1: %%
2: %% Beginning of file 'sample.tex'
3: %%
4: %% Modified 2005 December 5
5: %%
6: %% This is a sample manuscript marked up using the
7: %% AASTeX v5.x LaTeX 2e macros.
8:
9: %% The first piece of markup in an AASTeX v5.x document
10: %% is the \documentclass command. LaTeX will ignore
11: %% any data that comes before this command.
12:
13: %% The command below calls the preprint style
14: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
15: %% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
16: %% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
17: %%
18: %%\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}text
19:
20: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
21:
22: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
23:
24: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
25:
26: %\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
27:
28: \documentclass[12pt, preprint]{aastex}
29: %\usepackage{emulateapj5} % ApJ journal style
30: %\usepackage[active]{srcltx}
31: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
32: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
33: %% use the longabstract style option.
34:
35: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
36:
37: %% If you want to create your own macros, you can do so
38: %% using \newcommand. Your macros should appear before
39: %% the \begin{document} command.
40: %%
41: %% If you are submitting to a journal that translates manuscripts
42: %% into SGML, you need to follow certain guidelines when preparing
43: %% your macros. See the AASTeX v5.x Author Guide
44: %% for information.
45:
46: \newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
47: \newcommand{\myemail}{skywalker@galaxy.far.far.away}
48: \newcommand{\vk}[1]{{\bf VK: #1}}
49:
50: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
51:
52: %\slugcomment{Not to appear in Nonlearned J., 45.}
53:
54: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
55: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
56: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
57: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
58: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
59: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
60:
61: \shorttitle{Discovery of hot gas in outflow in NGC3379}
62: \shortauthors{Trinchieri, Pellegrini,Fabbiano et al.}
63:
64: %% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
65: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.
66: \def\ergs{erg s$^{-1}$}
67: \def\ergcmsec{erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$}
68:
69:
70: \def\Reff{$R_{\rm e}$}
71: \def\sp{$\,$}
72:
73:
74: \begin{document}
75:
76: %% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than
77: %% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if
78: %% you desire.
79:
80: \title{Discovery of hot gas in outflow in NGC3379}
81:
82: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
83: %% author and affiliation information.
84: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
85: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
86: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
87: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.
88:
89: \author{G. Trinchieri}
90: \affil{INAF-Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, Via Brera 28, 20212 Milano, Italy}
91: \email{ginevra.trinchieri@brera.inaf.it}
92:
93: \author{S. Pellegrini}
94: \affil{Dipartimento di Astronomia, Universita’ di Bologna, Via Ranzani 1, 40127 Bologna, Italy}
95:
96: \author{G. Fabbiano, R. Fu, N. J. Brassington, A. Zezas, D-W. Kim}
97: \affil{Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden St., Cambridge, MA 02138}
98:
99: \author{J. Gallagher}
100: \affil{Department of Astronomy, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706-1582}
101:
102: \author{L. Angelini}
103: \affil{Laboratory for X-ray Astrophysics, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771}
104:
105: \author{R. L. Davies}
106: \affil{Sub-Department of Astrophysics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3RH, UK}
107:
108: \author{V. Kalogera}
109: \affil{Northwestern University, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Evanston, IL 60208}
110:
111: \author{ A. R. King}
112: \affil{Theoretical Astrophysics Group, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK}
113:
114: \and
115:
116: \author{S. Zepf}
117: \affil{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824-2320}
118:
119: %% Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
120: %% are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. Specify alternate
121: %% affiliation information with \altaffiltext, with one command per each
122: %% affiliation.
123:
124:
125: %% Mark off your abstract in the ``abstract'' environment. In the manuscript
126: %% style, abstract will output a Received/Accepted line after the
127: %% title and affiliation information. No date will appear since the author
128: %% does not have this information. The dates will be filled in by the
129: %% editorial office after submission.
130:
131: \begin{abstract}
132: We report the discovery of a faint ($\rm L_x \sim 4 \pm 1.5 \times 10^{37}$
133: \ergs, 0.5-2 keV), out-flowing gaseous hot interstellar medium (ISM)
134: in NGC 3379. This represents the lowest
135: X-ray luminosity ever measured from a hot phase of the ISM in a nearby
136: early type galaxy. The discovery of the hot ISM in a very deep {\it Chandra}
137: observation was possible thanks to its unique spectral and
138: spatial signatures, which distinguish it from the integrated stellar
139: X-ray emission, responsible for most of the unresolved emission in the
140: {\it Chandra} data. This hot component is found in a region of $\sim
141: 800$ pc in radius at the center of the galaxy and has a total mass
142: M$\sim 3 \pm 1 \times 10^5$ M$_{\sun}$. Independent theoretical prediction
143: of the characteristics of an ISM in this galaxy, based on the intrinsic properties
144: of NGC~3379, reproduce well the observed luminosity, temperature, and radial
145: distribution and mass of the hot gas, and
146: indicate that the gas is in an outflowing phase, predicted by models
147: but not observed in any system so far.
148: \end{abstract}
149:
150: %% Keywords should appear after the \end{abstract} command. The uncommented
151: %% example has been keyed in ApJ style. See the instructions to authors
152: %% for the journal to which you are submitting your paper to determine
153: %% what keyword punctuation is appropriate.
154:
155: \keywords{X-rays: ISM --- galaxies: NGC 3379 --- galaxies : elliptical and
156: lenticular --- X-rays : galaxies}
157:
158: %% From the front matter, we move on to the body of the paper.
159: %% In the first two sections, notice the use of the natbib \citep
160: %% and \citet commands to identify citations. The citations are
161: %% tied to the reference list via symbolic KEYs. The KEY corresponds
162: %% to the KEY in the \bibitem in the reference list below. We have
163: %% chosen the first three characters of the first author's name plus
164: %% the last two numeral of the year of publication as our KEY for
165: %% each reference.
166:
167:
168: %% Authors who wish to have the most important objects in their paper
169: %% linked in the electronic edition to a data center may do so by tagging
170: %% their objects with \objectname{} or \object{}. Each macro takes the
171: %% object name as its required argument. The optional, square-bracket
172: %% argument should be used in cases where the data center identification
173: %% differs from what is to be printed in the paper. The text appearing
174: %% in curly braces is what will appear in print in the published paper.
175: %% If the object name is recognized by the data centers, it will be linked
176: %% in the electronic edition to the object data available at the data centers
177: %%
178: %% Note that for sources with brackets in their names, e.g. [WEG2004] 14h-090,
179: %% the brackets must be escaped with backslashes when used in the first
180: %% square-bracket argument, for instance, \object[\[WEG2004\] 14h-090]{90}).
181: %% Otherwise, LaTeX will issue an error.
182:
183: \section{Introduction}
184:
185: The nature of the X-ray emission of elliptical galaxies has been
186: debated since their discovery as X-ray sources with the {\it Einstein
187: Observatory}, which led to the early suggestion of ubiquitous hot X-ray
188: emitting halos in hydrostatic equilibrium (Forman et al. 1985). These halos would
189: originate from the stellar ejecta resulting from their normal evolution,
190: accumulated during the lifetime of the galaxies, and
191: retained by their deep dark matter potentials. However, from the analysis
192: of these early observations and of ROSAT and ASCA data, a more complex
193: picture of the X-ray emission emerged, suggesting that the
194: non-nuclear X-ray emission of these galaxies consist of varying amounts
195: of hot ISM, and of a baseline component related to the stellar
196: population, either from the finale stages of stellar evolution (i.e.
197: low-mass X-ray binaries, LMXBs,
198: Trinchieri \& Fabbiano 1985; Canizares et al. 1987; Kim, Fabbiano \&
199: Trinchieri 1992; Fabbiano et al. 2006; Matsushita et al. 1994) or possibly
200: from coronal stellar emission
201: (Pellegrini \& Fabbiano 1994). Although controversial at
202: the time, this picture has important implications for the evolutions
203: of the stars and of the gaseous components of ellipticals, suggesting
204: halo retention in the most massive systems, and partial or full winds
205: in most galaxies (Ciotti et al, 1991; David et al. 1991; Pellegrini \& Ciotti 1998).
206:
207: With {\it Chandra} for the first time the X-ray emission of nearby
208: ellipticals can be imaged, and the existence of the different emission
209: components can be pursued by direct observational means. These
210: observations have led to the detection and study of LMXB populations
211: (see review in Fabbiano 2006), and the removal of their contamination
212: from the diffuse emission component (e.g. NGC~1316, Kim \& Fabbiano 2003).
213: In some galaxies this diffuse emission is due
214: to gaseous halos; however, in other galaxies, where the
215: X-ray luminosity function can be probed to very low luminosities and the residual
216: emission is itself of low luminosity, unresolved LMXBs
217: and possibly stellar emission may account for a large amount or even the
218: bulk of the X-ray luminosity (e.g.NGC821, Pellegrini et al 2007a,b; M32,
219: Revnintsev et al. 2007).
220:
221: We can now attempt to constrain the presence and properties of vestigial
222: hot halos in these gas-poor galaxies. Since ellipticals are
223: expected to host super-massive nuclear black holes (e.g., Richstone et al. 1998), which are
224: however radiatively quiescent in most cases (Fabian \& Canizares 1988, Pellegrini 2005, Ho 2008),
225: these measurements provide useful constraints
226: for models of halo evolution and nuclear feedback (e.g., Springel, Di Matteo \& Hernquist
227: 2005; see Pellegrini et al 2007b). The nearby, gas-poor, early-type galaxy
228: NGC3379 provides an excellent target for these investigations.
229: This is a very well studied prototypical elliptical, with $\rm L_B = 1.5 \times 10^{10}$
230: $\rm L_{B \sun}$. A
231: series of very deep exposures were obtained for this galaxy by our team
232: (PI: Fabbiano), as part of a very large {\it Chandra} program aimed
233: at unraveling and studying the different X-ray emission components of
234: ellipticals. Together with pre-existent archival data (David et al
235: 2005),
236: these observations resulted in an integrated exposure of 337 ks with ACIS
237: S-3 (see Brassington et al. 2008 for details).
238: In this paper we present our analysis of the diffuse/unresolved
239: X-ray emission component of this galaxy. This analysis leads us to
240: conclude that in addition to the unresolved emission of faint LMXBs and
241: other stellar sources (Revnivtsev et al. 2008), a hot ISM is likely to
242: be present in the central 800 pc of NGC3379.
243:
244: We discuss our data analysis in Section 2, and our interpretation of
245: these results in Section 3. Our conclusions are summarized in Section 4.
246: We assume a distance of 10.6 Mpc (Tonry et al. 2001), which gives a
247: scale of 51 pc/\arcsec.
248:
249: \section{Analysis and Results}
250:
251: We have used the same dataset that Brassington et al. (2008)
252: used to determine the
253: source list and compose the most complete X-ray catalog to-date in NGC
254: 3379, down to (0.3-8.0) keV luminosities $\rm L_x \sim 10^{36}$ \ergs.
255: All sources in the catalog
256: have been excluded from the present analysis. We have
257: used an aperture of 2$''$ radius.
258: On axis, this aperture encircles $>$ 97/95\% of the Point Spread Function (PSF), for energies 0.5/1.5
259: keV (see Figures 4.6 and 4.20, and Table 4.2 in The Chandra Proposers' Observatory
260: Guide, and our own simulations with ChaRT, see Appendix), and it degrades very slowly to encircle $\sim 90$\% at $\ge 3'$ for the same energies (Fig. 4.13 in the The Chandra Proposers' Observatory
261: Guide). As will become apparent in what follows,
262: this work will concentrate on the central area NGC~3379, of $\sim 80''$
263: radius; therefore, our data are not affected by the
264: degradation of the {\it Chandra} point response function, and we do not need to consider a larger area for source exclusion. We discuss the possible contamination of the PSF in the Appendix.
265:
266:
267: The size of the area considered also ensures a very homogeneous coverage
268: from all five observations, since the region under study resides
269: well within the area uniformly covered in all the {\it Chandra}
270: exposures (roughly a $8' \times 5'$ rectangle, see Fig. 1 in
271: Brassington et al. 2008). Therefore we do not need to resort to modelling
272: of the exposure, and we can use a local estimate of the background from
273: the same merged dataset. This procedure minimizes the uncertainties introduced
274: by using a template or ``blank sky observations" of different portions
275: of the sky at different times, to estimate the field background.
276:
277: We have used two different merged datasets for our analysis.
278: All five observations were
279: used for the spatial analysis
280: but only the four most
281: recent observations were merged for the spectral analysis, given the
282: significantly different response of the ACIS S3 CCD in the first observation
283: obtained in 2001 (AO2). Since this observation has the shortest
284: exposure, not using it will not significantly degrade the statistics,
285: while reducing the systematic error from the calibration uncertainties.
286: The responses of the last four observations over the
287: area of interest are virtually identical
288:
289: \subsection{Radial Distributions of the X-ray Surface Brightness}
290:
291: Fig.~\ref{raw} shows azimuthally averaged radial profiles of the
292: diffuse X-ray emission in the (0.3-2.0 keV) and (2.0-5.0)~keV
293: energy bands. The choice of the spectral ranges is motivated
294: by our intention to discriminate between a harder band (2.0-5.0)~keV,
295: where all the emission, resolved and unresolved, is likely to arise from
296: stellar sources, and a softer band (0.3-2.0)~keV, to which a hot ISM may
297: contribute. We have excluded all detected sources (as explained
298: above), and centered the concentric annuli
299: on the nucleus, identified as the optical/IR
300: center and coinciding with source \# 81 in
301: Brassington et al. (2008). Note that as a consequence of this, and also
302: due to source crowding at the center, the X-ray profiles cannot probe the very central region
303: within r=2--3\arcsec. The raw
304: profiles shown in Fig.~\ref{raw} flatten at a radius
305: of $> 80''$, indicating that the field background dominates. We can
306: therefore use the 100$''-140''$ region to estimate the local background
307: and subtract it from the emission, to produce the net profiles shown in
308: Fig.~\ref{raw}-right in the
309: same energy bands. Note that the soft profile is more extended and
310: more centrally peaked
311: relative to the hard profile.
312:
313: In Fig~\ref{softprof} we divide the full energy range considered in
314: three, and show the azimuthally averaged net profiles in
315: the (0.3-0.7) keV, (0.7-1.5) keV and (1.5-5.0) keV bands. This choice
316: of energy boundaries was motivated by the results of the spectral
317: analysis of the diffuse emission (see next section, Fig~\ref{unfold}),
318: to maximize the contribution of the two optically thin thermal plasma
319: component identified in the X-ray spectrum, with temperatures of $\sim
320: 0.3$ keV and at $\sim 1$ keV, respectively. It is clear from Fig.~\ref{softprof}
321: that while both the very soft and the harder component follow a similar radial
322: distribution, the soft (0.7-1.5 keV) component has a distinct excess for galactocentric
323: radii r$\le 20''$.
324:
325: In the same Fig.~\ref{softprof} we plot the radial profiles in the
326: optical and in the near IR K-band, from the HST F814 filter image
327: and the 2MASS k-band image, obtained from their respective archives
328: (see also Cappellari et al. 2006).
329: These profiles are also azimuthally averaged, but do not cover the full
330: 360\degr\ azimuthal plane of the galaxy, except for the very center
331: ($10''$ and $30''$ radius for HST and 2MASS respectively) since the two
332: images only partially cover the galaxy.
333: We also add the Sauron I-band
334: data profile from Cappellari et al. (2006) that cover instead the full
335: extent of the galaxy. The profiles are normalized to the X-ray data by
336: rescaling them for radii r$>100''$.
337:
338: With the exception of the very central region ($<3''$ radius), the
339: optical-IR profiles follow one another, and trace well the distribution
340: of the very soft and hard X-ray profiles. On the contrary, the (0.7-1.5) keV
341: profile is more centrally peaked and only becomes consistent with the shape
342: of the optical-IR ones at r$>15''$.
343:
344: \subsection{Spectral Analysis}
345:
346: We have analyzed the spectral data extracted in the $2''-15''$,
347: $2''-30''$ and $2''-45''$ regions from the merged dataset from the four more
348: recent observations. Most of the results discussed here come from the
349: $2''-30''$ region, which is a reasonable compromise that includes a large
350: fraction of the diffuse emission at high significance, but all regions
351: studied give a consistent picture. To increase the
352: statistical significance of each spectral bin, we have binned the data
353: to obtain a minimum significance of 2$\sigma$ or better in the net data.
354: The spectral fits are done assuming the line-of-sight galactic N$_H$
355: of 2.7$\times 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$, the abundance tables of Wilms et al.
356: (2000), the APEC model to account from the optically thin thermal
357: emission of a plasma, with abundances fixed at the 100\% value (different
358: values do not change the final results), and a
359: Bremsstrahlung to account for the X-ray emission of unresolved fainter
360: LMXBs and stellar X-ray sources.
361:
362: We find that a single APEC component, with kT$\sim$0.3 keV, and a 7 keV
363: Bremsstrahlung model are able to approximate the data and give
364: an acceptable value for the reduced $\chi^2 \sim$ 1. However, inspection of
365: the residuals shows a noticeable excess at around 1 keV (with a peak at
366: about 5 $\sigma$) and a less significant deficit
367: at 0.6-0.8 keV, as shown in Fig.~\ref{spec1}.
368: The addition of a second APEC component reduces the $\chi^2$ value and
369: most of all eliminates the excess, suggesting two separate components
370: at 0.3 keV and 1.0 keV (Fig.~\ref{spec1}, bottom). Fig.~\ref{contour}
371: shows the 68\%, 90\% and 99\% confidence regions for the
372: two interesting parameters, the temperatures of the very soft and soft
373: components. Fig.~\ref{unfold} shows the best-fit unfolded spectral components,
374: from which it becomes evident that the $\sim 1$ keV component is clearly dominant over the
375: $\sim 0.3$ keV component in the
376: 0.7-1.5 keV band.
377:
378: We tested whether the existing data support a requirement of a second soft plasma component
379: in the spectrum, by computing the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), discussed by
380: Schwarz (1978;
381: an astronomical introduction to it can be found in Liddle 2004, and an application in Tajer
382: et al. 2007) for both models. This quantity approximates the Bayes factor (Jeffreys 1961; Kass
383: \& Raftery
384: 1995), which gives the posterior odds of one model against another, presuming that the models
385: are equally favored prior to the data fitting (Liddle 2004).
386: The difference $\Delta$BIC can be used to evaluate the relative value of the two models.
387: We find $\Delta$BIC of 5-6 (depending on the region used), which
388: can be used as a strong evidence (see Jeffreys 1961; Liddle 2004)
389: that we are justified in introducing the 1 keV component in the spectral modelling.
390:
391: We have investigated further the spatial distribution of the different spectral
392: components by comparing the spectra from the $2''-15''$ and
393: $20''-30''$ regions, both fitted with a single APEC spectrum at 0.3 keV
394: (Fig.~\ref{spec2}).
395: It is clear that there is no residual emission at 1 keV in the spectrum
396: from the outer region; this suggests that the additional ``soft" component
397: is more concentrated towards the center, consistent with the radial
398: profile comparison of Fig.~\ref{softprof}.
399:
400: From the spectral results we can estimate the luminosity of each
401: individual component, summarized in Table 1.
402: The measured unabsorbed
403: luminosity of the total unresolved emission, within the 30$''$ region,
404: is $\rm L_x \sim 4 \pm 0.4 \times 10^{38}$ \ergs\ in the 0.3-10 keV range,
405: equally divided below and above 2 kev. The hard band luminosity is
406: totally accounted for by the Bremsstrahlung component, which alone
407: gives a luminosity L$_x \sim 1\pm 0.1 \times 10^{38}$ \ergs\ in the 0.5-2.0 keV band.
408: The 1 keV component contributes for $\rm L_x \sim 4 ^{+2.5}_{-0.2} \times 10^{37}$
409: \ergs\ in this band, and the residual $\rm L_x \sim 6^{+2.5}_{-0.4}\times 10^{37}$
410: \ergs\ is due to the 0.3 keV emission. Errors are estimated from the best fit values (68\% confidence values, from XSPEC). We have estimated a correction
411: factor to recover the area lost due to masking the point sources (see
412: Table 1), and a second one to account for the fraction of emission not
413: included in the area used in the spectral analysis (given in Table 2).
414: These can be used to estimate the total luminosity of the very soft
415: and hard components, which we list in Table 2. The component at 1 keV
416: appears to contribute only in the central region, for r $< 30''$.
417:
418:
419: \section{Summary of results and comparison with the literature}
420:
421: We have analyzed the spectral and spatial distribution of the diffuse
422: X-ray emission in NGC 3379 with deep {\it Chandra} data, cleaned of all
423: detected sources down to a threshold luminosity L$_x \sim 10^{36}$ \ergs\
424: (see Brassington et al. 2008). The residual emission can be detected only
425: out to $\rm r \sim 1'$, corresponding to 3 kpc, well within the D$_{25}$,
426: measured at $5.4'\times4.8'$ (from NED, see also Cappellari et al. 2006).
427:
428: The spectral distribution of this unresolved emission in the 30\arcsec\
429: region used for the spectral analysis suggests the presence of 3 distinct
430: components. The dominant contribution in the broad 0.3-10 keV band can
431: be modeled with a Bremsstrahlung emission at $\sim 7 $ keV and is
432: likely to arise from lower luminosity LMXBs and other stellar components
433: that can not be detected individually in the present data, as also
434: suggested by its spatial distribution, which follows
435: that of the optical and IR stellar light (Fig.~\ref{softprof}).
436: This component accounts for all of the emission above 2 keV
437: and about 1/2 of the emission below 2 keV, and has an estimated total $\rm L_x
438: \sim 5 \times 10^{38}$ \ergs\ (0.5-10 keV, see Table 2).
439:
440: We also find two additional optically thin thermal components, with best fit
441: temperatures of $\sim 0.3$~keV and $\sim 1$~keV,
442: contributing roughly 2/3 and 1/3 of the 0.5-2.0 keV residual
443: luminosity, respectively (see Table 1), in the 30\arcsec\ radius region.
444: This result is supported by the combined evidence of excess emission at
445: $\sim 1$ keV over
446: the dominant 0.3 kev plasma in the spectral data (Fig.~\ref{spec1}),
447: and of a different spatial distribution of the two components, when
448: the data below and above 0.7 keV are selected
449: (Fig.~\ref{softprof}).
450:
451: On average, the 0.3 keV component has a spatial distribution consistent
452: with that of the lower luminosity LMXBs and coronally active stars
453: (traced by the emission above 1.5 keV) and of the stars (traced by the
454: I-band and K-band emission),
455: while the 1~keV emission is more centrally peaked,
456: and is prominent out to $\rm r \sim 15''-20''$.
457:
458: Two previous detailed studies of the diffuse emission of NGC~3379 based on {\it Chandra} data can
459: be found in the literature. Based on the first 2001 short observation
460: David et al. (2005) conclude that the diffuse
461: emission is dominated by undetected faint
462: point sources, but with a 10\% contribution from a
463: gaseous component, with kT$\sim 0.6$ keV,
464: in the central 770 pc.
465: This hot ISM would have a luminosity of $\sim 9
466: \times 10^{37}$ \ergs (0.3-10 keV) and a mass of $\sim 5
467: \times 10^{5}$ M$_\sun$. Our estimate of the luminosity of the optically thin thermal
468: diffuse emission in the same region
469: is consistent with that of David et al (2005), but we are able to distinguish two
470: separate components of this emission.
471: NGC 3379 is also included in the sample examined by Fukazawa et al. (2006), who also report
472: a detection of a component at 0.5 keV in a small region of the galaxy.
473:
474: More recently, Revnivtsev et al. (2008) have suggested a different
475: interpretation for the unresolved emission: using the full dataset as
476: in the present work, they derive a radial profile of the 0.5-2.0 keV
477: emission, cleaned of detected sources, which they compare with the
478: K-band profile. Based on this comparison they conclude that all of
479: the unresolved emission observed in NGC 3379 can be attributed to the
480: emission of stellar sources, with no evidence of a truly diffuse ISM.
481: Our net radial profile of Fig.~\ref{raw} is entirely consistent with that
482: of Revnivtsev et al. (2008), giving us confidence that slight differences
483: in the data analysis, in the subtraction of detected sources obtained
484: with different algorithms or in the choice of the background level,
485: are not significant sources of discrepancies. The main difference
486: between this work and Revnivtsev et al. (2008) therefore lies in our
487: spectral and spatial analysis, that enables us to distinguish two separate
488: spectral components of the soft diffuse emission, with different spatial
489: properties, which contribute equal amounts to the total in the inner
490: $15''$ radius.
491:
492: \section{Discussion}
493: \label{models}
494:
495: Our analysis suggests the presence of three components of the diffuse
496: emission of NGC 3379. As summarized above, the hard and very soft emission
497: are spatially consistent with a stellar origin; a detailed discussion of
498: this integrated X-ray emission from stellar sources (LMXBs, cataclysmic
499: variables, active stars and stellar coronae) is given by Revnivtsev et al
500: (2008). This stellar emission has been invoked to explain
501: the diffuse X-ray emission of the Galactic Ridge (Revnivtsev et al
502: 2006, Sazonov et al. 2006), the bulge of M31 (Bogd\'an \& Gilfanov 2008), M32 (Revnivtsev et
503: al. 2007) and NGC821 (Pellegrini et al 2007a).
504:
505: In what follows we will concentrate on the emission of the (0.7-1.5)~keV
506: band. This component has a different spatial distribution,
507: more concentrated in the center and more centrally peaked than the stellar emission (see
508: Fig.~\ref{softprof}),
509: indicating a different origin. We suggest that
510: this component is likely to originate from a $\sim$1~keV hot plasma, and discuss
511: it in the context of an appropriate model for a galactic flow.
512:
513:
514: \subsection{Evidence for hot ISM in NGC 3379}
515:
516: The interpretation of the 0.7-1.5 keV emission detected in NGC 3379 as
517: due to a different component than the softer and harder ones opens the
518: possibility that this is the long sought for evidence of a hot ISM in
519: this galaxy (e.g., Ciotti et al. 1991, David et al. 2005).
520: However, as shown by Fig.~\ref{unfold}, all three components
521: contribute to the 0.7-1.5 keV emission, while both the softer, and in
522: particular the harder, energy ranges are less contaminated by the
523: other components. The spectral results can be
524: reliably used to estimate the
525: contribution of each component to the total luminosity. To estimate
526: the spatial distribution of each separately, we have to resort to a
527: few reasonable assumptions, which we have already discussed and that we
528: summarize below: a) the profiles in both the very soft and hard
529: energy bands are very similar in shape, therefore we can treat them as
530: having a common origin with different rescaling factors;
531: b) they are also consistent with the I-band and K- band profiles, again with possibly
532: different rescaling along the full spatial extent probed; and c)
533: the 0.7-1.5 keV profile is also consistent in shape with all above
534: profiles for r$>15''$, where there is no longer any
535: evidence of the emission due to the 1 keV component (Fig.~\ref{spec2}).
536: We can therefore reasonably conclude that the
537: 0.7-1.5 keV emission at r$>15''$ traces the soft and hard components,
538: and that an extrapolation at smaller radii could be used to give a reasonable estimate of
539: the local contribution from the stellar component
540: at different radii.
541: We have used the K-band data normalized to the 0.7-1.5 keV emission at r$>15''$ as the best proxy to extrapolate the profile at smaller radii, since we can use it as a model with virtually no errors. While this relies on the assumption that the stellar light is a good tracer of the X-ray binary population, with no local, though small, variations, the observed agreement with the X-ray profiles of the residual emission at softer and harder bands (Fig.~\ref{softprof}) supports this assumption. We therefore derive the radial distribution of the $\sim 1$ keV component
542: as the excess over our model
543: (Fig.~\ref{gas}) which we can now compare to the expected emission from
544: a hot ISM, derived from the hydrodynamical simulations described below.
545: Note that the X-ray luminosity
546: derived from integrating the radial distribution of Fig.~\ref{gas} is L$_x \sim 2.5 \pm 1 \times 10^{37}$ erg s$^{-1}$, consistent with
547: that derived from the spectral analysis.
548:
549: From the spectral results and the assumption of spherical symmetry, we can estimate the
550: average density and total mass of gas responsible for the emission measured.
551: We derive a very low density of $\rm n_e \sim 0.007$ cm$^{-3}$ and a total mass of gas M$\sim
552: 3 \times 10^5$ M$_{\sun}$, in a region of $\sim 770$ pc in radius at the center.
553:
554: \subsection{The hot gas from hydrodynamical simulations}
555:
556: The round optical shape (morphological type E1), its optical colors,
557: typical of an old population (Terlevich \& Forbes 2002), and the lack of
558: signs of current or past interactions (Schweizer \& Seitzer 1992) allow
559: us to assume that a simple ``passively evolving" stellar population
560: feeds a hot gas flow, whose evolution can be reasonably studied with
561: spherically symmetric hydrodynamical simulations. The numerical code
562: used to solve the time-dependent equations of hydrodynamics with source
563: terms is described in details in Ciotti et al. (1991). We adopt a
564: central grid spacing of 20 pc, which provides a good match to the
565: scale of the observations in the inner regions;
566: the simulations do not cover feedback effects and the flow evolution
567: close to the central massive black hole (Shapiro et al. 2006).
568:
569: Given the high quality data available for this galaxy, it is possible to build
570: a mass model tailored
571: specifically onto NGC~3379, and consider the best recipes available for
572: the mass and energy source terms. These are briefly described below.
573:
574: \subsection{The mass model}
575:
576: The optical profile is well described by a de Vaucouleurs (1948) law
577: over a span of ~10 magnitudes (Capaccioli et al. 1990; Peletier et
578: al. 1990), therefore the simulations use the stellar mass density profile given
579: by the Hernquist (1990) distribution, that is a very good
580: approximation of the de Vaucouleurs law and has the advantage
581: that its dynamical properties can be expressed analytically. We also
582: impose the observed B-band luminosity of 1.5$\times 10^{10}$ L$\rm _{B\sun}$,
583: the central stellar velocity
584: dispersion of 230 km s$^{-1}$ (from the detailed modeling of
585: ground-based and $HST$ spectroscopy, Shapiro et al. 2006) and a total
586: stellar mass $M_* = 10^{11}M_{\odot}$, obtained from
587: dynamical and stellar population synthesis studies
588: (Saglia,
589: Bertin \& Stiavelli 1992, Gerhard et al. 2001, Napolitano et
590: al. 2005, Cappellari et al. 2006,
591: Douglas et al. 2007). The resulting shape of the stellar profile, when projected,
592: is close to the optical profiles in Fig.~\ref{softprof}.
593:
594: The radial density distribution of the dark haloes of ellipticals is
595: not well constrained by observations; theoretical arguments and
596: high resolution numerical simulations of dissipation-less collapse
597: produce a density distribution $\propto r^{-1}$ near the center
598: (Dubinsky \& Carlberg 1991, Navarro, Frenk, \& White 1996). The model
599: galaxy is therefore a superposition of two Hernquist density
600: distributions, one for the luminous matter and one for the dark matter.
601:
602: The total amount of mass in NGC~3379 has been calculated several times
603: using the observed stellar velocity dispersion profile,
604: extending out to $\sim 1-2$ effective radii (\Reff, e.g., Saglia, Bertin \& Stiavelli
605: 1992, Kronawitter et al. 2000, Samurovic \& Danziger 2005), and dynamical
606: tracers as planetary nebulae or globular clusters extending out to
607: larger radii (Romanowsky et al. 2003, Dekel et al. 2005, Teodorescu et al. 2005; Pierce
608: et al. 2006, Bergond et al. 2006, Douglas et al. 2007, De Lorenzi et al. 2008). Regardless of the
609: details of the modelling, studies based on the observed
610: stellar velocity dispersion profile invariably show very little dark
611: matter within \Reff, or even no dark matter.
612: Within 2--3 \Reff,
613: the stellar component alone satisfies reasonably well the
614: observations, and the amount of dark matter is constrained to be at
615: most very modest (with a dark to stellar mass ratio of the order of $M_h/M_*\sim 0.1$,
616: Kronawitter et al. 2000; Cappellari et al. 2006). The evidence for dark matter is at
617: the largest scales (10--40 kpc),
618: probed mostly by globular clusters (see also
619: the analysis of an HI ring, Schneider 1985), with a global galactic
620: value of $M_h/M_*=1.1-1.5$ (Dekel et al. 2005), $M_h/M_*\sim 2$ (Puzia
621: et al. 2004), up to
622: $M_h/M_*\sim 6$ (Bergond et al. 2006).
623:
624: In order to make the model mass distribution consistent with the
625: observations, we also imposed the ratio $M_h/M_* = 0.1$ within one
626: \Reff\footnote{In the code the presence of dark matter
627: contributes also to produce the observed central stellar velocity
628: dispersion, as described in Pellegrini \& Ciotti (2006), though this
629: aspect is not very important here given the small amount of dark
630: matter in the central regions.}, while on the global galactic scale
631: it has been varied instead between 1 and 6.
632:
633:
634: \subsection{Time evolving inputs}
635:
636: The model does not assume a steady state configuration, therefore the input ingredients
637: of the numerical simulations, which are
638: the rates of stellar mass loss from the aging stellar population and
639: the rate of SNIa heating, are both evolving with time. In the numerical code the exact mass return
640: rate prescribed by the stellar evolution theory is used
641: (Ciotti et al. 1991), updated to
642: take into account the latest stellar population synthesis models
643: and more recent estimates for the mass ejection from
644: stars as a function of their mass (Maraston 2005).
645: This gives a present epoch ($\sim 10$ Gyr) mass return rate of
646: $\sim 0.3 M_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ for the whole galaxy.
647:
648: The SNIa heating rate is parameterized as $L_{SN}(t)= E_{SN}\,
649: R_{SN}(t)\,L_B$, where $E_{SN}$ is the kinetic energy injected in the
650: ISM by one SNIa, and the number of events as a function of time is
651: $R_{SN}(t)L_B\propto t^{-s}$, where the slope $s$ describes the
652: unknown decay rate. $R_{SN}(t)$
653: is normalized to give the present SNIa's explosion rate in nearby
654: E/S0s of Cappellaro et al. (1999), i.e., 0.16$h_{70}^2$ SNu (where 1 SNu = 1 SNIa per 100 yrs per
655: $10^{10}L_{B,\odot}$, $h_{70}=H_{\circ}/70$), that has an associated
656: uncertainty of $\sim 30$\%. A detailed
657: theoretical modeling of the evolution of the rate shows that, after
658: the first 0.5--1 Gyr, it is well approximated by a power law with a
659: slope $s\sim 1.0-1.2$ for double degenerates exploders, and a slope
660: $s\sim 1.5-1.7$ for the single degenerate exploders (Greggio 2005).
661:
662: The thermalization of the stellar mass losses to the local ``temperature"
663: set by the stellar velocity dispersion is another heating source, though of lower
664: relevance. Its contribution is determined at each radius
665: using the velocity dispersion profile obtained by solving
666: the Jeans equation for the two-component Hernquist model in the
667: globally isotropic case (Pellegrini \& Ciotti 2006). For realistic
668: anisotropy distributions, the difference with the isotropic case is small;
669: in addition, the heating due to thermalization of stellar motions is significantly
670: smaller than SNIa heating.
671:
672:
673: \subsection{Results and comparison with observations}
674:
675: With the SNIa's explosion rate from Cappellaro et al. (1999) and the
676: adopted mass model, the resulting gas flow phase is of a global
677: outflow, with velocities ranging from $10^7$ to a few $10^7$ cm s$^{-1}$,
678: going from the central region to the galaxy outskirts (e.g., subsonic out to r$\sim$1 kpc and
679: supersonic outwards). When varying the total
680: amount of dark matter within the range $M_h/M_*=1-6$ allowed for by
681: observations, this flow pattern keeps basically the same (provided that the SNIa's rate increases together with $M_h/M_*$,
682: but still within its observational uncertainty).
683:
684: For the resulting gas flows, the X-ray luminosity in the energy bands
685: of 0.3--2 keV and 2--8 keV, and the temperature weighted with the
686: emission in the 0.3--8 keV band ($<kT>$), have been calculated. In order to
687: do this, the
688: values of the cooling function $\Lambda(T,Z)$, as a function of
689: temperature, have been obtained with the APEC code in XSPEC, for solar
690: abundance, consistent with the estimate for the stellar population
691: (Terlevich \& Forbes 2002); a ``best fit" $\Lambda$ was then derived
692: from these values and used in
693: the $L_X$ and $<kT>$ calculation (that takes into account the whole
694: density and temperature distributions over the computational grid).
695:
696: After $\sim 9$ Gyr, the gas has a
697: 0.3--2 keV luminosity of $2\times
698: 10^{37}$ erg s$^{-1}$, in good agreement with the observed one. This
699: is a reasonable time scale that corresponds to the estimated
700: age of NGC 3379: Terlevich \& Forbes (2002) give an age of
701: $9.0^{+2.3}_{-1.9}$ Gyr; more recently, a mean age in the range 8--15
702: Gyr has been confirmed by Gregg et al. (2004) and Denicol\`o et
703: al. (2005). The
704: central temperature is $\sim 10^7$ K out to a few hundred pc, and
705: is steeply declining outwards; the central gas density is
706: $n_e=2\times 10^{-2}$ cm$^{-3}$ and is also steeply declining
707: outwards. The mass of the hot gas is $\sim 3-4\times 10^5 M_{\odot}$ within
708: a radius of 800 pc (in good agreement with that obtained in Sect. 4.1). The
709: emission weighted gas temperature within a radius of $15^{\prime\prime}$ is $<kT>\sim 0.8$ keV, a value near the lower range of those allowed for by observations (see Fig.~\ref{contour}). The
710: projection along the line of sight of the 0.3--2 keV emission is shown
711: in Fig.~\ref{gas}, for two models with a total $M_h/M_*=4$, a SNIa's
712: rate close to that of Cappellaro et al. (1999), and a slope for the SNIa's decay rate of $s=1.0$ and $s=1.5$. Both model profiles reproduce well
713: the observed ``gas profile" derived above. We note that a larger age for the gas flow
714: would result in a lower stellar mass loss rate and lower gas content,
715: with consequently lower ISM emission, below the observed one.
716:
717: \section{Conclusions}
718:
719: With the very deep {\it Chandra} observation of NGC 3379 we have
720: scored two firsts: we have the first evidence of a very small amount of
721: hot ISM in a nearby galaxy, down to the level of $\rm L_x \sim 4 \times 10^{37}$ \ergs\
722: (0.5-2.0 keV), and at the same time we have the first evidence that this
723: gas is in an outflow phase, which has been predicted by models but as of yet
724: has not been observed.
725: As a third and equally important result, we find that detailed modelling based on the
726: optical data (stellar mass, total mass and supernova rate) reproduces remarkably
727: well the observed total
728: luminosity, total mass and spatial distribution of the hot phase of the gas.
729:
730: After detection and removal of point sources down to a luminosity of $\rm L_x \sim 10^{36}$
731: \ergs\ we have been able to study the unresolved emission in NGC 3379.
732: The detailed spectral analysis has led us to the evidence of three separate components:
733: a very soft (plasma at kT$\sim$0.3 keV) and a hard (Bremsstrahlung at kT=7 keV)
734: components can be attributed to the integrated emission of
735: unresolved sources, closely linked to the stellar population (binary systems and coronally
736: active stars, as discussed by Revnivtsev et al. 2008). However we also detect
737: a hot ISM in this galaxy, within the innermost $\sim$ 800 pc, with a
738: luminosity $\rm L_x \sim 4 \pm 1.5 \times 10^{37}$ \ergs\ (0.5-2.0 keV). This is
739: lowest detection of a hot gas in a nearby early-type galaxy. The total
740: gas mass involved is also very small, of a few $10^5$ M$_{\sun}$.
741:
742: With the aid of hydrodynamical simulations and a galaxy model tailored specifically on
743: NGC3379, we have reproduced both the luminosity and
744: the average radial distribution of this hot gas component.
745: For a SNIa's explosion rate consistent with current estimates, the gas
746: is outflowing, even for the
747: "maximum" dark matter model, where the amount of dark mass is the
748: maximum allowed for by optical studies.
749:
750: %% If you wish to include an acknowledgments section in your paper,
751: %% separate it off from the body of the text using the \acknowledgments
752: %% command.
753:
754: %% Included in this acknowledgments section are examples of the
755: %% AASTeX hypertext markup commands. Use \url without the optional [HREF]
756: %% argument when you want to print the url directly in the text. Otherwise,
757: %% use either \url or \anchor, with the HREF as the first argument and the
758: %% text to be printed in the second.
759: \section{Appendix: Consideration upon the effects of the PSF}.
760:
761: At the suggestion of the referee, we have thoroughly checked that the results obtained above, in particular the detection of the $\sim 1$ keV component, are not due to a faulty subtraction of the detected sources. We have run several tests, which we illustrate below.
762:
763: \noindent 1) We have first redone the spatial and spectral analysis assuming a circle of $2.5"$ and $3" $ radius for point source exclusion, with analogous results, albeith somewhat larger errors,
764: due to the smaller statistics available.
765:
766: \noindent 2) We have also simulated the {\it Chandra}'s PSF using ChaRT (Carter et al. 2003). Since we were interested in the wings of the PSF, we have run several simulations for 20,000 counts each and then merged the resulting images to increase the statistics at radii larger than $1''$ We have used the average spectrum obtained in the inner 15$''$, inclusive of all detected sources, as an input parameter in all simulations. We have then treated the results as we have the data of NGC 3379, namely we have produced radial profiles in the same energy bands and calculated the expected contribution from point sources in the regions of interest. We expect that 4\% of the counts detected from a point sources within 2$''$ from its peak falls in the $2''-30''$ region, and 3.6\% in the $2''-15''$ region, in the 0.3-2.0 keV band (with values between 3\% and 5\% in the softer and harder of the bands considered). If we integrate the contribution due to the ``wings'' of all point sources detected in a radius=30\arcsec, we can only account for 10-25\% of the detected counts in the 0.3-0.7, and 0.7-1.5 keV bands in the unresolved component. This is a generous estimate of the contribution from the discrete population, since only sources at the center of the region will contribute the full amount, the wings of the others being only partially included in the region considered.
767:
768: \noindent 3) We have used the current documents online\footnote{{\tt http://cxc.harvard.edu/cal/Hrma/psf/index.html} } and directly contacted the experts on both the PSF and its wings (Dr. T Gaetz and D. Jerius) to better understand the effects of the wings of the point spread function. The most updated studies on the PSF wings are based on the ground XRCF and on-orbit Her X-1 data. Both data sets demonstrate the existence of the PSF wings, but the effects of this component decrease rapidly with decreasing energy. The ray trace model used to simulate the PSF (point 2 above) includes some of the effects of wings, and appears to be reliable at low energies ($<$ 2 keV) and small radii, although it might be underestimating the wing effects at energies above 2.0-2.5 keV. However, we are mostly interested in the emission below $\sim$ 1.5 keV and relatively small radii, where the model appears to be adequate.
769:
770:
771: \noindent 4) We have re-analyzed the spectrum of the emission in the $2''-15''$ regions excluding only the 5 brightest sources with a significantly smaller exclusion region of $1''$ radius. This exclusion is necessary to avoid that the point source population completely dominates the spectral results; on the other hand, if the sources were responsible for the 1 keV component, it should be significantly stronger when sources are included in the spectral analysis.
772: The spectral results indicate that, while the net counts increase by a factor of 4, the 1 keV component only increases by a factor of 1.5 the original value, consistent with the ratio of the areas of the regions considered.
773:
774: All in all, we believe that the excess emission observed in the 0.7-1.5 keV band is a real effect, and is not an artifact related to the wings of the many individual sources detected in the area. This excess is relative to the emission in adjacent energy bands, and is seen at energies where the effects of PSF wings are significantly smaller than at higher energies. We also believe that there is excess emission over the scattering from the detected point sources, although we are fully aware of the fact that the exact evaluation of its strength has large uncertainties, both in the soft and in particular in the hard band.
775:
776:
777: \acknowledgments
778: We thank Stefano Andreon for many interesting discussion on the statistical
779: aspects of the data analysis, and Terry Gaetz and Diab Jerius for their help in understanding the PSF issues.
780: We thank the referee for raising the issue of the effects of the PSF, that prompted us to better investigate the reliability of the results.
781: The data analysis was supported by the CXC CIAO software and CALDB, and
782: has made use of the SAOImage DS9 and funtools softwares, developed by
783: the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory. We
784: have used the NASA NED and ADS facilities, and have extracted archival
785: data from the {\it Chandra}, HST and 2MASS archives.
786: This work was supported by the {\it
787: Chandra} GO grant G06-7079A (PI: Fabbiano) and sub-contract G06-7079B
788: (PI: Kalogera). We acknowledge partial support from NASA contract
789: NAS8-39073 (CXC); A. Zezas acknowledges support from NASA LTSA grant
790: NAG5-13056; S. Pellegrini acknowledges partial financial support from
791: the Italian Space Agency ASI (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana) through grant
792: ASI-INAF I/023/05/0.
793:
794: %% To help institutions obtain information on the effectiveness of their
795: %% telescopes, the AAS Journals has created a group of keywords for telescope
796: %% facilities. A common set of keywords will make these types of searches
797: %% significantly easier and more accurate. In addition, they will also be
798: %% useful in linking papers together which utilize the same telescopes
799: %% within the framework of the National Virtual Observatory.
800: %% See the AASTeX Web site at http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AAS/AASTeX
801: %% for information on obtaining the facility keywords.
802:
803: %% After the acknowledgments section, use the following syntax and the
804: %% \facility{} macro to list the keywords of facilities used in the research
805: %% for the paper. Each keyword will be checked against the master list during
806: %% copy editing. Individual instruments or configurations can be provided
807: %% in parentheses, after the keyword, but they will not be verified.
808:
809: {\it Facilities:} \facility{CXO (ACIS)}.
810:
811: \begin{thebibliography}{}
812:
813: \bibitem{} Bergond, G., Zepf,
814: S.~E., Romanowsky, A.~J., Sharples, R.~M., \& Rhode, K.~L.\ 2006, \aap,
815: 448, 155
816:
817: \bibitem{} Brassington, N. J. et al 2008, ApJ, submitted.
818:
819: \bibitem{} Bogdan, A., \& Gilfanov, M.\ 2008, ArXiv e-prints, 803, arXiv:0803.0063
820:
821: \bibitem{} Canizares, C.~R.,
822: Fabbiano, G., \& Trinchieri, G.\ 1987, \apj, 312, 503
823:
824: \bibitem{}Capaccioli, M., Held, E.V., Lorenz, H., Vietri, M. 1990, AJ
825: 99, 1813
826:
827: \bibitem{}Cappellari, M., Bacon, R., Bureau, M., et al. 2006, MNRAS 366,
828: 1126
829:
830: \bibitem{}Cappellaro, E., Evans, R., Turatto, M. 1999, A\&A 351, 459
831:
832: \bibitem{}Carter, C. Karovska,
833: M., Jerius, D., Glotfelty, K.,
834: \& Beikman, S.\ 2003, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XII, 295, 477
835:
836: \bibitem{} Ciotti, L., D'Ercole,
837: A., Pellegrini, S., \& Renzini, A.\ 1991, \apj, 376, 380
838:
839: \bibitem{} David, L.~P., Forman, W.,
840: \& Jones, C.\ 1991, \apj, 380, 39
841:
842: \bibitem{} David, L.~P., Jones, C.,
843: Forman, W., \& Murray, S.~S.\ 2005, \apj, 635, 1053
844:
845: \bibitem{}Dekel, A., Stoehr, F., Mamon, G. A., Cox, T. J., Novak, G. S.,
846: Primack, J. R. 2005, Nature 437, 707
847:
848: \bibitem{}De Lorenzi, F.; Gerhard, O.; Coccato, L. et al. 2008,
849: arXiv:0804.3350
850:
851: \bibitem{}de Vaucouleurs G., 1948, Ann.Ap., 11, 247
852:
853: \bibitem{} Denicol{\'o}, G.,
854: Terlevich, R., Terlevich, E., Forbes, D.~A.,
855: \& Terlevich, A.\ 2005, \mnras, 358, 813
856:
857: \bibitem{} Douglas, N.~G., et al.\
858: 2007, \apj, 664, 257
859:
860: \bibitem{}Dubinski, J., Carlberg, R. G. 1991, ApJ 378, 496
861:
862: \bibitem{} Fabbiano, G., et al.\
863: 2006, \apj, 650, 879
864:
865: \bibitem{} 2006, \araa, 44, 323
866:
867: \bibitem{} Fabian, A.C., \& Canizares, C.R. 1988, Nature, 333, 829
868:
869: \bibitem{} Forman, W., Jones, C.,
870: \& Tucker, W.\ 1985, \apj, 293, 102
871:
872: \bibitem{} Fukazawa, Y.,
873: Botoya-Nonesa, J.~G., Pu, J., Ohto, A., \& Kawano, N.\ 2006, \apj, 636, 698
874:
875: \bibitem{}Gerhard O., Kronawitter, A., Saglia, R. P., Bender, R. 2001,
876: AJ 121, 1936
877:
878: \bibitem{} Gregg, M.~D., Ferguson,
879: H.~C., Minniti, D., Tanvir, N., \& Catchpole, R.\ 2004, \aj, 127, 1441
880:
881: \bibitem{}Greggio, L., 2005, A\&A 441, 1055
882:
883: \bibitem{}Hernquist L.E., 1990, ApJ, 536, 359
884:
885: \bibitem{}Ho, L.C. 2008, arXiv:0803.2268
886:
887: \bibitem{}Jeffreys H., 1961, Theory of probability, 3rd edn, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford
888:
889: \bibitem{}Kass R. E., Raftery A. E. , 1995, Journ. American Stat. Assoc., 90, 773
890:
891: \bibitem{} Kim, D.-W., \& Fabbiano, G.\ 2003, \apj, 586, 826
892:
893: \bibitem{} Kim, D.-W., et al.\ 2006,
894: \apj, 652, 1090
895:
896:
897: \bibitem{} Kim, D.-W., Fabbiano, G.,
898: \& Trinchieri, G.\ 1992, \apj, 393, 134
899:
900: \bibitem{}Kronawitter A., Saglia R.P., Gerhard O., Bender R., 2000,
901: A\&AS, 144, 53
902:
903: \bibitem{} Liddle, A.~R.\ 2004, \mnras,
904: 351, L49
905:
906: \bibitem{}Maraston, C. 2005, MNRAS 362, 799
907:
908: \bibitem{} Matsushita, K., et
909: al.\ 1994, \apjl, 436, L41
910:
911: \bibitem{} Napolitano, N.~R.,
912: et al.\ 2005, \mnras, 357, 691
913:
914: \bibitem{}Navarro, J.F., Frenk, C.S., White, S.D. M. 1996, ApJ 462, 563
915:
916: \bibitem{}Peletier R.F., Davies, R.L., Illingworth, G., Davis, L.E.,
917: Cawson, M. 1990, AJ 100, 1091
918:
919: \bibitem{} Pellegrini, S.\ 2005, \apj,
920: 624, 155
921:
922: \bibitem{}Pellegrini, S., Ciotti, L. 1998, A\&A, 333, 433
923:
924:
925: \bibitem{}Pellegrini, S., Ciotti, L., 2006, MNRAS 370, 1797
926:
927: \bibitem{} Pellegrini, S.,
928: Siemiginowska, A., Fabbiano, G., Elvis, M., Greenhill, L., Soria, R.,
929: Baldi, A., \& Kim, D.~W.\ 2007a, \apj, 667, 749
930:
931: \bibitem{} Pellegrini, S.,
932: Baldi, A., Kim, D.~W., Fabbiano, G., Soria, R., Siemiginowska, A.,
933: \& Elvis, M.\ 2007b, \apj, 667, 731
934:
935: \bibitem{} Pellegrini, S., \& Fabbiano, G.\ 1994, \apj, 429, 105
936:
937: \bibitem{}Pierce, M., Beasley, M. A., Forbes, D. A., et al. 2006, MNRAS 366,
938: 1253
939:
940: \bibitem{} Puzia, T.~H., et al.\ 2004, \aap, 415, 123
941:
942: \bibitem{} Revnivtsev, M.,
943: Sazonov, S., Gilfanov, M., Churazov, E., \& Sunyaev, R.\ 2006, \aap,
944: 452, 169
945:
946: \bibitem{} Revnivtsev, M., Churazov, E.,
947: Sazonov, S., Forman, W., \& Jones, C.\ 2007, \aap, 473, 783
948:
949: \bibitem{}Revnivtsev, M., Churazov, E.,
950: Sazonov, S., Forman, W., \& Jones, C.\ 2008, ArXiv e-prints, 804, arXiv:0804.0319
951:
952: \bibitem{}Richstone, D.; Ajhar, E. A.; Bender, R.; Bower, G.; Dressler,
953: A.; Faber, S. M.; Filippenko, A. V.; Gebhardt, K.; Green, R.; Ho, L. C.;
954: Kormendy, J.; Lauer, T. R.; Magorrian, J.; Tremaine, S.
955: 1998 Nature 395 14
956:
957: \bibitem{}Romanowsky, A. J., Douglas, N. G., Arnaboldi, M., et al. 2003,
958: Science 301, 1696
959:
960: \bibitem{}Saglia R.P., Bertin G., Stiavelli M., 1992, ApJ, 384, 433
961:
962: \bibitem{}Samurovic, S.; Danziger, I. J. 2005, MNRAS 363, 769
963:
964: \bibitem{} Sazonov, S., Revnivtsev, M., Gilfanov, M., Churazov, E., \& Sunyaev, R.\ 2006, \aap, 450, 117
965:
966: \bibitem{} Schneider, S.\ 1985, \apjl,
967: 288, L33
968:
969: \bibitem{}Schweizer, F., Seitzer, P. 1992, AJ 104, 1039
970:
971: \bibitem{}Schwarz G., 1978, Annals of Statistics, 5, 461
972:
973: \bibitem{} Shapiro, K.~L.,
974: Cappellari, M., de Zeeuw, T., McDermid, R.~M., Gebhardt, K., van den Bosch,
975: R.~C.~E., \& Statler, T.~S.\ 2006, \mnras, 370, 559
976:
977: \bibitem{}Springel, V., Di Matteo, T., Hernquist, L. 2005, ApJ 620, L79
978:
979: \bibitem{} Tajer, M., et al.\ 2007, \aap, 467, 73
980:
981: \bibitem{}Teodorescu, A. M., Mendez, R. H., Saglia, R. P., Riffeser, A.,
982: Kudritzki, R.-P., Gerhard, O. E., Kleyna, J. 2005, ApJ 635, 290
983:
984: \bibitem{}Terlevich, A. I., Forbes, D.A. 2002, MNRAS 330, 547
985:
986: \bibitem{}Tonry, J.L., Dressler, A., Blakeslee, J.P., et al. 2001, ApJ 546,
987: 681
988:
989: \bibitem{} Trinchieri, G., \& Fabbiano, G.\ 1985, \apj, 296, 447
990:
991:
992: \bibitem{} Wilms, J., Allen, A.,
993: \& McCray, R.\ 2000, \apj, 542, 914
994:
995:
996:
997: \end{thebibliography}
998:
999:
1000: \clearpage
1001:
1002: %% Use the figure environment and \plotone or \plottwo to include
1003: %% figures and captions in your electronic submission.
1004: %% To embed the sample graphics in
1005: %% the file, uncomment the \plotone, \plottwo, and
1006: %% \includegraphics commands
1007: %%
1008: %% If you need a layout that cannot be achieved with \plotone or
1009: %% \plottwo, you can invoke the graphicx package directly with the
1010: %% \includegraphics command or use \plotfiddle. For more information,
1011: %% please see the tutorial on "Using Electronic Art with AASTeX" in the
1012: %% documentation section at the AASTeX Web site,
1013: %% http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AAS/AASTeX.
1014: %%
1015: %% The examples below also include sample markup for submission of
1016: %% supplemental electronic materials. As always, be sure to check
1017: %% the instructions to authors for the journal you are submitting to
1018: %% for specific submissions guidelines as they vary from
1019: %% journal to journal.
1020:
1021: %% This example uses \plotone to include an EPS file scaled to
1022: %% 80% of its natural size with \epsscale. Its caption
1023: %% has been written to indicate that additional figure parts will be
1024: %% available in the electronic journal.
1025:
1026:
1027: %% Here we use \plottwo to present two versions of the same figure,
1028: %% one in black and white for print the other in RGB color
1029: %% for online presentation. Note that the caption indicates
1030: %% that a color version of the figure will be available online.
1031: %%
1032:
1033:
1034: \begin{figure}
1035: \plottwo{f1a.ps}{f1b.ps}
1036: \caption{Azimuthally averaged radial profiles of the unresolved
1037: emission in NGC 3379, in two broad energy bands. Left: raw data; right:
1038: background subtracted data}
1039: \label{raw}
1040: \end{figure}
1041:
1042: \begin{figure}
1043: \plotone{f2.ps}
1044: \caption{Azimuthally averaged net profile in different X-ray bands,
1045: compared to the optical and K-band profiles}
1046: \label{softprof}
1047: \end{figure}
1048:
1049: \begin{figure}
1050: \plotone{f3.ps}
1051: \caption{Spectral data in the 30\arcsec\ region, fitted with a single
1052: temperature (0.3 keV) and a two temperature APEC model (top and bottom
1053: respectively, see text),
1054: plus a 7 keV bremsstrahlung. For displaying purposes, data are rebinned to 5$\sigma$.
1055: }
1056: \label{spec1}
1057: \end{figure}
1058:
1059: \begin{figure}
1060: \plotone{f4.ps}
1061: \caption{Confidence contour regions
1062: (at 68, 90 99\% level for two interesting parameters)
1063: for the two temperatures of the APEC component (see text).
1064: }
1065: \label{contour}
1066: \end{figure}
1067:
1068: \begin{figure}
1069: \plotone{f5.ps}
1070: \caption{Region 30$''$, unfolded spectrum: 0.3 + 1.0 keV APEC + 7 keV
1071: Bremsstrahlung, line-of-sight absorption.}
1072: \label{unfold}
1073: \end{figure}
1074:
1075:
1076: \begin{figure}
1077: \plotone{f6.ps}
1078: \caption{Spectral data in the 0\arcsec-15\arcsec\ and
1079: 20\arcsec-30\arcsec\ region, fitted with
1080: a single temperature plasma model}
1081: \label{spec2}
1082: \end{figure}
1083:
1084: \begin{figure}
1085: \plotone{f7.ps}
1086: \caption{The observed 0.3--2 keV emission from the ``pure" 1 keV component, compared with
1087: the profiles resulting for two gas models, one with $s=1.0$ (dashed line)
1088: and the other with $s=1.5$ (solid line).
1089: See Sect.~\ref{models} for more details.
1090: }
1091: \label{gas}
1092: \end{figure}
1093:
1094: \clearpage
1095:
1096: \begin{table}
1097: \begin{center}
1098: \caption{Measured luminosities of the different components}
1099: \begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
1100: \tableline\tableline
1101: Region & Net counts\tablenotemark{a} & L$_X$\tablenotemark{b} & L$_X$\tablenotemark{b} &
1102: L$_X$\tablenotemark{b} & B/A1/A2\tablenotemark{c} & Correction\tablenotemark{d} \\
1103: &&0.3-10 keV & 0.5-2.0 keV & 2.0-10.0 keV& 0.5-2.0 keV \\
1104: \tableline
1105: 2\arcsec-30\arcsec & 1550$\pm$53 & 4.4$\times10^{38}$ &2.0$\times10^{38}$ & 2.0$\times10^{38}$ &
1106: 1/0.6/0.35 & 1.15\\
1107: 2\arcsec-15\arcsec &978$\pm$35 &2.9$\times10^{38}$ &1.3$\times10^{38}$
1108: &1.3$\times10^{38}$ &0.8/0.27/0.28 &1.34\\
1109: \tableline
1110: \end{tabular}
1111: %% Any table notes must follow the \end{tabular} command.
1112: \tablenotetext{a}{Net counts used in the spectral fit}
1113: \tablenotetext{b}{Total luminosity in the given band in \ergs}
1114: \tablenotetext{c}{$\rm L_x$ in the 0.5-2 keV band for the Bremsstrahlung / APEC @ 0.3 keV/ APEC @ 1 keV components, in units of $10^{38}$ \ergs}
1115: \tablenotetext{d}{Correction factor to take into account the area lost due to the excised
1116: sources}
1117: \end{center}
1118: \end{table}
1119:
1120:
1121: \begin{table}
1122: \caption{Total luminosities of the different components, after correcting
1123: for area lost and total extent
1124: }
1125: \begin{tabular}{lcccccc}
1126: \\
1127: \tableline\tableline
1128: Component & Extension & Correction\tablenotemark{a}& L$_X$ & L$_X$ \\
1129: & (arcsec) & & 0.5-2.0 & 2-10 \\
1130: \tableline
1131: Very soft (0.3 keV)& 95 & 1.60& 1.1$\times10^{38}$& 2.3$\times10^{35}$\\
1132: Soft (1 keV) & 20 & 1.00 & 4.0$\times10^{37}$ & 5.0$\times10^{36}$ \\
1133: Hard (7 keV) & 50 & 1.35 & 1.6$\times10^{38}$& 3.0$\times10^{38}$\\
1134: \tableline
1135: \end{tabular}
1136: \tablenotetext{a}{Correction factor to extrapolate from the
1137: spectral extraction region (30\arcsec, see Tab. 1) to the total source
1138: counts}
1139: \end{table}
1140:
1141:
1142:
1143:
1144: \end{document}
1145:
1146: %%
1147: %% End of file `sample.tex'.
1148: