1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %
3: % (uses AASTeX 5.0)
4: %
5: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6:
7: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
8: %\newenvironment{deluxetable*}{\begin{landscape}\begin{deluxetable}}{\end{deluxetable}\end{landscape}}
9: \documentclass{emulateapj}
10: \usepackage{lscape}
11: \newcommand{\mycolspace}{}
12: \newcommand{\ssp}{}
13: \newcommand{\erg}{\mbox{$\rm\,erg$}}
14: \newcommand{\kev}{\mbox{$\rm\,keV$}}
15: \newcommand{\cm}{\mbox{$\rm\,cm$}}
16: \newcommand{\ev}{\mbox{$\rm\,eV$}}
17: \newcommand{\gyr}{\mbox{$\rm\,Gyr$}}
18: \newcommand{\yr}{\mbox{$\rm\,yr$}}
19: \newcommand{\s}{\mbox{$\rm\,s$}}
20: \newcommand{\ks}{\mbox{$\rm\,ks$}}
21: \newcommand{\mpc}{\mbox{$\rm\,Mpc$}}
22: \newcommand{\kpc}{\mbox{$\rm\,kpc$}}
23: \newcommand{\pc}{\mbox{$\rm\,pc$}}
24: \newcommand{\au}{\mbox{$\rm\,AU$}}
25: \newcommand{\msun}{\mbox{$\,M_\odot$}}
26: \newcommand{\kms}{\mbox{${\rm\,km\,s}^{-1}$}}
27: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}
28: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}
29: \newcommand{\vv}[1]{\mathbf{#1}}
30: \newcommand{\RJ}{\ensuremath{R_{\rm J}}}
31: \newcommand{\LNVSS}{\ensuremath{L_{\rm NVSS}}}
32: \newcommand{\Lxgas}{\ensuremath{L_{\rm X,gas}}}
33: \newcommand{\lxgas}{\ensuremath{L_{\rm X,gas}}}
34: \newcommand{\aout}{\ensuremath{\alpha_{\rm 24}}}
35: \newcommand{\ain}{\ensuremath{\alpha_{\rm 02}}}
36: \newcommand{\rhomass}{\ensuremath{\rho_{\rm 2MASS}}}
37: \newcommand{\rhotully}{\ensuremath{\rho_{\rm Tully}}}
38: \newcommand{\MK}{\ensuremath{M_{\rm K}}}
39: \newcommand{\Lsix}{\ensuremath{L_{\rm 6cm}}}
40: \newcommand{\TX}{\ensuremath{T_{\rm X}}}
41:
42: \shorttitle{Thermal Structure of Hot ISM in Normal Ellipticals}
43: \shortauthors{Diehl \& Statler}
44:
45: \begin{document}
46:
47: \title{The Hot Interstellar Medium in Normal Elliptical Galaxies\\ III:
48: The Thermal Structure of the Gas}
49:
50: \author{Steven Diehl\altaffilmark{1,2} and Thomas S. Statler\altaffilmark{2}}
51: \altaffiltext{1}{Theoretical Astrophysics Group (T-6)/Computational Methods
52: Group (CCS-2), Mailstop B227, Los Alamos National Laboratory, P.O. Box 1663,
53: Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA (present address)}
54: \altaffiltext{2}{Astrophysical Institute, Department of Physics and Astronomy,
55: 251B Clippinger Research Laboratories, Ohio University, Athens, OH
56: 45701, USA}
57: \email{diehl@lanl.gov, statler@ohio.edu}
58:
59:
60: \begin{abstract}
61: This is the third paper in a series analyzing X-ray emission from the
62: hot interstellar medium in a sample of 54 normal elliptical galaxies
63: observed by Chandra. We focus on a subset of 36 galaxies with
64: sufficient signal to compute radial temperature profiles. We
65: distinguish four qualitatively different types of profile: positive
66: gradient (outwardly rising), negative gradients (falling),
67: quasi-isothermal (flat) and hybrid (falling at small radii and rising
68: at larger radii). We measure the mean logarithmic temperature
69: gradients in two radial regions: from 0--2 $J$-band effective radii
70: $R_J$ (excluding the central point source), and from 2--$4R_J$. We
71: find the outer gradient to be uncorrelated with intrinsic host galaxy
72: properties, but strongly influenced by the environment: galaxies in
73: low-density environments tend to show negative outer gradients, while
74: those in high-density environments show positive outer gradients,
75: suggesting the influence of circumgalactic hot gas. The inner
76: temperature gradient, however, is unaffected by the environment but
77: strongly correlated with intrinsic host galaxy characteristics:
78: negative inner gradients are more common for smaller, optically faint,
79: low radio-luminosity galaxies, whereas positive gradients are found in
80: bright galaxies with stronger radio sources. There is no evidence for
81: bimodality in the distribution of inner or outer gradients. We propose
82: three scenarios to explain the inner temperature gradients: (1) Weak
83: AGN heat the ISM locally, while higher-luminosity AGN heat the system
84: globally through jets inflating cavities at larger radii; (2) The
85: onset of negative inner gradients indicates a declining importance of
86: AGN heating relative to other sources, such as compressional heating
87: or supernovae; (3) The variety of temperature profiles are snapshots
88: of different stages of a time-dependent flow, cyclically reversing the
89: temperature gradient over time.
90: \end{abstract}
91:
92: \keywords{galaxies: cooling flows---galaxies: elliptical and lenticular,
93: cD---galaxies: ISM---X-rays: galaxies---X-rays: ISM}
94:
95:
96: %------------------------------------------------------------------
97:
98: \section{Introduction}
99:
100: In the first two papers of this series
101: \citep[][hereafter Paper I and Paper II]{DiehlGallery,DiehlAGN},
102: we conducted a comprehensive morphological analysis of the hot gas in normal
103: elliptical galaxies. In Paper I, we introduced a technique to separate the
104: hot gas emission from the contamination of
105: unresolved point sources. We applied this technique to a {\it Chandra}
106: archive sample of 54 elliptical galaxies and presented a gallery of
107: adaptively binned gas-only images, which were photon-flux calibrated
108: and background corrected. We used these gas maps to derive isophotal
109: ellipticity profiles and conducted a systematic morphological
110: analysis. A comparison between optical and X-ray ellipticities measured
111: in the inner, stellar mass dominated regions shows no correlation, contrary
112: to what would be expected if the gas were in perfect hydrostatic equilibrium.
113: We modeled the expected correlation under various assumptions, and
114: concluded that these systems, in general, are at best only approximately
115: hydrostatic. Moreover, the gas morphologies almost always look disturbed.
116: In Paper II, we introduced a quantitative measure of morphological asymmetry,
117: and found it to be tightly correlated with radio continuum power and nuclear
118: X-ray luminosity. We also found the gas morphology to be influenced, to a
119: comparable degree, by the ambient intergalactic medium. But the AGN--morphology
120: correlation forms a continuous trend down to the lowest detectable AGN
121: luminosities, indicating the importance of AGN feedback, even in rather
122: X-ray faint elliptical galaxies.
123:
124: In this third paper, we address the question of whether the central AGN is
125: merely redistributing the gas, or heating it as well. We produce
126: radial temperature profiles and find that they fall into a variety of
127: distinct types. In particular, we confirm that negative (outwardly falling)
128: temperature gradients \citep{HumphreyDarkmatter,FukazawaMassprofiles,
129: RandallXMMNGC4649, PonmanNGC6482} are present, and relatively common, in
130: low-luminosity systems.
131:
132: Outwardly {\em rising\/} (positive-gradient) temperature profiles,
133: nearly ubiquitous in galaxy clusters, X-ray groups, and massive
134: ellipticals, are usually understood as being the result of efficient
135: radiative cooling in the dense central regions. Accreting gas at large
136: radii can additionally shock-heat itself, amplifying the positive
137: gradient. This interpretation is supported by the short central
138: cooling times observed for galaxies, groups, and clusters, which can
139: drop well below $100\,{\rm Myr}$. However, cooling times
140: are equally short in galaxies with negative temperature gradients,
141: i.e. with a warm center \citep{HumphreyDarkmatter}.
142: Several solutions have been proposed to
143: explain these counter-intuitive objects.
144:
145: \citet{FukazawaMassprofiles} suggest that the gradients are a function
146: of environment, with outwardly rising (positive) gradients caused by
147: the hotter ambient intracluster or intragroup gas surrounding the
148: galaxy. Galaxies with negative gradients should instead be isolated.
149:
150: \citet{HumphreyDarkmatter}, on the other hand, propose a bimodal
151: distribution of temperature gradients, and suggest that the total mass
152: of the system is the decisive factor for the sign of the gradient. The
153: division between their two groups happens at a virial mass of $\sim
154: 10^{13}M_\sun$, implying a distinction between normal galaxies and
155: groups. They hypothesize further that the temperature gradients could
156: be related to a significant difference in the galaxies' evolutionary
157: histories.
158:
159: \citet{HumphreyDarkmatter} also discuss the role of
160: compressive (gravitational) heating, noting that during a
161: slow inflow of relatively cool gas ($<1-2\kev$) the energy gain
162: would exceed the radiative losses. For
163: the inflow of hotter baryons, radiative cooling would dominate and one
164: would observe a positive temperature gradient instead. However, they
165: find no reason for hot baryons to be specific to systems above their
166: break mass $\sim 10^{13}M_\sun$, and suspect the environment as a fuel
167: source instead.
168:
169: \citet{PonmanNGC6482} observe a negative temperature gradient in the
170: fossil group candidate NGC~6482 and argue along the same lines. They
171: model NGC~6482's temperature profile successfully with a steady-state
172: cooling flow with a reasonable cooling rate of $\dot M =
173: 2M_\sun\,\yr^{-1}$, and adopt it as their preferred solution. They
174: also estimate that type Ia supernovae (SN) may be responsible for
175: balancing about $1/3$ of the radiative losses in this galaxy. They
176: find the contribution from type II SN to be insignificant and argue
177: against AGN feedback on grounds of the very relaxed appearance of
178: NGC~6482.
179:
180: In this paper, we show that the distribution of temperature gradients
181: is {\em not\/} bimodal. We further show that the temperature gradients within
182: the inner 2 optical effective radii are {\em not\/} strongly influenced by the
183: environment. Instead, we find evidence that these inner gradients owe their
184: origins either to the specific nature of low-luminosity AGN feedback or to a
185: declining importance of AGN relative to compressive heating or supernovae.
186:
187: In \S\ref{s5.dataanalysis}, we summarize our analyses and results from
188: Papers I and II, and describe the methodology to derive radial
189: temperature profiles. We then discuss the
190: various types of temperature profiles seen in our sample in
191: \S\ref{s5.temperature}. For a quantitative analysis, we split the
192: radial range into two regions: the inner region extending out to 2
193: effective radii and an outer region between $2-4$ effective radii. We
194: fit and analyze the gradients in these two regions separately,
195: and demonstrate that the
196: inner gradient is determined by galaxy properties, while the outer
197: gradient is strongly influenced by the presence of neighboring galaxies and/or
198: a hot ambient medium. In
199: \S\ref{s5.discussion}, we discuss the implications of our findings for
200: cooling flows, SN heating, and AGN feedback, before we briefly
201: summarize in \S\ref{s5.conclusions}.
202:
203:
204:
205:
206: %------------------------------------------------------------------
207: \section{Data Analysis}\label{s5.dataanalysis}
208:
209: \subsection{Summary of Results from Papers I and II}
210: \label{s5.preliminary}
211:
212: We make use of several parameters from Papers I and II. We list those
213: essential to our analysis in Tables \ref{t.tempprop} and
214: \ref{t.tempprop2} for completeness, along with some additional
215: quantities. We extract absolute $K$ magnitudes $M_{\rm K}$ and
216: $J$-band effective radii $\RJ$ from the 2MASS extended source catalog
217: \citep{2MASS}. We adopt $20\cm$ radio continuum radio luminosities
218: $L_{\rm NVSS}$ from the NRAO VLA Sky Survey \citep[NVSS,][]{NVSS}
219: within $3\RJ$ (see Paper II). In addition, we extract $6\cm$ radio
220: continuum luminosities $L_{\rm 6cm}$ from the GB6 catalog of radio
221: sources \citep{GB6cm}, the Parkes-MIT-NRAO 4.85GHz Surveys
222: \citep{PMN6cm}, and a $6\cm$ radio catalog by \citet{Becker6cm} in the
223: same region. Central velocity dispersion values are taken from the
224: Lyon--Meudon Extragalactic Database \citep[LEDA;][]{LEDA}. We also
225: adopt the projected galaxy density parameter $\rho_{2MASS}$ from Paper
226: II, which is based on the number of neighbors in the 2MASS extended
227: source catalog, and corrected for incompleteness. As it is one of the
228: few accessible parameters to describe the galaxy environment, we also
229: list the \citet{TullyRho} galaxy density $\rho_{\rm Tully}$.
230:
231: %------------------------------------------------------------------
232:
233: \begin{deluxetable*}{lrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr}
234: %\rotate
235: \ssp \tablewidth{0pt} \tablecaption{{\it Chandra} X-ray luminosity and
236: temperature profile parameters. \label{t.tempprop}} \tablehead{
237: \colhead{Name} & \colhead{\mycolspace} & \colhead{$L_{\rm
238: X,Gas}$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{$T_{\rm X}$\tablenotemark{b}} &
239: \colhead{$\alpha_{02}$\tablenotemark{c}} &
240: \colhead{$\alpha_{24}$\tablenotemark{c}} }
241:
242: \startdata
243: IC1262 & & $ 2.0\pm 1.7\times 10^{43} $ & $ 1.30 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.29 \pm 0.02 $ & $ 0.21 \pm 0.07 $ \\
244: IC1459 & & $ 4.3\pm 3.2\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.48 \pm 0.02 $ & $ -0.00 \pm 0.03 $ & $ -0.27 \pm 0.04 $ \\
245: IC4296 & & $ 1.1\pm 0.4\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.88 \pm 0.02 $ & $ 0.23 \pm 0.04 $ & $ 0.08 \pm 0.07 $ \\
246: NGC0193 & & $ 2.5\pm 0.8\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.77 \pm 0.01 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
247: NGC0315 & & $ 9.4\pm 3.4\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.64 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.02 \pm 0.02 $ & \nodata \\
248: NGC0383 & & $ < 7.5\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.98 \pm 0.04 $ & $ 0.42 \pm 0.06 $ & $ 0.50 \pm 0.16 $ \\
249: NGC0404 & & $ < 2.1\times 10^{38} $ & $ 0.28 \pm 0.07 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
250: NGC0507 & & $ > 5.7\times 10^{42} $ & $ 1.03 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.01 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.16 \pm 0.10 $ \\
251: NGC0533 & & $ 9.6\pm 3.5\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.98 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.18 \pm 0.04 $ & \nodata \\
252: NGC0720 & & $ 9.3\pm 2.7\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.57 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.05 \pm 0.03 $ & $ -0.04 \pm 0.15 $ \\
253: NGC0741 & & $ 3.2\pm 1.3\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.96 \pm 0.02 $ & $ 0.31 \pm 0.04 $ & $ -0.10 \pm 0.12 $ \\
254: NGC0821 & & $ < 3.3\times 10^{40} $ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
255: NGC1132 & & $ > 9.1\times 10^{42} $ & $ 1.02 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.24 \pm 0.07 $ & $ -0.22 \pm 0.11 $ \\
256: NGC1265 & & $ < 1.1\times 10^{42} $ & $ 0.86 \pm 0.08 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
257: NGC1316 & & $ 5.7\pm 2.1\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.62 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.04 \pm 0.04 $ & $ 0.12 \pm 0.26 $ \\
258: NGC1399 & & $ > 7.9\times 10^{41} $ & $ 1.13 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.17 \pm 0.02 $ & $ 0.10 \pm 0.03 $ \\
259: NGC1404 & & $ 1.7\pm 0.4\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.58 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.10 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.15 \pm 0.05 $ \\
260: NGC1407 & & $ 1.0\pm 0.3\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.87 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.11 \pm 0.04 $ & $ 0.46 \pm 0.23 $ \\
261: NGC1549 & & $ > 2.0\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.34 \pm 0.03 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
262: NGC1553 & & $ 2.8\pm 2.6\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.41 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.21 \pm 0.13 $ & $ -0.28 \pm 0.12 $ \\
263: NGC1600 & & $ > 1.2\times 10^{42} $ & $ 1.18 \pm 0.04 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
264: NGC1700 & & $ > 3.2\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.43 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.06 \pm 0.14 $ & \nodata \\
265: NGC2434 & & $ 2.6\pm 2.0\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.53 \pm 0.03 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
266: NGC2865 & & $ < 9.9\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.66 \pm 0.09 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
267: NGC3115 & & $ < 8.7\times 10^{39} $ & $ 0.50 \pm 0.04 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
268: NGC3377 & & $ < 6.1\times 10^{39} $ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
269: NGC3379 & & $ < 6.3\times 10^{39} $ & $ 0.33 \pm 0.03 $ & $ -0.27 \pm 0.06 $ & \nodata \\
270: NGC3585 & & $ > 4.2\times 10^{39} $ & $ 0.33 \pm 0.01 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
271: NGC3923 & & $ 4.3\pm 1.3\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.48 \pm 0.02 $ & $ -0.07 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.37 \pm 0.11 $ \\
272: NGC4125 & & $ 7.2\pm 2.7\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.44 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.06 \pm 0.02 $ & $ -0.15 \pm 0.16 $ \\
273: NGC4261 & & $ 4.8\pm 1.1\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.78 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.25 \pm 0.05 $ & \nodata \\
274: NGC4365 & & $ > 3.8\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.64 \pm 0.02 $ & $ 0.14 \pm 0.04 $ & \nodata \\
275: NGC4374 & & $ 5.9\pm 1.3\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.71 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.16 \pm 0.02 $ & $ 0.44 \pm 0.08 $ \\
276: NGC4406 & & $ > 1.0\times 10^{42} $ & $ 0.78 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.06 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.05 \pm 0.04 $ \\
277: NGC4472 & & $ > 8.5\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.97 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.14 \pm 0.01 $ & \nodata \\
278: NGC4494 & & $ < 2.1\times 10^{40} $ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
279: NGC4526 & & $ 8.8\pm 7.5\times 10^{39} $ & $ 0.35 \pm 0.03 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
280: NGC4552 & & $ 2.1\pm 1.2\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.57 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.21 \pm 0.04 $ & $ 0.42 \pm 0.16 $ \\
281: NGC4555 & & $ > 2.3\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.97 \pm 0.03 $ & \nodata & $ -0.02 \pm 0.03 $ \\
282: NGC4564 & & $ > 2.0\times 10^{39} $ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
283: NGC4621 & & $ 1.1\pm 0.9\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.23 \pm 0.03 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
284: NGC4636 & & $ 2.7\pm 2.0\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.69 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.11 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.04 \pm 0.02 $ \\
285: NGC4649 & & $ 1.3\pm 0.3\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.80 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.02 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.01 \pm 0.01 $ \\
286: NGC4697 & & $ > 3.5\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.32 \pm 0.01 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
287: NGC5018 & & $ < 1.9\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.45 \pm 0.09 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
288: NGC5044 & & $ 2.6\pm 0.8\times 10^{42} $ & $ 0.91 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.09 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.12 \pm 0.02 $ \\
289: NGC5102 & & $ < 1.6\times 10^{39} $ & $ 0.38 \pm 0.08 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
290: NGC5171 & & $ > 2.7\times 10^{42} $ & $ 0.80 \pm 0.05 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
291: NGC5532 & & $ < 8.7\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.61 \pm 0.02 $ & \nodata & $ -0.38 \pm 0.07 $ \\
292: NGC5845 & & $ < 5.2\times 10^{40} $ & $ 0.32 \pm 0.05 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
293: NGC5846 & & $ 3.9\pm 0.9\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.71 \pm 0.01 $ & $ 0.02 \pm 0.02 $ & $ 0.03 \pm 0.17 $ \\
294: NGC6482 & & $ 1.7\pm 1.3\times 10^{42} $ & $ 0.74 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.09 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.34 \pm 0.02 $ \\
295: NGC7052 & & $ > 1.1\times 10^{41} $ & $ 0.53 \pm 0.03 $ & \nodata & \nodata \\
296: NGC7618 & & $ 2.3\pm 0.9\times 10^{42} $ & $ 0.80 \pm 0.01 $ & $ -0.14 \pm 0.06 $ & $ -0.12 \pm 0.08 $ \\
297: \enddata
298: \tablenotetext{a}{Total X-ray gas luminosity in ${\rm ergs\,s^{-1}}$ for the $0.3-5\kev$ band, see Paper I for more details}.
299: \tablenotetext{b}{Luminosity weighted temperature within 3 optical radii.}
300: \tablenotetext{c}{Temperature gradients, measured in $\log r/\RJ - \log T/\kev$ space, between $0-2\RJ$ (\ain) and $2-4\RJ$ (\aout).}
301: \end{deluxetable*}
302:
303:
304: %\begin{landscape}
305: \begin{deluxetable*}{lrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr}
306: %\rotate
307: \ssp
308: \tablewidth{0pt}
309: \tablecaption{Optical, radio, and environmental parameters\label{t.tempprop2}}
310: \tablehead{
311: \colhead{} & \colhead{} &
312: \multicolumn{2}{c}{2MASS\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{} & \colhead{LEDA\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{} &
313: \multicolumn{2}{c}{Radio\tablenotemark{c}} & \colhead{} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Environment\tablenotemark{d}} \\
314: \cline{3-4} \cline{6-6} \cline{8-9} \cline{11-12}\\
315: \colhead{Name} & \colhead{\mycolspace} & \colhead{$M_{\rm K}$} & \colhead{$\RJ$} & \colhead{\mycolspace} & \colhead{$\sigma$} & \colhead{\mycolspace} & \colhead{$L_{\rm NVSS}$} & \colhead{$L_{\rm GB6}$} & \colhead{\mycolspace} & \colhead{$\log \rho_{\rm 2MASS}$} & \colhead{$\rho_{\rm Tully}$}
316: }
317: \startdata
318: IC1262 & & $ -25.43 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 14.4 $ & & $ 266 \pm 36 $ & & $ 1.8\pm 0.5\times 10^{30} $ & $ < 4.5\times 10^{29} $ & & $ 3.47 \pm 0.22 $ & \nodata \\
319: IC1459 & & $ -25.53 \pm 0.28 $ & $ 29.1 $ & & $ 308 \pm 6 $ & & $ 1.3\pm 0.3\times 10^{30} $ & $ 1.2\pm 0.1\times 10^{30} $ & & $ 2.41 \pm 0.31 $ & $ 0.28 $ \\
320: IC4296 & & $ -26.06 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 25.5 $ & & $ 333 \pm 6 $ & & $ 6.0\pm 1.8\times 10^{30} $ & $ 6.0\pm 0.5\times 10^{30} $ & & $ 2.77 \pm 0.25 $ & \nodata \\
321: NGC0193 & & $ -24.71 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 14.5 $ & & \nodata & & $ 5.6\pm 1.7\times 10^{30} $ & $ 3.8\pm 0.3\times 10^{30} $ & & $ 2.66 \pm 0.31 $ & \nodata \\
322: NGC0315 & & $ -26.33 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 22.9 $ & & $ 296 \pm 21 $ & & $ 9.8\pm 2.9\times 10^{30} $ & $ 5.7\pm 0.5\times 10^{30} $ & & $ 2.43 \pm 0.43 $ & \nodata \\
323: NGC0383 & & $ -25.84 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 17.8 $ & & $ 277 \pm 6 $ & & $ 1.3\pm 0.4\times 10^{31} $ & $ 6.8\pm 0.6\times 10^{30} $ & & $ 3.52 \pm 0.13 $ & \nodata \\
324: NGC0404 & & \nodata & \nodata & & $ 38 \pm 3 $ & & $ 4.3\pm 0.6\times 10^{25} $ & $ < 2.3\times 10^{26} $ & & \nodata & $ 0.20 $ \\
325: NGC0507 & & $ -25.98 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 26.1 $ & & $ 315 \pm 9 $ & & $ 6.1\pm 1.8\times 10^{29} $ & $ < 1.1\times 10^{29} $ & & $ 3.03 \pm 0.22 $ & \nodata \\
326: NGC0533 & & $ -26.01 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 25.2 $ & & $ 275 \pm 6 $ & & $ 2.1\pm 0.6\times 10^{29} $ & $ < 1.3\times 10^{29} $ & & $ 3.17 \pm 0.19 $ & \nodata \\
327: NGC0720 & & $ -24.94 \pm 0.17 $ & $ 27.4 $ & & $ 242 \pm 5 $ & & $ < 2.3\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 3.8\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 2.57 \pm 0.25 $ & $ 0.25 $ \\
328: NGC0741 & & $ -26.19 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 25.9 $ & & $ 290 \pm 8 $ & & $ 6.4\pm 1.9\times 10^{30} $ & $ 2.0\pm 0.2\times 10^{30} $ & & $ 2.95 \pm 0.25 $ & $ 0.05 $ \\
329: NGC0821 & & $ -24.01 \pm 0.17 $ & $ 23.9 $ & & $ 199 \pm 2 $ & & $ < 1.7\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 1.2\times 10^{28} $ & & \nodata & $ 0.08 $ \\
330: NGC1132 & & $ -25.70 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 19.8 $ & & $ 247 \pm 13 $ & & $ 1.1\pm 0.3\times 10^{29} $ & $ < 4.6\times 10^{29} $ & & $ 3.07 \pm 0.25 $ & \nodata \\
331: NGC1265 & & \nodata & \nodata & & \nodata & & $ 3.3\pm 1.0\times 10^{31} $ & $ < 2.6\times 10^{29} $ & & \nodata & \nodata \\
332: NGC1316 & & $ -26.07 \pm 0.17 $ & $ 49.8 $ & & $ 227 \pm 4 $ & & $ 1.6\pm 0.3\times 10^{29} $ & $ < 2.2\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 3.13 \pm 0.13 $ & $ 1.15 $ \\
333: NGC1399 & & $ -25.19 \pm 0.16 $ & $ 36.9 $ & & $ 337 \pm 5 $ & & $ 3.0\pm 0.4\times 10^{29} $ & $ < 3.4\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 3.28 \pm 0.12 $ & $ 1.59 $ \\
334: NGC1404 & & $ -24.79 \pm 0.19 $ & $ 19.3 $ & & $ 233 \pm 3 $ & & $ 2.1\pm 0.5\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 3.8\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 3.27 \pm 0.11 $ & $ 1.59 $ \\
335: NGC1407 & & $ -25.60 \pm 0.26 $ & $ 36.4 $ & & $ 272 \pm 5 $ & & $ 9.7\pm 2.3\times 10^{28} $ & $ < 4.2\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 3.10 \pm 0.14 $ & $ 0.42 $ \\
336: NGC1549 & & $ -24.69 \pm 0.18 $ & $ 29.0 $ & & $ 203 \pm 3 $ & & \nodata & $ < 1.9\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 2.74 \pm 0.22 $ & $ 0.97 $ \\
337: NGC1553 & & $ -25.06 \pm 0.17 $ & $ 33.9 $ & & $ 177 \pm 4 $ & & \nodata & $ < 1.6\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 2.96 \pm 0.18 $ & $ 0.97 $ \\
338: NGC1600 & & $ -26.06 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 24.8 $ & & $ 335 \pm 6 $ & & $ 3.6\pm 1.1\times 10^{29} $ & $ < 2.1\times 10^{29} $ & & $ 3.09 \pm 0.19 $ & \nodata \\
339: NGC1700 & & $ -25.59 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 15.9 $ & & $ 235 \pm 3 $ & & $ < 8.8\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 1.4\times 10^{29} $ & & $ 2.31 \pm 0.43 $ & \nodata \\
340: NGC2434 & & $ -23.78 \pm 0.29 $ & $ 19.3 $ & & $ 188 \pm 5 $ & & \nodata & $ < 2.2\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 2.56 \pm 0.25 $ & $ 0.19 $ \\
341: NGC2865 & & $ -24.43 \pm 0.20 $ & $ 14.8 $ & & $ 170 \pm 2 $ & & $ < 4.3\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 7.2\times 10^{28} $ & & \nodata & $ 0.11 $ \\
342: NGC3115 & & $ -24.05 \pm 0.09 $ & $ 36.4 $ & & $ 257 \pm 5 $ & & $ < 2.8\times 10^{26} $ & $ < 4.5\times 10^{27} $ & & \nodata & $ 0.08 $ \\
343: NGC3377 & & $ -22.81 \pm 0.09 $ & $ 27.7 $ & & $ 139 \pm 2 $ & & $ < 3.8\times 10^{26} $ & $ < 2.7\times 10^{27} $ & & \nodata & $ 0.49 $ \\
344: NGC3379 & & $ -23.85 \pm 0.11 $ & $ 29.9 $ & & $ 205 \pm 2 $ & & $ 3.2\pm 0.7\times 10^{26} $ & $ < 2.4\times 10^{27} $ & & $ 3.82 \pm 0.10 $ & $ 0.52 $ \\
345: NGC3585 & & $ -24.81 \pm 0.18 $ & $ 32.3 $ & & $ 207 \pm 4 $ & & $ < 1.2\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 2.0\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 2.43 \pm 0.31 $ & $ 0.12 $ \\
346: NGC3923 & & $ -25.30 \pm 0.28 $ & $ 43.8 $ & & $ 247 \pm 6 $ & & $ < 1.6\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 2.6\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 2.89 \pm 0.16 $ & $ 0.40 $ \\
347: NGC4125 & & $ -25.03 \pm 0.25 $ & $ 33.0 $ & & $ 226 \pm 6 $ & & $ 1.7\pm 0.4\times 10^{28} $ & $ < 1.2\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 3.13 \pm 0.13 $ & $ 0.34 $ \\
348: NGC4261 & & $ -25.24 \pm 0.19 $ & $ 25.5 $ & & $ 320 \pm 8 $ & & $ 1.0\pm 0.2\times 10^{31} $ & $ 4.8\pm 0.1\times 10^{30} $ & & $ 3.09 \pm 0.14 $ & $ 0.84 $ \\
349: NGC4365 & & $ -24.91 \pm 0.17 $ & $ 40.7 $ & & $ 255 \pm 2 $ & & $ < 1.2\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 9.0\times 10^{27} $ & & $ 3.16 \pm 0.13 $ & $ 2.93 $ \\
350: NGC4374 & & $ -25.10 \pm 0.11 $ & $ 34.8 $ & & $ 280 \pm 2 $ & & $ 2.5\pm 0.3\times 10^{30} $ & $ 1.3\pm 0.0\times 10^{30} $ & & $ 3.18 \pm 0.14 $ & $ 3.99 $ \\
351: NGC4406 & & $ -25.07 \pm 0.14 $ & $ 59.7 $ & & $ 235 \pm 2 $ & & $ 1.1\pm 0.2\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 6.3\times 10^{27} $ & & $ 3.31 \pm 0.13 $ & $ 1.41 $ \\
352: NGC4472 & & $ -25.66 \pm 0.10 $ & $ 59.2 $ & & $ 288 \pm 2 $ & & $ 8.1\pm 0.8\times 10^{28} $ & $ 2.7\pm 0.0\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 3.41 \pm 0.12 $ & $ 3.31 $ \\
353: NGC4494 & & $ -24.16 \pm 0.11 $ & $ 30.8 $ & & $ 149 \pm 3 $ & & $ < 8.7\times 10^{26} $ & $ < 6.3\times 10^{27} $ & & \nodata & $ 1.04 $ \\
354: NGC4526 & & $ -24.67 \pm 0.20 $ & $ 43.8 $ & & $ 263 \pm 18 $ & & $ 6.6\pm 1.2\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 6.1\times 10^{27} $ & & $ 2.54 \pm 0.31 $ & $ 2.45 $ \\
355: NGC4552 & & $ -24.20 \pm 0.14 $ & $ 25.4 $ & & $ 253 \pm 2 $ & & $ 2.9\pm 0.4\times 10^{28} $ & $ 1.9\pm 0.0\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 3.62 \pm 0.09 $ & $ 2.97 $ \\
356: NGC4555 & & $ -25.78 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 10.9 $ & & \nodata & & $ < 2.8\times 10^{28} $ & $ < 2.0\times 10^{29} $ & & $ 3.19 \pm 0.22 $ & \nodata \\
357: NGC4564 & & $ -22.94 \pm 0.17 $ & $ 19.9 $ & & $ 158 \pm 2 $ & & $ < 6.7\times 10^{26} $ & $ < 4.8\times 10^{27} $ & & \nodata & $ 4.09 $ \\
358: NGC4621 & & $ -24.56 \pm 0.20 $ & $ 32.9 $ & & $ 225 \pm 3 $ & & $ < 10.0\times 10^{26} $ & $ < 7.2\times 10^{27} $ & & $ 2.66 \pm 0.25 $ & $ 2.60 $ \\
359: NGC4636 & & $ -24.41 \pm 0.13 $ & $ 59.3 $ & & $ 202 \pm 3 $ & & $ 2.7\pm 0.3\times 10^{28} $ & $ 1.8\pm 0.0\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 3.47 \pm 0.12 $ & $ 1.33 $ \\
360: NGC4649 & & $ -25.39 \pm 0.15 $ & $ 45.2 $ & & $ 334 \pm 3 $ & & $ 9.8\pm 1.4\times 10^{27} $ & $ 1.3\pm 0.0\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 3.39 \pm 0.12 $ & $ 3.49 $ \\
361: NGC4697 & & $ -23.98 \pm 0.14 $ & $ 42.4 $ & & $ 173 \pm 2 $ & & $ < 4.1\times 10^{26} $ & $ < 6.6\times 10^{27} $ & & $ 3.65 \pm 0.11 $ & $ 0.60 $ \\
362: NGC5018 & & $ -25.27 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 15.6 $ & & $ 214 \pm 8 $ & & $ < 4.8\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 8.0\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 2.50 \pm 0.31 $ & $ 0.29 $ \\
363: NGC5044 & & $ -24.76 \pm 0.28 $ & $ 25.3 $ & & $ 238 \pm 8 $ & & $ 4.0\pm 1.0\times 10^{28} $ & $ < 4.9\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 3.17 \pm 0.13 $ & $ 0.38 $ \\
364: NGC5102 & & $ -21.09 \pm 0.14 $ & $ 79.3 $ & & $ 66 \pm 4 $ & & $ 6.1\pm 1.5\times 10^{25} $ & $ < 1.4\times 10^{27} $ & & \nodata & $ 0.17 $ \\
365: NGC5171 & & $ -24.95 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 10.8 $ & & \nodata & & $ < 2.9\times 10^{28} $ & $ < 2.1\times 10^{29} $ & & \nodata & \nodata \\
366: NGC5532 & & $ -26.33 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 16.0 $ & & $ 293 \pm 18 $ & & $ 5.8\pm 1.7\times 10^{31} $ & $ 1.6\pm 0.1\times 10^{31} $ & & $ 3.11 \pm 0.25 $ & \nodata \\
367: NGC5845 & & $ -22.96 \pm 0.21 $ & $ 4.9 $ & & $ 234 \pm 8 $ & & $ < 2.0\times 10^{27} $ & $ < 1.4\times 10^{28} $ & & \nodata & $ 0.84 $ \\
368: NGC5846 & & $ -25.04 \pm 0.20 $ & $ 34.5 $ & & $ 239 \pm 3 $ & & $ 1.6\pm 0.3\times 10^{28} $ & $ < 1.3\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 2.97 \pm 0.15 $ & $ 0.84 $ \\
369: NGC6482 & & $ -25.48 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 12.6 $ & & $ 303 \pm 9 $ & & $ < 1.0\times 10^{28} $ & $ < 7.5\times 10^{28} $ & & $ 2.64 \pm 0.31 $ & \nodata \\
370: NGC7052 & & $ -25.66 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 21.8 $ & & $ 271 \pm 9 $ & & $ 1.2\pm 0.4\times 10^{30} $ & $ 6.7\pm 0.6\times 10^{29} $ & & $ 2.72 \pm 0.31 $ & \nodata \\
371: NGC7618 & & $ -25.40 \pm 0.33 $ & $ 11.6 $ & & \nodata & & $ 2.7\pm 0.8\times 10^{29} $ & $ < 1.3\times 10^{29} $ & & $ 2.76 \pm 0.31 $ & \nodata \\
372: \enddata
373: \tablenotetext{a}{2MASS data from the extended source catalog \citep{2MASS}. $K$-band absolute magnitude $M_{\rm K}$ and $J$-band effective radius \RJ\ in $\kpc$.}
374: \tablenotetext{b}{Velocity dispersion (in ${\rm km}\, \s^{-1}$) from LEDA \citep{LEDA}.}
375: \tablenotetext{c}{\LNVSS (in $\erg \, \s^{-1}$): $20\cm$ radio continuum luminosity from NVSS \citep{NVSS}; \Lsix\ (in $\erg \, \s^{-1}$): Combination of $6\cm$ radio continuum luminosities from \citet{GB6cm}, \citet{PMN6cm}, and \citet{Becker6cm}. }
376: \tablenotetext{d}{Projected galaxy density \rhomass\ is scaled logarithmically and in units of $\mpc^{-2}$, Tully galaxy density \rhotully\ is scaled linearly and in units of $\mpc^{-3}$.}
377: \end{deluxetable*}
378: %\end{landscape}
379:
380:
381: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------
382:
383:
384: \subsection{Temperature Profiles}\label{s5.tempprofile}
385:
386: To produce radial temperature profiles, we divide the X-ray counts
387: image of each galaxy into elliptical annuli, according to the X-ray
388: ellipticity profiles computed in Paper I. For those galaxies with
389: insufficient signal to fit ellipses, we revert to circular annuli. We
390: find no evidence that this choice affects our results in any way. We
391: adapt the width of our annuli to contain a minimum of 900 counts above
392: the background level, which we determine by the appropriately rescaled
393: Markevitch blank-sky background
394: files\footnote{http://cxc.harvard.edu/cal/Acis/Cal\_prods/bkgrnd/acisbg/COOKBOOK}.
395:
396: We then extract a source and background spectrum for each annulus and
397: fit them with a two-component model using the CIAO analysis package
398: Sherpa. The first component consists of an APEC
399: \footnote{Astrophysical Plasma Emission Code} plasma model to
400: represent the hot gas emission. A quantitative comparison with its
401: better-known predecessor, the Mekal model, shows nearly identical
402: fitting results. We fix the gas metallicity at the solar abundance
403: value. Unresolved point sources are represented by a power-law model
404: with the power law index fixed at 1.6. This ``universal'' spectral
405: model is an adequate representation for the emission of low-luminosity
406: low-mass X-ray binaries, as demonstrated in Paper I and determined
407: independently by \citet{Irwin03}. We also add a multiplicative
408: absorption component, for which we fix the hydrogen column density to
409: the Galactic value, evaluated at the target position with the CIAO
410: tool {\it Colden}\footnote{http://cxc.harvard.edu/toolkit/colden.jsp}.
411:
412: We repeat our spectral analysis for a few objects with the gas
413: abundance as a free parameter, and find that our choice to fix them to
414: the solar value does not affect the fitted temperature. Since the
415: metallicity is poorly constrained by the fits in low signal-to-noise
416: systems, we fix the metallicity for all of our galaxies, in order not
417: to introduce systematic differences in the analysis.
418:
419: \section{Results}
420: \label{s5.temperature}
421:
422: \subsection{Radial Temperature Profile Types}
423:
424: We categorize the observed temperature profiles into four major
425: groups, described below. Two examples from each are shown in Figure
426: \ref{f.temptypes}. (Note that the distinctions between the groups are
427: not always clear cut.)
428:
429: \paragraph{Positive Gradients.}
430: These temperature profiles show a positive gradient at all radii,
431: i.e. the temperature continuously rises outwardly. These profiles
432: resemble those found in clusters of galaxies, which generally harbor
433: cool cores.
434:
435: \paragraph{Negative Gradients.}
436: The temperature profiles show a negative gradient at all radii,
437: i.e. temperatures monotonically decline outward. This phenomenon is
438: less well-known, and has been reported only recently
439: \citep{RandallXMMNGC4649,FukazawaMassprofiles,HumphreyDarkmatter,
440: PonmanNGC6482}.
441:
442: \paragraph{Hybrid.}
443: These peculiar cases exhibit a dramatic change in the temperature
444: gradients. The gradient changes its sign from negative to positive at
445: some intermediate radius, generally between $1-3R_{\rm J}$. These
446: galaxies have warm centers, outside of which their temperatures drop
447: to a minimum level and rise back up again. These profiles have first
448: been noted by \citet{HumphreyDarkmatter}.
449:
450: \paragraph{Quasi-Isothermal.}
451: The radial temperature profiles in this category are consistent with
452: being almost flat at all radii. These galaxies form the transition
453: point between galaxies with positive and negative gradients.
454:
455:
456: We observe only hybrid temperature profiles that change their gradient
457: from negative to positive. Some cooling flow clusters have been found
458: to exhibit the opposite behavior \citep{PiffarettiClusters}. Their
459: temperature profiles show a cool center, then rise to a peak
460: temperature and fall back down on the outskirts. This ``break''
461: usually happens at around 10\% of the virial radius, which is larger
462: than the radii that we are probing in normal galaxies. A {\it ROSAT}
463: study by \citet{OSullivan} exhibits similar trends for elliptical
464: galaxies at larger radii.
465:
466: We split the profiles into two radial regions and analyze the inner
467: and outer temperature gradients separately. As most hybrid profiles
468: exhibit their turnover in slope somewhere around $2R_{\rm J}$, we use
469: this radius as the boundary between our two regions. Accordingly, we
470: define the inner region from outside the central point source
471: extending out to $2R_{\rm J}$ and the outer region between $2-4R_{\rm
472: J}$. We then fit each part of the profile with a power law to derive
473: effective temperature gradients for each region. We will refer to the
474: logarithmic gradients ${\rm d}\ln T /{\rm d} \ln R$ evaluated within
475: 2\RJ\ and from $2-4\,\RJ$ as $\alpha_{02}$ and $\alpha_{24}$,
476: respectively.
477:
478: The best-fit values for \ain\ and \aout\ are listed in Table
479: \ref{t.tempprop}. The reported errors are the formal $1\sigma$
480: statistical errors obtained from the fitting procedure. For cases with
481: only 2 valid data points within the fitting range, we use the
482: difference between these two points to derive a gradient; the errors
483: are derived by propagating the statistical errors of the individual
484: temperature measurements.
485:
486:
487: \begin{figure}
488: \begin{center}
489: \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f1}
490: \end{center}
491: \caption{Examples of different projected temperature profiles as a
492: function of radius. Temperature profile types can be divided into 4
493: major groups (top to bottom rows): (1) Positive gradient (outwardly
494: rising) at all radii; (2) Negative gradient (outwardly falling) at all
495: radii; (3) Hybrid, negative gradient in the core and positive gradient
496: at larger radii; (4) Quasi-isothermal, no apparent temperature change
497: with radius. The complete set of temperature profiles is available
498: online for all 36 galaxies with two or more valid temperature profile
499: points. \label{f.temptypes}}
500: \end{figure}
501:
502: \begin{figure}
503: \begin{center}
504: \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f2}
505: \end{center}
506: \caption{Combined plot of all projected temperature profiles, as a
507: function of radius scaled by the $J$-band effective radius $R_{\rm
508: J}$. Error bars are omitted for clarity; for typical error estimates,
509: refer to Figure \ref{f.temptypes}. The profiles are colored according
510: to the luminosity weighted average temperature of the galaxy within 3
511: optical radii \TX, as indicated by the color scale bar. The
512: temperature gradient changes continuously from positive gradients at
513: the top to isothermal and hybrid profiles to negative gradient
514: profiles at the bottom, along with the average
515: temperature. \label{f.tempprofiles}}
516: \end{figure}
517:
518:
519: \subsection{The Inner Temperature Gradient $\alpha_{02}$}
520:
521: Figure \ref{f.tempprofiles} shows the compilation of
522: all profiles overlaid in one plot, with the
523: radial axes scaled by their $J$-band effective radius $\RJ$. This plot
524: already clearly indicates the absence of any real bimodality in the
525: temperature profiles.
526: Each profile is colored according to its luminosity weighted
527: temperature $T_{\rm X}$ within 3 optical radii. The coloring changes
528: smoothly from top to bottom, indicating overall positive gradients for
529: intrinsically hotter galaxies and negative gradients for cooler
530: galaxies. We plot $\alpha_{02}$ as a function of $T_{\rm X}$ in Figure
531: \ref{f.txtslope02}. Again, there is no sign of bimodality in $\alpha_{02}$.
532: The plot shows a tight correlation, significant at the $9.1\sigma$ level,
533: reflecting the fact that we observe only a
534: very small range in central temperatures between $0.6-0.7\kev$ (Figure
535: \ref{f.tempprofiles}). Thus, any average temperature will obviously be
536: strongly correlated with the gradient as well. Consistently, the fit
537: suggests that the transition from positive to negative inner
538: temperatures gradient occurs at a mean temperature around $0.64\kev$.
539:
540: To establish the underlying cause for the negative inner temperature
541: gradients, we perform a correlation analysis with various galaxy
542: properties, the most interesting of which are listed in the upper half
543: of Table \ref{t.gradcorrelations}: X-ray gas luminosities $L_{\rm
544: X,gas}$, absolute $K$ magnitudes $M_{\rm K}$, central velocity
545: dispersions $\sigma$, radio luminosities at 20cm ($L_{\rm NVSS}$) and
546: 6cm ($L_{\rm6cm}$), and environmental measures of local galaxy
547: density, \rhomass\ and \rhotully.
548:
549: We assess the correlation of $\alpha_{02}$ with each of these properties
550: using the linear fitting algorithm \texttt{bandfit} (see Appendix of
551: Paper II). This algorithm models the distribution of $(x,y)$ points as
552: a linear band with a Gaussian intrinsic width. The model is fitted by
553: maximizing the likelihood of the data; this is similar to fitting a
554: straight line by minimizing the error-weighted perpendicular residuals.
555: The standard error $\sigma$ in the best-fit slope is obtained from the
556: covariance matrix, and the significance of the correlation is the
557: number of $\sigma$ by which the slope differs from zero.
558: In these fits, the quantities assigned as abscissae are
559: scaled logarithmically (except for $M_{\rm K}$, which is
560: already intrinsically logarithmic), while the ordinate \ain\ is
561: scaled linearly. The top half of Table \ref{t.gradcorrelations} lists
562: the best-fit parameters and the statistical significance of the correlation.
563: The fitted parameters are omitted where the significance is $<2\sigma$.
564: The tabulated fits are obtained from the full data set including upper
565: limits, but we also include in the last column the significance of the
566: correlation obtained with the upper limits omitted.\footnote{The exception
567: is $L_{\rm GB6}$, for which we give the parameters for the fit without upper
568: limits. This is because the number of galaxies with upper limits only
569: (49) greatly outweighs that of galaxies with actual detections (15).}
570: The $x_0$ column indicates the transition point from negative to positive
571: temperature gradients in each fit.
572:
573: As the table and Figure \ref{f.kmaglradiotslope02} show, the strongest
574: correlations with \ain\ are found with the 20 cm NVSS radio luminosity
575: \LNVSS, the velocity dispersion $\sigma$, and the absolute K-magnitude
576: \MK. All of these three correlations are of roughly the same
577: significance, with comparable intrinsic widths, as Figure
578: \ref{f.kmaglradiotslope02} shows. The correlation with the $6\cm$
579: radio luminosity $L_{\rm GB6}$ seems equally tight, but has a lower
580: significance, due to the smaller sample size with $6\cm$ radio
581: luminosity measurements.
582:
583: We do not find {\it any} evidence that \ain\ is correlated with the
584: environmental galaxy densities \rhomass\ or \rhotully. The
585: \rhomass--\ain\ plot is shown in the bottom panel of Figure
586: \ref{f.tempenvironment}. We conclude that the inner temperature
587: gradients are neither the result of interactions with neighbor galaxies, nor
588: with ambient intragroup
589: or intracluster gas. Instead, we find that they are connected to
590: intrinsic galaxy properties. We can generally characterize galaxies
591: with negative inner temperature gradients as being smaller, optically
592: fainter galaxies with lower velocity dispersions, lower X-ray gas
593: luminosities, lower average temperatures, and lower radio luminosities
594: than their positive gradient counterparts.
595:
596: Unfortunately, {\it all} of these galaxy properties are intimately
597: connected with each other through well-known correlations such as the
598: \TX--$\sigma$ relation \citep[e.g.][]{OSullivan}, the Faber-Jackson
599: relation \citep{FaberJackson}, the \Lxgas--\TX\ relation
600: \citep[e.g.][]{OSullivan} and the $L_{\rm Radio}$--$\sigma$ relation
601: \citep[e.g.][]{SnellenLsigma}. This makes it difficult to distinguish
602: between fundamental correlations that are really responsible for
603: determining the inner temperature structure and others that are simply
604: ``riding along'' via other correlations.
605:
606: We check the robustness of our results by deriving inner temperature
607: gradients for different cutoff radii and find that all of the observed
608: trends are confirmed, as long as the cutoff-radius does not exceed
609: $\sim 3\RJ$. In particular, we find that for smaller cutoff-radii
610: (e.g. 1\RJ), the significance of the correlations with $\sigma$, \MK\
611: and \Lxgas\ slightly decreases, while the correlations with the radio
612: luminosities \LNVSS\ and \Lsix\ strengthen even further. This may suggest
613: that the correlations with radio luminosities are intrinsically the
614: strongest. Figure \ref{f.tempprofilesradio} shows a combined plot of
615: all temperature profiles, similar to Figure \ref{f.tempprofiles}, but
616: this time colored according to the NVSS radio luminosities. A trend
617: with radio luminosity is clearly evident. We will discuss the
618: implications of our results in \S\ref{s5.discussion}.
619:
620: \begin{deluxetable*}{llrrrcc}
621: %\rotate
622: \ssp
623: \tablewidth{0pt}
624: \tablecaption{Correlations involving inner and outer temperature gradients. \label{t.gradcorrelations}}
625: \tablehead{
626: \colhead{$y$} & \colhead{$x$} & \colhead{$a$} & \colhead{$b$} & \colhead{$x_0$} & \colhead{Significance} & \colhead{Significance} \\
627: & & & & & \colhead{(with limits)} & \colhead{(without limits)}
628: }
629: \startdata
630: $\alpha_{02}$ & $\log L_{\rm NVSS}$ & $ 0.060\pm0.019$ & $-1.65\pm0.02$ & $ 27.4$ & $3.2\sigma$ & $4.3\sigma$ \\
631: $\alpha_{02}$ & $\log \sigma$ & $ 4.171\pm1.192$ & $-10.0\pm0.01$ & $ 2.40$ & $3.6\sigma$ & $3.6\sigma$ \\
632: $\alpha_{02}$ & $M_{\rm K}$ & $-0.141\pm0.044$ & $-3.50\pm0.02$ & $-24.8$ & $3.2\sigma$ & $3.2\sigma$ \\
633: $\alpha_{02}$ & $\log L_{\rm GB6}$\tablenotemark{*} & $ 0.083\pm0.036$ & $-2.35\pm0.04$ & $ 28.3$ & $0.4\sigma$ & $2.3\sigma$ \\
634: $\alpha_{02}$ & $\log L_{\rm X,gas}$ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & $1.0\sigma$ & $1.0\sigma$ \\
635: $\alpha_{02}$ & $\log \rho$ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & $0.7\sigma$ & $0.7\sigma$ \\
636: $\alpha_{02}$ & $\log \rho_{\rm Tully}$ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & $0.4\sigma$ & $0.4\sigma$ \\
637: \\%\tablevspace{0.25\baselineskip}
638: $\alpha_{24}$ & $\log \rho$ & $ 0.735\pm0.223$ & $-2.28\pm0.03$ & $ 3.10$ & $4.4\sigma$ & $4.4\sigma$ \\
639: $\alpha_{24}$ & $\log \rho_{\rm Tully}$ & $ 0.272\pm0.102$ & $ 0.04\pm0.04$ & $ 0.15$ & $2.8\sigma$ & $2.8\sigma$ \\
640: $\alpha_{24}$ & $M_{\rm K}$ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & $1.6\sigma$ & $1.6\sigma$ \\
641: $\alpha_{24}$ & $\log \sigma$ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & $0.5\sigma$ & $0.5\sigma$ \\
642: $\alpha_{24}$ & $\log L_{\rm GB6}$ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & $<0.1\sigma$ & $0.6\sigma$ \\
643: $\alpha_{24}$ & $\log L_{\rm NVSS}$ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & $<0.1\sigma$ & $0.3\sigma $ \\
644: $\alpha_{24}$ & $\log L_{\rm X,gas}$ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & $<0.1\sigma$ & $<0.1\sigma$ \\
645:
646: \enddata
647:
648: \tablecomments{Results are listed in order of decreasing correlation
649: significance. Parameters refer to linear fits of the form $y=ax+b$
650: (for correlations of $>2\sigma$ significance). $x_0$ denotes the
651: point where the fit yields 0, i.e. where the temperature gradients
652: change sign. The last two columns quote the correlation significances
653: with and without upper and lower limits included, respectively.}
654:
655: \tablenotetext{*}{The fitted parameters for the $L_{\rm GB6}$ --
656: $\alpha_{02}$ correlation are quoted for the fit without upper and
657: lower limits included.}
658: \end{deluxetable*}
659:
660:
661: \begin{figure}
662: \begin{center}
663: \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f3}
664: \end{center}
665: \caption{Inner temperature gradient within $2\,R_{\rm J}$ as a
666: function of the average luminosity weighted temperature within 3
667: optical radii. The dashed line indicates the best
668: fit. \label{f.txtslope02}}
669: \end{figure}
670: % Figure produced by $DIARY/papers/entropy/figure.notes
671:
672: \begin{figure*}
673: \begin{center}
674: \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{f4a}
675: \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{f4b}
676: \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{f4c}
677: \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{f4d}
678: \end{center}
679: \caption{Inner temperature gradient within $2\,R_{\rm J}$ as a
680: function of $20\cm$ NVSS radio luminosity (top left), central velocity
681: dispersion (top right), absolute $K$ magnitude (or stellar mass,
682: bottom left) and $6\cm$ radio luminosity (bottom right). The dashed
683: lines indicate the best-fit correlations from bandfit, as given in
684: Table \ref{t.gradcorrelations}. \label{f.kmaglradiotslope02} }
685: \end{figure*}
686: % Figure produced by $DIARY/papers/entropy/figure.notes
687:
688: \begin{figure}
689: \begin{center}
690: \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f5}
691: \end{center}
692: \caption{Projected galaxy number density \rhomass\ vs. outer (\aout,
693: top panel) and inner (\ain, bottom panel) temperature gradients. Note
694: that \ain\ is evidently unaffected by environment, whereas \aout\
695: depends strongly on the density of nearby systems, suggesting the
696: influence of hot ambient
697: gas.\label{f.tempenvironment}}
698: \end{figure}
699: % Figure produced by $DIARY/papers/entropy/figure.notes
700:
701: \begin{figure}
702: \begin{center}
703: \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f6}
704: \end{center}
705: \caption{Temperature profiles, as in Figure \ref{f.tempprofiles}, but
706: with colors indicating NVSS $20\cm$ continuum radio luminosity within
707: $3 R_{\rm J}$,
708: as shown by the color bar. The radio luminosity changes
709: continuously as profiles change from positive to negative
710: temperature gradients. \label{f.tempprofilesradio}}
711: \end{figure}
712:
713: \subsection{The Outer Temperature Gradient $\alpha_{24}$}\label{s5.touter}
714:
715: We now look at the outer temperature gradient between $2$ and
716: $4\,R_{\rm J}$, and with what it is correlated. Like $\alpha_{02}$,
717: $\alpha_{24}$ is correlated with the average temperature within
718: $3\,R_{\rm J}$ (Fig. \ref{f.txtslope24}), though less strongly
719: ($2.5\sigma$, compared with $9.1\sigma$). This trend is such that
720: galaxies with a hotter average temperature have stronger positive
721: temperature gradients. Some correlation is expected because these
722: quantities are not truly independent. As a consequence, the outer
723: temperature gradient is also weakly correlated ($2.4\sigma$) with the
724: inner temperature gradient.
725:
726: We now repeat the same analysis for the outer temperature gradient
727: \aout . The results of the correlation analysis are listed in the
728: bottom half of Table \ref{t.gradcorrelations}. Unlike \ain,
729: \aout\ does {\it not} depend on the intrinsic galaxy properties
730: \LNVSS, \Lsix, $\sigma$, or \MK. Instead, we find strong evidence that
731: \aout\ depends only on the environmental density parameters \rhomass\
732: and \rhotully. This trend with environment is statistically even
733: stronger than the one with the luminosity weighted temperature \TX,
734: even though those parameters are not independent measurements.
735:
736: To check the robustness of these results, we repeat our analysis using
737: larger outer radial boundaries and confirm all trends. The
738: significance of the environmental dependence gets even stronger when
739: extending the analysis to larger radii. These relations are
740: strongest, when one fits temperature gradients to all radii beyond
741: 2\RJ without imposing an outer radial limit. However, since
742: the gradients tend to get stronger with radius, and our galaxies have
743: very different cutoff radii owing to different surface brightness
744: profiles, we do not report the functional form of the fit, as it is
745: driven by the brightest galaxies. Nevertheless, this strengthens the
746: confidence in the observed correlation.
747:
748: We conclude that the inner and outer temperature gradients are
749: essentially decoupled. While the inner gradient depends only on
750: intrinsic galaxy properties, the outer gradient shows no correlations
751: {\it but} with the environment.
752:
753: \begin{figure}
754: \begin{center}
755: \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f7}
756: \end{center}
757: \caption{Outer temperature gradient within $2-4\,R_{\rm J}$ as a
758: function of the average luminosity weighted temperature within
759: $3\,R_{\rm J}$. The dashed line indicates the best
760: fit. \label{f.txtslope24}
761: }
762: \end{figure}
763: % Figure produced by $DIARY/papers/entropy/figure.notes
764:
765:
766: %------------------------------------------------------------------
767:
768:
769: \section{Discussion}\label{s5.discussion}
770:
771: \subsection{Implications for Cooling Flows}
772:
773: Steady-state cooling flow models have gone out of fashion recently due to
774: extensive work on galaxy clusters, which show insufficient amounts of
775: cooling gas at the center \citep[][]{PetersonCoolingspec}. These simple
776: models are unlikely to apply to X-ray bright
777: elliptical galaxies either. We showed in Paper II that the hot gas in
778: these systems is almost always disturbed, and we see evidence linking the
779: origin of these disturbances to the central AGN.
780:
781: However, it is far from proven that the same is true for
782: low-luminosity galaxies, in which we find negative inner
783: temperature gradients. Compressive heating during a gradually cooling
784: inflow of relatively cool gas may be able to offset radiative losses
785: for low-temperature gas in steep gravitational potentials
786: \citep[e.g.][]{MathewsReview}. This counter-intuitively results in a
787: cooling flow that gets heated during inflow and may even produce a hot
788: center, i.e. a negative gradient. We also find in Paper II
789: that these systems are generally less disturbed, which could be
790: consistent with a steady state cooling flow solution.
791:
792: \citet{PonmanNGC6482} observe a falling temperature profile for the
793: fossil group candidate NGC~6482 and successfully fit a steady-state
794: cooling flow model with a reasonable cooling rate of $\dot M =
795: 2M_\sun\,\yr^{-1}$. However, they derive the inner gravitational
796: potential from the X-ray profiles themselves assuming hydrostatic
797: equilibrium, which yields a steep inner potential gradient. They then
798: use this potential to fit the cooling flow model to the negative
799: temperature gradient. This could be circular reasoning: a central
800: temperature peak together with the assumption of hydrostatic
801: equilibrium implies a steep gravitational potential, which leads to
802: increased compressional heating \citep[e.g.][]{MathewsReview} and a
803: central temperature peak. In addition, we have argued in Paper I
804: that an assumption of hydrostatic equilibrium is generally not secure.
805: It would be much safer to derive the gravitational
806: potential from independent stellar dynamics, as the inner region is
807: most likely stellar-mass dominated, at least within two effective
808: radii \citep[e.g.][]{MamonDarkmatterI}. In any event, NGC~6482 is the
809: only negative-gradient object that has been successfully fitted with a
810: cooling flow model so far. Only modeling a more complete sample will
811: show if this idea can generally hold.
812:
813: \subsection{Implications for the Existence of Circumgalactic Gas}
814:
815: Negative temperature gradients have been recognized only recently
816: \citep{HumphreyDarkmatter,FukazawaMassprofiles,RandallXMMNGC4649,
817: PonmanNGC6482}. Because earlier observations revealed only positive
818: gradients, many theoretical flow models have been dismissed on the
819: grounds that they produce negative gradients
820: \citep[e.g.][]{MathewsReview}. Instead, theoretical effort has focused
821: on finding an explanation for the prevalence of positive
822: gradients. \citet{BrighentiCircumgas} argue that a hot circumgalactic
823: gas reservoir is able to reverse a negative temperature gradient. This
824: explanation is consistent with our observations that the outer
825: temperature gradient is correlated with the environment. Whether
826: models with circumgalactic gas can quantitatively account for the more
827: complex hybrid temperature profiles remains to be seen.
828:
829:
830: \subsection{Implications for Supernova Feedback}
831:
832: Another means of producing negative temperature gradients involves
833: supernova (SN) feedback. Since star formation should be negligible in
834: elliptical galaxies, this mechanism would involve only contributions
835: from type Ia SN. Early proposed wind models involving SN feedback
836: \citep{BinneyCoolevolution} were later dismissed, since a main feature
837: was a negative temperature gradient throughout their evolution, which
838: had not been observed at that time. However, \citet{MathewsReview}
839: point out that these models are able to reproduce observed gas
840: profiles only for a very short period of time ($\sim 10^8\yr$) just
841: before a cooling catastrophe sets in. Furthermore, these models are
842: sensitive to the assumed SN rate, resulting in abrupt transitions to
843: SN driven winds, and thus require fine-tuning. This fine-tuning
844: problem can be circumvented by the presence of circumgalactic gas
845: \citep{MathewsReview}. However, our observations of purely negative
846: gradients without an outer rise in temperature may present a challenge
847: to this model, though we cannot exclude the possibility of an external
848: gas reservoir below our detection limit.
849:
850: In addition, the predicted metallicities in galactic wind models are
851: generally super-solar, significantly exceeding the historically
852: observed extremely low abundances in the hot gas
853: \citep[][]{ArimotoIrondiscrepancy}. A {\it Chandra} spectral analysis
854: of abundance gradients in a sample of 28 elliptical galaxies by
855: \citet{Humphrey}, on the other hand, no longer shows strongly
856: sub-solar abundances. They attribute this difference to previously
857: imperfect modeling of the spectra, mainly caused by the neglect of the
858: unresolved point source component and attempting to fit
859: multi-temperature gas with a single-temperature model, the so-called
860: iron-bias \citep[e.g.][]{BuoteIronbias}. Nevertheless, they conclude
861: that their abundances are still far too low to be consistent with
862: galactic wind models, and favor the circulation flow model of
863: \citet{Circflow} instead.
864:
865: However, if we consider only the energy input by SNIa feedback, we
866: find that SN feedback could play a role in heating the hot gas. The
867: average SNIa rate for elliptical and S0 galaxies is $r_{\rm
868: SN}=0.18\pm 0.06\, (100\yr)^{-1}\, (10^{10} L_{B\sun})^{-1}$
869: \citep{CappellaroSNrates}. With an average energy injection of $\sim
870: 10^{51}$ ergs per SN, this results in a SN heating rate of $L_{\rm
871: SN}=5.7\times 10^{30} (L_{\rm B}/L_{\rm B, \sun})\, \erg \s^{-1} $. An
872: inspection of the \Lxgas--$L_{\rm B}$ diagram in Paper I shows that
873: $L_{\rm SN}>\Lxgas$ for galaxies below the blue luminosity where the
874: inner temperature gradients turn from negative to positive ($\sim
875: 4\times 10^{10} L_{\rm B\sun}$). Although this is somewhat suggestive,
876: the large scatter in X-ray luminosity of almost 2 orders of magnitude
877: at a given blue luminosity, combined with the also rather large
878: scatter in the $L_{\rm B}$--\ain\ relation, make it impossible to tell
879: if this is simply coincidence.
880:
881: However, if SN heating were the main cause, we would expect a
882: correlation between the inner temperature gradient and the SN heating
883: to X-ray cooling ratio ($L_{\rm SN}/\lxgas$), in the sense that
884: negative gradients would correspond to high ratios of heating to
885: cooling. We do not find such a correlation. $L_{\rm SN}/\lxgas$
886: correlates with the inner temperature gradient very weakly on the less
887: than $0.5\sigma$ level. We conclude that supernova feedback may be
888: important for balancing part of the radiative losses in X-ray faint
889: galaxies, but our analysis suggests that it is most likely not the
890: dominant factor.
891:
892: \subsection{Implications for AGN feedback}
893:
894: In Paper II we have measured the amount of asymmetry in the hot gas,
895: and find a strong correlation between asymmetry and AGN power. This
896: correlation persists all the way down to the weakest AGN luminosities
897: at the detection limit of the NVSS $20\cm$ survey.
898: We now find that the temperature structure is also strongly correlated
899: with the AGN luminosities, another hint toward the importance of AGN
900: feedback throughout the elliptical galaxy population.
901: However, we cannot completely rule out compressionally
902: heated cooling flows or SN feedback to explain the prevalence of
903: negative temperature gradients. Thus, we propose three possible
904: scenarios involving AGN feedback to explain our results:
905:
906: \begin{enumerate}
907: \item
908: Weak AGN with smaller black holes heat the ISM
909: locally, while higher-luminosity sources feed powerful jets
910: that distribute the heat globally by blowing large cavities into
911: the ISM. This is consistent with the observation that smaller
912: elliptical galaxies have rather weak AGN and generally less
913: extended radio emission, and also in agreement with our findings
914: from Papers I and II that the amount of asymmetry correlates with
915: AGN luminosity. In this scenario, weak AGN would still be
916: disturbing the gas, but on a scale and surface brightness level
917: that is simply less detectable, resulting in a lower
918: asymmetry. Negative temperature gradients could then be a sign of
919: very localized heating by the central AGN.
920: \item
921: AGN are responsible for globally heating the hot gas only in X-ray
922: bright galaxies with positive temperature gradients. The onset of
923: negative inner temperature gradients marks the point where AGN
924: heating becomes unimportant, relative to other sources. These
925: other sources could include compressional heating or supernovae.
926: \item
927: The observed temperature
928: gradients are snapshots of different stages of a time-dependent
929: flow, which cyclically reverses the temperature gradient over
930: time. If such solutions exist, it will be challenging for
931: theoretical models to explain the fact that none of our galaxies
932: exhibit central temperatures below $\sim 0.6\kev$. Thus, any
933: cyclic solution has to keep the central temperature rather
934: constant, while reversing the temperature gradient by heating or
935: cooling only at large radii. The best chance to achieve this may
936: be for galaxies to cycle through wind and inflow phases, possibly
937: intimately correlated with the time-dependent AGN activity of the
938: central black hole.
939: \end{enumerate}
940:
941: The possible importance of AGN heating for elliptical galaxies has
942: also recently been pointed out by \citet{BestAGNcooling}. They combine
943: two empirical results to derive an estimate of time-averaged heating
944: by radio sources in galaxies. They use a result by
945: \citet{BirzanCavities} for galaxy clusters that empirically links the
946: $p{\rm d}V$ work associated with inflating X-ray cavities into the
947: intracluster medium with the observed $20\cm$ radio continuum power of
948: the associated radio source. Although this correlation exhibits
949: significant scatter, Best et al. derive a linear fit and use it to
950: convert their radio powers to mechanical energy. In an earlier study,
951: \citet{BestRadioloudAGN} find that the fraction of elliptical galaxies
952: hosting radio-loud AGN correlates with black hole mass and radio
953: luminosity. Assuming that all elliptical galaxies have AGN at their
954: centers, Best et al. interpret the fraction of galaxies with active
955: AGN as the fraction of time that they are turned on. By combining the
956: computed mechanical work per unit radio luminosity derived from
957: \citet{BirzanCavities} with the fraction of time the radio source is
958: turned on, Best et al. calculate the time-averaged mechanical heat
959: input of the AGN. A comparison with the \Lxgas--$L_{\rm B}$ relation
960: for normal ellipticals shows a remarkable agreement between the
961: time-average AGN heat input and the averaged radiative losses of
962: elliptical galaxies \citep[Figure 2]{BestAGNcooling}. This good
963: agreement is actually surprising, since the conversion factor from
964: radio power to mechanical energy has a rather large scatter and is
965: only based on observations of cluster cavities.
966:
967: Further support for AGN heating has been provided by
968: \citet{FabianAccretionJet}, who measure the mechanical energy
969: associated with X-ray cavities in 9 X-ray luminous elliptical
970: galaxies. They compare this value to the Bondi accretion rate, which
971: they derive from deprojected density and temperature profiles,
972: evaluated at the accretion radius. Allen et al. find a tight
973: correlation between the Bondi accretion rate and the mechanical energy
974: injected into the ISM, and find that this energy input may be
975: sufficient to prevent the gas from cooling.
976:
977: \subsection{What is so special about $\sim 0.6\kev$?}
978:
979: A close inspection of Figure \ref{f.tempprofiles} shows a remarkably
980: small range in central temperature, which falls between $0.6$ to
981: $0.7\kev$. The upper limit owes its origin to our explicit exclusion
982: of brightest cluster galaxies, with higher temperatures, from our
983: sample. Including cluster cDs in our sample would add the missing
984: profiles, adding positive temperature gradients with higher central
985: temperatures.
986:
987: However, the lower limit is quite mysterious. We find it unlikely that
988: this is simply a {\it Chandra} sensitivity effect. We know that our
989: temperature fits are sensitive to lower temperatures, as we can see
990: them in fits to the outer regions of the same objects. Conceivably,
991: this could represent a selection effect imposed on the {\it
992: Chandra} archive through the proposal process, which disfavors
993: observations of systems with lower temperature due to the
994: drop in instrument sensitivity at lower energy. We find this
995: explanation also difficult to believe, as galaxies with negative
996: gradients would have been characterized simply as having a lower mean
997: temperature, since {\it ROSAT} would not have been able to detect the
998: rise in temperature toward the center. However, we do see that the
999: faintest galaxies in our sample exclusively build the lower envelope
1000: in the temperature profiles, with luminosity weighted temperatures of
1001: $\sim 0.4\kev$. Thus, fainter galaxies could lower this envelope even
1002: further, and with it the central temperature. The lower envelope may
1003: also mark the transition to a galactic wind, which would render the
1004: temperature gradient for these galaxies unobservable due to low gas
1005: densities.
1006:
1007: Nevertheless, something {\it is} special about $\sim 0.6\kev$. First,
1008: we do not observe any central temperature below this value. Second,
1009: all hybrid temperature profiles drop below $0.6\kev$ at some
1010: intermediate radius and then rise back up again. And third, the best
1011: fit for the \TX--\ain\ relation puts the transition between negative
1012: and positive gradients at $0.64\kev$. Any flow model on the galaxy
1013: scale has to be able to reproduce these properties.
1014:
1015:
1016:
1017: %------------------------------------------------------------------
1018:
1019:
1020: \section{Conclusions}\label{s5.conclusions}
1021:
1022: We have reported on the shape of temperature profiles in 36 normal elliptical
1023: galaxies.
1024: These profiles show a variety of different profile types:
1025: purely positive gradients, purely negative gradients, quasi-isothermal
1026: and even hybrid profiles. To understand this complexity, we derive
1027: mean temperature gradients for an inner region within $2\RJ$,
1028: excluding the central point source, and an outer region between
1029: $2-4\RJ$. We find that the outer temperature gradient is independent
1030: of intrinsic galaxy properties, but a strong function of environment,
1031: such that positive outer temperature gradients are restricted to
1032: cluster and group environments. This suggests that the outer gradients
1033: are caused by interaction with hotter ambient gas, whereas galaxies
1034: with negative outer gradients are in less dense environments and lack
1035: this intergalactic gas reservoir.
1036:
1037: The inner temperature gradient, on the other hand, is completely
1038: independent of the environmental
1039: influence. Instead, we find that it is correlated with a number of
1040: intrinsic galaxy properties; in decreasing order of significance, the
1041: $20\cm$ radio luminosity, the central velocity dispersion, the
1042: absolute $K$ magnitude, and the $6\cm$ radio luminosity.
1043:
1044: The data cannot rule out the idea that negative gradients can be
1045: produced by compressional heating in low-temperature systems, during a
1046: slow cooling inflow in a steep gravitational potential.
1047: SN feedback may also provide sufficient energy to offset
1048: cooling in X-ray faint galaxies, but we find no direct evidence that
1049: SN heating dominates.
1050:
1051: Our preferred feedback model involves the central AGN. The
1052: inner temperature gradient is most strongly correlated with radio
1053: luminositiy and central velocity dispersion, which may be
1054: interpreted as a surrogate for black hole mass
1055: \citep{TremaineBHsigma}. The nature of these correlations is such that
1056: weak AGN hosts show negative temperature gradients, whereas more
1057: luminous AGN exclusively live in positive gradient systems. Thus, we
1058: propose three scenarios, to explain the observed features. (1) Weak
1059: AGN distribute their heat locally, whereas luminous AGN heat the gas
1060: more globally with their extended jets. (2) The onset of negative
1061: gradients marks the point where AGN heating becomes unimportant, and
1062: compressional heating or SN feedback becomes dominant. (3) A cyclic
1063: model in which the AGN drives an outflow, which shuts the AGN
1064: activity off until the flow reverses itself, fuels the black
1065: hole and starts another cycle.
1066:
1067: These findings are in agreement with the results from Paper I, which
1068: showed that precise hydrostatic equilibrium does not hold for the hot gas in
1069: elliptical galaxies, and established the prevalence of disturbances
1070: in the X-ray gas morphology. The results of Paper II indicate that the
1071: central AGN probably causes these disturbances. Combining these
1072: results with the connection between the temperature structure and the radio
1073: luminosity of the system produces a strong argument for the general
1074: importance of AGN feedback in nearly all normal elliptical galaxies.
1075:
1076:
1077: %------------------------------------------------------------------
1078:
1079:
1080: \acknowledgments We have made use of the HyperLEDA database
1081: (http://leda.univ-lyon1.fr). Support for this work was provided by
1082: the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) through
1083: Chandra Awards G01-2094X and AR3-4011X, issued by the {\em Chandra
1084: X-Ray Observatory Center}, which is operated by the Smithsonian
1085: Astrophysical Observatory for and on behalf of NASA under contract
1086: NAS8-39073, and by National Science Foundation grant AST0407152.
1087:
1088:
1089: %------------------------------------------------------------------
1090:
1091: \bibliographystyle{apj}
1092: %\bibliography{../dissertation/publications,../dissertation/references,../dissertation/binning}
1093: \bibliography{../bibtex/allreferences}
1094:
1095: \clearpage
1096: \appendix
1097: \section{Individual Temperature Profiles}
1098:
1099: \begin{figure}[h]
1100: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_2}
1101: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_3}
1102: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_4}
1103: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_5}
1104: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_6}
1105: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_7}
1106: \end{figure}
1107: \clearpage
1108:
1109: \begin{figure}
1110: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_8}
1111: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_9}
1112: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_10}
1113: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_11}
1114: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_12}
1115: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_13}
1116: \end{figure}
1117: \clearpage
1118:
1119: \begin{figure}
1120: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_14}
1121: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_15}
1122: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_16}
1123: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_17}
1124: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_18}
1125: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_19}
1126: \end{figure}
1127: \clearpage
1128:
1129: \begin{figure}
1130: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_20}
1131: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_21}
1132: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_22}
1133: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_23}
1134: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_24}
1135: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_25}
1136: \end{figure}
1137: \clearpage
1138:
1139: \begin{figure}
1140: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_26}
1141: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_27}
1142: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_28}
1143: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_29}
1144: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_30}
1145: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_31}
1146: \end{figure}
1147: \clearpage
1148:
1149: \begin{figure}
1150: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_32}
1151: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_33}
1152: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_34}
1153: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_35}
1154: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_36}
1155: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f1_37}
1156: \end{figure}
1157:
1158: \end{document}
1159:
1160:
1161:
1162: