1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2:
3: %\slugcomment{Version \today}
4:
5: \shorttitle{Emission from a Black Hole}
6: \shortauthors{Fujita}
7:
8: \begin{document}
9:
10: \title{X-Ray Emission from a Supermassive Black Hole Ejected from the
11: Center of a Galaxy}
12:
13: \author{Yutaka Fujita}
14: \affil{Department of Earth and Space Science, Graduate School
15: of Science, Osaka University, \\
16: 1-1 Machikaneyama-cho, Toyonaka, Osaka
17: 560-0043, Japan}
18:
19: \begin{abstract}
20: Recent studies have indicated that the emission of gravitational waves
21: at the merger of two black holes gives a kick to the final black
22: hole. If the supermassive black hole at the center of a disk galaxy is
23: kicked but the velocity is not large enough to escape from the host
24: galaxy, it will fall back onto the the disk and accrete the
25: interstellar medium in the disk. We study the X-ray emission from the
26: black holes with masses of $\sim 10^7\: M_\sun$ recoiled from the
27: galactic center with velocities of $\sim 600\rm\: km\: s^{-1}$. We find
28: that their luminosities can reach $\ga 10^{39}\rm\: erg\: s^{-1}$, when
29: they pass the apastrons in the disk. While the X-ray luminosities are
30: comparable to those of ultra-luminous X-ray sources (ULXs) observed in
31: disk galaxies, ULXs observed so far do not seem to be such supermassive
32: black holes. Statical studies could constrain the probability of merger
33: and recoil of supermassive black holes.
34: \end{abstract}
35:
36:
37: \keywords{black hole physics --- ISM: general --- galaxies: nuclei ---
38: X-rays: general}
39:
40: \section{Introduction}
41:
42: Recently, studies in numerical general relativity have shown that merged
43: binary black holes can have a large recoil velocity through anisotropic
44: emission of gravitational waves \citep[e.g.][]{gon07,cam07}. The maximum
45: velocity would reach $\sim 4000\rm\: km\: s^{-1}$, although the actual
46: distribution of kick velocities is very uncertain. The discovery of such
47: recoiled black holes is important for studies about the growth of black
48: holes as well as the general relativity.
49:
50: Supermassive black holes ($\ga 10^6\: M_\sun$) at the centers of disk
51: galaxies would be kicked through this mechanism. Although they would be
52: bright just after the kick because of the emission from the accretion
53: disk carried by the black holes, they would soon get dim as the disk is
54: consumed by the black holes \citep{loe07}. However, if the kick velocity
55: of a black hole is not large enough to escape from the host galaxy, it
56: will eventually fall back onto the galactic disk. If the time-scale of
57: dynamical friction is large enough, it will revolve around the galactic
58: center many times before it finally spirals into the galactic
59: center. When the black hole passes the galactic disk, it will accrete
60: the interstellar medium (ISM) in the disk \citep{ble08}.
61:
62: The accretion of the surrounding gas onto an isolated black hole has
63: been studied by several authors \citep*[][and references
64: therein]{fuj98,ago02,mii05,map06}. Most of the previous studies focused
65: on stellar mass ($\sim 10\: M_\sun$) or intermediate mass black holes
66: (IMBHs; $\sim 10^3\: M_\sun$). The accretion rate and thus the
67: luminosity of a black hole depend on the mass of the black hole and the
68: density of the gas surrounding it (see equation~[\ref{eq:dotm}]). Since
69: the mass of a stellar-mass black hole is small, its luminosity becomes
70: large enough to be observed only when it plunges into a high density
71: region such as a molecular cloud. On the other hand, in this letter, we
72: show that a recoiled supermassive black hole can shine even in the
73: ordinary region of a galactic disk because of its huge mass.
74:
75: \section{Models}
76:
77: We calculate the orbit of a recoiled black hole in a fixed galaxy
78: potential. The galaxy potential consists of three components, which are
79: \citet{miy75} disk, Hernquist spheroid, and a logarithmic halo:
80: %
81: \begin{equation}
82: \Phi_{\rm disk}=-\frac{G M_{\rm dist}}
83: {\sqrt{R^2+(a+\sqrt{z^2+b^2})^2}}\:,
84: \end{equation}
85: %
86: \begin{equation}
87: \Phi_{\rm sphere}=-\frac{G M_{\rm sphere}}{r+c}\:,
88: \end{equation}
89: %
90: \begin{equation}
91: \Phi_{\rm halo}=\frac{1}{2}v_{\rm halo}^2
92: \ln\left[R^2+\left(\frac{z}{q}\right)^2+d^2\right]\:,
93: \end{equation}
94: %
95: where $R$ ($=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}$) and $z$ are cylindrical coordinates
96: aligned with the galactic disk, and $r=\sqrt{R^2+z^2}$. We adopt the
97: parameters for the Galaxy. We take $M_{\rm disk}=1.0\times 10^{11}\:
98: M_\sun$, $M_{\rm sphere}=3.4\times 10^{10}\: M_\sun$, $a=6.5$~kpc,
99: $b=0.26$~kpc, $c=0.7$~kpc, $d=13$~kpc, and $q=0.9$; $v_{\rm halo}$ is
100: determined so that the circular velocity for the total potential is
101: $220\rm\: km\: s^{-1}$ at $R=7$~kpc \citep[see][]{law05}. We solve the
102: equation of motion for the supermassive black hole:
103: %
104: \begin{equation}
105: \label{eq:motion}
106: \mbox{\boldmath{$\dot{v}$}}=-\nabla\Phi\:,
107: \end{equation}
108: %
109: where {\boldmath{$v$}}$=(v_x, v_y, v_z)$ is the velocity of the black
110: hole, and $\Phi=\Phi_{\rm disk}+\Phi_{\rm sphere}+\Phi_{\rm halo}$. The
111: density of the disk is given by
112: %
113: \begin{equation}
114: \rho_{\rm disk}=\left(\frac{b^2 M_{\rm disk}}{4\pi}\right)
115: \frac{a R^2+(a+3\sqrt{z^2+b^2})(a+\sqrt{z^2+b^2})^2}
116: {[R^2+(a+\sqrt{z^2+b^2})^2]^{5/2}(z^2+b^2)^{3/2}}
117: \end{equation}
118: %
119: \citep{miy75}. We assume that part of the disk consists of the ISM; its
120: density is represented by $\rho_{\rm ISM}=f_{\rm ISM}\rho_{\rm disk}$
121: and $f_{\rm ISM}=0.2$. The circulation velocity of the disk is given by
122: %
123: \begin{equation}
124: v_{\rm cir}=\sqrt{r\frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial r}} \:.
125: \end{equation}
126: %
127:
128:
129: The accretion rate of the ISM onto the supermassive black hole is given by
130: the Bondi-Hoyle accretion \citep{bon52}:
131: %
132: \begin{equation}
133: \label{eq:dotm}
134: \dot{m}=2.5\pi G^2
135: \frac{m_{\rm BH}^2\rho_{\rm ISM}}{(c_s^2+v_{\rm rel}^2)^{3/2}}\:,
136: \end{equation}
137: %
138: where $m_{\rm BH}$ is the mass of the black hole, $c_s$ ($=10\rm\: km\:
139: s^{-1}$) is the sound velocity of the ISM, and $v_{\rm rel}$ is the
140: relative velocity between the black hole and the surrounding ISM. We
141: assume that the orbit of the black hole is confined on the $x$-$z$ plane
142: ($v_y=0$). Thus, the relative velocity is simply given by $v_{\rm
143: rel}^2=v_x^2+v_{\rm cir}^2+v_z^2$.
144: %
145: The X-ray luminosity of the black hole is given by
146: %
147: \begin{equation}
148: L_{\rm X}=\eta \dot{m}c^2\:,
149: \end{equation}
150: %
151: where $\eta$ is the efficiency. Since the accretion rate is relatively
152: small for the mass of the black hole, the accretion flow would be a
153: radiatively inefficient accretion flow \citep[RIAF;][]{ich77,nar95}. In
154: this case, the efficiency follows $\eta\propto\dot{m}$ for $L_{\rm X}\la
155: 0.1 L_{\rm Edd}$, where $L_{\rm Edd}$ is the Eddington luminosity
156: \citep*[e.g.][]{kat98}. Therefore, we assume that $\eta=\eta_{\rm Edd}$
157: for $\dot{m}> 0.1 \dot{m}_{\rm Edd}$ and $\eta = \eta_{\rm
158: Edd}\dot{m}/(0.1\dot{m}_{\rm Edd})$ for $\dot{m}< 0.1 \dot{m}_{\rm
159: Edd}$, where $\dot{m}_{\rm Edd}=L_{\rm Edd}/(c^2 \eta_{\rm Edd})$
160: \citep{mii05}. We assume that $\eta_{\rm Edd}=0.1$.
161:
162: We solved equation~(\ref{eq:motion}) by Mathematica 6.0 using a command
163: NDSolve. The black hole is ejected on the $x$-$z$ plane at $t=0$. The
164: direction of the ejection changes from $\theta=0\arcdeg$ to $90\arcdeg$,
165: where $\theta=0\arcdeg$ corresponds to the $z$-axis. We calculate the
166: orbit until $t=t_{\rm max}$, which is chosen to be much larger than the
167: period of revolution and to be smaller than the time-scale of dynamical
168: friction. The latter is estimated to be
169: %
170: \begin{equation}
171: \label{eq:dynfrc}
172: t_{\rm df}=\frac{v_{\rm rel}}{\dot{v}_{\rm rel}}
173: =\frac{v_{\rm rel}^3}{4\pi G^2 m_{\rm BH}
174: \rho\ln\Lambda}\:
175: \end{equation}
176: %
177: \citep{bin08}, where $\rho$ is the total density
178: (disk$+$sphere$+$halo). The halo component does not much affect the
179: dynamical friction. Since $N$-body simulations for a spherically
180: symmetric potential showed that the Coulomb logarithm is $\ln\Lambda\sim
181: 2$--3 \citep{gua08}, we take $\ln\Lambda=2.5$. The effects of dynamical
182: friction on orbits in a complex potential like the one we adopted would
183: be complicated and ideally should be studied with high-resolution
184: $N$-body simulations. Thus, equation~(\ref{eq:dynfrc}) should be
185: regarded as a rough estimate of the time-scale of the
186: dynamical-friction.
187:
188:
189: \section{Results}
190: \label{sec:results}
191:
192: The black hole is placed at the center of the galaxy at $t=0$. Since we
193: do not know the distributions of mass and initial velocity ($v_0$) of
194: the black hole, we consider situations in which the emission from it
195: would be observed easily. That is, the luminosity of the black hole
196: would be large, and the observable time would be long.
197:
198: We consider five combinations of $m_{\rm BH}$ and $v_0$ shown in
199: Table~\ref{tab:par}. If we take larger $m_{\rm BH}$ and/or smaller
200: $v_0$, the dynamical friction becomes more effective and the black hole
201: quickly falls into the galaxy center. On the other hand, if we take
202: smaller $m_{\rm BH}$ and/or larger $v_0$, the luminosity of the black
203: hole becomes too small to be observed
204: (equation~[\ref{eq:dotm}]). Moreover, the black hole is not bound to the
205: galaxy, if $v_0$ is too large. The dynamical friction is most effective
206: when $\theta=90\arcdeg$. In Table~\ref{tab:par}, we show the
207: time-average of the time-scale, $\langle t_{\rm
208: df}\rangle_{\theta=90\arcdeg}$, for $0<t<t_{\rm max}$ and
209: $\theta=90\arcdeg$.
210:
211: Fig.~\ref{fig:orbit} shows the orbit of the black hole when
212: $v_0=600\rm\: km\: s^{-1}$ and $\theta=80\arcdeg$. Fig.~\ref{fig:lum}
213: shows the luminosity of the same black hole ($m_{\rm BH}=3\times 10^7\:
214: M_\sun$). In Table~\ref{tab:par}, we present the distance of the
215: apastrons from the center of the galaxy ($r_{\rm max}$) when
216: $\theta=90\arcdeg$. It is to be noted that $r_{\rm max}$ is not much
217: dependent on $\theta$ for a given $v_0$. We also present the maximum
218: X-ray luminosity of the black hole ($L_{\rm max}$) when
219: $\theta=90\arcdeg$ in Table~\ref{tab:par}. For a given $m_{\rm BH}$ and
220: $v_0$, the X-ray luminosity is larger when $\theta$ is closer to
221: $90\arcdeg$, because the orbit is included in the galactic disk, where
222: $\rho_{\rm ISM}$ is large.
223:
224: We found that for $v_0\la 600\rm\: km\: s^{-1}$, the luminosity reaches
225: its maximum when the black hole passes apastrons and when the apastrons
226: reside in the disk of the galaxy. This is because $v$ decreases,
227: $\rho_{\rm ISM}$ increases, and thus $\dot{m}$ increases there
228: (equation~[\ref{eq:dotm}]). On the other hand, for $v_0\sim 700\rm\:
229: km\: s^{-1}$, the distance of the apastrons from the galactic center
230: ($r_{\rm max}$) is always large (Table~\ref{tab:par}). Thus, even if
231: apastrons reside in the disk, $\rho_{\rm ISM}$ is small
232: there. Therefore, the luminosity of the black hole reaches its maximum
233: between the apastron and periastron, and $L_{\rm max}$ is smaller
234: compared with the models of $v_0\la 600\rm\: km\: s^{-1}$
235: (Table~\ref{tab:par}).
236:
237: Assuming that black holes are ejected in random directions at the
238: centers of galaxies, we estimate the probability of observing black
239: holes with luminosities larger than a threshold luminosity $L_{\rm
240: th}$. For given $m_{\rm BH}$ and $v_0$, we calculate 91 evolutions of
241: the luminosity by changing $\theta$ from $0\arcdeg$ to $90\arcdeg$ by
242: one degree. Then, we obtain the period during which the relation $L_{\rm
243: X}>L_{\rm th}$ is satisfied for each $\theta$, and divide the period by
244: $t_{\rm max}$. This is the fraction of the period during which the black
245: hole luminosity becomes larger than $L_{\rm th}$. We refer to this
246: fraction as $f(\theta)$ and show it in Fig.~\ref{fig:ftheta} when
247: $m_{\rm BH}=3\times 10^7\: M_\sun$, $v_0=600\rm\: km\: s^{-1}$, and
248: $L_{\rm th}=3\times 10^{39}\rm\: erg\: s^{-1}$. We average $f(\theta)$
249: by $\theta$, weighting with $\sin\theta$, and obtain the probability of
250: observing black holes with $L_{\rm X}>L_{\rm th}$. In
251: Table~\ref{tab:par}, we present the probability $P_{3e39}$ when $L_{\rm
252: th}=3\times 10^{39}\rm\: erg\: s^{-1}$; for the parameters we chose,
253: $P_{3e39}\sim 0$--0.56.
254:
255: \section{Discussion}
256:
257: We have found that a supermassive back hole that had been recoiled at
258: the center of a disk galaxy could be observed in the galactic disk with
259: an X-ray luminosity of $L_{\rm X}\ga 10^{39}\rm\: erg\: s^{-1}$. One of
260: the candidates of such objects is ultraluminous X-ray sources (ULXs)
261: observed in disk galaxies \citep{col99,mak00,mus04}. They are found in
262: off-nuclear regions of nearby galaxies and their X-ray luminosities
263: exceed $\sim 3\times 10^{39}\rm\: erg\: s^{-1}$, which are larger than
264: the Eddington luminosity of a black hole with a mass of $\sim 20\:
265: M_\sun$. If ULXs are stellar mass black holes, they might be explained
266: by anisotropic emission \citep{rey97,kin01}, slim-disks \citep*{wat01}
267: or thin, super-Eddington accretion disks \citep{beg02}. On the other
268: hand, there is some evidence that they are IMBHs at least for some of
269: them \citep*{mil04,cro04}.
270:
271: Considering their X-ray luminosities and off-center positions, some of
272: the ULXs might be the recoiled supermassive black holes. However, the
273: fraction of supermassive black holes in the ULXs would not be
274: large. \citet{sch07} estimated that for comparable mass binaries with
275: dimensionless spin values of 0.9, only $\sim 10$\% of all mergers are
276: expected to result in an ejection speed of $\sim 500$--$700\rm\: km\:
277: s^{-1}$. Since the ejection speed is smaller for mergers with large mass
278: ratios and smaller spin values, the actual fraction would be
279: smaller. Moreover, in our model, the time-corrected probability of
280: observing black holes with $L_{\rm X}>3\times 10^{39}\rm\: erg\: s^{-1}$
281: is $\tilde{P}_{3e39}\la 0.1$, where $\tilde{P}_{3e39}$ is obtained by
282: averaging $\min[\langle t_{\rm df}\rangle_{\theta},t_{\rm age}]
283: f(\theta)/t_{\rm age}$ by $\theta$, weighting with $\sin\theta$, and
284: $t_{\rm age}$ ($\sim 10$~Gyr) is the age of a galaxy
285: (Table~\ref{tab:par}). Here, we note that $\langle t_{\rm
286: df}\rangle_{\theta}$ should be regarded as the upper-limit of the actual
287: time-scale, because $t_{\rm df}$ should decrease through the dynamical
288: friction every time the black hole passes the dense region of the
289: galaxy. Furthermore, our model indicates that a traveling supermassive
290: black hole needs to have a mass comparable to the one currently observed
291: at the galactic center in order to have large $L_X$. It is unlikely that
292: a galaxy would have undergone many mergers of black holes with such
293: masses. The number of such mergers that a galaxy has undergone would be
294: $N\la 1$. Thus, the probability that a galaxy has a traveling
295: supermassive black hole with a luminosity comparable to that of ULXs is
296: $\la 1\times 10^{-2}$.
297:
298: In fact, current radio observations seem to show that ULXs observed so
299: far are not supermassive black holes. Our model predicts that the X-ray
300: luminosity of a supermassive black hole traveling through the galaxy is
301: comparable to the typical X-ray luminosity of a LINER \citep[$\sim
302: 4\times 10^{39}$--$5\times 10^{41}\:\rm erg\: s^{-1}$;][]{ter02}. LINERs
303: seem to show core radio emission and many even have detectable jets
304: \citep{nag05}. On the other hand, radio observations have shown that no
305: ULX has been detected with a unresolved radio core
306: \citep{mus04}. Moreover, it has been shown that the optical luminosities
307: of ULXs tend to be smaller than their X-ray luminosities
308: \citep[e.g.][]{pta06}, which is inconsistent with typical RIAF spectra
309: \citep*[e.g.][]{yua04}. Thus, it is unlikely that most of the ULXs are
310: the supermassive black holes traveling through the galaxies.
311:
312: However, the recoiled supermassive black holes could be found through
313: future extensive surveys. Our model predicts that the X-ray luminous
314: black holes should not be observed far from the centers of the host
315: galaxies (say $\ga 10$~kpc), because $\rho_{\rm ISM}$ should be small
316: there (\S~\ref{sec:results}). Our model also predicts that the relative
317: velocity between the X-ray source and the surrounding ISM and stars is
318: $v_{\rm rel}\ga v_{\rm cir}$. If atomic line emission associated with
319: the X-ray source is observed, the velocity could be estimated through
320: the Doppler shift. Instead of X-rays, \citet{mac05} argued that radio
321: detections may be best to search for isolated accreting black holes. The
322: detailed analysis of the spectra and the time variability would be
323: useful to determine the masses of the black holes \citep{mus04}. In the
324: future, statistical studies could observationally constrain the
325: probability of the mergers of black holes and the recoil.
326:
327: \section{Conclusion}
328:
329: We have shown that a supermassive black hole ejected from the center of
330: the host disk galaxy will return to the galactic disk, if the initial
331: velocity is smaller than the escape velocity of the galaxy. The black
332: hole accretes the surrounding ISM and the resultant X-ray luminosity can
333: reach $\ga 10^{39}\:\rm erg\: s^{-1}$, when it passes the apastrons in
334: the disk. Although the luminosity of a recoiled supermassive black hole
335: is comparable to that of ultra-luminous X-ray sources (ULXs), it is
336: unlikely that many of the observed ULXs are the supermassive black
337: holes.
338:
339: \acknowledgments
340:
341: I would like to thank the anonymous referee for useful comments. I am
342: grateful to H.~Tagoshi and T.~Tsuribe for useful discussion. YF was
343: supported in part by Grants-in-Aid from the Ministry of Education,
344: Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan (20540269).
345:
346: \begin{thebibliography}{}
347:
348: \bibitem[Agol
349: \& Kamionkowski(2002)]{ago02} Agol, E., \& Kamionkowski,
350: M.\ 2002, \mnras, 334, 553
351:
352: \bibitem[Begelman(2002)]{beg02} Begelman, M.~C.\ 2002, \apjl,
353: 568, L97
354:
355: \bibitem[Binney \& Tremaine(2008)]{bin08} Binney, J., \& Tremaine,
356: S. 2008, Galactic Dynamics 2nd edition (Princeton:
357: Princeton Univ. Press)
358:
359: \bibitem[Blecha
360: \& Loeb(2008)]{ble08} Blecha, L., \& Loeb, A.\ 2008, ArXiv e-prints,
361: 805, arXiv:0805.1420
362:
363: \bibitem[Bondi(1952)]{bon52} Bondi, H.\ 1952, \mnras, 112,
364: 195
365:
366: \bibitem[Campanelli et al.(2007)]{cam07} Campanelli, M.,
367: Lousto, C., Zlochower, Y., \& Merritt, D.\ 2007, \apjl, 659, L5
368:
369: \bibitem[Colbert
370: \& Mushotzky(1999)]{col99} Colbert, E.~J.~M., \&
371: Mushotzky, R.~F.\ 1999, \apj, 519, 89
372:
373: \bibitem[Cropper et al.(2004)]{cro04} Cropper, M., Soria, R.,
374: Mushotzky, R.~F., Wu, K., Markwardt, C.~B.,
375: \& Pakull, M.\ 2004, \mnras, 353, 1024
376:
377: \bibitem[Fujita et al.(1998)]{fuj98} Fujita, Y., Inoue, S.,
378: Nakamura, T., Manmoto, T., \& Nakamura, K.~E.\ 1998, \apjl, 495, L85
379:
380: \bibitem[Gonz{\'a}lez et al.(2007)]{gon07} Gonz{\'a}lez,
381: J.~A., Hannam, M., Sperhake, U., Br{\"u}gmann, B.,
382: \& Husa, S.\ 2007, Physical Review Letters, 98, 231101
383:
384: \bibitem[Gualandris
385: \& Merritt(2008)]{gua08} Gualandris, A., \& Merritt, D.\ 2008, \apj,
386: 678, 780
387:
388: \bibitem[Ichimaru(1977)]{ich77} Ichimaru, S.\ 1977, \apj,
389: 214, 840
390:
391: \bibitem[Kato et al.(1998)Kato, Fukue \& Mineshige]{kat98} Kato, S.,
392: Fukue, J., \& Mineshige, S. 1998, Black-Hole Accretion
393: Disks (Kyoto: Kyoto Univ. Press)
394:
395: \bibitem[King et al.(2001)]{kin01} King, A.~R., Davies,
396: M.~B., Ward, M.~J., Fabbiano, G., \& Elvis, M.\ 2001, \apjl, 552, L109
397:
398: \bibitem[Law et al.(2005)]{law05} Law, D.~R., Johnston,
399: K.~V., \& Majewski, S.~R.\ 2005, \apj, 619, 807
400:
401: \bibitem[Loeb(2007)]{loe07} Loeb, A.\ 2007, Physical Review
402: Letters, 99, 041103
403:
404: \bibitem[Maccarone(2005)]{mac05} Maccarone, T.~J.\ 2005,
405: \mnras, 360, L30
406:
407: \bibitem[Makishima et al.(2000)]{mak00} Makishima, K., et
408: al.\ 2000, \apj, 535, 632
409:
410: \bibitem[Mapelli et al.(2006)Mapelli, Ferrara \& Rea]{map06} Mapelli,
411: M., Ferrara,
412: A., \& Rea, N.\ 2006, \mnras, 368, 1340
413:
414: \bibitem[Mii
415: \& Totani(2005)]{mii05} Mii, H., \& Totani, T.\ 2005, \apj, 628, 873
416:
417: \bibitem[Miller et al.(2004)Miller, Fabian \& Miller]{mil04} Miller,
418: J.~M., Fabian,
419: A.~C., \& Miller, M.~C.\ 2004, \apjl, 614, L117
420:
421: \bibitem[Miyamoto
422: \& Nagai(1975)]{miy75} Miyamoto, M., \& Nagai, R.\ 1975, \pasj, 27, 533
423:
424: \bibitem[Mushotzky(2004)]{mus04} Mushotzky, R.\ 2004,
425: Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement, 155, 27
426:
427: \bibitem[Nagar et
428: al.(2005)]{nag05} Nagar, N.~M., Falcke, H., \& Wilson, A.~S.\ 2005, \aap,
429: 435, 521
430:
431: \bibitem[Narayan(2005)]{nar95} Narayan, R.\ 2005, \apss, 300, 177
432:
433: \bibitem[Ptak et al.(2006)]{pta06} Ptak, A., Colbert, E., van
434: der Marel, R.~P., Roye, E., Heckman, T.,
435: \& Towne, B.\ 2006, \apjs, 166, 154
436:
437: \bibitem[Reynolds et al.(1997)]{rey97} Reynolds, C.~S., Loan,
438: A.~J., Fabian, A.~C., Makishima, K., Brandt, W.~N.,
439: \& Mizuno, T.\ 1997, \mnras, 286, 349
440:
441: \bibitem[Schnittman
442: \& Buonanno(2007)]{sch07} Schnittman, J.~D., \& Buonanno, A.\ 2007,
443: \apjl, 662, L63
444:
445: \bibitem[Terashima et al.(2002)]{ter02} Terashima, Y.,
446: Iyomoto, N., Ho, L.~C., \& Ptak, A.~F.\ 2002, \apjs, 139, 1
447:
448: \bibitem[Watarai et al.(2001)Watarai, Mizuno \& Mineshige]{wat01}
449: Watarai, K., Mizuno,
450: T., \& Mineshige, S.\ 2001, \apjl, 549, L77
451:
452: \bibitem[Yuan et al.(2004)Yuan, Quataert \& Narayan]{yua04} Yuan, F.,
453: Quataert, E.,
454: \& Narayan, R.\ 2004, \apj, 606, 894
455:
456: \end{thebibliography}
457:
458: \clearpage
459:
460: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccccc}
461: \tablewidth{0pt}
462: \tablecaption{Model Parameters and Results\label{tab:par}}
463: \tablehead{
464: \colhead{$m_{\rm BH}$} &
465: \colhead{$v_0$} &
466: \colhead{$t_{\rm max}$} &
467: \colhead{$\langle t_{\rm df}\rangle_{\theta=90\arcdeg}$} &
468: \colhead{$r_{\rm max}$} &
469: \colhead{$L_{\rm max}$} &
470: \colhead{$P_{\rm 3e39}$} &
471: \colhead{$\tilde{P}_{\rm 3e39}$} \\
472: \colhead{($M_\sun$)} &
473: \colhead{($\rm km\: s^{-1}$)} &
474: \colhead{(Gyr)} &
475: \colhead{(Gyr)} &
476: \colhead{(kpc)} &
477: \colhead{($\rm erg\: s^{-1}$)} &
478: \colhead{} &
479: \colhead{}
480: }
481: \startdata
482: $3\times 10^6$&500& 0.3 & 4.7 & 1 & $1\times 10^{38}$ & 0 & 0 \\
483: $1\times 10^7$&500& 0.3 & 1.4 & 1 & $5\times 10^{39}$ & 0.064 & 0.010\\
484: $1\times 10^7$&600& 1 & 4.5 & 3 & $5\times 10^{39}$ & 0.016 & 0.012\\
485: $1\times 10^7$&700& 2 & 27 & 13 & $8\times 10^{37}$ & 0 & 0 \\
486: $3\times 10^7$&500& 0.3 & 0.47 & 1 & $1\times 10^{41}$ & 0.56 & 0.031\\
487: $3\times 10^7$&600& 1 & 1.5 & 3 & $1\times 10^{41}$ & 0.15 & 0.11 \\
488: $3\times 10^7$&700& 2 & 9.0 & 13 & $2\times 10^{39}$ & 0 & 0 \\
489: \enddata
490: \end{deluxetable}
491:
492: \clearpage
493:
494: \begin{figure}
495: \epsscale{.80} \plotone{f1.eps} \caption{The orbit of a black hole for
496: $0<t<1$~Gyr when $v_0=600\rm\: km\: s^{-1}$ and
497: $\theta=80\arcdeg$. \label{fig:orbit}}
498: \end{figure}
499:
500: \begin{figure}
501: \epsscale{.80} \plotone{f2.eps} \caption{The luminosity of a black
502: hole for $0<t<0.5$~Gyr when $m_{\rm BH}=3\times 10^7\: M_\sun$,
503: $v_0=600\rm\: km\: s^{-1}$ and $\theta=80\arcdeg$. \label{fig:lum}}
504: \end{figure}
505:
506: \begin{figure}
507: \epsscale{.80} \plotone{f3.eps} \caption{The fraction of the period
508: during which the black hole luminosity becomes larger than $L_{\rm th}$,
509: when $m_{\rm BH}=3\times 10^7\: M_\sun$, $v_0=600\rm\: km\: s^{-1}$, and
510: $L_{\rm th}=3\times 10^{39}\rm\: erg\: s^{-1}$. \label{fig:ftheta}}
511: \end{figure}
512:
513: \end{document}
514:
515: