are the same for GCs with and without LMXBs is rejected ($P_{\rm KS} = 1.7
878: \times 10^{-7}$ and $\sigma_{\rm WRS}=5.8$). This picture does not qualitatively
879: change if we calculate the encounter rates with the half-mass radii ($P_{\rm KS}
880: = 5.8 \times 10^{-7}$ and $\sigma_{\rm WRS}=5.5$). If LMXBs are preferentially
881: found in core-collapsed GCs, the difference between the actual encounter rates
882: of GCs with and without LMXBs will be larger than what we measured. We note that
883: the concentrations of GCs with and without LMXBs do not differ when considering
884: samples with matched masses \citep{JSM+2007}, statistically validating the use
885: of $\Gamma_h$ as a proxy for encouter rate. The correlation with encounter rate
886: is actually stronger than that found for the optical luminosity, because smaller
887: GCs appear (marginally) more likely to contain GCs in this galaxy, consistent
888: with Centaurus A \citep{JSM+2007} and the Virgo elliptical galaxies as a whole
889: \citep{SJS+2007}. When we compare the distributions of $r_h$ for GCs with and
890: without LMXBs, the hypothesis that they are the same is rejected ($P_{\rm KS} =
891: 7.3 \times 10^{-3}$ and $\sigma_{\rm WRS}=3.6$); however, part of this
892: correlation is due to the fact that redder GCs are both more likely to contain
893: LMXBs due to their color, and are also smaller for the same mass. The
894: differences between GCs with and without LMXBs are rejected more marginally when
895: comparing the distributions of $r_h^{\prime}$ ($P_{\rm KS} = 2.2 \times 10^{-2}$
896: and $\sigma_{\rm WRS}=2.6$).
897:
898: Recently, \citet{KKF+2006} suggested that $P_{X}$ may have a spatial dependence
899: due to higher encounter rates in GCs near the centers of their host galaxies.
900: Although our comparison of the projected galactocentric distances $d$ of GCs
901: with and without LMXBs does not indicate that they are drawn from two separate
902: populations at a significant level ($P_{\rm KS} = 0.21$ and $\sigma_{\rm
903: WRS}=1.6$), we do note that the median galactocentric distance of GCs with LMXBs
904: is smaller than those without. This question will be best addressed with our
905: HST-ACS observations of the entire galaxy.
906:
907: As in \citetalias{SJS+2007}, we have attempted to fit the expected number
908: ($\lambda$) of LMXBs in a GC with the sum of the false number of $\lambda_f$
909: LMXBs matched to a GC and the true expected number $\lambda_t$ parameterized by
910: power-law dependences on the GC properties. We considered the forms:
911: \begin{equation}
912: \lambda = \lambda_f +
913: A \, M^{\alpha} \,
914: (Z/Z_\odot)^{\beta} \,
915: (r)^{\delta} \, ,
916: \label{eq:expected1}
917: \end{equation}
918: and
919: \begin{equation}
920: \lambda = \lambda_f +
921: A \, (Z/Z_\odot)^{\beta} \,
922: \Gamma^{\epsilon},
923: \label{eq:expected2}
924: \end{equation}
925: where we evaluate the parameters separately using both $r_h$ and $r_h^\prime$.
926: The expected number of LMXBs in a GC can be converted to a probability that
927: there are no LMXBs, $P_{nX,i} = e^{-\lambda_i}$, and the probability that there
928: is at least one LMXB, $P_{X,i} = 1- e^{-\lambda_i}$. One can then maximize the
929: log likelihood for a given form of $\lambda$, $\psi = \ln [(\underset{nX}{\prod}
930: P_{nX}) \ (\underset{X}{\prod} P_{X})]$, where the products are taken over the
931: lists of GCs with no LMXBs and GCs with LMXBs (Table~\ref{tab:n4697gclmxb_par}).
932:
933: Although the general maximum likelihood statistic does not provide a measure of
934: goodness-of-fit, relative improvements ($\Delta \psi = -\Delta \chi^2 /2$) can
935: be used to determine whether a given fit is a statistical improvement over a
936: previous fit given the change in the number of degrees of freedom (dof). The
937: change in the log-likelihood can also be used to provide errors on the fitted
938: power-law indices. Here, we assumed that the errors in the fitting parameters in
939: equations~(\ref{eq:expected1}) \& (\ref{eq:expected2}) are much larger than the
940: uncertainties in the GC parameters ($M$, $Z$, and $r_{h}^\prime$) due to either
941: measurement errors or systematic errors in the conversions. Given the derived
942: sizes of our errors, this is justified. To use the relative change in the
943: log-likelihood ($\Delta \psi$), we first established a baseline value of the
944: log-likelihood ($\psi_0$) for the case where the expected number of LMXBs
945: $\lambda$ was constant and did not depend on any GC properties
946: (Table~\ref{tab:n4697gclmxb_par}, row 1).
947:
948: We then fit various combinations of dependencies of $\lambda$ on GC properties,
949: and determined the values of $\psi$ for the best-fit values. In rows 2--5 of
950: Table~\ref{tab:n4697gclmxb_par}, the expected number of GCs $\lambda$ is assumed
951: to depend on only a single GC property (the mass, metallicity, half-light
952: radius, or half-mass radius). Each fit is significantly better ($\Delta \chi^2 =
953: \, $$-$27.5, $-$10.4, and $-$7.8 for one less dof) than the baseline fit,
954: suggesting that all three properties affect $\lambda$, with mass having the
955: strongest effect.
956:
957: In the next two rows (6 and 7), the expected number of LMXBs is assumed to
958: depend only on the encounter rate parameter $\Gamma_h$. This fit was
959: considerably better than those for any other single parameter. Thus, it appears
960: that the most important single factor determining the occurrence of LMXBs in GCs
961: is the dynamical encounter rate. Given that the encounter rate calculated from
962: the half-light radius includes some metallicity dependence, it is not surprising
963: that it fits better than the encounter rate calculated from the half-mass
964: radius.
965:
966: In the next 7 rows (8--14), the expected number of LMXBs is assumed to depend on
967: pairs of the GC properties. It is particularly interesting to compare rows 8 and
968: 9 with rows 6 and 7. The encounter rate parameter $\Gamma_h$ is calculated from
969: the mass $M$ and the half-light (half-mass) radius $ r_h (r_h^\prime)$ (eq. 5 of
970: \citetalias{SJS+2007}). Thus, these two sets of rows compare a general
971: dependence on mass and radius with the specific form expected if LMXBs are
972: formed dynamically in GCs. The separate mass and half-light radius dependence
973: produces a marginally statistically significant better fit ($\Delta \chi^2 =
974: 3.0$, which implies $92\%$ significance), while the separate mass and half-mass
975: radius dependences produces a less significant fit ($\Delta \chi^2 = 1.8$, which
976: implies $82\%$ significance). However, both are significantly better fits than
977: just the GC mass, metallicity, or size dependence alone. In rows 8 and 9, note
978: that the best-fit exponents for the mass ($\alpha = 1.28 {\rm \ and \ } 1.31$)
979: are very close to the value predicted by the dependence on $\Gamma_h$ in rows 6
980: and 7 ($\alpha = 1.5 \times \epsilon = 1.34$ and $1.31$), although the
981: dependences on radius are steeper ($\delta = -3.35$ and $-3.19$) than predicted
982: by rows 6 and 7 ($\delta = -2.5 \times \epsilon = -2.22$ and $-2.18$).
983:
984: In rows 10--12, the metallicity dependence and either mass or radius dependence
985: are allowed to vary. Varying mass and metallicity dependences have the strongest
986: effect; however, neither effect is as strong as varying the dynamical
987: dependences (combination of mass and radius).
988:
989: When we compare fits including metallicity and sizes calculated by half-light
990: radii to metallicity and sizes calculated by half-mass radii (rows 11 and 12, 13
991: and 14, 15 and 16, and 17 and 18), we see a consistent pattern where the index
992: involving size barely changes, but the metallicity index is smaller when
993: half-light radii are used. Although this difference is not large for most of
994: these comparisons compared to their precision, the accuracy of the metallicity
995: index depends critically on which size is used. Under the mass-segregation
996: hypothesis for the GC color-size dependence \citep{J2004}, the half-mass radius
997: is clearly the correct size to use. We argue that this choice is also correct
998: under the projection effect hypothesis \citep{LB2003}; however in this case, the
999: correction to ``half-mass'' is actually a correction that is removing an effect
1000: on galactocentric distance. We note that the current analysis for NGC~4697 is
1001: insufficient to test this hypothesis.
1002:
1003: In rows 13--18, we combine dynamical dependence and metallicity dependence
1004: variations, providing the best fits to the data. We adopt row 14, dependence on
1005: metallicity and encounter rate calculated by half-mass radius, as our best fit:
1006: $\lambda_t \propto \Gamma_{h}^{0.79^{+0.18}_{-0.15}} \,
1007: (Z/Z_\odot)^{0.50^{+0.20}_{-0.18}}$. In addition to being the best statistical
1008: fit, we also note that this fit uses our preferred half-mass radius in
1009: calculating the encounter rate. The dependence on interaction rate matches well
1010: with the Galactic value found by \citet{PLA+2003} of $\lambda \propto
1011: \Gamma^{0.74\pm0.36}$. As NGC~4697 is a significant subset of the data
1012: used in \citetalias{SJS+2007}%
1013: \footnote{We note that there was a minor error in the $r_h$ of NGC~4697 used in
1014: \citetalias{SJS+2007}, but that the changes this causes are within the
1015: quoted errors.},%
1016: it is unsurprising that it matches well to the $\lambda \propto
1017: \Gamma_h^{0.82\pm0.05}$ relation determined for the GC/LMXB connection
1018: in Virgo elliptical galaxies. For comparison with \citet{JCF+2004}, we also fit
1019: the form $\lambda_t \propto \rho_0^{1.35^{+0.26}_{-0.21}} \,r_{\rm c}^2 \
1020: (Z/Z_\odot)^{0.50^{+0.20}_{-0.19}}$ (row 16); our results agree. We note that
1021: allowing mass, metallicity, and size to vary all at once (rows 17 and 18) does
1022: not significantly improve the fits compared to allowing encounter rates and
1023: metallicity to vary (rows 13 and 14).
1024:
1025: For our best fit, we find
1026: \begin{equation}
1027: \label{eq:n4697x_lambda}
1028: \lambda_t = 3.0 \times 10^{-6} \,
1029: \Gamma_{h}^{0.79^{+0.18}_{-0.15}} \,
1030: (Z/Z_\odot)^{0.50^{+0.20}_{-0.18}},
1031: \end{equation}
1032: where $\Gamma_h$ is calculated from $r_h^\prime$. Since our analysis includes
1033: matches below the completeness limit, the measured normalization is intermediate
1034: between the true normalizations at the detection limit and the completeness
1035: limit. We adopted the best-fit parameters of equation \ref{eq:n4697x_lambda} and
1036: only included matches above the completeness limit to determine that the
1037: normalization at the completeness limit of $1.4 \times 10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \,
1038: s}^{-1}$ is $2.1 \times 10^{-6}$. We can use the normalizations to estimate the
1039: number of GCs that might contain multiple LMXBs.
1040: \citep[e.g., there are two Galactic LMXBs in M15;][]{WA2001}.
1041: By summing $1 - \exp^{-\lambda} ( 1 + \lambda )$ over all the GCs, we calculate
1042: that $\sim7$ and 4 GCs contain multiple LMXBs above the detection and
1043: completeness limits, respectively. The majority of the 34 GCs we detect with
1044: LMXBs are likely to contain only one LMXB.
1045:
1046: \section{X-ray Luminosities and Luminosity Functions}
1047: \label{sec:n4697x_src_lum}
1048:
1049: We used the best-fit Chandra X-ray spectrum of the inner resolved
1050: sources ($a < a_{\rm eff}$: Table~\ref{tab:spectra_n4697}, row 3 below) and the
1051: assumption that each source was at the distance of
1052: NGC~4697 to convert
1053: the observed source count rates into unabsorbed X-ray (0.3--10 keV)
1054: luminosities ($L_X$).
1055: The fluxes were corrected for exposure (including vignetting), the time
1056: dependent QE degradation of the ACIS-S3 chip, and the PSF fraction of source
1057: counts within the region used to extract the counts. For a typical source, the
1058: individual conversion factors from observed count rates were 1.18, 1.50, 1.46,
1059: 1.46, and $1.47 \times 10^{41} {\rm \, ergs
1060: \, count}^{-1}$, for each of the observations ordered by time.
1061: We list the individual luminosities
1062: of Observations 0784 (A), 4727 (B), 4728 (C), 4729 (D), and 4730 (E)
1063: in columns 2--6 of Table~\ref{tab:n4697x_luminst}.
1064:
1065: \begin{figure}
1066: \plotone{f7.eps}
1067: \caption[Cumulative Luminosity Functions of Discrete X-ray Sources in NGC 4697: Individual Observations]{
1068: Cumulative luminosity functions for each of the five observations of
1069: the sources detected at the $> 3 \sigma$ level within $a <
1070: 220\arcsec$.
1071: The two-sample K-S tests do not indicate that any two of the observations
1072: are drawn from different populations.
1073: \label{fig:n4697x_lf_ind}}
1074: \end{figure}
1075:
1076: In Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_lf_ind}, we
1077: display the individual observation LFs of the sources in the Analysis Sample
1078: within $a < 220\arcsec$.
1079: We calculate the probability the LFs of each pair of observations are
1080: drawn from the same population using the two-sample K-S test. Since
1081: $P_{\rm KS}$ range from 0.33 (0784 versus 4727) to
1082: 0.94 (4729 versus 4730), we believe that the LFs do not change
1083: significantly on our inter-observation timescales, which vary from
1084: $11 {\rm \, d}$ to $4.6 {\rm \, yr}$.
1085:
1086: We combined the luminosities from all of the different observations;
1087: as before, we included the effects of varying exposure (including vignetting),
1088: the time dependent QE degradation of the ACIS-S3 chip, and the PSF fraction of
1089: source counts within the region used to extract the counts.
1090: We give this luminosity, combining all five
1091: observations, as $L_{\rm all}$ in Table~\ref{tab:n4697x_lumcolor}
1092: (column 4).
1093:
1094: \begin{figure}
1095: \plotone{f8.eps}
1096: \caption[Cumulative Luminosity Functions of Discrete X-ray Sources in NGC 4697: Constant Sources]
1097: {
1098: Cumulative luminosity function of the constant sources
1099: ($L_{X}=L_{\rm constant}$) detected within $a < 220\arcsec$ using
1100: their cumulative luminosity for all observations.
1101: The continuous curves are the sum of the
1102: best-fit LMXB luminosity functions (to sources detected at the
1103: $3 \sigma$ level) and the expected background source counts. The broken
1104: power law is the best fit model; however, a cutoff power law is acceptable
1105: according to the K-S test.
1106: \label{fig:n4697x_lf_constant}}
1107: \end{figure}
1108:
1109: One can compare $L_{\rm all}$ to the individual luminosities
1110: using $\chi^2$ to test if the individual values are all consistent with a
1111: constant luminosity.
1112: In Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_lf_constant}, we display the LF
1113: of sources with $a < 220\arcsec$ and a $<90\%$ probability of being
1114: variable.
1115: We fit
1116: this LF (for 68 sources in the Analysis Sample with
1117: $L_{\rm all} > 1.4 \times 10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$) using the
1118: same techniques we have used previously
1119: \citep[\citetalias{SIB2000,SIB2001};][]{BSI2001,ISB2002}.
1120: Since the average completeness correction factor in the Analysis
1121: Sample
1122: is only $\sim 1.01$, we do not apply completeness corrections
1123: for this fit.
1124: We adopted
1125: the background LF from \cite{KWG+2004}; however, we have assumed that
1126: background sources exhibit the same level of variability as the LMXBs
1127: and reduced the expected background number from 11.7 to 8.2.
1128:
1129: We modeled the LMXB populations with a single power law, a cutoff power
1130: law, and a broken power law.
1131: \begin{mathletters}
1132: \begin{eqnarray}
1133: \label{eq:n4697x_lfs}
1134: {\rm Single}: \ \ \
1135: \frac{ d N }{ d L_{37} } &=&
1136: N_{0,s} \
1137: L_{37} ^ {-\alpha_s}; \\
1138: \label{eq:n4697x_lfc}
1139: {\rm Cutoff}: \ \ \
1140: \frac{ d N }{ d L_{37} } &=&
1141: N_{0,c}
1142: \begin{cases}
1143: \left( \frac{L_X}{L_{\rm c}} \right)^{-\alpha_{\rm c}} & {\rm if \ } L_X \le L_{\rm c};\\
1144: 0 & {\rm otherwise};
1145: \end{cases}\\
1146: \label{eq:n4697x_lfb}
1147: {\rm Broken}: \ \ \
1148: \frac{ d N }{ d L_{37} } &=&
1149: N_{0,b}
1150: \begin{cases}
1151: \left( \frac{L_X}{L_{\rm b}} \right)^{-\alpha_{\rm l}} & {\rm if \ } L_X \le L_{\rm b};\\
1152: \left( \frac{L_X}{L_{\rm b}} \right)^{-\alpha_{h}} & {\rm otherwise},\\
1153: \end{cases}
1154: \end{eqnarray}
1155: \end{mathletters}%
1156: where $L_{37}$ is the X-ray luminosity in units of $10^{37} {\rm \,
1157: ergs \, s}^{-1}$. We used the maximum
1158: likelihood method to determine
1159: the best fits to the cumulative LF and Monte Carlo techniques to
1160: determine the errors (90\% confidence interval). A K-S test against
1161: the cumulative distribution function of our best-fit LF indicated only
1162: a 12\% chance that the single power law is a proper fit.
1163: Much better fits were achieved for a cutoff power-law
1164: ($\Delta \chi^2 = \ $$-$10.6 for one less dof) with
1165: $N_{0,c} = ( 9.5^{+22.5}_{-\phn5.6} ) \times 10^{-2}$,
1166: $\alpha_{\rm c} = 1.48^{+0.21}_{-0.27}$, and
1167: $L_{\rm c} = ( 6.0^{+3.8}_{-2.7} ) \times 10^{38} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$
1168: and for a broken power-law
1169: ($\Delta \chi^2 = \ $$-$14.3 for two less dof) with
1170: $N_{0,b} = 2.2^{+3.0}_{-1.2}$,
1171: $\alpha_{\rm l} = 1.02^{+0.30}_{-0.55}$,
1172: $\alpha_{h} = 2.91^{+3.14}_{-0.59}$, and
1173: $L_{\rm b} = ( 10.6^{+5.8}_{-4.4} ) \times 10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$.
1174: Although the broken power-law is the best fit according to
1175: $\Delta \chi^2$, we note that the one-sided K-S test indicated the
1176: cutoff power law model was acceptable (at the 50\% confidence level).
1177: All three fits are overlaid in Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_lf_constant}.
1178:
1179: Since each of the five observations is an independent measure of the
1180: instantaneous LF, there are enough datapoints that one can apply fits
1181: of equations~\ref{eq:n4697x_lfs}--\ref{eq:n4697x_lfb} to a binned,
1182: differential LF using standard $\chi^2$ techniques. In addition to the
1183: five-fold increase in the number of datapoints, this analysis has the
1184: advantage of including variable sources and producing a clearer
1185: goodness-of-fit test than is provided by the K-S statistic. We chose
1186: to combine the luminosities in bins of at least 25 instantaneous
1187: luminosities.
1188: Since there are five observations, each luminosity added 0.2 to the
1189: instantaneous LF.
1190: All fits were done for $L_X > 4\times10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$
1191: to avoid problems due to incompleteness and less accurate
1192: measurements of $L_X$;
1193: this resulted in 12 bins being used to fit the LFs.
1194: For our best fit single, cutoff, and
1195: broken power law LFs we found $\chi^2 = 25.1$, 14.0, and 4.9 for 10,
1196: 9, and 8 dof, which correspond to rejection probabilities of 99.5\%,
1197: 88\%, and 23\%. We believe that one of the reasons these rejection
1198: probabilities are stronger than for the K-S statistic is that the K-S
1199: test is less sensitive at the ends of its distribution. The single
1200: power law is strongly rejected. The broken power-law is clearly the
1201: best fit, with
1202: $N_{0,b} = 3.1\pm1.5$,
1203: $\alpha_{\rm l} = 0.83\pm0.52$,
1204: $\alpha_{h} = 2.38\pm0.33$, and
1205: $L_{\rm b} = ( 10.8\pm2.9 ) \times 10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$;
1206: however, we do not definitively rule out a cutoff
1207: power law with
1208: $N_{0,c} = 0.19 \pm 0.11$,
1209: $\alpha_{\rm c} =1.55\pm0.18$, and
1210: $L_{\rm c} = ( 4.9\pm1.1) \times10^{38} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$
1211: (90\% confidence intervals). We also checked for effects
1212: due to errors in the background LF from \cite{KWG+2004} by determining
1213: the best-fit LMXB LFs assuming 100 randomized realizations of the
1214: background LF.
1215: The single power law was rejected at the 98\% confidence level for
1216: all realizations.
1217: For 90\% of the realizations,
1218: the cutoff power law can be rejected at better than the 85\%
1219: confidence level (the lowest rejection is at the 70\% confidence
1220: level). Including these effects would have little impact on our error
1221: budget.
1222:
1223: \begin{figure}
1224: \plotone{f9.eps}
1225: \caption[Differential \, Instantaneous \, Luminosity \, Function \, of \, Discrete \, X-ray \, Sources \, in \, NGC~4697]
1226: {
1227: Completeness-corrected, instantaneous, differential luminosity
1228: function from all five observations for sources detected within $a <
1229: 220\arcsec$.
1230: Fits were performed on the solid data-points, whose
1231: incompleteness correction is minimal.
1232: The continuous curves are the sum
1233: of the best-fit LMXB luminosity function and the expected
1234: background source counts.
1235: The broken power law is the best fit;
1236: however, a cutoff power law cannot be rejected according to the
1237: $\chi^2$ test (at the 85\% confidence level for a majority of fits
1238: with different realizations of the background LF).
1239: The reliability of both the best-fit broken power law LF
1240: and the incompleteness correction factors are strengthened by the
1241: broken power law LF going through many of the dotted data-points
1242: (above $10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$) that were not part of the fit.
1243: \label{fig:n4697x_lf_inst}}
1244: \end{figure}
1245:
1246: We display the completeness-corrected, instantaneous, differential
1247: luminosity function of the five observations for sources detected
1248: within $a < 220\arcsec$ in Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_lf_inst}. The
1249: best-fit single, cutoff, and broken power law LFs derived above are
1250: overlaid. The reliability of both the fitted LF and the independent
1251: completeness correction factors (above $10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$)
1252: are strengthened by the broken power law LF going through many of the
1253: low luminosity data-points that were not included in the fitting
1254: process.
1255:
1256: \begin{figure}
1257: \plotone{f10.eps}
1258: \caption[Cumulative Luminosity Functions of Discrete X-ray Sources in NGC 4697: GC-LMXBs vs.\ Field-LMXBs]
1259: {
1260: Cumulative luminosity functions ($L_{X}=L_{\rm constant}$) of X-ray
1261: sources in the HST-ACS FOV, excluding sources identified with non-GC
1262: optical sources.
1263: There are more bright X-ray sources in GCs;
1264: however, this difference is not highly statistically significant.
1265: \label{fig:n4697x_lf_gc_field}}
1266: \end{figure}
1267:
1268: In Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_lf_gc_field} we have displayed the LFs
1269: (using $L_{\rm all}$) of X-ray sources in the HST-ACS FOV that are in GCs
1270: (34 GC-LMXBs) and in the field (44 Field-LMXBs).
1271: After proper
1272: renormalization, the distributions track each other very well when
1273: $L_X < 3\times10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$.
1274: Above $6\times10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$, there are always more
1275: GC-LMXBs than Field-LMXBs.
1276: A similar result was found by \citet{ALM2001} in NGC 1399, but was
1277: not seen clearly in other samples of early-type galaxies
1278: \citep{KMZ2002,SKI+2003,JCF+2004}.
1279: Neither the K-S ($P_{\rm KS} = 0.33$) nor the Wilcoxon rank-sum test
1280: $\sigma_{\rm WRS}=0.8$ indicate that the two LFs are drawn from a
1281: different distribution. On the other hand, we can construct $2\times2$
1282: contingency tables, comparing the numbers of Field-LMXBs and GC-LMXBs
1283: below and above a given luminosity, and calculate Fisher's Exact Test
1284: probabilities ($P_{\rm FE}$; \citealt{F1922}) that indicate $<$10\%
1285: chance that the rows and columns are independent. Since probabilities
1286: of independence calculated from contingency tables do not take into
1287: account the freedom to choose the luminosity used to divide the
1288: populations, the luminosity chosen must be physically motivated. If
1289: we choose the luminosity corresponding to the Eddington limit for a
1290: hydrogen accreting $1.4 {\rm \, M_\odot}$ NS ($1.8\times10^{38} {\rm
1291: \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$), we find $P_{\rm FE}=0.036$.
1292: While this is suggestive of a discrepancy between the LFs,
1293: we do not believe the current data clearly indicates a statistically
1294: significant difference between LFs of Field-LMXBs and GC-LMXBs.
1295:
1296: We also searched for any variation of the LF with projected
1297: galactocentric distance, using the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient
1298: \citep[hereafter Spearman's $\rho$,][]{S1904},
1299: which is a non-parametric test for correlations between two
1300: properties.
1301: Using both instantaneous and constant luminosities
1302: for sources within $a<220\arcsec$, as well as constant luminosities over
1303: the entire FOV, we found no significant evidence of a correlation
1304: between luminosity and spatial position, $a$, for Analysis Sample
1305: sources.
1306: Similarly, no spatial difference in the constant luminosity
1307: of significantly detected sources was indicated by a Wilcoxon rank-sum
1308: comparison of two spatial bins, $a < a_{\rm eff}$ and $a > a_{\rm eff}$.
1309: We display the luminosities of Analysis Sample sources
1310: versus galactocentric semimajor axis in the top frame of
1311: Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_lumhij_a}.
1312:
1313: \begin{figure}
1314: \plotone{f11.eps}
1315: \caption[Luminosity and Hardness Ratios Spatial Functions of Discrete X-ray Sources in NGC~4697]{
1316: Merged luminosities ($L_{X}=L_{\rm constant}$) and hardness ratios as a
1317: function of
1318: the projected galactocentric semimajor distance, $a$,
1319: for Analysis Sample sources.
1320: No significant spatial difference in the luminosity function is observed.
1321: Correlations
1322: between hardness ratios and position (harder at greater distance)
1323: appear to be associated with sources beyond 220$\arcsec$, and are likely due
1324: to hard background AGNs as opposed to LMXBs in NGC~4697.
1325: \label{fig:n4697x_lumhij_a}}
1326: \end{figure}
1327:
1328: \section{Hardness Ratios}
1329: \label{sec:n4697x_src_colors}
1330:
1331: The spectral properties of sources can be crudely characterized by
1332: hardness ratios or X-ray colors (e.g., \citetalias{SIB2000,SIB2001}).
1333: We defined hardness ratios of
1334: $H_{21} \equiv (M - S)/(M + S)$,
1335: $H_{31} \equiv (H - S)/(H + S)$,
1336: and
1337: $H_{32} \equiv (H - M)/(H + M)$,
1338: where $S$, $M$, and $H$ are the total counts in the
1339: soft (0.3--1 keV),
1340: medium (1--2 keV),
1341: and hard (2--6 keV) bands
1342: \citep{SSC2004}.
1343: Hardness ratios without superscripts are the measured values;
1344: we use the superscript 0 to indicate the intrinsic hardness ratios,
1345: correcting for Galactic absorption and QE degradation in the Chandra
1346: ACIS detectors.
1347: The counts in each band are corrected assuming the
1348: best-fit Chandra X-ray spectrum of the inner resolved
1349: sources ($a < a_{\rm eff}$: Table~\ref{tab:spectra_n4697}, row 3).
1350: Since the different observations had different QE
1351: degradations, we adopted the following technique for correcting the
1352: observed counts in a band.
1353: Let $N_{i,j,k}$ be the net counts
1354: for source $i$ in band $j$ during observation $k$,
1355: and let $C_{j,k}$ be the
1356: absorption and degradation correction to counts for observation $k$ in
1357: band $j$.
1358: (The QE degradation was assumed to be independent of position on the
1359: detector and thus the same for all sources within a given observation.)
1360: The combined correction for source $i$ in band $j$
1361: is given by
1362: $\langle C_{i,j} \rangle \equiv \underset{k}\sum (C_{j,k} N_{i,j,k}) /
1363: \underset{k}\sum N_{i,j,k}$,
1364: where the sums are only performed over observations where
1365: $N_{i,j,k}>0$. We require that $N_{i,j,k}>0$ because there is no
1366: correction to the source hardness when a source is not emitting at a
1367: detectable level. Having determined the appropriate correction, the
1368: corrected number of counts for source $i$ in band $j$ is $N^0_{i,j} =
1369: \langle C_{i,j} \rangle \underset{k}\sum N_{i,j,k}$, where the sum is
1370: now over all observations. The corrected band counts are then used to
1371: calculate the corrected hardness ratios. We also combined Monte Carlo
1372: simulations of the observed counts in the source and background
1373: apertures with the count corrections to calculate the $1 \sigma$
1374: confidence intervals for the hardness ratios. (When no counts are
1375: observed, we set the expected number of counts in the Monte Carlo
1376: simulations to 0.653. This is the average expectation for the Poisson
1377: distribution for expected numbers of counts between 0 and 1.841, which
1378: are the $1 \sigma$ confidence intervals on a measurement of zero
1379: counts.)
1380:
1381: \begin{figure*}
1382: \epsfig{file=f12a.eps, angle=-90, width=0.45\textwidth}
1383: \hfil
1384: \epsfig{file=f12b.eps, angle=-90, width=0.45\textwidth}
1385: \caption[Hardness Ratio Diagram of Discrete X-ray Sources in NGC~4697]{
1386: X-ray color-color diagrams
1387: $H_{31}^0$ vs.\ $H_{21}^0$ (left)
1388: and
1389: $H_{32}^0$ vs.\ $H_{21}^0$ (right)
1390: for the combined counts from all observations
1391: for the Analysis Sample sources.
1392: Here, $H_{21}^0 \equiv (M^0 - S^0)/(M^0 + S^0)$, $H_{31}^0
1393: \equiv (H^0 - S^0)/(H^0 + S^0)$, and $H_{32}^0 \equiv (H^0 - M^0)/(H^0
1394: + M^0)$, where $S^0$, $M^0$, and $H^0$ are the counts in the soft
1395: (0.3--1 keV), medium (1--2 keV), and hard (2--6 keV) bands, corrected
1396: for the effect of Galactic absorption and QE degradation according to
1397: the best-fit spectra of resolved sources. The area of each circle is
1398: proportional to the observed number of net counts. The solid curve and
1399: large diamonds show the hardness ratios for power-law spectral models;
1400: the diamonds indicate values of the power-law photon number index from
1401: $\Gamma = 0$ (upper right) to 3.2 (lower left) in increments of
1402: 0.4. The model underwent the same correction as the sources. The
1403: $1 \sigma$ error bars at the upper left illustrate the median of the
1404: uncertainties.
1405: \label{fig:n4697x_hij}}
1406: \end{figure*}
1407:
1408: X-ray color-color diagrams of the combined intrinsic hardness ratios
1409: of the Analysis Sample sources are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_hij}.
1410: The values of the hardness ratios
1411: and their $1 \sigma$ errors are listed in
1412: columns (5)--(7) of Table~\ref{tab:n4697x_lumcolor}.
1413: Harder sources tend to lie in the upper
1414: right of Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_hij}a. Extra absorption tends to push
1415: objects to the right in Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_hij}b.
1416:
1417: The majority of sources have hardness ratios consistent with power-law
1418: indices of 1.2--2.0. On average, these sources tend to lie to the
1419: right of the power-law curve, which might indicate some extra
1420: absorption is occurring. A few sources occupy very different positions
1421: in the hardness ratio planes. Sources 81, 96, 105, 112, 123, 134, 146,
1422: 148, 153, and 158 are harder than the typical source in NGC~4697. Both
1423: their spectral properties and tendency to occur farther away from the
1424: center of NGC~4697 suggest that these very hard sources may be
1425: unrelated, strongly absorbed AGNs. Sources 11, 19, 25, 78, 84, 94,
1426: 110, 121, and 156 are softer than the typical source in
1427: NGC~4697. Sources 84 and 156 both have optical counterparts; the
1428: former is an extended object much redder than a typical GC, while the
1429: latter is a star. Sources 19, 25, 78, and 110 have little if any emission
1430: above 1 keV and are all SSs. Based on its $H_{32}$ color, Source 150
1431: may be strongly absorbed or have a very atypical spectrum.
1432:
1433: As with luminosity, we used the Spearman's $\rho$ test to search for a
1434: correlation between merged hardness ratio and galactocentric semimajor
1435: distance, $a$. We display the hardness ratios of Analysis Sample
1436: sources versus spatial position in the bottom frames of
1437: Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_lumhij_a}. If we use the entire Analysis
1438: Sample, we find $1.8 \sigma$, $2.2 \sigma$, and $1.8 \sigma$
1439: significant correlations of $H_{21}^0$, $H_{31}^0$, and $H_{32}^0$,
1440: respectively, with distance. In each case, the sense of the
1441: correlation is that harder sources are found at larger $a$. These
1442: correlation become insignificant ($<1 \sigma$) when only sources with
1443: $a<220\arcsec$ are considered. The Wilcoxon rank-sum comparison of
1444: $a<220\arcsec$ and $a>220\arcsec$ significantly detected sources
1445: reproduces the effects seen by the Spearman's $\rho$ test. However,
1446: we believe that the correlation at larger distances is due to the
1447: increasing dominance of hard background AGNs, as opposed to LMXBs
1448: intrinsic to NGC~4697. Scaling the expected number of sources
1449: unrelated to NGC~4697 with the area in each region, we expect $\sim$12/97
1450: and $\sim$17/29 Analysis Sample sources are unrelated to NGC~4697 for
1451: $a<220\arcsec$ and $a>220\arcsec$, respectively.
1452:
1453: \section{Spectral Analysis}
1454: \label{sec:n4697x_src_spectra}
1455:
1456: We performed an analysis of the spectra of sources in the $0.5$--$10.0 {\rm \,
1457: keV}$ band, extracting the spectra and response files separately for
1458: each observation of each source. The background spectra for each source
1459: were determined locally, using the same nearby regions as discussed in
1460: \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_detections}. Note that the response files for each
1461: separate observation and source include the varying effects of
1462: absorption by the contaminant which produces the QE degradation in the
1463: ACIS detectors. Since the majority of our sources are too faint for
1464: spectral analysis, we co-added the spectra and responses of groups of
1465: sources for each observation. We only included sources whose total
1466: count rate was determined at the $3\sigma$ level. We also excluded the
1467: sources discussed individually in \S~\ref{sec:n4697x_ind_src_spectra}
1468: and Source 110 (see Paper V). All of the spectra were grouped to
1469: have at least 25 counts per spectral bin prior to background
1470: correction to enable our use of $\chi^2$ statistics.
1471: The use of a minimum number of counts per spectral bin and the restricted
1472: energy range in the spectrum can result in some excluded bins, although
1473: those bins have some photons in the allowed energy range.
1474: Unless otherwise noted, the individual
1475: observations were required to have the same spectral shape, but their
1476: normalizations were allowed to vary.
1477:
1478: The spectra of Galactic LMXBs can be complex. High luminosity LMXBs,
1479: like those seen in NGC~4697, have often been modeled with
1480: multi-component models that may include combinations of an isothermal
1481: blackbody, a multi-color disk blackbody, a Comptonized power-law, or
1482: more complicated models \citep{WNP1995}.
1483: For our observations, there are two complicating factors.
1484: First, we are
1485: looking at a collection of sources, each of which is likely to have a
1486: somewhat different spectrum.
1487: Second, our spectra, even when co-added, have a much lower signal-to-noise
1488: ratio than that for a Galactic LMXB.
1489: Therefore, we have only
1490: attempted to fit simple power-law or bremsstrahlung models to our
1491: spectra. We summarize the results of the spectral fits in
1492: Table~\ref{tab:spectra_n4697}. In each
1493: row, we list how the sources were grouped together in the second
1494: column. In the third column we list the model we used to fit the spectra.
1495: In addition to the input model, we accounted for
1496: an absorption column ($N_H$) using the Tuebingen-Boulder
1497: absorption ({\scshape tbabs}) model assuming abundances from
1498: \citet{WAM2000} and photoelectric absorption cross-sections from
1499: \citet{VFK+1996}.
1500: The absorbing column will typically be fixed at the Galactic
1501: absorption column
1502: \citep[$2.14 \times 10^{20} {\rm \, cm}^2$;][]{DL1990};
1503: however, some fits require non-Galactic absorption. Absorption columns below the
1504: Galactic value may indicate extra emission beyond the chosen model at low
1505: energies, while absorption columns above the Galactic value may indicate the
1506: presence of a local absorber or that the intrinsic spectra at low energies is
1507: softer than the model spectra. The value of the absorbing column density ($N_H$)
1508: is given in the fourth column. In the fifth column, we list either the
1509: temperature $kT$ (for bremsstrahlung) or photon number spectral index $\Gamma$
1510: (for a power-law). The sixth through tenth column list the unabsorbed fluxes $F$
1511: (0.3--10 keV) of observations 0784, 4727, 4728, 4729, and 4730 respectively. The
1512: last two columns give the total number of net counts in each set of spectra and
1513: $\chi^2$ per dof for the best-fit model. All errors reported in the spectral
1514: analysis are 90\% confidence level errors. Parentheses are used to indicate a
1515: frozen parameter, and square brackets are used when an error is unconstrained on
1516: one side.
1517:
1518: \subsection{Best-Fit Spectra of LMXBs}
1519:
1520: To determine the best-fit spectra for all LMXBs, we considered the
1521: spectrum of all significantly detected sources within the elliptical
1522: isophote that contains half of the optical light ($a < 1 a_{\rm eff}$;
1523: Table~\ref{tab:spectra_n4697}, rows 1--4). Of the four fits to this
1524: spectrum, those with bremsstrahlung models (bremss, rows 3 and 4) were
1525: significantly better than those with power-law models (power, rows 1
1526: and 2). For one dof, the $\Delta \chi^2 >12.8$. We note that the
1527: derived power-law photon indices, $\Gamma = 1.47$--$1.66$ are
1528: consistent with $\Gamma = 1.56 \pm 0.02$ found by \citet{IAB2003} for
1529: LMXBs in a sample of early-type galaxies. The better fit to a
1530: bremsstrahlung model compared to a power-law model has important
1531: implications for estimating the unabsorbed flux of a source; the flux
1532: conversion for the Galactic-absorbed bremsstrahlung model is $\sim
1533: 10\%$ lower than that for the Galactic-absorbed power-law model.
1534: There is no evidence for a non-Galactic absorbing column in the
1535: bremsstrahlung models ($\Delta \chi^2 = 0.08$ between row 3 and 4). We
1536: adopt row 3 ($N_{H} = 2.14 \times 10^{20} {\rm \, cm}^2$, $kT =
1537: 9.1^{+1.3}_{-1.1} {\rm \, keV}$) as our best-fit spectra. We believe
1538: that calibration changes may account for our spectra being slightly
1539: harder than that found by \citet{IAB2003} ($kT= 7.3\pm0.3 {\rm \,
1540: keV})$.
1541: We display the observed spectra overlaid by the best-fit spectral model in
1542: Figure~\ref{fig:n4697x_bf_spec}. Hereafter, we present results for a
1543: bremsstrahlung model with Galactic absorption in different selections
1544: of sources. We also present other models (power-law or non-Galactic
1545: absorption) when they are statistically better fits.
1546:
1547: \begin{figure}
1548: \hfil
1549: \epsfig{file=f13.eps, angle=-90, width=0.85\linewidth}
1550: \hfil
1551: \caption[X-ray Spectrum of LMXBs in NGC~4697]{
1552: {\it Top panel}: Cumulative X-ray spectra of the resolved
1553: sources in the inner effective elliptical isophote of NGC~4697
1554: overlayed by the solid
1555: histograms of the best-fit model spectra (Table~\ref{tab:spectra_n4697},
1556: row 3).
1557: The different observations are shown in different colors.
1558: {\it Bottom panel}: Contribution to
1559: $\chi^2$ with the sign indicating the sign of the residual.
1560: The differences between Observation 0784 and the Cycle-5 observations
1561: at low energies are the result of increased QE degradation with time
1562: due to a contaminant.
1563: \label{fig:n4697x_bf_spec}}
1564: \end{figure}
1565:
1566: \subsection{Spectra Grouped by Position}
1567:
1568: In Table~\ref{tab:spectra_n4697}, rows 3, 4--6, 8 and 9, we compare
1569: bremsstrahlung models with Galactic absorption for different collections of
1570: sources grouped by position. These results mirror those presented previously
1571: based on hardness ratios. When we compare the independent fits of
1572: sources within $a < a_{\rm eff}$ (row 3) and in the annulus
1573: $a_{\rm eff} < a < 2 a_{\rm eff}$ (row 5)
1574: to the fit when their temperatures are tied
1575: together (row 8), we find a $\Delta \chi^2 = 0.5$ for 1 dof. There is
1576: no evidence for any spectral variation with galactocentric distance
1577: within $2 a_{\rm eff}$.
1578:
1579: On the other hand, there is evidence for a spectral change for sources within $2
1580: a_{\rm eff} < a < 3 a_{\rm eff}$. First, comparing the fit to the spectra when
1581: the temperatures within $3 a_{\rm eff}$ are grouped together (row 9) to the fits
1582: when the temperatures can vary (rows 3, 5, and 6) indicates a slightly
1583: significant statistical difference ($\Delta \chi^2 = 7.0$ for 2 dof and the
1584: f-test indicates the probability that the free temperature model comes from the
1585: tied temperature model is 4.0\%). Furthermore, a power-law fit (row 7) for $2
1586: a_{\rm eff} < a < 3 a_{\rm eff}$ sources is a statistically better fit ($\Delta
1587: \chi^2 = 4.3$ for 0 dof) than a bremsstrahlung fit (row 6). The increasing
1588: dominance of background AGN in the spectra of regions further away from the
1589: galaxy center is a likely cause for the apparent spatial variation of the
1590: spectra. Our flanking-field HST observations will allow us to better address
1591: this issue by better identifying background AGN.
1592:
1593: \subsection{Spectra Grouped by GC Association}
1594:
1595: We compare bremsstrahlung models in Table~\ref{tab:spectra_n4697} rows 10--18
1596: for different collections of sources grouped by their association with
1597: GCs in the HST-ACS FOV. Our comparisons of GC-LMXBs, Field-LMXBs, and
1598: their combination (rows 10, 12, and 14; rows 11, 13, and 15) indicate
1599: that the GC-LMXBs and Field-LMXBs are likely to be fit by different
1600: spectrum. When a Galactic absorbing column is used, the $\Delta
1601: \chi^2 = 8.6$ for 1 dof and the probability both populations have the
1602: same temperature and absorption is $3.1\times10^{-3}$. The disparity is
1603: even larger if we allow a non-Galactic absorbing column;
1604: $\Delta \chi^2 = 14.0$ for 2 dof and the probability they have the
1605: same temperature and absorption is $7.7\times10^{-4}$.
1606:
1607: The best overall fit comes from allowing both GC-LMXBs and Field-LMXBs
1608: to have independent absorbing columns and temperatures (rows 11 and 13).
1609: The GC-LMXBs are better fit with a harder spectrum and larger
1610: absorbing column compared to the Field-LMXBs. Although a larger
1611: absorbing column in GC-LMXBs might explain this discrepancy, we note
1612: that the absorption column of Field-LMXBs tends be pushed towards
1613: sub-Galactic columns.
1614: This suggests that the bremsstrahlung model underpredicts the
1615: low-energy end of their spectra. A more accurate model and better
1616: understanding of low energy calibration issues is required to better
1617: probe the cause of the discrepancy in spectra between GC-LMXBs and
1618: Field-LMXBs.
1619:
1620: In \citet{MKZ2003}, the summed spectra of LMXBs in blue-GCs are found to be
1621: harder than the summed spectra for LMXBs in red-GCs. This appears to be best
1622: explained by an additional absorbing column in blue-GCs and is attributed to
1623: irradiation induced winds. While extra absorption due to winds might explain why
1624: our GC-LMXBs have a larger column than Field-LMXBs, we note that our data is not
1625: entirely consistent with this scenario. When we compare the fits of spectra of
1626: red-GC-LMXBs and blue-GC-LMXBs where they share the same absorbing column and
1627: temperature to fits where they have independent absorbing columns and
1628: temperatures, we find the $\Delta \chi^2 = 5.6$ for 2 dof and the probability
1629: they have the same temperature and absorption is 6.1\%. These differences are
1630: only marginal at best. Although the blue-GC LMXBs have a harder temperature than
1631: red-GC LMXBs, they also have a lower absorbing column that tends towards being
1632: sub-Galactic. Our understanding of the spectra of the blue-GC-LMXBs is limited
1633: by their relatively small numbers. In addition to a more accurate model and
1634: better understanding of low energy calibration issues, the spectra of
1635: blue-GC-LMXBs from many galaxies should be combined to improve our statistics.
1636:
1637: \subsection{Spectra Grouped by Luminosity}
1638:
1639: In our final grouped spectral fits, we examine the different spectra
1640: in two luminosity bins, $L_{38} < 2$ and $L_{38} > 2$, where
1641: $L_{38} = L_X/10^{38} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$.
1642: Since the brighter sources are above the Eddington limit for a
1643: hydrogen accreting $1.4 {\rm \, M_\odot}$ NS,
1644: they are likely to be either
1645: super-Eddington accreting NS-LMXBs or BH-LMXBs.
1646: Since we believe AGN
1647: may be significantly contaminating the spectra outside of $2 a_{\rm eff}$,
1648: we restrict our sample to LMXBs interior to that semi-major distance.
1649: We note that the brightest X-ray source
1650: in this spatial region (Source 58) has $L_{38} \approx 6$.
1651:
1652: Comparing the fainter LMXBs, the brighter LMXBs, and their combination (rows 19,
1653: 21, and 23; rows 20, 22, and 24) indicates that the fainter and brighter LMXBs
1654: are likely to have different spectra. Separate spectra improve the fit by
1655: $\Delta \chi^2 = 7.7$, and the probability both populations have the same
1656: temperature and Galactic absorption is $4.4\times10^{-3}$. Again, the disparity
1657: is larger if the groups are allowed to have different absorbing columns; the
1658: $\Delta \chi^2 = 14.2$ for 2 dof and the probability both populations have the
1659: same temperature and absorption is $5.5\times10^{-4}$. The best-fit comes from
1660: allowing faint LMXBs and bright LMXBs to have different temperatures and
1661: absorbing columns. Both populations tend to have the same temperature ($\sim 8
1662: {\rm \, keV}$). The fainter LMXBs tend to have smaller (mostly sub-Galactic)
1663: absorbing columns, while the brighter LMXBs tend to have a small excess
1664: absorption column ($\Delta N_H = 3.8^{+2.9}_{-2.8} \times 10^{20} {\rm \,
1665: cm}^2$), perhaps of local origin. If some fraction of the mass transferred
1666: to the compact object is not accreted and ends up acting as a
1667: source of absorption, the larger rate of accretion in brighter
1668: sources might account for the extra absorption column.
1669:
1670: \subsection{Individual Source Spectra}
1671: \label{sec:n4697x_ind_src_spectra}
1672:
1673: We can also explore the individual spectra of several sources. Although we
1674: mainly consider sources with $L_{\rm all} > 6 \times 10^{38} {\rm \, ergs \,
1675: s}^{-1}$, we also discuss the spectrum of the central source (Source 1). The
1676: spectra were extracted in the identical manner as the grouped spectra above. For
1677: these fits, the errors in fluxes and luminosities are only the scaled errors in
1678: the count rates from the spectral fitting process. The spectrum of the variable
1679: transient Source 110 is discussed in detail in Paper V.
1680:
1681: {\it Source 1:} The central source in NGC~4697 could be a central AGN, an LMXB,
1682: or a collection of confused LMXBs. Although the source is not particularly
1683: bright (spectral fits made to 343.9 total net counts), we extracted its
1684: individual spectra. The source is best fit by a power-law $\Gamma =
1685: 1.40^{+0.23}_{-0.22}$ with Galactic absorption ($\chi^2 = 11.6$ for 8 dof). The
1686: weighted unabsorbed luminosity at NGC~4697 for this spectra, $(4.00\pm0.20)
1687: \times 10^{38} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$, is 12\% higher than that derived from
1688: the best-fit spectral shape for sources within $a< a_{\rm eff}$, which is
1689: consistent with the difference between power-law and bremsstrahlung models. As
1690: this spectral fit is completely consistent with either a central AGN having a
1691: low absorbing column or an LMXB (or several LMXBs), the nature of Source 1 is
1692: still unknown.
1693:
1694: {\it Source 117:} This source is known to be an AGN at $z=0.696$
1695: (\citetalias{SIB2001}).
1696: The total net counts fit by spectra for this source was 993.3,
1697: but there was a large variance between observations. (We fit to
1698: 49.3 net counts in Observation 4729 and 280.0 in Observation 4730.)
1699: As we discuss in Paper V, the spectral
1700: state
1701: of this source in Observation 4729 appears to differ from that in the other
1702: observations. We accounted for this by allowing Observation 4729 to
1703: have a different absorption than the other observations. The best-fit
1704: spectra ($\chi^2 = 30.1$ for 31 dof) involved absorbed power-law
1705: ($\Gamma = 1.55^{+0.24}_{-0.23}$) models. Observation 4729 had a much
1706: larger absorbing column ($N_{H} = 3.4^{+1.9}_{-1.6} \times 10^{22}
1707: {\rm \, cm}^2$) than the other observations ($N_{H} =
1708: 2.3^{+1.1}_{-1.0} \times 10^{21} {\rm \, cm}^2$). This fits implies
1709: absorbed 0.5--$8.0 {\rm \, keV}$ X-ray luminosities of
1710: $(%
1711: 1.18\pm0.08,
1712: 1.48\pm0.09,
1713: 1.00\pm0.08,
1714: 1.12\pm0.16, {\rm \ and \ }
1715: 1.43\pm0.09%
1716: ) \times 10^{44} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$,
1717: respectively, for Observations 0784, and 4727--4730.
1718:
1719: {\it Source 134:} Source 134 is the brightest X-ray source in our observations
1720: and has 1973.3 net counts in its spectrum. Its hardness ratios,
1721: which vary between observations (see Paper V)
1722: indicate it is harder than a typical LMXB. Its spectra are best-fit
1723: ($\chi^2 = 56.4$ for 65 dof) by a power-law model
1724: ($\Gamma=1.79^{+0.18}_{-0.18}$). Each observation has a different
1725: absorbing column:
1726: $(%
1727: 1.35^{+0.30}_{-0.27},
1728: 1.59^{+0.33}_{-0.30},
1729: 0.85^{+0.30}_{-0.27},
1730: 1.10^{+0.30}_{-0.26},$ and $
1731: 1.30^{+0.38}_{-0.35}
1732: ) \,
1733: \times \, 10^{22} {\rm \, cm}^2$,
1734: respectively, for Observations 0784, and 4727-4730.
1735: If Source 134 is at the distance of NGC~4697, its unabsorbed
1736: 0.3--$10.0 {\rm \, keV}$ X-ray luminosities are then
1737: $(%
1738: 4.21\pm0.20,
1739: 4.92\pm0.23,
1740: 3.25\pm0.17,
1741: 3.77\pm0.21, {\rm \ and \ }
1742: 4.42\pm0.22%
1743: ) \times 10^{39} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$.
1744: In this case, Source 134 would be a heavily absorbed ULX. However, we
1745: believe it is more likely that this source is a background AGN with
1746: absorbed 0.5--$8.0 {\rm \, keV}$ X-ray fluxes of
1747: $(%
1748: 1.36\pm0.07,
1749: 1.54\pm0.07,
1750: 1.16\pm0.06,
1751: 1.28\pm0.07, {\rm \ and \ }
1752: 1.44\pm0.07
1753: ) \times 10^{-13} {\rm \, ergs \, cm}^{-2} {\rm \,s}^{-1}$.
1754:
1755: {\it Source 143:} This source appears to have an uncatalogued DSS
1756: counterpart. Although the X-ray source is bright, Source 143 only has
1757: enough counts for spectral fitting in Observation 4730 (150.4 net
1758: counts). The best-fit model ($\chi^2 = 4.1$ for 4 dof) is a
1759: Galactic-absorbed power-law ($\Gamma=1.92^{+0.35}_{-0.32}$). Its
1760: absorbed 0.5--$8.0 {\rm \, keV}$ X-ray flux is $(2.59 \pm 0.21) \times
1761: 10^{-14} {\rm \, ergs \, cm}^{-2} {\rm \, s}^{-1}$. Its unabsorbed
1762: 0.3--$10.0 {\rm \, keV}$ X-ray luminosity at the distance of NGC~4697
1763: is $(5.1 \pm 0.4) \times 10^{38} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$ for this
1764: spectral model.
1765:
1766: {\it Source 155:} Like Source 143, Source 155 appears to have an uncatalogued
1767: DSS counterpart. We fit spectra to 621.8 net X-ray counts from Observations
1768: 4727-4729. Although we tried power-law, bremsstrahlung, disk blackbody, and gas
1769: models (apec), none of these spectra gave a good fit. The Galactic-absorbed
1770: power-law ($\Gamma=1.26^{+0.12}_{-0.12}$) was the best fit we found ($\chi^2 =
1771: 34.5$ for 21 dof), with the model tending to underpredict emission below $\sim2
1772: {\rm \, keV}$. This spectral model implies absorbed 0.5--$8.0 {\rm \, keV}$
1773: X-ray fluxes of $(5.48 \pm 0.40, 6.17 \pm 0.44, 7.46 \pm 0.50)
1774: \times 10^{-14} {\rm \, ergs \, cm}^{-2} {\rm \,s}^{-1}$,
1775: respectively for Observations 4727-4729. The unabsorbed 0.3--$10.0
1776: {\rm \, keV}$ X-ray luminosities at the distance of NGC~4697 are
1777: $(1.07\pm0.08, 1.20\pm0.09, 1.45\pm0.10) \times 10^{39} {\rm \, ergs
1778: \, s}^{-1}$, respectively.
1779:
1780: {\it Source 156:} This source is clearly associated with the bright
1781: foreground star \object{BD-05 3573}, whose optical colors are roughly
1782: consistent with an early to middle G type star.
1783: Its effective temperature is $T_{\rm eff} \sim 5300 {\rm \, K}$
1784: \citep{G1999}.
1785: Based on its optical magnitude, the distance to the star is likely
1786: to be
1787: $\sim 7$ -- $700 {\rm \, pc}$, for dwarf to giant luminosity classes,
1788: respectively.
1789: In the three observations during which it is in our FOV
1790: (Observations 4727-4729), the spectrum contains 563.5 net counts.
1791: Among likely, simple stellar models of X-ray emission, we
1792: find the emission spectrum from collisionally-ionized diffuse gas
1793: (apec) model that has $kT = 440^{+56}_{-47} {\rm \, eV}$ and a
1794: heavy element abundance of $1.18 [>0.32]$ solar fits best.
1795: The temperature, $\sim5\times10^{6} {\rm \, K}$,
1796: is reasonable for that of an X-ray corona.
1797: While the 0.3--$10.0 {\rm \, keV}$ X-ray fluxes are
1798: $(%
1799: 2.89\pm0.17,
1800: 1.68\pm0.15, {\rm \ and \ }
1801: 1.88\pm0.15,
1802: ) \times 10^{-14} {\rm \, ergs \, cm}^{-2} {\rm \,s}^{-1}$, the bolometric
1803: flux is $\sim 60\%$ higher.
1804: We note that the X-ray luminosities expected at the distance
1805: of a giant G star are consistent with those of other K and G giant stars
1806: with $T_{\rm eff} \sim 5300 {\rm \, K}$ \citep{G1999}.
1807: One class of giant stars, FK Comae stars, are rapidly rotating
1808: chromospherically active stars. Such activity might explain the X-ray
1809: flaring (see Paper V) observed in this
1810: source. Follow-up optical spectroscopy is necessary to determine the
1811: spectral type and rotation speed of \object{BD-05 3573} and
1812: to test whether it is an FK Comae star.
1813:
1814: \section{Conclusions}
1815: \label{sec:n4697x_conclusion}
1816: Multi-epoch {\it Chandra} observations reveal a wealth of information
1817: on LMXBs in NGC~4697, the nearest optically luminous elliptical galaxy.
1818: We detect 158 sources, 126 of which have their count rates determined
1819: at $\ge 3 \sigma$. Ten sources have optical counterparts in ground-based
1820: catalogs, including a known AGN (Source 117) and the foreground star
1821: \object{BD-05 3573} (Source 156). With our {\it Hubble} observations of the
1822: galaxy center, we find 36 additional optical counterparts. Most importantly,
1823: we identify 34 LMXBs clearly associated with GCs.
1824:
1825: We confirm that GCs that are optically brighter ($4.5\sigma$) and redder
1826: ($3.0\sigma$) are more likely to contain GCs. We find that GCs with larger
1827: encounter rates are also more likely to contain GCs ($5.5\sigma$). When we fit
1828: the expected number ($\lambda_t$) of LMXBs in a GC, we find $\lambda_t
1829: \propto \Gamma_{h}^{0.74^{+0.14}_{-0.13}} \,
1830: (Z/Z_\odot)^{0.50^{+0.18}_{-0.16}}$, where $\Gamma_{h}$ is the encounter rate
1831: and $Z/Z_\odot$ is the metallicity of the GC. Our results agree well with those
1832: found for fainter X-ray sources in Galactic GCs \citep{PLA+2003} and LMXBs in
1833: M87 \citep{JCF+2004}. These results are also consistent with
1834: \citetalias{SJS+2007}; however, our NGC~4697 data set is included in that
1835: analysis.
1836:
1837: We detect sources with X-ray luminosities $> 6\times10^{36} {\rm
1838: \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$. The fraction of LMXBs associated with GCs,
1839: $f_{X,{\rm GC}}$, is $38.4^{+6.1}_{-5.7}\%$ and does not appear to
1840: depend on X-ray luminosity. We find $10.7^{+2.1}_{-1.8}\%$ of GCs
1841: contain an LMXB at the detection limit, although we note that it is
1842: likely that the percentage of GCs with an active LMXB is even higher
1843: due to the X-ray flux limit of the current observations.
1844: Furthermore,
1845: our X-ray detections are not complete at the detection limit.
1846: At the luminosity limit of our Analysis
1847: Sample ($1.4\times10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$), which is $>89\%$
1848: complete, $8.1^{+1.9}_{-1.6}\%$ of GCs contain an LMXB.
1849: This is the third deepest probe of the GC/LMXB connection in an
1850: early-type galaxy to date. [At $3.4 {\rm \, Mpc}$, fainter
1851: luminosities can be more easily reached with \object{Cen A}; however,
1852: studies of the GC-LMXB connection in Cen~A are made more difficult
1853: by its larger angular extent on the sky and recent star-formation
1854: \citep{I1998}]. Deep observations of NGC~3379 probe deeper in luminosity;
1855: however, only nine of its GCs contain LMXBs.]
1856: At this same limit, there have been two
1857: ($1.3^{+1.7}_{-0.9}\%$) Galactic GCs containing LMXBs (NGC 6440 and NGC 6624)
1858: over the history of X-ray astronomy. The discrepancy between the Milky Way and
1859: NGC 4697 may be explained by their different GC metallicity distributions (a 3:1
1860: metal-poor to metal rich ratio for Galactic GCs as compared to a 1:1 ratio for
1861: NGC 4697 GCs). Since metal-rich GCs ($[{\rm Fe/H}] > -0.75$) are about 3 times as
1862: likely to contain LMXBs, NGC 4697 is predicted to have about twice the
1863: percentage of GCs with LMXBs as the Milky Way. This correction eliminates most
1864: of the discrepancy between the two galaxies.
1865:
1866: We have determined the X-ray luminosity functions from each individual
1867: observation, from the combination of our five observations, and the LF of the
1868: non-variable sources. There is no statistically significant difference in the
1869: LFs of the different observations. This result is critical because it validates
1870: using single-epoch observations to measure LFs. While we clearly rule out a
1871: single power-law LF, we cannot definitively rule out cutoff power-law models
1872: with slopes of $\alpha = 1.5\pm0.2$ and cutoff luminosities of
1873: $(6^{+4}_{-3}) \times 10^{38} {\rm \, erg\,s}^{-1}$. Broken power-law
1874: models (eq.~[\ref{eq:n4697x_lfb}]) provide the best fits to our LFs. We adopt
1875: our fit of the instantaneous LF as our best-fit, with $N_{0,b} = 3.1\pm1.5$,
1876: $\alpha_{\rm l} = 0.83\pm0.52$, $\alpha_{h} = 2.38\pm0.33$, and $L_{\rm b} = (
1877: 10.8\pm2.9 ) \times 10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$. We note that \cite{KF2004}
1878: found evidence for a possible break in the LF of LMXBs in early-type galaxies at
1879: slightly larger luminosities; however recent deep observations of NGC~3379 and
1880: NGC~4278 have not found strong evidence for such a break \citep{KFK+2006}. This
1881: raises the possibility that there is no universal form for the LF of LMXBs in
1882: early-type galaxies.
1883:
1884: We find marginal evidence (significant at the $2.1\sigma$ level) that a larger
1885: number of LMXBs above the Eddington limit for a hydrogen accreting $1.4 {\rm
1886: \, M_\odot}$ NS tend to be found in GCs than in the field. Although this
1887: is consistent with results in \citet{ALM2001} in NGC 1399, we believe
1888: this result needs to be tested with a larger sample. One possible
1889: \citep[e.g.,][]{KMZ2007}
1890: explanation is that multiple LMXBs might exist in some GCs. We predict that this
1891: effect is small, only $\sim4$ of the GCs are expected to have multiple LMXBs
1892: with total X-ray luminosity above $1.4 \times 10^{37} {\rm \, ergs \, s}^{-1}$,
1893: which corresponds to $\sim 16\%$ of the GCs above that X-ray luminosity.
1894: An alternative explanation is that any possible discrepancy in the LFs occurs
1895: at lower luminosities. Such discrepancies have been seen for the bulge of M31
1896: and the Milky Way \citep{VG2007} and the elliptical galaxy NGC~3379
1897: \citep{FBZ+2008}; however, this effect is most evident at luminosities below
1898: those probed by our observations of NGC~4697.
1899:
1900: Our spectrum of sources in the inner effective semi-major axis is best-fit by
1901: bremsstrahlung emission with Galactic absorption ($kT = 9.1^{+1.3}_{-1.1} {\rm
1902: \, keV}$, $N_{H} = 2.14 \times 10^{20} {\rm \, cm}^2$). Both hardness ratios and
1903: spectral analysis indicate that the spectra of X-ray sources at large radii ($a
1904: \gtrsim 180\arcsec$) differ from those at small radii. We believe that this
1905: effect is due to an increasing dominance of unrelated foreground and background
1906: sources, particularly background AGNs. The spectra of GC-LMXBs and Field-LMXBs
1907: appear to differ (significant at the $3.3\sigma$ level). The GC-LMXBs are better
1908: fit with higher temperatures and greater absorbing columns compared to the
1909: Field-LMXBs. Similarly, we find a difference (significant at the $3.5\sigma$
1910: level) between X-ray fainter and brighter LMXBs. The fainter LMXBs tend to have
1911: smaller absorbing columns, while the brighter LMXBs tend to have a small excess
1912: in absorption, which may be due to having more accreting material. We find that
1913: spectra of LMXBs in metal-poor GCs have harder temperature and lower absorbing
1914: columns than those in metal-rich GCs; however, this marginal result is only
1915: significant at the $1.9\sigma$ level. In all cases, the sources with a smaller
1916: absorption column tend to be fit with sub-Galactic absorbing columns. This
1917: indicates that the spectral model (folded in with the calibration) underpredicts
1918: the soft emission in the spectra. To probe the cause of the spectral
1919: differences, we require a more physically accurate model and better
1920: understanding of the calibration at low energies.
1921:
1922: Among the spectral fits to individual bright sources,
1923: Source 117 (a known AGN) and Source 134 had spectral fits with
1924: large absorbing columns. We predict Source 134 is likely to be an AGN.
1925: The spectral fit and variability in Source 156 (the foreground star
1926: \object{BD-05 3573}) are consistent with it being an FK Comae star,
1927: a chromospherically active giant.
1928:
1929: \acknowledgements
1930:
1931: We thank Peter Frinchaboy and Rachel Osten for very helpful
1932: discussions. Support for this work was provided by NASA through {\it Chandra}
1933: Award Numbers GO4-5093X, AR4-5008X, and GO5-6086X, and through HST Award Numbers
1934: HST-GO-10003.01-A, HST-GO-10582.02-A, and HST-GO-10597.03-A. G.~R.~S.\
1935: acknowledges the receipt of an ARCS fellowship and support provided by the F. H.
1936: Levinson Fund.
1937:
1938: \bibliography{ms}
1939:
1940: %%% TABLES
1941:
1942: \clearpage
1943: \LongTables
1944: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1945: \input{4697_source_dlxtbl}
1946:
1947: \clearpage
1948: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
1949: \begin{landscape}
1950: \input{gb_match_dlxtbl}
1951: \clearpage
1952: \end{landscape}
1953:
1954: \clearpage
1955: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
1956: \LongTables
1957: \input{hst_match_dlxtbl}
1958:
1959: \clearpage
1960: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
1961: \LongTables
1962: \input{4697_gclmxb_dlxtbl}
1963:
1964: \clearpage
1965: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
1966: \LongTables
1967: \input{4697_lxinst_dlxtbl}
1968:
1969: \clearpage
1970: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
1971: \LongTables
1972: \input{4697_lxhij_dlxtbl}
1973:
1974: \clearpage
1975: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
1976: \begin{landscape}
1977: \LongTables
1978: \input{4697_spec_dlxtbl}
1979: \clearpage
1980: \end{landscape}
1981:
1982: \end{document}
1983: