1: %% *************************************************************************
2: %% cjaa.tex
3: %% CJAA Ver. 1.0, LaTeX class for Chinese Journal of Astronomy & Astrophysics
4: %% demonstration file
5: %% (C) Chin. J. Astron. Astrophys.
6: %% revised by Zhou Ai-Ying, 2001.08.28;2003.04.20
7: %%
8: %% Note: 1. The ChJAA macro class cjaa.cls for LaTeX2e was adapted from
9: %% aa.cls, the A&A's macro class (Ver.5.01). Manuscripts for
10: %% ChJAA can be prepared following this demo file using cjaa.cls.
11: %% 2. To include EPS/PS graphics, you may use one of the graphics macro packages:
12: %% graphicx.sty, epsf.sty or psfig.sty, or their mix. Please note the usage
13: %% of \input{*.sty} and \usepackage{*}, they have no difference.
14: %% 3. Pay close attention to the format of ChJAA's reference list and
15: %% other requirements. See Instructions for Authors (2001, ChJAA, Vol.1, No.1)
16: %% or visit ChJAA's web pages at http://www.chjaa.org
17: %% 4. Final publication layout will be produced with this LaTeX source file.
18: %%---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19: %%
20: \documentclass[referee]{chjaa} % referee version: for submission
21: %\documentclass{cjaa} % preprint, the final version for publication
22: %if use preprint, please de-comment \volnopage{} too.
23:
24: \usepackage{graphicx} %for PS/EPS graphics inclusion, new
25: %\input{epsf.sty} %for PS/EPS graphics inclusion, old
26: %\input{psfig.sty} %for PS/EPS graphics inclusion, old
27: \usepackage{epsfig}
28: %\baselineskip=6mm %%preserved for Editor. DOn't remove!
29:
30:
31: \begin{document}
32:
33: \title{The relation between black hole masses and Lorentz factors of the jet components in blazars}
34:
35: \volnopage{Vol.0 (200x) No.0, 000--000} %%preserved for Editor. DOn't remove!
36: \setcounter{page}{1} %%starting page, preserved for Editor. DOn't remove!
37: % \baselineskip=5mm %%preserved for Editor. DOn't remove!
38:
39: \author{Ming Zhou
40: \inst{1,2,3}\mailto{}
41: %% Please move "\mailto{}" to the corresponding author of the paper.
42: %% For single author or all the authors from an institute, use "\inst{}" only
43: %% Here is an example of three authors come from different institutes.
44: \and Xinwu Cao
45: \inst{1,2\star}}
46: \offprints{Ming Zhou} %% is disabled in fact
47: % \baselineskip=4.642mm %% preserved for Editor. DOn't remove!
48:
49: \institute{Shanghai Astronomical Observatory, CAS, Shanghai 200030, China\\
50: \email{mzhou@shao.ac.cn; cxw@shao.ac.cn}
51: %% Please give the E-mail address of the author, to whom future correspondence and
52: %% offprint requests will be sent. Note to pair \mailto{} with \email{}
53: \and
54: Joint Institute for Galaxy and Cosmology (JOINGC) of SHAO and USMC, 80 Randan Road, Shanghai 200030, China
55: \and
56: Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, BeiJing 100039, China}
57:
58: \date{Received~~ month day; accepted~~ ~~month day}
59:
60: \abstract{We explore the relation between black hole mass ($M_{\rm
61: BH}$) and the motion of the jet components for a sample of blazars.
62: The Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA) 2cm Survey and its continuation:
63: Monitoring of Jets in active galactic nuclei (AGNs) with VLBA
64: Experiments (MOJAVE) have observed 278 radio-loud AGNs, of which 146
65: blazars have reliable measurements on their apparent velocities of
66: jet components. We calculate the minimal Lorentz factors for these
67: sources from their measured apparent velocities, and their black
68: hole masses are estimated with their broad-line widths. A
69: significant intrinsic correlation is found between black hole masses
70: and the minimal Lorentz factors of the jet components, which the
71: Eddington ratio is only weakly correlated with the minimal Lorentz
72: factor, which may imply that the Blandford-Znajek (BZ) mechanism may
73: dominate over the Blandford-Payne (BP) mechanism for the jet
74: acceleration (at least) in blazars.
75: %Its physical implications are discussed.
76: \keywords{black hole physics --- galaxies: active --- galaxies: jets ---galaxies: nuclei
77: .}
78: }
79:
80: \authorrunning{Ming Zhou \and Xinwu Cao } %author_head in even pages
81: \titlerunning{Black hole masses and Lorentz factors of the jet components} % title_head in odd pages
82:
83: \maketitle
84: %% The author head (on even pages) and the title head (on odd pages) will be
85: %% automatically extracted from \author{} and \title{}. Whenever the title is too long,
86: %% you will be asked to supply a shorter one by inserting either \authorrunning{} or
87: %% \titlerunning{} before \maketitle. Anyway, you can specify your own heads in advance.
88: %%
89: %%
90: %% Note: In the following text body of your manuscript, please note several differences from
91: %% other major journals:
92: %% (1) \subsection{Please Capitalize the First Letter of Each Notional Word in Subsection Title}
93: %% (2) Please Capitalize the First Letter of Each Notional Word in table's caption
94:
95: %
96: %________________________________________________ sections below
97: %
98: \section{Introduction} %% first-level sections will be auto-capitalized
99: \label{sect:intro}
100: %\hspace{15pt}% %% preserved for Editor
101: Relativistic jets have been observed in many radio-loud AGNs, which
102: are believed to be formed very close to the black holes. The
103: currently most favored models of the jet formation are BZ and BP
104: mechanisms (Blandford \& Znajek 1977; Blandford \& Payne 1982). In
105: these mechanisms, the power of jet is extracted from the disk or
106: black hole rotational energy. The disk-jet connection has been
107: investigated by many authors in different ways (Rawlings \& Saunders
108: 1991; Falcke \& Biermann 1995; Cao \& Jiang 1999; 2001; 2002, Xie
109: et al. 2007; Xie et al. 2008).
110:
111:
112: Some different approaches were proposed to estimate the masses of
113: the black holes in AGNs, such as the gas kinematics near a black
114: hole (see Ho \& Kormendy 2000 for a review and references therein).
115: The central black hole mass derived from the direct measurements on
116: the gases moving near the hole is reliable, but unfortunately, it is
117: available only for very few AGNs. For most AGNs, the velocities of
118: the clouds in broad line regions (BLR) can be inferred from the
119: widths of their broad emission lines. If the radius of the BLR is
120: available, the mass of the central black hole can be derived from
121: the broad-line width on the assumption that the clouds in the BLR
122: are gravitationally bound and orbiting with Keplerian velocities
123: (Dibai 1980). The radius of the BLR can be measured by using the
124: reverberation-mapping method from the time delay between the
125: continuum and line variations (Peterson 1993; Netzer \& Peterson
126: 1997). Long-term monitoring on the source is necessary for applying
127: this method to derive the radius of the BLR, which leads to a small
128: amount of AGNs with measured black hole masses in this way.
129: Alternatively, a tight correlation was found between the size of the
130: BLR and the optical continuum luminosity, which can be used to
131: estimate the size of the BLR in an AGN from its optical luminosity
132: and then the black hole mass (e.g., Wandel, Peterson \& Malkan 1999;
133: Kaspi et al. 1996; 2000; Laor 2000).
134:
135: The kinematic properties of
136: the jet components in blazars were revealed by multi-epoch VLBI observations (e.g.,
137: Kellermann et al. 2004; Lister et al. 2005).
138: In this paper, we use a large sample of blazars, of which the proper motions were well
139: measured with VLBA, to explore the relations between the jet speeds and physical properties
140: of blazars, i.e., the black hole masses and Eddington ratios.
141:
142: The cosmological parameters $\Omega_{\rm M}=0.3$,
143: $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.7$, and $H_0=70~ {\rm km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ have
144: been adopted in this work.
145:
146:
147: %% ChJAA editors DID NOT use \cite{} for citation, \ref and \label for
148: %% cross-references of Table/Figure in publication version.
149: %% ChJAA editors prefered you giving a citation as 'Michel et al. 1992', and
150: %% writting Table~1 or Fig.~1 and so forth. However, that will make authors
151: %% inconvenient in adjusting/adding/removing text, tables or figures. Anyway,
152: %% authors can use \cite, \citep and \citet as widely used in other journals.
153: %% ChJAA editors are moving to use a more flexible LaTeX source.
154:
155: \section{Sample}
156: \label{sect:data}
157: %\hspace{15pt}% %% preserved for Editor
158: We start with a sample of radio-loud quasars and BL Lac objects with
159: measured apparent velocities of jet components. The sample is
160: compiled by searching the literature to include all blazars with
161: available proper motion data of the jets. Most data are taken from
162: several surveys, such as, the original flux-limited MOJAVE-I sample,
163: and the extended MOJAVE-II sample
164: \footnote[1]{http://www.physics.purdue.edu/astro/MOJAVE}. We find
165: that 278 sources have multi-epoch VLBI observations, of which 146
166: blazars have reliable measured apparent velocities. Their black hole
167: masses are estimated with the broad-line widths and
168: broad-line/continuum luminosities, which leads to 78 sources with
169: measured black hole masses.
170:
171: \section{Black Hole Masses and Minimal Lorentz Factors}
172: \label{sect:analysis}
173:
174:
175: In order to estimate their $M_{\rm BH}$, we search the literatures
176: for all the available measurements of the full width at half maximum
177: (FWHM) for broad-lines H$\alpha$, H$\beta$, Mg {\sc ii}, C {\sc iv}
178: or Ly$\alpha$ lines, as well as the fluxes of these lines. For the
179: sources without line flux data, we adopt their continuum fluxes
180: instead. We find that one source in our sample has very narrow
181: broad-lines (FWHM$<$ 1000 km~s$^{-1}$), which is similar to typical
182: narrow lines. It should be cautious on the black hole mass estimates
183: for this source, since we cannot rule out the possibility that this
184: line may be the narrow component emitted from the narrow line region
185: (e.g., Gu et al. 2001). We therefore rule out this source. For most
186: BL Lac objects, their broad-line emissions are too weak to be
187: measured, and we estimate their $M_{\rm BH}$ with the empirical
188: relation between $M_{\rm BH}$ and bulge luminosity $L_{\rm bulge}$.
189: We list all the data of the sample in Table 1. Columns (1)-(2)
190: represent the source's IAU name and redshift, respectively. The
191: lines used to estimate $M_{\rm BH}$ from their luminosity and the
192: references are listed in Columns (3) and (4), respectively. In
193: Columns (5), we list the lines, of which the widths are used to
194: estimate the $M_{\rm BH}$. We list the estimated $M_{\rm BH}$ in
195: Columns (7). The data of the BL Lac objects in this sample are
196: summarized in Table 2.
197:
198: For blazars, the optical/UV continuum may be contaminated by the
199: beamed synchrotron emission from the jets. Wu et al. (2004) compared
200: the black hole masses obtained for a sample of radio-loud quasars
201: with both the line and continuum, and they found that the masses
202: obtained with line luminosity are systematically lower that those
203: obtained with continuum. In this work, the black hole masses $M_{\rm
204: BH}$ are estimated by using the line width of either one of these
205: lines: Mg {\sc ii}, H$\beta$, or H$\alpha$, and the line
206: luminosities (or the optical/UV continuum, if the line luminosity is
207: unavailable). McGill et al. (2008) analyzed a sample of 19 AGNs of
208: which all three lines were observed in optical wavebands, and they
209: obtained a set of 30 internally self-consistent recipes for
210: estimating $M_{\rm BH}$ from a variety of observables with different
211: intrinsic scatters. Whenever more than one recipes are available for
212: estimating the black hole mass, we always choose the one with the
213: minimal intrinsic scatter (see McGill et al. 2008 for the details).
214: We therefore use the broad-line emission instead of the optical/UV
215: continuum to estimate $M_{\rm BH}$, provided their line luminosities
216: are available. When more than one empirical correlations are
217: applicable, we use one of following relations in order:
218: \begin{equation}
219: \log M_{\rm BH}=6.384+2\log \left(\rm FWHM_{\rm Mg_{\ II}} \over 1000 \mbox{\rm km s}^{-1} \right)+0.55\log \left({\it L}_{\rm H\alpha}\over10^{44}\mbox{\rm erg s}^{-1}\right)
220: \end{equation}
221: \begin{equation}
222: \log M_{\rm BH}=6.711+2\log \left(\rm FWHM_{\rm Mg_{\ II}} \over 1000 \mbox{\rm km s}^{-1} \right)+0.56\log \left({\it L}_{\rm H\beta}\over10^{44}\mbox{\rm erg s}^{-1}\right)
223: \end{equation}
224: \begin{equation}
225: \log M_{\rm BH}=6.711+2\log \left(\rm FWHM_{\rm Mg_{\ II}} \over 1000 \mbox{\rm km s}^{-1} \right)+0.56\log \left({\it L}^{'}_{\rm H\alpha}\over10^{44}\mbox{\rm erg
226: s}^{-1}\right),
227: \end{equation}
228: \begin{equation}
229: \log M_{\rm BH}=6.930+2\log \left(\rm FWHM_{\rm H\alpha} \over 1000 \mbox{\rm km s}^{-1} \right)+0.56\log \left({\it L}_{\rm H\beta}\over10^{44}\mbox{\rm erg
230: s}^{-1}\right),
231: \end{equation}
232: \begin{equation}
233: \log M_{\rm BH}=6.747+2\log \left(\rm FWHM_{\rm H\beta} \over 1000 \mbox{\rm km s}^{-1} \right)+0.55\log \left({\it L}_{\rm H\beta}\over10^{44}\mbox{\rm erg
234: s}^{-1}\right),
235: \end{equation}
236: \begin{equation}
237: \log M_{\rm BH}=6.420+2\log \left(\rm FWHM_{\rm H\beta} \over 1000 \mbox{\rm km s}^{-1} \right)+0.56\log \left({\it L}_{\rm H\alpha}\over10^{44}\mbox{\rm erg
238: s}^{-1}\right),
239: \end{equation}
240: \begin{equation}
241: \log M_{\rm BH}=6.747+2\log \left(\rm FWHM_{\rm H\beta} \over 1000 \mbox{\rm km s}^{-1} \right) +0.55\log \left({\it L}^{'}_{\rm H\beta}\over10^{44}\mbox{\rm
242: erg,
243: s}^{-1}\right),
244: \end{equation}
245: \begin{equation}
246: \log M_{\rm BH}=6.747+2\log \left(\rm FWHM_{\rm C_{\ IV}} \over 1000 \mbox{\rm km s}^{-1} \right) +0.55\log \left({\it L}^{'}_{\rm H\beta}\over10^{44}\mbox{\rm erg s}^{-1}\right)+\log
247: 0.5,
248: \end{equation}
249: \begin{equation}
250: \log M_{\rm BH}=6.990+2\log \left(\rm FWHM_{\rm Mg_{\ II}} \over 1000 \mbox{\rm km s}^{-1} \right)+0.518\log \left({\it L}_{\rm 5100}\over10^{42}\mbox{\rm erg
251: s}^{-1}\right),
252: \end{equation}
253: \begin{equation}
254: \log M_{\rm BH}=7.026+2\log \left(\rm FWHM_{\rm H\alpha} \over 1000 \mbox{\rm km s}^{-1} \right)+0.518\log \left({\it L}_{\rm 5100}\over10^{42}\mbox{\rm erg
255: s}^{-1}\right),
256: \end{equation}
257: \begin{equation}
258: \log M_{\rm BH}=7.026+2\log \left(\rm FWHM_{C_{\ IV}} \over 1000 \mbox{\rm km s}^{-1} \right)+0.518\log \left({\it L}_{\rm 5100}\over10^{42}\mbox{\rm erg s}^{-1}\right)+\log
259: 0.5,
260: \end{equation}
261: where $ M_{\rm BH}$ is in units of $M_{\odot}$, $ L^{'}_{\rm
262: H\alpha}$ and $L^{'}_{\rm H\beta}$ are estimate form $L_{\rm
263: Ly\alpha}$, $L_{\rm C_{\ IV}}$ or $L_{\rm Mg {\ II}}$ by their
264: relative rations (Gaskell, Shields \& Wampler 1981; Francis et al.
265: 1991),and $L_{5100}$ is nuclear luminosity $\lambda L_{\lambda}$ at
266: $\lambda =\rm 5100\rm \AA$.
267:
268: We also estimate $M_{\rm BH}$ using Eqs. (9), (10), and (11) for the
269: black holes with continuum luminosities, of which the masses can
270: also be estimated with line luminosities. We compare the black hole
271: masses with these two different methods in Fig. 1. It is indeed
272: found that the masses estimated with line luminosities are
273: systematically lower that those estimated with continuum
274: luminosities, which is consistent with Wu et al. (2004)'s
275: conclusion.
276:
277: For the BL Lac objects in this sample, we use the empirical relation
278: between host galaxy absolute magnitude at R-band $M_{\rm R}$ and
279: $M_{\rm BH}$ proposed by Bettoni et al. (2003),
280: \begin {equation}
281: \log M_{\rm BH}=-0.50 M_{\rm R}-3.00,
282: \end {equation}
283: to estimate their black hole masses.
284:
285: Although the apparent velocities of the jet components were measured
286: by VLBI observations, the intrinsic speeds of the jet components are
287: still unavailable, as the viewing angles of the jets are unknown for
288: most sources in this sample. However, we can derive the minimal
289: Lorentz factors from the observed apparent velocities of jet
290: components using:
291: \begin {equation}
292: \gamma_{\rm min}=(1+\beta_{\rm app} ^{2})^{0.5},
293: \end {equation}
294: and then analyze their relations with other physical quantities of
295: the sources. For the sources with more than one measured moving
296: component, we always select the one moving fastest, as we intend to
297: explore the acceleration mechanism of the jets in blazars (see Cohen
298: et al. 2007 for the detailed discussion).
299:
300: \section{Results}
301: \label{sect:analysis}
302:
303:
304: In Fig. 2, we plot the relation between black hole masses $M_{\rm
305: BH}$ and the minimal Lorentz factors $\gamma_{\rm min}$ of the jets.
306: The linear regression gives
307: \begin{equation}
308: \log \gamma_{\rm min}= 0.31 \log M_{\rm BH}-1.80
309: \end{equation}
310:
311: A significant correlation is found between these two quantities at
312: 99.6 per cent confidence (Spearman rank correlation analysis), and
313: the correlation coefficient is 0.33. It should be noted with caution
314: that this correlation may be caused by the common dependence of
315: redshift. In Fig. 3, we plot the relation between redshift $z$ and
316: the minimal Lorentz factor $\gamma_{\rm min}$, and only a weak
317: correlation is found at 93.6 per cent confidence between these two
318: quantities. We perform the Spearman partial rank correlation
319: analysis (Macklin 1982), and we find that the partial correlation
320: coefficient is 0.27 after subtracting the common redshift
321: dependence. The significance of the partial rank correlation is
322: 2.39, which is equivalent to the deviation from a unit variance
323: normal distribution if there is no correlation present (see Macklin
324: 1982 for the details). A summary of the results of partial rank
325: correlation analysis is listed in Table 3.
326:
327: We also perform a correlation analysis on the sources in the
328: restricted redshift range $0.1<z< 2.1$. For this subsample of 72
329: sources, a correlation at 97.6 per cent confidence is still present
330: between $\gamma_{\rm min}$ and $M_{\rm BH}$, while almost no
331: correlation between $\gamma_{\rm min}$ and z is found (at 55.2 per
332: cent confidence). It appears that the correlation between
333: $\gamma_{\rm min}$ and $M_{\rm BH}$ is an intrinsic one, not caused
334: by the common redshift dependence.
335:
336: The bolometric luminosity ($L_{\rm bol}$) is estimated by assuming
337: $L_{\rm bol}\approx10L_{\rm BLR}$ (e.g., Liu et al. 2006). For some
338: sources without measured broad-line luminosities, we estimate the
339: bolometric luminosities from the optical continuum luminosities
340: using the relation of $L_{\rm bol}\approx 9\lambda L_{\rm
341: \lambda,opt}$ ($\lambda =\rm 5100\rm \AA$) (Kaspi et al. 2000). We
342: plot the relation between the Eddington ratio ($L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm
343: Edd}$) and $\gamma_{\rm min}$ of the jets in Fig. 5. The linear
344: regression gives
345: \begin{equation}
346: \log \gamma_{\rm min}=0.11 \log L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}+0.87.
347: \end{equation}
348: We find that only a weak correlation between $L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm
349: Edd}$ and $\gamma_{\rm min}$ (at 93.5 per cent confidence) is
350: present.
351:
352:
353: \section{Discussion}
354: %\hspace{15pt}% %% preserved for Editor
355:
356:
357: We find an intrinsic correlation between black hole masses and the
358: minimal Lorentz factors of jet components for a sample of blazars,
359: while no significant correlation between the Eddington rations and
360: the Lorentz factors is present for the same sample. Our main
361: statistical results will not be altered, even if those black holes
362: with masses estimated with continuum luminosities are removed. Our
363: statistical results provide useful clues to the mechanisms of jet
364: formation and acceleration in blazars.
365:
366: It is believed that the growth of massive black holes in the centers
367: of galaxies is dominantly governed by mass accretion in AGN phases
368: (e.g., Soltan 1982; Yu \& Tremaine 2002). The massive black holes
369: will be spun up through accretion, as the black holes acquire mass
370: and angular momentum simultaneously though accretion. The spins of
371: massive black holes may also be affected by the mergers of black
372: holes. A rapidly rotating new black hole will be present after the
373: merger of two black holes, only if the binary's larger member
374: already spins quickly and the merger with the smaller hole is
375: consistently near prograde, or if the binary's mass ratio approaches
376: unity (Hughes \& Blandford 2003). The comoving space density for
377: heavier black holes is much lower than that for lighter black holes
378: (e.g., see the black hole mass function in Yu \& Tremaine 2002),
379: which means that the probability of the mergers of two black holes
380: with similar masses is lower for heavier black holes. This implies
381: the spins of heavier black holes are mainly regulated by accretion
382: rather than the mergers. Thus, it is natural to expect (in
383: statistical sense) that the heavier black holes have higher spin
384: parameters $a$ than their lower mass counterparts. Volonteri et al.
385: (2007) studied on how the accretion from a warped disc influences
386: the evolution of black hole spins and concluded that within the
387: cosmological framework, one indeed expects most supermassive black
388: holes in elliptical galaxies to have on average higher spin than
389: black holes in spiral galaxies, where random, small accretion
390: episodes (e.g., tidally disrupted stars, accretion of molecular
391: clouds) might have played a more important role. The jets can be
392: accelerated to higher speeds by the heavier black holes, because
393: they are spinning more rapidly (Blandford \& Znajek 1977). The
394: intrinsic correlation between black hole masses and the minimal
395: Lorentz factors of jet components found in this work is consistent
396: with the Blandford-Znajek mechanism. The properties of accretion
397: disks accretion disk are related with the dimensionless accretion
398: rates $\dot{m}$ ($\dot{m}=\dot{M}/\dot{M}_{\rm Edd}\propto L_{\rm
399: bol}/L_{\rm Edd}$). No significant correlation between $L_{\rm
400: bol}/L_{\rm Edd}$ and $\gamma_{\rm min}$ is found, which implies
401: that the jet acceleration may not be related with the properties of
402: the accretion disk, which may imply that the jet formation is not
403: sensitive to the disk structure. This is, of course, quite puzzling,
404: and to be verified by the future work with a larger blazar sample.
405: Our statistical results implies that the BZ mechanism may dominate
406: over BP mechanism for the jet acceleration in blazars.
407:
408:
409: \begin{acknowledgements}
410: We thank the referee for the helpful comments/suggestions, and
411: 'MOJAVE survey' for sharing their data on the website. This work is
412: supported by the NSFC (10773020), and the CAS (grant KJCX2-YW-T03).
413: This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database
414: (NED), which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
415: California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National
416: Aeronautics and Space Administration.
417: \end{acknowledgements}
418:
419: \clearpage
420: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
421: %% you can type \apj for ApJ, \aap for A&A, \apss for Ap&SS, etc. Please consult
422: %% the macro cjaa.cls. You can also find them in aasguide.tex (AASTeX for ApJ, AJ, PASP)
423: %% Please follow the format of ChJAA's reference list
424: \bibitem[]{}Baldwin J.A., Wampler E.J., Gaskell C.M., 1989, ApJ, 338, 630 (B89)
425: \bibitem[]{}Bettoni, D., Falomo, R., Fasano,G., et al., 2003, A\&A, 339, 869
426: \bibitem[]{}Blandford R. D., Payne D. G., 1982, MNRAS, 199, 883
427: \bibitem[]{}Blandford R. D., Znajek R. L., 1977, MNRAS, 179, 433
428: \bibitem[]{}Brotherton M. S. 1996, ApJS, 102, 1 (B96)
429: \bibitem[]{}Cao X., Jiang D. R., 1999, MNRAS, 307, 802
430: \bibitem[]{}Cao X., Jiang D. R., 2001, MNRAS, 320, 347
431: \bibitem[]{}Cao X., Jiang D. R., 2002, MNRAS, 331, 111
432: \bibitem[]{}Cohen M. H., Lister M. L., Homan D. C., et al., 2007, ApJ, 658, 232
433: \bibitem[]{}Dibai, \'{E}.~A.\ 1980, Azh., 57, 677 (English translation: Sov.~Astron., 24, 389)
434: \bibitem[]{}Falcke H., Biermann P., 1995, A\&A, 293, 665
435: \bibitem[]{}Francis P. J., Hewett P. C., Foltz C. B., et al., 1991, ApJ, 373, 465
436: \bibitem[]{}Gaskell C. M., Wampler E. J., Shields G. A., 1981, ApJ, 249, 443
437: \bibitem[]{}Gelderman R., Whittle M. 1994, ApJS, 91, 491 (G94)
438: \bibitem[]{}Gu M., Cao X., Jiang D. R., 2001, MNRAS, 327, 1111
439: \bibitem[]{}Henstock D. R., Browne I. W. A., Wilkinson P. N., et al., 1997,MNRAS, 290, 380 (H97)
440: \bibitem[]{}Ho L. C., Kormendy J., 2000, The Encyclopedia of Astronomy and Astrophysics (Institute of Physics Publishing). (astro-ph/0003267)
441: \bibitem[]{}Hughes S. A., Blandford Roger D. 2003, ApJ, 585, L101
442: \bibitem[]{}Hunstead R. W., Murdoch H. S., Shobbrook R. R., 1978, MNRAS, 185, 149(H78)
443: \bibitem[]{}Jackson N., Browne W. A. 1991, MNRAS, 250, 414 (JB91a)
444: \bibitem[]{}Jackson N., Browne W. A. 1991, MNRAS, 250, 422 (JB91b)
445: \bibitem[]{}Kaspi S., Smith P. S., Maoz D., et al., 1996, ApJ, 471, L75
446: \bibitem[]{}Kaspi S., Smith P. S., Netzer H., et al., 2000, ApJ, 533, 631
447: \bibitem[]{}Kellermann, K. I., Lister, M. L., D. C. Homan, 2004, ApJ, 609, 539
448: \bibitem[]{}Laor A. 2000, ApJ, 543, L111
449: \bibitem[]{}Lawrence C. R., Zucker J. R., REanhead C. S. et al. 1996, ApJS, 107, 541 (L96)
450: \bibitem[]{}Lister M. L., Homan D. C., 2005, AJ, 130, 1389L
451: \bibitem[]{}Liu Y., Jiang D. R.,Gu M. F., 2006, ApJ, 637, 669
452: \bibitem[]{}Macklin J. T., 1982, MNRAS, 199, 1119
453: \bibitem[]{}Marziani P., Sulentic J. W., Dultzin-Hacyan D. et al. 1996, ApJS, 104, 37 (M96)
454: \bibitem[]{}McGill K. L., Woo J.-H., Treu T., et al., 2008, ApJ, 673,703
455: \bibitem[]{}Nerzer H. N., Brotherton M. S., Wills B. J. et al. 1995, ApJ, 448, 27 (N95)
456: \bibitem[]{}Netzer H., Peterson B.M., 1997, in Astronomical Time Series, eds., D. Maoz, A. Sternberg \& E. Leibowitz (Dordrecht: Kluwer), 85
457: \bibitem[]{}Neugebauer G., Oke J. B., Beckline E. E., Matthews K.,1979, ApJ, 230, 79 (N79)
458: \bibitem[]{}Oshlack A. Y. K. N., Webster R. L., Whiting M. T. 2002, ApJ, 576, 81 (O02)
459: \bibitem[]{}Peterson B. M., 1993, PASP, 105, 207
460: \bibitem[]{}Rawlings S. G., Saunders R. D. E., 1991, Nat, 349, 138
461: \bibitem[]{}Scarpa R., Falomo R., 1997, A\&A, 325, 109 (S97)
462: \bibitem[]{}Soltan A. 1982, MNRAS, 200, 115
463: \bibitem[]{}Steidel C. C., Sargent W. L. W. 1991, ApJ, 382, 433 (S91)
464: \bibitem[]{}Stickel M., Fried W., K\"uhr H., 1989, A\&AS, 80, 103 (S89)
465: \bibitem[]{}Stickel M., K\"uhr H., 1993, A\&AS, 100, 395 (SK93)
466: \bibitem[]{}Stickel M., K\"uhr H., Fried J. W. 1993, A \& AS, 97, 483 (S93)
467: \bibitem[]{}Tadhunter C. N., Morganti R., Alighieri S. S. et al. 1993, MNRAS, 263, 999 (T93)
468: \bibitem[]{}Urry C. M., Scarpa, R., O'Dowd M., et al., 2000, ApJ, 532, 816 (U00)
469: \bibitem[]{}Volonteri M., Sikora M., Lasota J.-P., 2007, ApJ, 667, 704
470: \bibitem[]{}Wandel A., Peterson B.M., Malkan M.A., 1999, ApJ, 526, 579
471: \bibitem[]{}Wills B., Browne I. W. A. 1986, ApJ, 302, 56 (W86)
472: \bibitem[]{}Wills B. J., Thompson K. L., Han M., et al., 1995, ApJ, 447, 139 (W95)
473: \bibitem[]{}Wu X. B., Wang R., Kong M. Z., et al., 2004, A\&A, 424, 793
474: \bibitem[]{}Xie G. Z., Dai H., Zhou S. B., 2007, AJ, 134, 1464
475: \bibitem[]{}Xie Z. H., Hao J. M., Du L. M., Zet al., 2008, PASP, 120, 477
476: \bibitem[]{}Yu Q., Tremaine S. 2002, MNRAS, 335, 965
477: \end{thebibliography}
478:
479: \clearpage
480: \begin{table*}
481: \begin{center}
482: \begin{small}
483: \caption{\label{lines} The data for quasars. Col. (1): IAU source
484: name. Col. (2): Redshift. Col. (3): log of the minimal Lorentz
485: factor of jet. Col. (4): the lines used to estimate the black hole
486: masses from their fluxes. Col. (5): references for Col. (4). Col.
487: (6): the lines used to estimate the black hole masses from their
488: FWHMs. Col. (7): references for Col. (6). Col. (8): the black hole
489: masses.}
490: \begin{tabular}{lcccccccc}
491: \hline\hline
492: Source&z &$\log\gamma_{\rm min}$&line &Refs. &line &Refs. &$\log M_{\rm BH}/M_{\odot}$\\
493: (1)& (2)& (3)&(4)&(5)&(6)&(7)&(8)\\
494: \hline
495: 0016$+$731 & 1.781 & 0.760 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & $Ly\alpha$ C {\sc iv} Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & 8.93 \\
496: 0035$+$413 & 1.353 & 0.926 & Mg {\sc ii} & SK93 & Mg {\sc ii} & SK93 & 8.53 \\
497: 0106$+$013 & 2.107 & 1.461 & C {\sc iv} & B89 & C {\sc iv} & B89 & 8.83 \\
498: 0112$-$017 & 1.365 & 0.159 & Mg {\sc ii} & B89 & C {\sc iv} & B89 & 7.85 \\
499: 0119$+$041 & 0.637 & 0.291 & H$\beta$ & JB91b & H$\beta$ & JB91a & 8.50 \\
500: 0133$+$476 & 0.859 & 0.350 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & H$\beta$ & L96 & 8.30 \\
501: 0212$+$735 & 2.367 & 1.071 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & $Ly\alpha$ C {\sc iv} Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & 8.48 \\
502: 0333$+$321 & 1.263 & 1.030 & Mg {\sc ii} & B94 & Mg {\sc ii} & S91 & 8.49 \\
503: 0336$-$019 & 0.852 & 1.006 & Mg {\sc ii} & B89 & H$\beta$ & JB91a & 8.78 \\
504: 0403$-$132 & 0.571 & 1.279 & H$\beta$ & M96 & H$\beta$ & S97 & 8.77 \\
505: 0420$-$014 & 0.915 & 0.933 & Mg {\sc ii} & B89 & Mg {\sc ii} & S97 & 8.84 \\
506: 0440$-$003 & 0.844 & 0.183 & Mg {\sc ii} & B89 & H$\beta$ & JB91a & 8.63 \\
507: 0605$-$085 & 0.872 & 1.367 & Mg {\sc ii} & S93 & Mg {\sc ii} & S93 & 8.43 \\
508: 0607$-$157 & 0.324 & 0.047 & H$\beta$ & H78 & H$\beta$ & H78 & 7.63 \\
509: 0736$+$017 & 0.191 & 1.082 & H$\beta$ & B96 & H$\beta$ & S97 & 8.23 \\
510: 0738$+$313 & 0.630 & 0.892 & H$\beta$ & B96 & H$\beta$ & JB91a & 9.08 \\
511: 0804$+$499 & 1.432 & 0.552 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & C {\sc iv} Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & 8.57 \\
512: 0836$+$710 & 2.180 & 1.550 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & $Ly\alpha$ C {\sc iv} Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & 9.49 \\
513: 0850$+$581 & 1.322 & 0.903 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & 9.67 \\
514: 0859$-$140 & 1.339 & 1.214 & Mg {\sc ii} & B94 & Mg {\sc ii} & S91 & 8.87 \\
515: 0906$+$015 & 1.018 & 1.288 & Mg {\sc ii} & B89 & Mg {\sc ii} & S97 & 8.63 \\
516: 0923$+$392 & 0.698 & 0.729 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & H$\beta$ & L96 & 9.27 \\
517: 0945$+$408 & 1.252 & 1.230 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & C {\sc iv} Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & 9.71 \\
518: 0953$+$254 & 0.712 & 1.063 & H$\beta$ & JB91b & H$\beta$ & JB91a & 8.73 \\
519: 1038$+$064 & 1.265 & 0.848 & Mg {\sc ii} & B94 & Mg {\sc ii} & S91 & 8.76 \\
520: 1055$+$018 & 0.888 & 0.398 & Mg {\sc ii} & B89 & Mg {\sc ii} & S97 & 8.45 \\
521: 1226$+$023 & 0.158 & 1.118 & Mg {\sc ii} & B89 & H$\alpha$ & JB91a & 8.76 \\
522: 1253$-$055 & 0.538 & 0.953 & Mg {\sc ii} & W95 & H$\alpha$ & N79 & 8.53 \\
523: 1302$-$102 & 0.278 & 0.744 & Mg {\sc ii} & B89 & H$\beta$ & M96 & 7.90 \\
524: 1334$-$127 & 0.539 & 1.247 & Mg {\sc ii} & S93 & Mg {\sc ii} & S93 & 8.36 \\
525: 1458$+$718 & 0.904 & 0.833 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & H$\beta$ & L96 & 8.84 \\
526: 1502$+$106 & 1.839 & 1.249 & Mg {\sc ii} &W86 & C {\sc iv} & S97 & 8.86 \\
527: 1504$-$166 & 0.876 & 0.608 & Mg {\sc ii} & H78 & Mg {\sc ii} & H78 & 8.84 \\
528: 1510$-$089 & 0.360 & 1.133 & Mg {\sc ii} &W86 & H$\alpha$ & N79 & 8.22 \\
529: 1532$+$016 & 1.420 & 1.147 & Mg {\sc ii} & B89 & C {\sc iv} Mg {\sc ii} & S97 & 8.73 \\
530:
531:
532:
533:
534: \hline
535: \end{tabular}
536: \end{small}
537: \end{center}
538: \end{table*}
539: \addtocounter{table}{-1}
540:
541: \clearpage
542: \begin{table*}
543: \begin{center}
544: \begin{small}
545: \caption{Continued...}
546: \begin{tabular}{lcccccccc}
547: \hline\hline
548: Source&z &$\log \gamma_{\rm min}$&line &Refs. &line &Refs. &$\log M_{\rm BH}/M_{\odot}$\\
549: (1)& (2)& (3)&(4)&(5)&(6)&(7)&(8)\\
550: \hline
551: 1546$+$027 & 0.412 & 1.071 & Mg {\sc ii} & B89 & H$\beta$ & S97 & 8.82 \\
552: 1611$+$343 & 1.401 & 1.197 & H$\beta$ & N95 & $Ly\alpha$ C {\sc iv} & W95 & 9.49 \\
553: 1633$+$382 & 1.807 & 1.380 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & $Ly\alpha$ C {\sc iv} Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & 10.14 \\
554: 1637$+$574 & 0.751 & 1.118 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & H$\beta$ & L96 & 8.68 \\
555: 1641$+$399 & 0.594 & 1.275 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & H$\beta$ & L96 & 9.03 \\
556: 1642$+$690 & 0.751 & 1.222 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & 8.49 \\
557: 1656$+$053 & 0.879 & 0.655 & H$\beta$ & B96 & Mg {\sc ii} & S97 & 9.09 \\
558: 1739$+$522 & 1.379 & 0.961 & C {\sc iv} & L96 & C {\sc iv} & L96 & 8.20 \\
559: 1741$-$038 & 1.057 & 0.827 & Mg {\sc ii} & S89 & Mg {\sc ii} & S89 & 8.67 \\
560: 1828$+$487 & 0.692 & 1.110 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & H$\beta$ & L96 & 8.66 \\
561: 1921$-$293 & 0.352 & 0.637 & H$\beta$ & JB91b & H$\alpha$ & JB91a & 8.38 \\
562: 1928$+$738 & 0.303 & 0.913 & H$\alpha$ & L96 & H$\beta$ & L96 & 8.76 \\
563: 2113$+$293 & 1.514 & 0.303 & Mg {\sc ii} & S93 & Mg {\sc ii} & S93 & 8.74 \\
564: 2121$+$053 & 1.941 & 1.165 & Mg {\sc ii} & B94 & Mg {\sc ii} & S91 & 8.60 \\
565: 2128$-$123 & 0.501 & 0.864 & H$\alpha$ & O02 & H$\beta$ & T93 & 9.16 \\
566: 2134$+$004 & 1.932 & 0.391 & C {\sc iv} & B89 & C {\sc iv} & B89 & 8.50 \\
567: 2145$+$067 & 0.999 & 0.407 & Mg {\sc ii} & B94 & Mg {\sc ii} & S91 & 8.61 \\
568: 2155$-$152 & 0.672 & 0.523 & Mg {\sc ii} & S89 & H$\beta$ & S89 & 7.81 \\
569: 2201$+$315 & 0.298 & 0.848 & Mg {\sc ii} & W95 & H$\alpha$ & JB91a & 8.91 \\
570: 2216$-$038 & 0.901 & 0.748 & Mg {\sc ii} & B94 & $Ly\alpha$ C {\sc iv} Mg {\sc ii} & W95 S91 & 8.89 \\
571: 2223$-$052 & 1.404 & 1.249 & C {\sc iv} & W95 & $Ly\alpha$ C {\sc iv} Mg {\sc ii} & W95 S97 & 8.54 \\
572: 2230$+$114 & 1.037 & 0.950 & C {\sc iv} & W95 & $Ly\alpha$ C {\sc iv} Mg {\sc ii} & W95 S97 & 8.64 \\
573: 2251$+$158 & 0.859 & 1.187 & H$\beta$ & N95 & H$\beta$ & JB91a & 8.87 \\
574: 2345$-$167 & 0.576 & 1.145 & H$\beta$ & JB91b & H$\beta$ & JB91a & 8.59 \\
575: 2351$+$456 & 1.986 & 1.452 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & Mg {\sc ii} & L96 & 9.22 \\
576: 0458$-$020 & 2.291 & 1.179 & C {\sc iv} & B89 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 9.27 \\
577: 0730$+$504 & 0.720 & 1.236 & Mg {\sc ii} & H97 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 8.84 \\
578: 0748$+$126 & 0.889 & 1.317 & Mg {\sc ii} & W86 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 8.84 \\
579: 1012$+$232 & 0.565 & 1.012 & H$\beta$ & B96 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 8.69 \\
580: 1127$-$145 & 1.187 & 1.133 & Mg {\sc ii} & W86 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 9.18 \\
581: 1145$-$071 & 1.342 & 0.433 & C {\sc iv} & W86 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 8.61 \\
582: 1156$+$295 & 0.729 & 1.290 & H$\beta$ & B96 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 9.19 \\
583: 1508$-$055 & 1.191 & 1.269 & Mg {\sc ii} & W86 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 8.97 \\
584: 1655$+$077 & 0.621 & 1.048 & Mg {\sc ii} & W86 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 7.91 \\
585: 1726$+$455 & 0.714 & 0.602 & Mg {\sc ii} & H97 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 8.59 \\
586: 1901$+$319 & 0.635 & 0.455 & H$\beta$ & G94 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 8.80 \\
587: 2008$-$159 & 1.178 & 0.536 & Mg {\sc ii} & W86 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 9.56 \\
588: 2227$-$088 & 1.562 & 0.925 & C {\sc iv} & W86 & $m_{\rm B}$ & ... & 8.85 \\
589:
590:
591:
592: \hline
593: \end{tabular}
594: \end{small}
595: \end{center}
596: \vskip 1mm $^{*}$the sources without line luminosities, we use their
597: optical continuum luminosities at B band to estimate $M_{\rm BH}$.
598: \end{table*}
599: \clearpage
600: \begin{table*}
601: \begin{center}
602: \begin{small}
603: \begin{tabular}{lcccccccc}
604: \hline
605: \end{tabular}
606: \end{small}
607: \end{center}
608: \vskip 1mm References:B89: Baldwin et al. (1989). B94: Brotherton et
609: al. (1996). B96: Brotherton (1996). G94: Gelderman et al. (1994).
610: H78: Hunstead et al. (1978). H97: Henstock et al. (1997) JB91a:
611: Jackson \&Browne (1991). JB91b: Jackson \& Browne (1991). L96:
612: Lawrence et al. M96: Marziani et al. (1996). N79: Neugebauer et al.
613: (1979). N95: Nerzer et al. (1995). O02: Oshlack et al. (2002). S89:
614: Stickel et al. (1989). S91: Steidel et al. (1991). SK93: Stickel \&
615: K\"uhr (1993). S93: Stickel et al. (1993). S97: Scarpa et al. (1997)
616: T93: Tadhunter et al. (1993). W95: Wills et al. (1995). W86: Wills
617: et al. (1986).
618: \end{table*}
619: \clearpage
620: \begin{table*}
621: \begin{center}
622: \begin{small}
623: \caption{$\gamma_{\rm min}$ and $M_{\rm BH}$ for BL Lac. Col. (1):
624: IAU source name. Col. (2): Redshift. Col. (3): log of the minimal
625: Lorentz factor of jet. Col. (4): absolute R host galaxy magnitude
626: and the references, respectively. Col. (6): the black hole masses.}
627: \begin{tabular}{lcccccccc}
628: \hline\hline
629: Source&z &$\log \gamma_{\rm min}$ & $M_{\rm R}(host)$ & Refs. &$\log M_{\rm BH}/M_{\odot}$\\
630: (1)& (2)& (3)&(4)&(5)& (6)\\
631: \hline
632: 0829$+$046 & 0.180 & 1.037 & -22.98 & U00 & 8.49 \\
633: 1749$+$096 & 0.320 & 0.923 & -22.68 & U00 & 8.34 \\
634: 1807$+$698 & 0.051 & 0.480 & -23.18 & U00 & 8.59 \\
635: 2007$+$777 & 0.342 & 0.114 & -22.96 & U00 & 8.48 \\
636: 2200$+$420 & 0.069 & 0.813 & -22.84 & U00 & 8.42 \\
637:
638:
639: \hline
640: \end{tabular}
641: \end{small}
642: \end{center}
643: \vskip 1mm References:U00: Urry et al. (2000).
644: \end{table*}
645:
646: \clearpage
647: \begin{table*}
648: \begin{center}
649: \begin{small}
650: \caption{The Spearman partial rank correlation analysis of the sample.
651: Here $r_{\rm AB}$ is the rank correlation coefficient of the two
652: variables, and $r_{\rm AB,C}$ the partial rank correlation
653: coefficient. The significance of the partial rank correlation is
654: equivalent to the deviation from a unit variance normal distribution
655: if there is no correlation present. }
656: \begin{tabular}{lcccccccc}
657: \hline\hline
658: Sample&N&Correlated variables: A,B & Variable: C & $r_{\rm AB}$
659: & $r_{\rm AB,C}$ & significance \\ \hline
660: All & 78 &$ M_{\rm BH}$,$\gamma_{\rm min}$& z &0.33 &0.27 & 2.39\\
661: & & z,$\gamma_{\rm min}$ &$M_{\rm BH}$ &0.21 &0.07 & 0.61\\
662: & & $M_{\rm BH}$, z & $\gamma_{\rm min}$&0.46 &0.42 & 3.85\\
663: & & $L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}$,$\gamma_{\rm min}$& z & 0.21 &
664: 0.18& 1.52\\
665: Within &72& $M_{\rm BH}$,$\gamma_{\rm min}$& z &0.27 &0.25 & 2.14\\
666: $0.1<z<2.1$ & & z ,$\gamma_{\rm min}$ &$M_{\rm BH}$ &0.09 &-0.02 & -0.17\\
667: & & $M_{\rm BH}$, z & $\gamma_{\rm min}$&0.41 &0.40 & 3.47\\
668:
669: \hline
670: \end{tabular}
671: \end{small}
672: \end{center}
673: \end{table*}
674: \clearpage
675: \begin{figure}
676: \vspace{2mm}
677: \begin{center}
678: \hspace{3mm}\epsfig{figure=f1.eps,width=150mm,height=100mm,angle=0.0}
679: % \parbox{180mm}{{\vspace{2mm} }}
680: \caption{The comparison of the black hole masses estimated with two
681: different approaches.}
682: \label{Fig:lightcurve-ADAri1}
683: \end{center}
684: \end{figure}
685: \clearpage
686: \begin{figure}
687: \vspace{2mm}
688: \begin{center}
689: \hspace{3mm}\epsfig{figure=f2.eps,width=150mm,height=100mm,angle=0.0}
690: % \parbox{180mm}{{\vspace{2mm} }}
691: \caption{The relation between black hole mass and the minimal
692: Lorentz factor of the jet. The full circles represent quasars which
693: $M_{\rm BH}$ estimated by line luminosities, while the triangles
694: represent BL Lac objects. The crosses represent quasars which
695: $M_{\rm BH}$ estimated by continuum luminosities.}
696: \label{Fig:lightcurve-ADAri1}
697: \end{center}
698: \end{figure}
699: \clearpage
700: \begin{figure}
701: \vspace{2mm}
702: \begin{center}
703: \hspace{3mm}\epsfig{figure=f3.eps,width=150mm,height=100mm,angle=0.0}
704: % \parbox{180mm}{{\vspace{2mm} }}
705: \caption{The minimal Lorentz factor of jet versus redshift plane for
706: our sample (symbols as in Fig. 2). The restricted redshift range,
707: $0.1<z<2.1$, is indicated by the dotted lines.}
708: \label{Fig:lightcurve-ADAri1}
709: \end{center}
710: \end{figure}
711: \clearpage
712: \begin{figure}
713: \vspace{2mm}
714: \begin{center}
715: \hspace{3mm}\epsfig{figure=f4.eps,width=150mm,height=100mm,angle=0.0}
716: % \parbox{180mm}{{\vspace{2mm} }}
717: \caption{The same as Fig. 2, but for the subsample within the restricted redshift range.}
718: \label{Fig:lightcurve-ADAri1}
719: \end{center}
720: \end{figure}
721:
722: \clearpage
723: \begin{figure}
724: \vspace{2mm}
725: \begin{center}
726: \hspace{3mm}\epsfig{figure=f5.eps,width=150mm,height=100mm,angle=0.0}
727: % \parbox{180mm}{{\vspace{2mm} }}
728: \caption{The relation between the Eddington ratio and the minimal
729: Lorentz factor of the jet (symbols as in Fig. 2).}
730: \label{Fig:lightcurve-ADAri1}
731: \end{center}
732: \end{figure}
733: \clearpage
734: \end{document}
735: %%==^..^============== the END of cjaa.tex ===================^_^==
736: