1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %%% PASJ LaTeX template for draft(body)<2007/01/19>
3: %%%
4: %%% IMPORTANT NOTICE FOR AUTHORS
5: %%% 1. ``\draft'' creates single column and double spaces format.
6: %%% 2. If you comment out ``\draft'', the output will be double column
7: %%% and single space.
8: %%% 3. For cross-references, the use of \label/\ref/\cite and the
9: %%% thebibliography environment is strongly recommended
10: %%% 4. Do NOT use \def/\renewcommand.
11: %%% 5. Do NOT redifine commands provided by PASJ00.cls.
12: %%%
13: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
14: %%
15: %% REVISION HISTORY
16: %%
17: %% 2008/05/04 Submitted to PASJ
18: %% 2008/07/15 Reflect Referee comments (PASJ 3374_1), e-mailed to KH
19: %% 2008/07/25 Reflect KH's revisions
20: %% 2008/08/02 Reflect KH's revisions2
21: %% 2008/08/08 Reflect YS's revisions
22: %% 2008/09/18 Reflect Referee's last comment and KH's comments
23: %%
24: \documentclass{pasj00}
25: \draft
26:
27: \usepackage{color}
28: \usepackage{ulem}
29:
30: \begin{document}
31: \SetRunningHead{Y. Ezoe et al.}{
32: Suzaku and XMM-Newton Observations of the Eastern Tip
33: Region of the Carina Nebula}
34: \Received{}%{yyyy/mm/dd}
35: \Accepted{}%{yyyy/mm/dd}
36:
37: \title{
38: Suzaku and XMM-Newton Observations of Diffuse X-ray Emission
39: from the Eastern Tip Region of the Carina Nebula
40: }
41:
42: \author{
43: Yuichiro \textsc{Ezoe}\altaffilmark{1},
44: Kenji \textsc{Hamaguchi}\altaffilmark{2,3},
45: Robert A. \textsc{Gruendl}\altaffilmark{4},
46: You-Hua \textsc{Chu}\altaffilmark{4},\\
47: Robert \textsc{Petre}\altaffilmark{5}, and
48: Michael F. \textsc{Corcoran}\altaffilmark{2,3}
49: %% and Leisa K. \textsc{Townsley}\altaffilmark{6}
50: }
51:
52: \altaffiltext{1}{
53: Tokyo Metropolitan University, 1-1, Minami-Osawa, Hachioji,
54: Tokyo, 192-0397, JAPAN
55: % RIKEN (The Institute of Physical and Chemical Research),
56: % 2-1, Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, JAPAN
57: }
58:
59: %\altaffiltext{2}{The Institute of Space and Astronautical Science,
60: % 3-1-1 Yoshinodai, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 229-8510, JAPAN
61: %}
62:
63: \altaffiltext{2}{
64: CRESST and X-ray Astrophysics Laboratory NASA/GSFC, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
65: }
66:
67: \altaffiltext{3}{
68: Universities Space Research Association,
69: 10211 Wincopin Circle, Suite 500, Columbia, MD 21044-3432, USA
70: }
71:
72: \altaffiltext{4}{
73: Department of Astrophysics, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
74: }
75:
76: \altaffiltext{5}{
77: Astrophysics Science Division, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771
78: }
79:
80: %\altaffiltext{6}{
81: %Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 525 Davey Laboratory, Pennsylvania State
82: %University, University Park, PA 16802
83: %}
84:
85: \email{ezoe@phys.metro-u.ac.jp}
86:
87: \KeyWords{X-ray: ISM --- ISM: abundances --- ISM: individual (Carina nebula) ---
88: stars: winds --- stars: supernovae: general}
89:
90: \maketitle
91:
92: \begin{abstract}
93: The eastern tip region of the Carina Nebula was observed with the Suzaku XIS
94: for 77 ks
95: to conduct a high-precision spectral study of extended X-ray emission.
96: %%{\bf
97: XMM-Newton EPIC data of this region were also utilized
98: to detect point sources.
99: %%}
100: The XIS detected strong extended X-ray emission from the entire field-of-view
101: with a 0.2--5 keV flux of $0.7\sim4\times10^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$.
102: The emission has a blob-like structure that coincides with an ionized gas filament observed
103: in mid-infrared images.
104: %%{\bf
105: Contributions of astrophysical backgrounds and
106: the detected point sources were insignificant.
107: Thus the emission is diffuse in nature.
108: %%}
109: %%
110: The X-ray spectrum of the diffuse emission was represented by a two-temperature
111: plasma model with temperatures of 0.3 and 0.6 keV and an absorption column
112: density of 2$\times10^{21}$ cm$^{-1}$.
113: %%
114: The X-ray emission showed normal nitrogen-to-oxygen abundance ratios
115: and a high iron-to-oxygen abundance ratio.
116: %%
117: The spectrally deduced parameters, such as temperatures and column densities,
118: are common to the diffuse X-ray emission near $\eta$ Car.
119: Thus, the diffuse X-ray emission in these two fields may have the same origin.
120: %%
121: The spectral fitting results are discussed to constrain the origin in the context
122: of stellar winds and supernovae.
123: \end{abstract}
124:
125: \section{Introduction}
126: \label{sec:intro}
127:
128: Diffuse X-ray emission extending over several to tens pc
129: has been reported in many massive star-forming regions, such as
130: NGC 2024 \citep{Ezoe2006a},
131: %%{\bf
132: the Orion Nebula \citep{Guedel2008},
133: %%}
134: the Rosette Nebula, \citep{Townsley2003},
135: M17 \citep{Townsley2003,Hyodo2008},
136: RCW 38 \citep{Wolk2002},
137: NGC 6334 \citep{Ezoe2006b},
138: the Carina Nebula \citep{Hamaguchi2007},
139: %%\textcolor{red}{Put a Leisa's proceeding as well}
140: W49 \citep{Tsujimoto2006},
141: NGC 3603 \citep{Moffat2002},
142: the Arches Cluster \citep{Yusef-Zadeh2002,Tsujimoto2007},
143: and the Quintuplet Cluster \citep{Wang2002}.
144: %%
145: This diffuse component contributes a considerable fraction of the
146: total X-ray emission and shows different spectral characteristics
147: among these regions.
148: Diffuse X-ray emission can be roughly classified into three types:
149: thin-thermal plasma emission with a temperature $kT\sim$ 0.1--1 keV,
150: higher-temperature plasma emission with $kT\sim$ 2--10 keV,
151: and possibly non-thermal emission with a photon index of 1-1.5.
152: %%
153: These phenomena can be explained by plasma heating and particle
154: acceleration in strong shocks by fast stellar winds from young
155: OB stars \citep{Townsley2003,Ezoe2006a,Ezoe2006b,Guedel2008}
156: and/or past supernova remnants (SNRs) \citep{Wolk2002,Hamaguchi2007}.
157: The precise origin of diffuse X-ray emission, however, is often
158: unclear.
159:
160: Recently \citet{Hamaguchi2007} suggest that the origin of diffuse
161: X-ray emission can be constrained by plasma diagnostics or measurements
162: of elemental abundances.
163: %%
164: %%{\bf 2
165: While main-sequence late-O to early B stars have nearly solar abundances
166: (e.g., \cite{Cunha1994,Daflon2004}), evolved stars show non-solar elemental
167: compositions due to the CNO cycle.
168: %%}
169: %%Evolved stars show non-solar elemental compositions due to the
170: %%CNO cycle.
171: For instance, the plasma will be overabundant in nitrogen if its origin
172: is the wind from a nitrogen-rich Wolf-Rayet
173: star.
174: %%
175: On the other hand, the plasma will be overabundant in oxygen, neon, and
176: silicon if it is produced by a Type II SNR (e.g., \cite{Tsujimoto1995}).
177: %%
178: The low-temperature ($kT\sim$0.1--1 keV) type of diffuse X-ray
179: emission is ideal for such diagnostic studies, because a variety
180: of K-shell lines exist in the 0.2--2 keV range.
181:
182: The Carina Nebula is an excellent site to investigate
183: plasma diagnostics of diffuse X-ray emission.
184: %%
185: At a distance of 2.3 kpc, it is one
186: of the most active massive star forming regions in the Galaxy.
187: %%
188: It contains eight massive stellar clusters: Trumpler 14, 15, 16,
189: Collinder 228, Bochum 10, 11, NGC 3293, and NGC 3324.
190: In total, there exist more than 64 O stars \citep{Feinstein1995,
191: Smith2006}, including the extreme-type luminous blue variable
192: $\eta$ Car and four Wolf-Rayet stars.
193: %
194: % YS's comment
195: %
196: % I checked van der Hucht's catalog of Galactic WR stars and found
197: % at least 4 WR stars within the boundary of the Carina Nebula!
198: %
199: % that include two rate main-sequence O3 stars
200: %($\eta$ Car and HD 93129A) and two Wolf-Rayet stars.
201: %
202: %%
203: The age of the nebula is estimated to be $\sim3$ Myr based
204: on the most evolved stars and the size of the HII region
205: \citep{Smith2000}.
206: %%
207: The young massive stars that are still enshrouded in gas and dust
208: have been observed in optical, infrared, and radio wavelengths
209: (e.g., \cite{Harvey1979, Smith2000, Yonekura2005}).
210: %%
211: The number counts of the most massive O stars, e.g., O3 stars,
212: suggest that the star-formation activity of the Carina Nebula
213: rivals those of the most active regions, such as NGC 3603
214: at $D=6.9$ kpc and W49 at $D=11.4$ kpc.
215: %%
216: The proximity of the Carina Nebula, compared with NGC 3603 and W49,
217: makes it the best target to study diffuse X-ray emission
218: resulting from star-forming activities.
219:
220: Seward et al.\ (1979) first suggested the existence of possible
221: diffuse soft X-ray emission in the Carina Nebula with a luminosity of
222: $\sim$10$^{35}$ erg s$^{-1}$ and a spatial extent of several pc,
223: using {Einstein} observations.
224: %%
225: Although the limited energy and spatial resolution of Einstein
226: hindered the determination of precise plasma parameters and
227: the contribution from point sources, \citet{Seward1982}
228: postulated that the extended X-rays were from hot gas with
229: $T\sim10^{7}$ K.
230: %%
231: With {Chandra}, Evans et al.\ (2003) confirmed the existence
232: of diffuse X-ray emission near $\eta$ Car in addition to
233: point sources; however, the limited photon statistics and
234: high background prevented detailed spectral analysis.
235: %%
236: Hamaguchi et al.\ (2007) obtained spectra
237: of the diffuse X-ray emission around $\eta$ Car with {Suzaku}.
238: %%
239: Owing to the good low-energy response and the low background
240: of the X-ray CCD onboard {Suzaku}, % (XIS: X-ray Imaging Spectrometer),
241: the spectra extracted from the regions north and south of
242: $\eta$ Car can be modeled with high precision; both spectra
243: are best represented by three-temperature plasma models with
244: $kT\sim0.2$, $\sim0.6$, and $\sim5$ keV.
245: %%
246: Analyzing the {Suzaku} data in conjunction with XMM-Newton and
247: Chandra data, Hamaguchi et al.\ (2007) concluded that the 0.2 keV
248: and 0.6 keV components most likely originated from diffuse plasma,
249: but the 5 keV component could not be easily distinguished from
250: the unresolved point sources.
251: %%
252: They found that the iron and silicon abundances were significantly
253: different in the north and south regions, and that the nitrogen-to-oxygen
254: abundance ratios in both regions were far lower than those of stellar winds
255: from evolved massive stars such as $\eta$ Car and WR25 in this field.
256: %%
257: From these results, they concluded that the diffuse X-ray emission
258: near $\eta$ Car originated from one or multiple SNRs.
259:
260: We have studied extended X-ray emission
261: from an eastern tip region of the Carina Nebula.
262: %%
263: Located $\sim$ 30$'$ ($\sim$ 20 pc) from $\eta$ Car, this region is
264: less contaminated by X-ray emission from OB stars than the regions
265: near $\eta$ Car.
266: %%
267: Previous {Einstein} observations have revealed strong extended X-ray
268: emission in this region, although no massive stars earlier than B3
269: are known here \citep{Seward1982}.
270: %%
271: It is not known whether this emission is truly diffuse and,
272: if so, whether its origin is similar to that of the regions near $\eta$ Car.
273: %%
274: In this paper we report the first detailed spectral analysis of
275: the extended X-ray emission in this eastern tip region of the
276: Carina Nebula using Suzaku observation. To augment the limited
277: angular resolution of Suzaku, the analysis also made use of
278: {XMM-Newton} data.
279:
280: \section{Suzaku Observation}
281: \label{sec:obs}
282:
283: Suzaku is the 5th Japanese X-ray observatory \citep{Mitsuda2007}.
284: It carries four scientific instruments;
285: X-ray optics or the X-Ray Telescope (XRT: \cite{Serlemitsos2007});
286: an X-ray calorimeter (XRS: \cite{Kelly2007});
287: four X-ray CCDs (XIS: \cite{Koyama2007});
288: and a hard X-ray detector (HXD: \cite{Takahashi2007,Kokubun2007}).
289: %%
290: The XIS consists of three front-illuminated (FI) CCDs
291: (XIS0, 2, and 3) and one back-illuminated (BI) CCD (XIS1).
292: %%
293: Due to the low-earth orbit of Suzaku and the large effective
294: area, the XIS has the lowest particle backgrounds
295: among all X-ray CCDs in currently available X-ray observatories.
296: %%
297: Furthermore, the XIS has good energy resolution
298: and superior low-energy response with negligible low-energy tails,
299: compared to the other X-ray CCDs onboard XMM-Newton and Chandra.
300:
301: We observed the eastern tip region of the Carina Nebula
302: with Suzaku on 2006 June 5.
303: %%
304: During the observation, the XIS and HXD were operated in the normal
305: mode. In the present paper, we use only the XIS data because we are
306: interested in the spectral analysis of the soft extended X-ray emission.
307:
308: The data reduction was performed on the version 1.2.2.3
309: screened data provided by the Suzaku processing facility,
310: using the HEAsoft analysis package ver 6.1.1.
311: %%
312: No background flares were seen in the data.
313: The net exposure of each FI and BI chip was 77 ks.
314: %%
315: For spectral fits, we generated response matrices and auxiliary
316: files with {\tt xisrmfgen} and {\tt xissimarfgen} released on
317: 2006 October 26.
318: %%
319: The in-flight gradual degradation of energy resolution and absorption
320: due to XIS contamination were considered in these softwares.
321:
322: \section{Extended X-ray Emission}
323: \label{sec:diff}
324:
325: Figure \ref{fig:overview}a shows the location of our observation
326: (top left box) on an MSX 8.28 $\mu$m image of the Carina Nebula
327: retrieved from the NASA/IPAC Infrared Science Archive
328: \footnote{http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/MSX/MSX/}.
329: %%
330: This mid-IR image is dominated by cationic polycyclic aromatic
331: hydrocarbon emission in photodissociation regions \citep{Smith2000}
332: and traces the surface of molecular clouds that are ionized by
333: stellar winds and ultra-violet radiations from OB stars.
334: A curved mid-infrared filament runs across the XIS field-of-view (FOV).
335: %%
336: Figure \ref{fig:overview}b shows an X-ray overview of the same
337: area with XMM-Newton MOS\footnote{http://xmm.esac.esa.int/external/xmm\_science/gallery/}.
338: In X-rays, there exists patchy extended soft X-ray emission whose
339: distribution roughly follows the mid-infrared filament.
340: %%
341: This suggests that the X-ray emission contributes to the ionization
342: of the molecular cloud and that the emitting hot gas is in contact
343: with the surface of the molecular clouds.
344:
345: We created Suzaku XIS images in 0.2--2 and 2--10 keV bands,
346: as shown in figure \ref{fig:xisimage}.
347: %%
348: The vignetting in the images has been corrected by dividing
349: the observed images by model XIS images produced with the XRT$+$XIS
350: simulator {\bf xissim} for a uniform surface brightness.
351: %%
352: In simulations, we assumed monochromatic X-rays of energy
353: 1.49 keV and 8.05 keV, since the vignetting is best studied
354: in these energies \citep{Serlemitsos2007}.
355: %%
356: A blob-like extended X-ray emission is clearly detected
357: in the soft X-ray band.
358: %%
359: No significant X-ray emission is seen in the hard X-ray band, which
360: is consistent with the XMM-Newton image (figure~\ref{fig:overview} b).
361:
362: To evaluate the significance of the extended X-ray emission,
363: we defined a region named blob, as shown in figure~\ref{fig:xisimage}.
364: %%
365: The total area of the blob region is 234 arcmin$^2$, or 105 pc$^2$.
366: We extracted the XIS0-3 spectra from this region.
367: %%
368: To evaluate the background, we utilized spectra accumulated
369: from observations of the night side of the Earth, as the night
370: Earth backgrounds reproduced well all the observed spectra above
371: $\sim$6 keV, where the instrumental background dominated.
372: %%
373: The background-subtracted XIS1 (BI) and XIS$0+2+3$ (FI)
374: spectra are shown in figure \ref{fig:xisdiffspec}a,
375: and their 0.2--5 keV count rates with 1$\sigma$ uncertainties
376: are $1.073\pm0.004$ (BI) and $0.609\pm0.002$ (FI) counts s$^{-1}$,
377: respectively.
378: %%
379: The emission is highly significant and shows a
380: number of emission lines such as O VII, O VIII,
381: Ne IX, Ne X, Mg XI, Si XIII, and S XV.
382: %%
383: Lines from these ions in different ionization states,
384: such as O VII and Si XIII, suggest that the extended X-rays
385: are from not a single-temperature but multi-temperature plasma.
386:
387: We extracted spectra from two surrounding regions named
388: east and nw, as shown in figure~\ref{fig:xisimage}.
389: The areas of the east and nw regions are 47 arcmin$^2$ (or 21 pc$^2$)
390: and 21 arcmin$^2$ (or 9.3 pc$^2$), respectively.
391: %%
392: We again used the night Earth spectra at the respective detector
393: positions as backgrounds. The background-subtracted spectra
394: are shown in figures \ref{fig:xisdiffspec}b and c.
395: %%
396: Although their surface brightnesses are an order-of-magnitude
397: lower than that in the blob region, there exist signs of
398: emission lines from O VII, Ne IX, Ne X, Mg XI, and Si XIII.
399: Thus extended X-ray emission appears to be present over
400: the entire FOV.
401: %%
402: The surface brightness below 0.3 keV and above 2 keV
403: is similar in all three regions.
404: %%
405: Therefore, in addition to the plasma emission that is
406: dominant between 0.3 and 2 keV, there must be
407: additional X-ray sources.
408: %%
409: Plausible candidates are the local hot bubble (LHB),
410: the cosmic X-ray background (CXB), the galactic ridge
411: X-ray emission (GRXE), and point sources.
412: %%
413: LHB and CXB are uniform and common
414: background sources existing in all X-ray observations.
415: %%
416: GRXE is also a uniform X-ray background and must
417: contribute to the emission because the observational
418: FOV is located in the Galactic plane
419: ($l=288^\circ$, $b=-0^\circ\hspace*{-1mm}.4$,
420: see figure~\ref{fig:overview}a).
421: %%
422: The point sources, on the other hand, are position-dependent.
423: %%
424: Contamination from these astrophysical backgrounds
425: and point sources needs to be carefully considered in order to
426: characterize the possible diffuse emission from the Carina
427: Nebula.
428:
429: \section{Point Sources}
430: \label{sec:ps}
431:
432: To quantify the contribution from point sources,
433: we analyzed the XMM-Newton data.
434: %%
435: XMM-Newton observed this region on 2004 December 7 for 27 ks.
436: %%
437: The European Photon Imaging Camera (EPIC) provided CCD imaging
438: spectroscopy with one pn camera \citep{Struder2001} and two MOS
439: cameras \citep{Turner2001}.
440: The medium optical blocking filter was used.
441: %%
442: As shown in figure \ref{fig:overview}b, the FOVs of MOS cover
443: the entire FOV of the XIS.
444: %%
445: We analyzed the archival processed data using SAS (Science Analysis
446: Software) version 7.0.0, following the SAS user's
447: guide\footnote{http://xmm.esac.esa.int/external/xmm\_user\_support/documentation/sas\_usg/USG/}.
448: %%
449: The event files were time-filtered to exclude periods of high
450: background, during which the count rate from the entire CCD area
451: at energies $>$10 keV is more than 1.2 times the average rate for
452: each MOS and pn observation.
453: %%
454: This removed $\sim$1 ks from each observation, and yielded 22 and
455: 26 ks\sout{ec} of usable exposure for pn and each MOS, respectively.
456: %%
457: Source detection was accomplished with the SAS program
458: {\tt edetect\_chain}.
459: Images in 8 bands (0.2--0.5, 0.5--2.0, 2.0--4.5,
460: 4.5--7.5, 7.5--12.0, and 0.2--12.0 keV) were utilized,
461: in order not to miss very soft or very hard sources.
462: %%
463: The resulting source list was checked manually for spurious
464: detections and missed sources.
465: %%
466: As a result, 10 sources have been detected, among which
467: 5 sources were within the FOV of the XIS.
468: %%
469: The locations of these X-ray point sources are marked by
470: circles in figure \ref{fig:overview}b.
471:
472: For each individual point source, we extracted counts using a circular
473: region of a 30 arcsec radius centered at the source.
474: %%
475: Background counts were extracted from an adjacent annular region
476: with an outer radius of 1 arcmin.
477: In the case that the annular region included other sources, the
478: background was then extracted from a nearby circular source-free region.
479: %%
480: To identify counterparts of these X-ray point sources in other
481: wavelengths, we searched the 2$\mu$m all sky survey catalog (2MASS)\footnote{http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/index.html}
482: and the AXAF Guide and Acquisition Star Catalog (AGAST)\footnote{http://cxc.harvard.edu/cgi-gen/cda/agasc/agascInterface.pl}
483: for candidates within 10 arcsec, the angular resolution of XMM-Newton.
484: %%
485: In cases where multiple candidates exist, we chose the closest one as the
486: most plausible counterpart.
487: %%
488: Among the 10 X-ray sources, 9 have counterparts in 2MASS
489: and 1 has a counterpart in AGAST.
490: %%
491: The properties of these individual sources are summarized in table \ref{tbl:srclist}.
492:
493: %Because significant X-ray time variation is one of the
494: %characteristics of young low-mass stars,
495: We examined the 10 sources for possible temporal variations.
496: %%
497: %%For each source, we produced 0.4--10 keV X-ray light curves
498: %%of pn and MOS using a binning size of 512 s bin$^{-1}$.
499: For each source, we produced pn and MOS X-ray light curves
500: in the 0.4--10 keV band using a binning size of 512 s bin$^{-1}$.
501: %%
502: The light curves were examined against a constant hypothesis
503: in terms of $\chi^2$ statistics.
504: %%
505: If the $\chi^{2}$ probability of constancy became less than 4\%,
506: at least in one detector, we regarded the source as variable.
507: %%
508: Only the source No.3 has been found to be variable.
509: %%
510: It showed a factor of about 5 increase in the first 5 ks of the
511: observation, decreased in the next 5 ks, and stayed constant in the rest.
512: %%
513: Such rapid temporal variations strongly suggest that No.3
514: is a young low-mass star.
515:
516: We also conducted spectral analysis for 4 bright sources
517: (No.1, 2, 4, and 7) that had $>100$ counts in the pn observation.
518: %%
519: We analyzed only the pn spectra because of the limited statistics
520: of MOS.
521: %%
522: The SAS tasks {\tt rmfgen} and {\tt arfgen} were utilized to
523: generate response matrix files and auxiliary files for each source.
524: %%
525: We fitted the spectra using a thin-thermal plasma emission model
526: in collisional equilibrium (the APEC mode; \cite{Smith2001})
527: convolved with the interstellar absorption.
528: Such models, with abundances fixed at 0.3 solar, are commonly
529: used in X-ray spectral analyses of star-forming regions
530: (e.g., \cite{Getman2005}).
531: %%
532: We found that all the spectra except that of No.1 were well represented
533: by this simple model.
534: %%
535: For the No.1 spectrum, we tried a two-temperature plasma emission model
536: with a common absorption, and were able to find acceptable fits.
537: %%
538: The fitting results are summarized in table \ref{tbl:srcfit} and
539: figure \ref{fig:xmmsrcspec}.
540:
541: Source No.1 has a very hard continuum without any sign of emission
542: lines, thus it may be a background active galactic nucleus.
543: %% Hama 080726
544: %% \textcolor{red}{Can you try a thermal + power-law model?}
545: %%
546: Source No.2 may be an embedded young low-mass star because
547: it has a large absorption column density and a moderate temperature,
548: while source No.4 may be a foreground star because of its
549: small absorption column and moderate temperature.
550: %%
551: Source No.7 is peculiar with a low temperature and possibly high luminosity.
552: %%
553: Its position is within 8 arcsec from the X-ray source No.78 in an
554: XMM-Newton observation of $\eta$ Car reported by \citet{Colombo2003}.
555: %%
556: %%If they correspond to the same source, its luminosity varied by a
557: %%factor of 4 between these two observations.
558: %%
559: %%Such a large temporal variability suggests a young low-mass star but its
560: %%temperature and luminosity are {\bf similar to} those of evolved OB stars.
561: %%
562: Further optical spectroscopic study is needed to identify the nature
563: of this source.
564:
565: We estimated X-ray fluxes of the other 6 sources assuming a
566: thin-thermal plasma model and convolving it with an estimated interstellar
567: absorption of $N_{\rm H}=1.3\times10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$.
568: %%
569: %% Hama 080726
570: %% \textcolor{red}{Question:
571: %% Why is this value? The absorption to the Carina nebula is 2-3$\times$10$^{22}$, right?
572: %% Do you assume these are extragalactic sources?}
573: %%
574: We adopted a temperature of 3 keV and a metal abundance of 0.3 solar
575: that are typical of emission from young stars (e.g., \cite{Imanishi2001}).
576: %%
577: WebPIMMS\footnote{http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/Tools/w3pimms.html}
578: was used to convert the pn count rates to X-ray fluxes. The results are shown
579: in table \ref{tbl:srclist}.
580: %%
581: The fluxes range from 2$\times$10$^{-14}$ to 4$\times$10$^{-13}$
582: erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$.
583:
584: \section{Contamination from Astrophysical Backgrounds
585: and Point Sources}
586: \label{sec:contami}
587:
588: We proceeded to estimate contribution
589: to the observed X-ray emission by
590: LHB, CXB, GRXE, and point sources.
591: %%
592: For the LHB, CXB, and GRXE,
593: we assumed the same models in \citet{Hamaguchi2007}:
594: the Raymond-Smith thin-thermal plasma model with
595: $kT\sim0.1$ keV and a surface brightness of $\sim4\times10^{4}$
596: counts s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$ for LHB based on \citet{Snowden1998},
597: the model Id1 in table 2 of \citet{Miyaji1998} for CXB, and
598: the free abundance model in table 8 of \citet{Ebisawa2005}
599: with the X-ray flux of $1.4\times10^{-11}$ erg cm$^{-2}$
600: s$^{-1}$ deg$^{-2}$ (3--20 keV) for GRXE.
601: %%
602: We used the same spectral parameters except
603: for the normalization to fit, which was adjusted.
604: %%
605: To estimate the X-ray fluxes from these components with
606: different spatial distribution,
607: we prepared an arf file for
608: the uniform emission (LHB, CXB, and GRXE)
609: by using the {\tt xissimarfgen} program, while
610: we created an arf file for each point source.
611: %%
612: We used the best-fit models in table \ref{tbl:srcfit}
613: for the bright point sources and assumed the typical
614: spectral model of young low-mass stars for the other
615: faint point sources ($kT=3$ keV and $N_{\rm H}=1.3\times10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$)
616: using the APEC emission code.
617:
618: In figure \ref{fig:bgdest}a, we plot the
619: estimated contamination from LHB, CXB, GRXE, and
620: point sources in the blob region.
621: %%
622: Below 0.3 keV, LHB accounts for the X-ray emission, while
623: X-rays above 2 keV can be explained by the sum of CXB,
624: GRXE and point sources.
625: This makes a sharp contrast to the $\eta$ Car region
626: where a residual hard X-ray emission is seen above 2 keV.
627: %%
628: The excellent fit of these sources to the spectrum
629: below 0.3 keV and above 2 keV supports the validity
630: of our estimation.
631: %%
632: Thus, almost all the excess counts in 0.3--2 keV can be
633: considered to be truly diffuse plasma emission.
634: %%
635: This conclusion is also supported by the clear spectral
636: differences between the diffuse plasma and point sources.
637:
638: In the same way, we estimated the X-ray contamination
639: in the east and nw regions as shown in figures
640: \ref{fig:bgdest}b and c.
641: %%
642: In both regions, LHB, CXB, GRXE, and point sources
643: explain all the emission in $<0.3$ and $>2$ keV
644: as well as in the blob region, but there are still
645: excesses in 0.3--2 keV.
646: %%
647: Therefore, diffuse soft X-ray emission exists in these fields, too.
648:
649: \section{Spectral Analysis}
650: \label{sec:spec}
651:
652: \subsection{The blob Region}
653: \label{sec:spec:blob}
654:
655: The nature of the diffuse X-ray emission is investigated
656: through spectral analysis.
657: We simultaneously fitted the 0.2--5 keV XIS
658: BI and FI spectra of the blob region.
659: %%
660: %%{\bf
661: We created XIS arf files using {\tt xissimarfgen},
662: assuming the 0.4--2 keV XMM MOS image in figure \ref{fig:overview}b
663: as spatial distribution of the diffuse X-ray emission.
664: %%}
665: %%
666: In single or two-temperature plasma models utilized below,
667: we allow the abundances of the noticeable elements (O, Ne, Mg, Si,
668: S, and Fe) to vary, while those of the other elements were
669: fixed at 0.3 solar value, which is generally seen in low-resolution
670: CCD spectra of young stars.
671:
672: In addition to the plasma model for the diffuse X-ray emission,
673: we introduced a thin-thermal plasma model and a power-law
674: model to reproduce the LHB, CXB, GRXE, and point source
675: contributions (\S \ref{sec:contami}).
676: %%
677: For the plasma model of LHB, we fixed the temperature
678: at 0.1 keV and the abundances at 1 solar, but allowed
679: the normalization to vary.
680: %%
681: For simplicity, the CXB, GRXE, and point sources were together
682: approximated by a single power-law model with the photon
683: index fixed at 1.5 and convolved with the same absorption
684: of the diffuse X-ray emission.
685: %%
686: To take into account possible uncertainties in the energy
687: scale calibration, we introduced two additional fitting
688: parameters, gain and offset.
689: %%
690: Throughout the fittings below, the best-fit energy scale
691: and offset values were $<$1 \% and $<$6 eV, respectively,
692: consistent with the current calibration uncertainties
693: \footnote{http://www.astro.isas.jaxa.jp/suzaku/process/caveats/}.
694:
695: We first tested a single-temperature thin-thermal
696: plasma model convolved with an absorption.
697: %%
698: This simple model yielded an unacceptable best fit
699: for the spectra with $\chi^2$/d.o.f. of $2.4$.
700: The best-fit temperature, $kT$ = 0.59 keV, was too
701: high to reproduce the significant OVII and NeIX lines.
702: %%
703: We then tried a commonly-absorbed
704: two-temperature plasma model as shown in figure
705: \ref{fig:fit12}a and table \ref{tbl:fit1} (model 1).
706: %%
707: This model represents the data far better ($\chi^2$/d.o.f. of $1.2$).
708: %%
709: A small discrepancy of the fit to the data at 0.5--0.8 keV
710: and 1.1--1.2 keV may be caused by inaccuracy of the Fe
711: L-shell emission line model and calibration uncertainty
712: near the mirror Au L edges, respectively.
713: %%
714: Indeed, similar discrepancies at 0.5--0.8 keV can be seen in
715: other Suzaku XIS spectral fits (e.g., \cite{Hamaguchi2007}).
716: %%
717: Therefore, we think the best-fit two-temperature model
718: represents the data well, although the $\chi^2$ is still
719: not above the 90\% confidence level.
720:
721: \subsection{The east and nw Regions}
722: \label{sec:spec:eastnw}
723:
724: Similar to the analysis of the blob region, we fitted the east
725: and nw spectra with a two-temperature plasma model.
726: Since no evident spatial structures were seen in these regions
727: (figure \ref{fig:xisimage}),
728: we created arf files assuming a uniform emission.
729: %%
730: We did not use the additional fitting parameters gain and offset
731: because the photon statistics were limited.
732: The results are shown in figures \ref{fig:fit12}b and c, and table \ref{tbl:fit1}.
733: %%
734: In both regions, the fits are acceptable and all resulting
735: parameters except the surface brightness are consistent with
736: those in the blob region, although the uncertainties are large.
737: %%
738: As expected from figure \ref{fig:xisimage}, the surface brightness
739: of the east and nw regions is a factor of $\sim$5 lower than
740: that in the blob region.
741:
742: We also tried a single-temperature plasma model and
743: obtained acceptable fits in both regions, but the best-fit
744: column densities were small, $\sim8\times10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$,
745: and the best-fit temperatures were high, $\sim$0.6 keV.
746: %%
747: Such a large variation in the column density within the XIS FOV
748: is inconsistent with the CO map (figure \ref{fig:overview}a),
749: although the CO gas can lie behind the X-ray emitting gas.
750: %%
751: There is also a hint of OVII K emission in both spectra
752: (figures \ref{fig:xisdiffspec} b and c) that cannot be reproduced
753: by this best-fit single-temperature model.
754: %%
755: Therefore, it is likely that the east and nw spectra are also
756: best fitted by a two-temperature plasma model.
757:
758: \subsection{XMM-Newton spectra}
759: \label{sec:spec:xmm}
760:
761: We also analyzed the XMM-Newton observations of the blob region
762: with the same data used in the point source analysis (\S \ref{sec:ps}).
763: %%
764: We used only the MOS data with relatively low particle background events,
765: whose background spectrum during the observation can be easily estimated
766: from the ESAS package\footnote{http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/xmm/xmmhp\_xmmesas.html}.
767: %%
768: We used SAS version 7.0.0 and ESAS version 1.0 for the analysis, and
769: generated response matrices using the {\tt rmfgen} and {\tt arfgen}.
770: %%
771: We found that the two-temperature plasma model well represents
772: the MOS spectra, as was the case for the Suzaku XIS spectra.
773: Figure \ref{fig:fit3} and table \ref{tbl:fit3} show the fitting result.
774: Since there can be C K$_\alpha$ emission around 0.4 keV,
775: we allowed the C abundance to vary.
776: %%
777: The energy band of 1.16--1.28, 1.4--1.6, and 1.7--1.8 keV
778: are omitted in order to exclude the instrumental emission lines
779: from Mg K$_\alpha$, Al K$_\alpha$, and Si K$_\alpha$.
780: %%
781: Because the low energy tail of the MOS response
782: prevents the distinction between the diffuse
783: low temperature plasma component and the LHB,
784: only an upper limit is obtained for the LHB.
785: %%
786: Alternatively the best-fit column density becomes somewhat
787: lower than that in table \ref{tbl:fit1} (model 1),
788: to compensate the decreased low energy counts by the LHB component.
789: %%
790: The other two-temperature plasma parameters such as
791: temperatures and abundances are surprisingly similar
792: to those in table \ref{tbl:fit1} (model 1).
793: %%
794: The only difference is the higher power-law component flux.
795: This may be caused by the relatively higher background of
796: XMM-Newton observations and their higher uncertainty.
797: %%
798: We thus conclude that the XIS and MOS data are consistent
799: with each other and the fitting result of the XIS data is reliable.
800:
801: \section{Discussion}
802: \label{sec:diss}
803:
804: We investigated extended X-ray emission in the eastern tip region of the
805: Carina Nebula with Suzaku XIS.
806: %
807: For the first time, we conducted detailed spectral analysis of the
808: X-ray emission and found that there is indeed diffuse X-ray emission,
809: even considering LHB, CXB, GRXE, and point sources.
810: %
811: The diffuse X-ray emission is well represented by a two-temperature
812: plasma model with $kT$ $\sim$0.25 and $\sim$0.55 keV.
813: %%
814: Emission measures and abundances of O, Ne, Mg, Si, S, and Fe
815: are well constrained owing to the good photon statistics and
816: the excellent energy response of XIS.
817: %%
818: %%Below we compare the plasma parameters to those in the $\eta$
819: %%Car region. We further estimate the plasma properties and
820: %%examine the abundance pattern, to assess the origin of the diffuse
821: %%plasma.
822: %%
823: Below we estimate plasma properties based on the
824: spectral fitting and then compare the spectral parameters
825: such as absorption column density, temperature and abundance
826: to those in the $\eta$ Car region, in order to assess the
827: origin of the diffuse plasma.
828:
829: \subsection{Physical Properties of the Plasmas}
830: \label{sec:diss:prop}
831:
832: %%{\bf
833: High signal-to-noise XIS spectra enable us to accurately
834: constrain the parameters of the diffuse plasma in the eastern
835: tip region of the Carina Nebula.
836: %%
837: The best-fit column density of $N_{\rm H}\sim2$--$3\times10^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$
838: and also the temperatures of $kT\sim0.2$--0.3 keV and 0.4--0.6 keV
839: in the blob, east and nw regions agree very well with those in the $\eta$
840: Car regions (see the medium-temperature components of the $N_{\rm H}$, $kT$
841: tied model in table 2 of \cite{Hamaguchi2007} or hereafter H2007 model;
842: $N_{\rm H}\sim2\times10^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$, $kT\sim0.2$ keV and $0.6$ keV).
843: %%
844: Although the high-temperature component represented by a hot plasma model
845: with $kT\sim5$ keV in the H2007 model is not seen in the eastern
846: tip region, this is thought to be a composite of diffuse hard X-ray
847: emission and contaminations from CXB, GRXE, and point source, and hence
848: can be ignored.
849: %%
850: This similarity in basic plasma parameters provides strong evidence that
851: the diffuse plasma in the vicinity of the Carina Nebula has the same origin.
852: %%}
853:
854: %%{\bf
855: The continuous distribution of the diffuse X-ray emission over the
856: Carina Nebula, as shown in figure \ref{fig:overview}, supports this hypothesis.
857: %%
858: Thus, we can draw a scenario that the X-ray emitting diffuse plasma generated
859: by stellar winds from OB stars and/or SNRs forms hot bubbles with the size of
860: several tens of pc and ionizes ambient molecular clouds which can be seen in
861: the mid-infrared emission.
862: %%}
863:
864: To investigate the origin of the diffuse plasma,
865: we estimate physical properties of the plasma in the blob region.
866: %%
867: We assume that the plasma in the blob region have a prolate ellipsoidal
868: shape with the major and minor axis lengths of 8 and 3 pc, respectively.
869: %%
870: Following the plasma analysis by \citet{Townsley2003}, we estimate the
871: electron density, the pressure, the total energy content, the cooling
872: time and the mass of the plasma from the observed X-ray luminosity,
873: temperatures, and the assumed volume.
874: %%
875: We derived two sets of plasma parameters for the two-temperature
876: components from model 1 in table \ref{tbl:fit1}.
877: %%using the cooling function in \citet{Raymond1976}.
878: The derived parameters are summarized in table \ref{tbl:plasma}.
879: %%
880: Below we examine the two interpretations, i.e., stellar winds
881: from OB stars and SNRs, based on these derived parameters.
882: %%
883: Because there are no massive OB stars in the eastern tip region,
884: we must consider the massive stellar clusters in the central part
885: of the Carina Nebula for the former scenario.
886:
887: The estimated plasma pressure $P$ is on the order of $\sim$10$^{6}$
888: K cm$^{-3}$ and should be larger than that of the surrounding gas
889: in the eastern tip region since both the CO and radio continuum
890: intensities are weak in the vicinity of the blob region
891: \citep{Yonekura2005, Huchtmeier1975}.
892: %%{\bf
893: This means that diffuse plasma in the eastern tip region
894: could flow from its neighbor.
895: %%}
896: If we consider that the plasma originated in stellar winds from OB stars
897: near $\eta$ Car and has been
898: propagated to this region at the plasma sound velocity, the crossing
899: time will be 0.1 Myr.
900: %%
901: Because this time scale is much shorter than that of the radiative
902: cooling timescale, $t_{\rm cool}$ $>$1 Myr, the plasma temperatures
903: can be held constant.
904: %%
905: %%If we consider the stellar-wind interpretation,
906: OB stars are able to continuously produce the plasma during 0.1 Myr
907: since their typical life time is at least ten times longer.
908: %%
909: The SNR interpretation is also possible in terms of the pressure
910: if one or multiple SNRs occurred in these regions.
911:
912: The total thermal energy of the plasma, $U$ = $1\times10^{48}$ ergs,
913: is marginally lower than the total kinetic energy supplied by the
914: stellar wind from a single massive star within $\sim1$ Myr,
915: $\sim3\times10^{48}$ ergs \citep{Ezoe2006a}.
916: %%
917: As the Carina Nebula contains $>$64 OB stars, the observed thermal
918: energy can be easily supplied by the mechanical energy of the
919: stellar winds from the $>$64 OB stars, $>2\times10^{50}$ ergs.
920: %%
921: If all the diffuse X-ray emission observed with {Einstein} has
922: the same origin, the total plasma energy will be about 10 times
923: larger, i.e., $1\times10^{49}$ ergs.
924: %%
925: %% 0.5- 2 keV blob luminosity 1.5e34 erg/s -> x 10 2e35 erg/s
926: %% ??? Hamaguchi et al. ?? 2e50 ergs ???????H@???
927: %% ??ATonwsley et al. 2003 ? T2 ?????????vB
928: %%
929: Assuming that the stellar winds from these $>64$ OB stars
930: ($>2\times10^{50}$ ergs) are responsible for the hot plasma,
931: the kinetic-to-thermal energy conversion efficiency will be $<$5\%.
932: %%
933: According to \citet{Weaver1977}, the thermal energy in the
934: shocked stellar wind is 5/11 of the total stellar wind
935: kinetic energy. Thus, this conversion efficiency may be
936: doubled, $<$10 \%, which is comparable to that in M17 ($\sim$10\%,
937: \cite{Townsley2003})
938: and larger than that in the Orion nebula ($\sim0.01$\%,
939: \cite{Guedel2008}).
940: %%
941: In the SNR case, we can also explain the energy by
942: only one canonical supernova ($\sim1\times10^{51}$ ergs) even if
943: we must explain all the diffuse X-ray emission in the entire
944: Carina Nebula.
945: %%
946: %%Thus, SNR(s) can explain the emission more easily.
947: %%
948:
949: The mass of the plasma, $M_{\rm plasma}$ $\sim0.4M_{\odot}$,
950: needs at least four typical OB stars assuming a typical mass
951: loss rate of stellar winds of 10$^{-7}M_{\odot}$yr$^{-1}$ in 1 Myr.
952: %%
953: If we consider the whole Carina Nebula,
954: about $>$80 OB stars are necessary for the entire diffuse
955: plasma mass. The known number of OB stars is thus marginal.
956: %%
957: On the other hand, one SNR again can supply this mass
958: (e.g., \cite{Willingale2003}).
959:
960: Therefore, although both the stellar-wind and SNR interpretations
961: are possible, SNR(s) can explain the derived plasma parameters
962: such as the total plasma energy and the plasma mass, more easily.
963: %%
964: As suggested by \citet{Hamaguchi2007}, the existence of the Carina
965: flare supershell \citep{Fukui1999} validates the SNR scenario.
966: %%
967: If true, the observed plasma temperatures of 0.3 and 0.6 keV
968: limit the SNR age to less than $\sim$10$^4$ yr, since an older SNR
969: would be in the radiative phase and efficiently cool down to
970: less than 0.1 keV.
971:
972: %\subsection{Comparison with the $\eta$ Car Region}
973: %\label{sec:diss:comp}
974:
975: \subsection{Abundance}
976: \label{sec:diss:abd}
977:
978: The abundance pattern of the X-ray emitting plasma provides
979: another key piece of information to constrain its origin.
980: %%
981: We showed abundance patterns of the blob region and that
982: of the $\eta$ Car regions in figures \ref{fig:abd}~a and b,
983: respectively.
984: %%
985: Since \citet{Hamaguchi2007} divided the $\eta$ Car region
986: into the north and south regions and fitted the two spectra
987: simultaneously with tied column density and temperatures
988: in the H2007 model, two sets of abundances are shown.
989:
990: All the metal abundances in the blob region (model 1, black)
991: are significantly higher than those in the $\eta$ Car regions.
992: %%
993: This may strengthen the result of \citet{Hamaguchi2007}
994: that the metal abundances of the diffuse X-ray emission
995: show spatial variations.
996: %%
997: However, there is a possibility that the fixed abundances
998: of C, N, Al, Ar, Ca and Ni in table \ref{tbl:fit1}
999: influence the other metal abundances.
1000: %%
1001: Thus, we refitted the blob region spectra with different
1002: fixed abundance sets.
1003:
1004: %%{\bf
1005: Firstly we tested one solar for the fixed abundances.
1006: %%
1007: In model 1, we implicitly assumed 0.3 solar for them
1008: because the value is generally used for young stars in star-forming regions.
1009: %%
1010: However, since any mixing of the plasma generated by either
1011: stellar winds or SNR(s) interacting with the ambient molecular clouds
1012: contains processed stellar material and may have higher abundances,
1013: it is thus worth considering the solar abundances in modeling the
1014: diffuse emission.
1015: %%
1016: The results are summarized in figure \ref{fig:abd}~a and
1017: table \ref{tbl:fit1} (model 2).
1018: %%
1019: The $\chi^2$ was comparable to that of model 1 and all
1020: the abundances increased by a factor of $\sim$2, while
1021: the emission measures of the
1022: two plasma components decreased by about the same amount,
1023: to balance the increased line intensities.
1024: %%
1025: Since the SNRs with an age around 10$^4$ yrs, like the Cygnus
1026: Loop or Vela, globally show no strong deviation from
1027: solar abundances \citep{McEntaffer2008},
1028: this fitting result allows the SNR interpretation.
1029: %%}
1030:
1031: Next we assumed the abundances of the H2007 model
1032: in which all the abundances were allowed to vary and
1033: constrained with good photon statistics. We used two sets of fixed
1034: abundances corresponding to the north and the south fits.
1035: %%
1036: The results are summarized in figure \ref{fig:abd}~a and
1037: table \ref{tbl:fit1} (models 3 and 4).
1038: %%
1039: In both cases, the fittings were acceptable and all the
1040: free abundances were significantly decreased.
1041: %%
1042: These changes were caused by the decreased N and Ni fixed abundances
1043: that influence the others via the NV K and Ni L emission lines.
1044: %%
1045: For instance, when we used the abundances for the north region (model 3),
1046: the N abundance changes from 0.3 to 0 solar and to compensate for the decreased
1047: photon counts in the 0.5--0.6 keV band, the normalization of the lower-temperature
1048: component ($kT\sim0.25$ keV) increases and the abundances of the other
1049: elements are suppressed.
1050: %%
1051: When the abundances for the south region (model 4) are utilized,
1052: the Ni L lines in the 0.8--1.4 keV range increases and the
1053: abundances of the other elements related to this energy band
1054: decreases.
1055: %%
1056: The abundances of the blob region approaches to those
1057: of the $\eta$ Car region (figure \ref{fig:abd}~b)
1058: if we use these abundance sets.
1059:
1060: %%{\bf
1061: The abundance values are therefore strongly influenced
1062: by the fixed abundances.
1063: %%
1064: In model 2, all the abundances are around one solar, while
1065: in model 1, 3 and 4, the best-fit metal abundances are far less
1066: than one.
1067: %%
1068: This is due to the fact that the metal abundance and
1069: emission measure are coupled with each other.
1070: %%
1071: To decouple these parameters, we need more precise spectral
1072: measurements with X-ray microcalorimeters in future missions.
1073: %%}
1074:
1075: %%{\bf
1076: In spite of the difficulty to determine the absolute abundances,
1077: abundance patterns of the blob region in models 1-4 are
1078: similar to those in the $\eta$ Car regions.
1079: %%}
1080: %%
1081: This similarity is another line of evidence
1082: that the diffuse X-ray emission in the eastern tip region and the
1083: $\eta$ Car region has the same origin.
1084:
1085: %%{\bf
1086: Because the abundance patterns are rather independent of the fixed abundances,
1087: we can also evaluate the abundance ratio of different elements.
1088: %%}
1089: Importantly, there is no significant overabundance
1090: in nitrogen to oxygen that is expected from the optical, UV and X-ray
1091: spectroscopy of $\eta$ Car and WR 25 \citep{Davidson1982, vanderHucht1981, Tsuboi1997}.
1092: %%
1093: %%{\bf 2
1094: This result agrees with that in the $\eta$ Car region \citep{Hamaguchi2007} and
1095: suggests that, if stellar winds produced the diffuse X-ray plasma,
1096: the main drivers of the winds are main-sequence OB stars, and not
1097: evolved massive stars.
1098: %%}
1099: %%
1100: %%This result agrees with that in the $\eta$ Car region \citep{Hamaguchi2007}
1101: %%and may be inconsistent with the stellar-wind interpretation
1102: %%
1103: Also the observed Fe/O ratio of 1.3--1.9 is too high
1104: compared to that of a type-II supernova, 0.5 \citep{Tsujimoto1995}.
1105: %%
1106: Although the Fe/O ratio increases up to 1 in type-II SNRs
1107: for less massive stars ($\sim13M_{\odot}$, table 1 in
1108: \cite{Tsujimoto1995}), this contradicts the fact that
1109: the more massive stars evolve faster and explode earlier.
1110:
1111: We note that similar situations exist in other massive star
1112: forming regions. For example, detailed spectral study of
1113: the diffuse X-ray emission has been conducted with Suzaku
1114: in M17 \citep{Hyodo2008}.
1115: %%
1116: We plot the abundance pattern of the diffuse
1117: plasma in M17 in figure \ref{fig:abd}~c.
1118: %%
1119: As is the case for the Carina Nebula, it shows a
1120: high Fe/O ratio and not enhanced N-to-O ratio,
1121: %%{\bf 2
1122: the latter of which may be natural because M17 contains
1123: no WR stars \citep{Townsley2003}.
1124: %%}
1125: %%
1126: %%{\bf
1127: Its subsolar abundances may be affected by the
1128: fixed values at 0.3 solar.
1129: %%}
1130:
1131: %%{\bf
1132: Thus, both the stellar-wind and SNR interpretations are
1133: possible in terms of the absolute abundances.
1134: %%
1135: %%{\bf 2
1136: The abundance pattern may favor plasma heating by winds from main-sequence OB stars.
1137: %%}
1138: %%
1139: %%These abundance patterns may suggest that we need additional
1140: %%mechanisms to explain the diffuse X-ray emission in massive
1141: %%star forming regions in general.
1142: %%
1143: %%{\bf We can consider other possibilities, for example,
1144: %%a mixture of stellar winds and SNRs.}
1145: Another possibility is a mixture of stellar winds and SNRs.
1146: %%
1147: Also, since hot shocked gas by stellar winds and/or SNRs mix up
1148: interstellar gas, we may only see the interstellar abundances
1149: rather than stellar and/or SNR abundances.
1150: %%
1151: Further studies are necessary from both observational
1152: and theoretical aspects.
1153:
1154: \subsection{Hard X-ray component}
1155: \label{sec:diss:hardX}
1156:
1157: The X-ray spectrum above 2~keV can be
1158: explained by contribution of CXB, GRXE and known point sources.
1159: %%
1160: This means that the residual hard X-ray emission,
1161: seen around $\eta$~Carinae
1162: \citep{Hamaguchi2007}, localizes within $\sim$30$'$ from $\eta$~Car.
1163: %%
1164: The scale size is consistent with an apparently extended hard X-ray emission
1165: discovered with the GINGA satellite \citep{Koyama1990}
1166: though the GINGA result did not count out emission from known point sources.
1167: %%
1168: Because soft ($<$2~keV) diffuse X-ray spectra of the eastern tip region and the
1169: southern part of the $\eta$~Car region are almost identical,
1170: the diffuse plasma would not relate to the residual hard X-ray emission.
1171: %%
1172: Probably, the residual emission originates from a large number of low
1173: mass young stars embedded in the cloud around $\eta$~Car,
1174: which are too faint to be detected individually.
1175:
1176: \section{Conclusion}
1177:
1178: %%{\bf
1179: In the present paper, we have investigated the properties of diffuse
1180: X-ray emission associated with the eastern tip region of the Carina
1181: Nebula using the Suzaku and XMM-Newton data.
1182: Our conclusion is as follows.
1183:
1184: (1) Strong extended X-ray emission was detected from the entire
1185: field-of-view of Suzaku with a 0.2--5 keV surface brightness of
1186: 0.7$\sim$4$\times10^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$.
1187: Comparisons with the estimated contamination from astrophysical
1188: backgrounds and point sources suggest that most of the emission
1189: is diffuse in nature.
1190:
1191: (2) The observed absorption column density and temperature are
1192: consistent with those in the $\eta$Car region, suggesting the same origin as
1193: the diffuse X-ray emission in the vicinity of the Carina Nebula.
1194:
1195: (3) Estimated physical properties of the plasma such as pressure,
1196: total energy, and mass can be explained by stellar winds from
1197: OB stars in the Carina Nebula or young SNR(s) with the age less
1198: than $\sim$10$^4$ yr. The SNR interpretation can provide the
1199: necessary energy and mass more easily.
1200:
1201: (4) Absolute abundance values are strongly affected by abundances of
1202: metals fixed in spectral fits, allowing both the stellar-wind and
1203: SNR interpretations. The low nitrogen-to-oxygen and high
1204: iron-to-oxygen ratios derived from the spectral fits
1205: %%
1206: %%{\bf 2
1207: may support that the diffuse plasma heated up by stellar winds
1208: from main-sequence OB stars. The abundance ratios can be produced
1209: by a mixture of stellar winds and SNRs, as well.
1210: %%}
1211:
1212: The authors acknowledge discussion with Y. Hydo.
1213: K.H. is supported by the NASA Astrobiology Program under RTOP 344-53-51.
1214:
1215: \clearpage
1216:
1217: %% Fig. 1 Overview
1218:
1219: \begin{figure}[p]
1220: \begin{center}
1221: \FigureFile(0.7\textwidth,){fig1av1p.eps}
1222: \FigureFile(0.7\textwidth,){fig1bv1.eps}
1223: \end{center}
1224: \caption{(a) %An MSX band-A (6.8-10.8 $\mu$m) image of the Carina nebula
1225: An MSX band-A 8.28 $\mu$m image of the Carina nebula
1226: taken from the NASA/IPAC Infrared Science Archieve.
1227: Yellow contours show the 12CO (J$=$2-1) map
1228: \citep{Yonekura2005}.
1229: Two white boxes represent field-of-views of this
1230: (upper left) and previous Suzaku observations (lower right,
1231: \cite{Hamaguchi2007}).
1232: (b) An EPIC MOS mosaic of the same nebula
1233: with XMM-Newton taken from the XMM-Newton Image Gallery.
1234: The red, green and blue colors show soft (0.4--0.7 keV),
1235: medium (0.7--1.3 keV) and hard (2--7 keV) X-ray emission,
1236: respectively.
1237: Circles and numbers indicate point sources detected in our
1238: analysis (see \S \ref{sec:ps}).
1239: }\label{fig:overview}
1240: \end{figure}
1241:
1242: \clearpage
1243:
1244: %% Fig. 2 Suzaku Images
1245:
1246: \begin{figure}[p]
1247: \begin{center}
1248: \FigureFile(0.8\textwidth,){fig2v2.eps}
1249: \end{center}
1250: \caption{Suzaku BI images of the eastern tip region of the Carina
1251: nebula in the (a) 0.2--2 keV and (b) 2--10 keV bands,
1252: displayed on the J2000.0 coordinates.
1253: For clarity, images are binned by a factor of 8 and smoothed
1254: by a Gaussian of $\sigma$ = 3 pixels. %% ds9 default kernel size = 3 pix
1255: Vignettings are corrected (see \S \ref{sec:obs}).
1256: The unit of intensity in the greyscale wedge is arbitrary.
1257: Solid black lines mark regions utilized in the
1258: spectral analysis.
1259: The strong emission at the bottom-left and -right parts of
1260: the panel (b) corresponds to calibration 55Fe sources.
1261: }\label{fig:xisimage}
1262: \end{figure}
1263:
1264: \clearpage
1265:
1266: %% Fig. 3 Suzaku Spectra of Three regions
1267:
1268: \begin{figure}[p]
1269: \begin{center}
1270: \FigureFile(0.55\textwidth,){fig3v2.eps}
1271: \end{center}
1272: \caption{Background-subtracted BI (black)
1273: and FI (red) spectra of (a) the blob,
1274: (b) the east, and (c) the nw regions. Center energies of
1275: emission lines are shown in the panel (a).
1276: For comparison, the vertical axis is normalized by the
1277: angular size of each region.
1278: }\label{fig:xisdiffspec}
1279: \end{figure}
1280:
1281: \clearpage
1282:
1283: %% Fig. 4 XMM point source spectra
1284:
1285: \begin{figure}[p]
1286: \begin{center}
1287: \FigureFile(0.8\textwidth,){fig4v0.eps}
1288: \end{center}
1289: \caption{XMM-Newton EPIC-pn spectra of the bright point sources
1290: (No.1, 2, 4, and 7).
1291: The solid lines show the best-fit absorbed plasma models.
1292: The dotted lines in the panel (a) show two plasma components.
1293: The bottom panels exhibit residuals from the best-fit models.
1294: }\label{fig:xmmsrcspec}
1295: \end{figure}
1296:
1297: \clearpage
1298:
1299: %% Fig. 5 Suzaku X1 spectra & Background Estimation
1300:
1301: \begin{figure}[p]
1302: \begin{center}
1303: \FigureFile(0.55\textwidth,){fig5v2.eps}
1304: \end{center}
1305: \caption{Background-subtracted BI spectra of
1306: (a) the blob, (b) the east, and (c) the nw regions.
1307: Solid lines show estimated contamination from
1308: X-ray sources.
1309: }\label{fig:bgdest}
1310: \end{figure}
1311:
1312: %% Fig. 6 Suzaku X0123 spectral fit of the diffuse X-ray emission
1313:
1314: \begin{figure}[p]
1315: \begin{center}
1316: \FigureFile(0.55\textwidth,){fig6v2.eps}
1317: \end{center}
1318: \caption{Best-fit spectral results of the diffuse X-ray emission
1319: in (a) the blob, (b) the east, and (c) the nw regions.
1320: The best-fit model is shown in a solid black line. The model
1321: components for the XIS1 spectrum are shown in solid colored lines
1322: (cyan: the LHB component, magenta and red: the two-temperature
1323: plasma component, blue: the power-law component).
1324: See tables \ref{tbl:fit1} and \ref{tbl:fit2}
1325: for the obtained parameters.
1326: }\label{fig:fit12}
1327: \end{figure}
1328:
1329: \clearpage
1330:
1331: %% Fig. 7 MOS12 spectral fit of the diffuse X-ray emission
1332:
1333: \begin{figure}[p]
1334: \begin{center}
1335: \FigureFile(0.55\textwidth,){fig7v0.eps}
1336: \end{center}
1337: \caption{XMM-Newton MOS fitting result of the diffuse X-ray emission
1338: in the blob region.
1339: Line colors are the same as figure \ref{fig:fit12} but for
1340: the MOS1 and MOS2 data.
1341: See table \ref{tbl:fit3} for the obtained parameters.
1342: }\label{fig:fit3}
1343: \end{figure}
1344:
1345: %\clearpage
1346: \bigskip
1347:
1348: %% Fig. 8 Abundance distribution
1349:
1350: \begin{figure}[p]
1351: % \begin{center}
1352: \hspace*{-10mm}
1353: \FigureFile(1.1\textwidth,){fig8v3.eps}
1354: % \end{center}
1355: \bigskip
1356: \caption{Abundance distributions in (a) the blob region in the
1357: eastern tip region (this paper),
1358: (b) the north and south regions in the
1359: $\eta$ Car region \citep{Hamaguchi2007},
1360: and (c) sub-regions in M17 \citep{Hyodo2008}.
1361: The filled marks represent the fixed values.
1362: }\label{fig:abd}
1363: \end{figure}
1364:
1365: \clearpage
1366:
1367: %% Tbl. 1 X-ray Sources
1368:
1369: \begin{table}[p]
1370: \caption{Properties of XMM-Newton point sources.}\label{tbl:srclist}
1371: \begin{center}
1372: \begin{tabular}{lcccccccc}
1373:
1374: \hline
1375: No. & R.A.$^{\rm a}$ & Decl.$^{\rm a}$
1376: & $C_{\rm MOS}$$^{\rm b}$ & $C_{\rm pn}$$^{\rm b}$
1377: & Flux$^{\rm c}$ & Var$^{\rm d}$ & Counterpart$^{\rm e}$ \\
1378: \hline
1379:
1380: 1 & 10:47:31.68 & -59:32:33.7
1381: & 199$\pm13$ & 411$\pm30$
1382: & 3.8 & No & 2MASS J 10473148-5932345 \\
1383:
1384: 2 & 10:49:28.08 & -59:34:55.2
1385: & 68$\pm8$ & 124$\pm$17
1386: & 1.1 & No & 2MASS J 10492780-5935000 \\
1387:
1388: 3$^{\rm f}$ & 10:48:52.80 & -59:40:39.4
1389: & 62$\pm9$ & 22$\pm13$
1390: & 0.07 & Yes & 2MASS J 10485248-5940392 \\
1391:
1392: 4 & 10:47:22.80 & -59:23:37.3
1393: & 66$\pm8$ & 174$\pm$19
1394: & 0.38 & No & 2MASS J 10472233-5923392 \\
1395:
1396: 5 & 10:46:45.84 & -59:30:13.0 % old 6
1397: & 30$\pm7$ & 83$\pm15$
1398: & 0.27 & No & \begin{tabular}{c}
1399: 2MASS J 10464595-5930130 \\
1400: GSC 0862602325\\
1401: \end{tabular}\\
1402:
1403: 6 & 10:47:05.28 & -59:30:27.0 % old 7
1404: & 15$\pm7$ & 61$\pm17$
1405: & 0.20 & No & 2MASS J 10470505-5930247 \\
1406:
1407: 7$^{\rm g} $& 10:46:09.12& -59:43:08.0 % old 11
1408: & --- & 336$\pm28$
1409: & 0.79 & No & 2MASS J 10460901-5943025 \\
1410:
1411: 8 & 10:48:10.80 & -59:41:44.9 % old 13
1412: & 47$\pm10$ & 73$\pm22$
1413: & 0.23 & No & 2MASS J 10480990-5941489 \\
1414:
1415: 9 & 10:48:30.96 & -59:42:14.8 % old 14
1416: & 26$\pm8$ & 78$\pm19$
1417: & 0.25 & No & 2MASS J 10483064-5942144 \\
1418:
1419: 10 & 10:48:14.16 & -59:43:32.2 % old 15
1420: & 15$\pm9$ & 81$\pm19$
1421: & 0.26 & No & --- \\
1422:
1423: % old 5 & 10:49:06.72 & -59:33:55.4
1424: % & 26$\pm8$ & 8$\pm12$
1425: % & & No & 2MASS J 10490603-5933529 \\
1426:
1427: % old 8$^e$& 10:46:42.96 & -59:38:56.0
1428: % & 3$\pm9$ & -26$\pm18$
1429: % & & No & 2MASS J 10464286-5938565 \\
1430:
1431: % old 9$^{e,f}$& 10:46:21.36 & -59:26:20.8
1432: % & --- & -3$\pm10$
1433: % & & No & 2MASS J 10462175-5926220 \\
1434:
1435: % old 10$^e$& 10:46:35.52& -59:39:45.0
1436: % & -1$\pm9$ & -31$\pm22$
1437: % & & No & 2MASS J 10463483-5939417 \\
1438:
1439: % old 12$^e$& 10:49:40.56 & -59:34:22.4
1440: % & -8$\pm6$ & 10$\pm10$
1441: % & & No & 2MASS J 10494122-5934237 \\
1442:
1443: % old 16 & 10:49:12.24 & -59:32:47.8
1444: % & 9$\pm6$ & 31$\pm15$
1445: % & & No & 2MASS J 10491204-5932467 \\
1446:
1447: \hline
1448: \end{tabular}
1449: \end{center}
1450: {\noindent
1451: $^{\rm a}$ Source positions in J2000 coordinates.\\
1452: $^{\rm b}$ Background-subtracted photon counts
1453: detected with EPIC MOS and pn in 0.4--10 keV.
1454: $C_{\rm MOS}$ is the average counts of MOS1 and MOS2.
1455: Errors are 1$\sigma$.\\
1456: $^{\rm c}$ The 0.4--10 keV X-ray flux in 10$^{-13}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$
1457: which corresponds to 6$\times10^{31}$ erg s$^{-1}$ at 2.3 kpc.
1458: Fluxes of No.1, 2, 4, and 7 are derived from the spectral fittings,
1459: while the other are estimated from $C_{\rm pn}$ assuming the thin-thermal
1460: plasma model (see text).\\
1461: $^{\rm d}$ Time variability based on the $\chi^2$ statistics.\\
1462: $^{\rm e}$ Counterpart candidates within 10 arcsec of the X-ray position,
1463: based on searches of the 2MASS and AGAST catalogs.\\
1464: $^{\rm f}$ This source falls in the CCD gap of pn.\\
1465: $^{\rm g}$ This source is outside the FOV of MOS.\\
1466: }
1467: \end{table}
1468:
1469: %% Tbl. 2 Sources Spectral Fits
1470:
1471: \begin{table}[p]
1472: \caption{Results of the spectral fits to the point sources$^{\rm a}$.}
1473: \label{tbl:srcfit}
1474:
1475: \begin{center}
1476: \begin{tabular}{lccccc}
1477:
1478: \hline
1479: No. & $N_{\rm H}$$^{\rm b}$
1480: & $kT$$^{\rm c}$
1481: & Normalization$^{\rm d}$
1482: & $L_{\rm X}$$^{\rm e}$
1483: & $\chi^2$/d.o.f. \\ \hline
1484:
1485: 1 & 0.17$_{-0.12}^{+0.57}$
1486: & 0.42$_{-0.18}^{+0.45}$, $>32$
1487: & 4.8$_{-2.9}^{+4.1}$$\times10^{-5}$, 2.5$_{-0.6}^{+0.5}$$\times10^{-4}$
1488: & 3
1489: & 19.5/25 \\
1490:
1491: 2 & 9.6$_{-3.8}^{+6.3}$
1492: & 1.8$_{-0.8}^{+2.3}$
1493: & 1.0$\pm{0.1}$$\times10^{-3}$
1494: & 6
1495: & 3.5/7 \\
1496:
1497: 4 & $<0.95$
1498: & 0.70$_{-0.44}^{+0.10}$
1499: & 4.4$\pm0.7$$\times10^{-5}$
1500: & 0.3
1501: & 7.1/9 \\
1502:
1503:
1504: 7 & $0.72_{-0.16}^{+0.17}$
1505: & $0.12_{-0.03}^{+0.04}$
1506: & 8.4$_{-4.5}^{+4.6}$$\times10^{-2}$
1507: & 80
1508: & 37.6/23 \\
1509:
1510: \hline
1511: \end{tabular}
1512: \end{center}
1513: {\noindent
1514:
1515: $^{\rm a}$ A single plasma model is assumed for No. 2, 4, and 7, while a two temperature
1516: model is used for No.1. A metal abundance is fixed at 0.3 solar value.
1517: Errors refer to the 90\% confidence range. \\
1518: $^{\rm b}$ Hydrogen column density in 10$^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$.\\
1519: $^{\rm c}$ Plasma temperature in keV.\\
1520: $^{\rm d}$ Normalization factor of the APEC model, representing
1521: 10$^{-14}$/4$\pi D^2$ $EM$, where $D$ is
1522: a distance to the Carina nebula and $EM$ is an emission measure in
1523: cm$^{-3}$.\\
1524: $^{\rm e}$ Absorption-corrected 0.4--10 keV luminosity
1525: in 10$^{32}$ erg s$^{-1}$ assuming a distance of 2.3 kpc.\\
1526:
1527: }
1528: \end{table}
1529:
1530: %% Tbl. 3 Blob - Two-temp plasma model
1531:
1532: \begin{table}[p]
1533: \caption{Results of the two-temperature plasma model fit to the diffuse X-ray emission in the blob region.}
1534: \label{tbl:fit1}
1535:
1536: \begin{center}
1537: \begin{tabular}{lccccc}
1538:
1539: \hline\hline
1540: Model$^{\rm a}$ & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & Typical error$^{\rm b}$ \\
1541: \hline
1542:
1543: Two-temperature plasma component$^{\rm c}$\\
1544:
1545: $N_{\rm H}$ (10$^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$) & 0.23 & 0.25 & 0.22 & 0.26 & 0.01\\ % par1
1546: $kT_1$ (keV) & 0.25 & 0.24 & 0.25 & 0.24 & 0.01 \\ % par2
1547: $kT_2$ (keV) & 0.55 & 0.56 & 0.55 & 0.54 & 0.01 \\ % par18
1548: C (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 1.0 (fixed) & 0.0 (fixed) & 0.0 (fixed) & $-$ \\
1549: N (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 1.0 (fixed) & 0.0 (fixed) & 0.0 (fixed) & $-$ \\
1550: O (solar) & 0.24 & 0.55 & 0.16 & 0.10 & 0.01 \\ % par6
1551: Ne (solar) & 0.46 & 0.93 & 0.36 & 0.21 & 0.01 \\ % par7
1552: Mg (solar) & 0.44 & 0.94 & 0.32 & 0.24 & 0.01 \\ % par8
1553: Al (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 1.0 (fixed)& 0.075 (fixed)& 0.029 (fixed)& $-$ \\
1554: Si (solar) & 0.54 & 1.1 & 0.40 & 0.37 & 0.02 \\ % par10
1555: S (solar) & 0.74 & 1.5 & 0.56 & 0.57 & 0.1 \\ % par11
1556: Ar (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 1.0 (fixed) & 0.0 (fixed) & 0.13 (fixed) & $-$ \\
1557: Ca (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 1.0 (fixed) & 0.0 (fixed) & 0.0 (fixed) & $-$ \\
1558: Fe (solar) & 0.32 & 0.71 & 0.23 & 0.19 & 0.01 \\ % par14
1559: Ni (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 1.0 (fixed) & 0.089 (fixed)& 0.78 (fixed) & $-$ \\
1560: log$EM_1$ (cm$^{-3}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 54.9 & 54.6 & 55.0 & 55.4 & 0.02 \\ % par17
1561: log$EM_2$ (cm$^{-3}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 54.5 & 54.2 & 54.6 & 54.7 & 0.02 \\ % par33
1562: Flux1 (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 1.8 & 1.8 & 1.8 & 2.3 & 0.1 \\ % par17
1563: Flux2 (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 2.2 & 2.2 & 2.2 & 1.8 & 0.1 \\ % par33
1564: \hline
1565:
1566: Power-law component$^{\rm d}$ \\
1567: Flux (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 0.56 & 0.57 & 0.56 & 0.56 & 0.02 \\ % par35
1568: \hline
1569:
1570: LHB component$^{\rm e}$ \\
1571: Flux (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 0.10 & 0.11 & 0.10 & 0.10 & 0.02 \\ % par39
1572: \hline
1573:
1574: $\chi^2$/d.o.f. & 1.24 & 1.31 & 1.21 & 1.22 & \\
1575: d.o.f. & 1231 & 1231 & 1231 & 1231 & \\
1576: \hline
1577:
1578: %Gain component$^{\rm e}$ \\
1579: %Slope (XIS1) & & & & \\
1580: %Offset (XIS1) & & & & \\
1581: %Slope (XIS0$+$2$+$3) & & & & \\
1582: %Offset (XIS0$+$2$+$3) & & & & \\
1583: %\hline
1584:
1585: \end{tabular}
1586:
1587: \end{center}
1588: {\noindent
1589:
1590: $^{\rm a}$ Fitting models with different fixed abundances. \\
1591: % In model 1, the fixed abundances are typical values in
1592: % star-forming regions. In models 2 and 3, they are the derived values
1593: % in the north and south regions of the
1594: % $\eta$ Car region \citep{Hamaguchi2007}.\\
1595: $^{\rm b}$ Typical fitting errors at the 90\% confidence level.\\
1596: $^{\rm c}$ A commonly-absorbed plasma model.
1597: Arabic numbers 1 and 2 denote the two temperature components.
1598: Parameter definitions are the same as those in table \ref{tbl:srcfit}.
1599: Fluxes are calculated in 0.2--5 keV.\\
1600: % The abundances of the elements not described in this table are fixed at 0.3 solar.
1601: $^{\rm d}$ A power-law model representing CXB, GRXE, and point sources.
1602: A photon index is fixed at 1.5. The same
1603: absorption for the two-temperature plasma is assumed. Normalization
1604: is photon keV$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ at 1 keV.\\
1605: $^{\rm e}$ A single-temperature plasma model representing LHB.
1606: A plasma temperature is fixed at 0.1 keV.\\
1607:
1608: }
1609: \end{table}
1610:
1611: %% Tbl. 4 East & NW - Two-temp plasma model
1612:
1613: \begin{table}[p]
1614: \caption{Results of the two-temperature plasma model fit to the diffuse X-ray emission in the east and nw regions$^{\rm a}$.}
1615: \label{tbl:fit2}
1616:
1617: \begin{center}
1618: \begin{tabular}{lccccc}
1619:
1620: \hline\hline
1621: Region & east & nw \\
1622: \hline
1623:
1624: Two-temperature plasma component\\
1625:
1626: $N_{\rm H}$ (10$^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$) & 0.21$_{-0.07}^{+0.09}$ & 0.32$_{-0.07}^{+0.11}$ \\ % par1
1627: $kT_1$ (keV) & 0.20$_{-0.02}^{+0.04}$ & 0.19$_{-0.03}^{+0.02}$ \\ % par2
1628: $kT_2$ (keV) & 0.54$_{-0.07}^{+0.04}$ & 0.41$_{-0.08}^{+0.10}$ \\ % par18
1629: C (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 0.3 (fixed) \\
1630: N (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 0.3 (fixed) \\
1631: O (solar) & 0.15$_{-0.06}^{+0.12}$ & 0.07$_{-0.02}^{+0.04}$ \\ % par6
1632: Ne (solar) & 0.33$_{-0.14}^{+0.31}$ & 0.27$_{-0.05}^{+0.14}$ \\ % par7
1633: Mg (solar) & 0.30$_{-0.14}^{+0.29}$ & 0.25$_{-0.10}^{+0.16}$ \\ % par8
1634: Al (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 0.3 (fixed) \\
1635: Si (solar) & 0.43$_{-0.20}^{+0.37}$ & 0.96$_{-0.43}^{+0.57}$ \\ % par10
1636: S (solar) & 0.74 (fixed) & 0.74 (fixed) \\ % par11
1637: Ar (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 0.3 (fixed) \\
1638: Ca (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 0.3 (fixed) \\
1639: Fe (solar) & 0.16$_{-0.05}^{+0.10}$ & 0.17$_{-0.06}^{+0.03}$ \\ % par14
1640: Ni (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) & 0.3 (fixed) \\
1641: log$EM_1$ (cm$^{-3}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 54.3$_{-0.5}^{+0.4}$ & 55.0$\pm{0.7}$ \\ % par17
1642: log$EM_2$ (cm$^{-3}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 54.0$\pm{0.2}$ & 54.3$_{-0.3}^{+0.8}$ \\ % par33
1643: Flux1 (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 0.23$_{-0.15}^{+0.41}$ & 0.41$\pm{0.08}$ \\ % par17
1644: Flux2 (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 0.48$_{-0.20}^{+0.31}$ & 0.45$_{-0.20}^{+0.11}$ \\ % par33
1645: \hline
1646:
1647: Power-law component \\
1648: Flux (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 0.56$\pm{0.06}$ & 0.55$\pm{0.09}$ \\ % par17
1649: \hline
1650:
1651: LHB component \\
1652: Flux (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 0.087$_{-0.032}^{+0.031}$& 0.15$_{-0.06}^{+0.05}$ \\ % par17
1653: \hline
1654:
1655: $\chi^2$/d.o.f. & 0.77 & 0.60 \\
1656: d.o.f. & 245 & 111 \\
1657: \hline
1658: \end{tabular}
1659:
1660: \end{center}
1661: {\noindent
1662:
1663: $^{\rm a}$ Notations and symbols are the same as table \ref{tbl:fit1}.
1664:
1665: }
1666: \end{table}
1667:
1668: \clearpage
1669:
1670: %% Tbl. 5 XMM MOS Two-temp plasma model
1671: \begin{table}[p]
1672: \caption{Result of the two-temperature plasma model fit to the XMM MOS spectra of the blob region$^{\rm a}$.}
1673: \label{tbl:fit3}
1674:
1675: \begin{center}
1676: \begin{tabular}{lccccc}
1677:
1678: \hline\hline
1679: Model & 1 \\
1680: \hline
1681:
1682: Two-temperature plasma component\\
1683:
1684: $N_{\rm H}$ (10$^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$) & 0.19$_{-0.02}^{+0.03}$ \\ % par1
1685: $kT_1$ (keV) & 0.24$\pm{0.01}$ \\ % par2
1686: $kT_2$ (keV) & 0.58$\pm{0.01}$ \\ % par18
1687:
1688: C (solar) & 1.2$_{-0.9}^{+0.4}$ \\
1689: N (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) \\
1690: O (solar) & 0.23$_{-0.03}^{+0.02}$ \\ % par6
1691: Ne (solar) & 0.44$\pm{0.07}$ \\ % par7
1692: Mg (solar) & 0.46$\pm{0.07}$ \\ % par8
1693: Al (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) \\
1694: Si (solar) & 0.48$_{-0.08}^{+0.07}$ \\ % par10
1695: S (solar) & 0.48$_{-0.18}^{+0.20}$ \\ % par11
1696: Ar (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) \\
1697: Ca (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) \\
1698: Fe (solar) & 0.32$_{-0.04}^{+0.05}$ \\ % par14
1699: Ni (solar) & 0.3 (fixed) \\
1700: log$EM_1$ (cm$^{-3}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 54.8$\pm{0.1}$ \\ % par17
1701: log$EM_2$ (cm$^{-3}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 54.5$\pm{0.1}$ \\ % par33
1702: Flux1 (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 1.7$\pm{0.2}$ \\ % par17
1703: Flux2 (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 2.7$_{-0.4}^{+0.2}$ \\ % par33
1704: \hline
1705:
1706: Power-law component \\
1707: Flux (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & 0.84$\pm{0.05}$ \\ % par17
1708: \hline
1709:
1710: LHB component \\
1711: Flux (10$^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$) & $<0.06$ \\ % par17
1712: \hline
1713:
1714: $\chi^2$/d.o.f. & 1.20 \\
1715: d.o.f. & 337 \\
1716: \hline
1717: \end{tabular}
1718:
1719: \end{center}
1720: {\noindent
1721:
1722: $^{\rm a}$ Notations and symbols are the same as table \ref{tbl:fit1}.
1723:
1724: }
1725: \end{table}
1726:
1727: \clearpage
1728:
1729: %% Tbl. Physical Properties of Plasmas
1730:
1731: \begin{table}[p]
1732: \caption{Physical properties of the diffuse plasma in the blob region$^a$.}
1733: \label{tbl:plasma}
1734:
1735: \begin{center}
1736: \begin{tabular}{lccccc}
1737:
1738: \hline\hline
1739: Parameter & Scale Factor & $T_1$ & $T_2$\\
1740: \hline
1741:
1742: \multicolumn{4}{c}{Observed X-ray Properties}\\
1743: \hline
1744:
1745: $kT$ (keV) & $-$ & 0.3 & 0.6 \\
1746: $L_{\rm X}$ (ergs s$^{-1}$) & $-$ & 2$\times10^{34}$ & 1$\times10^{34}$\\
1747: $V$ (cm$^{3}$) & $\eta$ & 1$\times10^{57}$ & 1$\times10^{57}$\\
1748: % print pi * 4 /3 * 4 * 1.5 * 1.5 * (3.085e18)**3
1749: % Fe (solar) & $-$ & 0.3 & 0.3 \\
1750: \hline
1751:
1752: \multicolumn{4}{c}{Estimated X-ray Plasma Properties}\\
1753: \hline
1754:
1755: % cooling 15e-23 erg/sec/cc @ 0.2 keV = 2.3e6 K
1756: % 5e-23 erg/sec/cc @ 0.6 keV = 7.0e6 K
1757:
1758: $n_{\rm e}$ (cm$^{-3}$) & $\eta^{-1/2}$ & 0.3 & 0.4 \\
1759: % print (1.5e34/15e-23/1.1e57)**0.5
1760: % print (0.8e34/5e-23/1.1e57)**0.5
1761: $P/k$ (K cm$^{-3}$) & $\eta^{-1/2}$ & 2$\times10^{6}$ & 5$\times10^{6}$\\
1762: % print 2 * (1.5e34/15e-23/1.1e57)**0.5 * (0.25e3*1.60e-19/1.38e-23)
1763: % print 2 * (0.8e34/5e-23/1.1e57)**0.5 * (0.55e3*1.60e-19/1.38e-23)
1764: $U$ (ergs) & $\eta^{1/2}$ & 4$\times10^{47}$ & 1$\times10^{48}$\\
1765: % print 3 * (1.5e34/15e-23/1.1e57)**0.5 * (0.25e3*1.60e-12) * 1.1e57
1766: % print 3 * (0.8e34/5e-23/1.1e57)**0.5 * (0.55e3*1.60e-12) * 1.1e57
1767: $t_{\rm cool}$ (yr) & $\eta^{1/2}$ & 1$\times10^{6}$ & 4$\times10^{6}$\\
1768: % print 3 * (1.5e34/15e-23/1.1e57)**0.5 * (0.25e3*1.60e-12) * 1.1e57 / (1.5e34 * 24 * 3600 * 365)
1769: % print 3 * (0.8e34/5e-23/1.1e57)**0.5 * (0.55e3*1.60e-12) * 1.1e57/(0.8e34 * 24 * 3600 * 365)
1770: $M_{\rm plasma}$ ($M_\odot$) & $\eta^{1/2}$ & 0.2 & 0.2 \\
1771: % print 0.62 * 1.673e-24 * (1.5e34/15e-23/1.1e57)**0.5 * 1.1e57 / 1.99e33
1772: % print 0.62 * 1.673e-24 * (0.8e34/5e-23/1.1e57)**0.5 * 1.1e57 / 1.99e33
1773:
1774: %$M_{\rm Fe}$ ($M_\odot$) & $\eta^{1/2}$ & 2$\times10^{-3}$ & 2$\times10^{-3}$ \\
1775: % print 52 * 4.68e-5 * 1.673e-24 * (1.5e34/15e-23/8.9e57)**0.5 * 8.9e57 / 1.99e33
1776: % print 52 * 4.68e-5 * 1.673e-24 * (0.8e34/5e-23/8.9e57)**0.5 * 8.9e57 / 1.99e33
1777: %http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/xanadu/xspec/manual/XSabund.html
1778: \hline
1779:
1780: \end{tabular}
1781:
1782: \end{center}
1783: {\noindent
1784:
1785: $^{\rm a}$ $\eta$ is a filling factor for the volume of the
1786: plasma. $T_1$ and $T_2$ indicate the two temperature plasma
1787: component in table \ref{tbl:fit1} model 1.
1788:
1789: }
1790: \end{table}
1791:
1792: \clearpage
1793:
1794: \begin{thebibliography}{}
1795:
1796: % ???????????AP?????A??CjV??i???CjV??????????????jA?????????J?}????????A???????O??&?????B??A???9l?????A1l????????et al.????????B????A??CjV??. ?i?????t????????j???????J?}?????????B
1797:
1798: \bibitem[Colombo et al.(2003)]{Colombo2003}
1799: Colombo, J.F.A., Mendez, M., \& Morrell, N. I.\ 2003, \mnras, 346, 704
1800:
1801: \bibitem[Cunha et al.(1994)]{Cunha1994}
1802: Cunha, K., \& Lambert, D. L.\ 1994, \apj, 426, 170
1803:
1804: %%\bibitem[Daflon et al.(1999)]{Daflon1999}
1805: %% Daflon, S., CunHa, A, \& Becker, S. R.\ 1999, \apj, 522, 950
1806:
1807: \bibitem[Daflon et al.(2004)]{Daflon2004}
1808: Daflon, S., CunHa, A, \& Butler, K.\ 2004, \apj, 604, 326
1809:
1810: \bibitem[Davidson et al.(1982)]{Davidson1982}
1811: Davidson, K., Walborn, N. R., \& Gull, T. R.\ 1982, \apj, 254, L47
1812:
1813: \bibitem[Davidson \& Humphreys(1997)]{Davidson1997}
1814: Davidson, K., \& Humphreys, R. M.\ 1997,
1815: \araa, 35, 1
1816:
1817: \bibitem[Dicky \& Lockman(1990)]{Dickey1990}
1818: Dicky, J.M. ., \& Lockman, F.J.\ 1990, \araa, 28, 215
1819:
1820: \bibitem[Ebisawa et al.(2005)]{Ebisawa2005}
1821: Ebisawa, K., et al.\ 2005, \apj, 635, 214
1822:
1823: \bibitem[Evans et al.(2003)]{Evans2003}
1824: Evans, N.R., Seward, F.D., Krauss, M.I., Isobe, T., Nichols, J.,
1825: Schlegel, E.M., \& Wolk, S.J.\ 2003, \apj, 589, 509
1826:
1827: \bibitem[Ezoe et al.(2006a)]{Ezoe2006a}
1828: Ezoe, Y., Kokubun, M., Makishima, K., Sekimoto, Y., \& Matsuzaki, K.\
1829: 2006a, \apj, 638, 860
1830:
1831: \bibitem[Ezoe et al.(2006b)]{Ezoe2006b}
1832: Ezoe, Y., Kokubun, M., Makishima, K., Sekimoto, Y., \& Matsuzaki, K.\
1833: 2006b, \apj, 649, L123
1834:
1835: \bibitem[Feinstein(1995)]{Feinstein1995}
1836: Feinstein, A.\ 1995, RMxAC, 2, 57
1837:
1838: \bibitem[Fukui et al.(1999)]{Fukui1999}
1839: Fukui, Y., Onishi, T., Abe, R., Kawamura, A., Tachihara, K., Yamaguchi, R.,
1840: Mizuno, A., \& Ogawa, H.\ 1999, \pasj, 51, 751
1841:
1842: \bibitem[Fujimoto et al.(2007)]{Fujimoto2007}
1843: Fujimoto, R., et al.\ 2007, \pasj, 59, 133
1844:
1845: \bibitem[Getman et al.(2005)]{Getman2005}
1846: Getman, K. V., et al.\ 2005, \apjs, 160, 319
1847:
1848: \bibitem[G{\" u}edel et al.(2008)]{Guedel2008}
1849: G{\" u}del, M., Briggs, K. R., Montmerle, T., Audard, M., Rebull, L.,
1850: \& Skinner, S. L.\ 2008, Science, 319, 309
1851:
1852: \bibitem[Hamaguchi et al.(2007)]{Hamaguchi2007}
1853: Hamaguchi, K., et al.\ 2007, \pasj, 59, S151
1854:
1855: %\bibitem[Hamaguchi et al.(2007b)]{Hamaguchi2007b}
1856: % Hamaguchi, K., the Suzaku Eta Carinae team, \& the Carinae D1 team,
1857: % 2007b, astro-ph, 0704.346
1858:
1859: \bibitem[Harvey et al.(1979)]{Harvey1979}
1860: Harvey, P. M., Hoffmann, W. F., \& Campbell, M. F.\ 1979, \apj, 227, 114
1861:
1862: \bibitem[Huchtmeier \& Day(1975)]{Huchtmeier1975}
1863: Huchtmeier, W. K., \& Day G. A.\ 1975, A\&A, 41, 153
1864:
1865: \bibitem[Hyodo et al.(2008)]{Hyodo2008}
1866: Hyodo, Y., Tsujimoto, M., Hamaguchi, K., Koyama, K.,
1867: Kitamoto, S., Maeda, Y., Tsuboi, Y., \& Ezoe, Y.\ 2008, \pasj, 60, 85
1868:
1869: \bibitem[Imanishi et al.(2001)]{Imanishi2001}
1870: Imanishi, K., Koyama, K., \& Tsuboi, Y.\ 2001, \apj, 557, 747
1871:
1872: \bibitem[Kelly et al.(2007)]{Kelly2007}
1873: Kelly, R., et al.\ 2007, \pasj, 59, S77
1874:
1875: \bibitem[Kokubun et al.(2007)]{Kokubun2007}
1876: Kokubun, M., et al.\ 2007, \pasj, 59, S53
1877:
1878: \bibitem[Koyama et al.(1990)]{Koyama1990}
1879: Koyama, K., Asaoka, I., Ushimaru, N., Yamauchi, S., \& Corbert, R.H.,\
1880: 1990, \apj, 362, 215
1881:
1882: \bibitem[Koyama et al.(2007)]{Koyama2007}
1883: Koyama, K., et al.\ 2007, \pasj, 59, S23
1884:
1885: \bibitem[McEntaffer \& Cash (2008)]{McEntaffer2008}
1886: McEntaffer, R. L., \& Cash, W. \ 2008, \apj, 680, 328
1887:
1888: \bibitem[Miyaji et al.(1998)]{Miyaji1998}
1889: Miyaji, T., Ishisaki, Y., Ogasaka, Y., Ueda, Y., Freyberg, M.J.,
1890: Hasinger, G., \& Tanaka, Y.\ 1998, \aa, 334, L13
1891:
1892: %\bibitem[Miyata et al.(2007)]{Miyata2007}
1893: % Miyata, E., Katsuda, S., Tsunemi, H., Hughes, J. P.,
1894: % Kokubun, M., \& Porter, F. S.\ 2007, \pasj, 59, S163
1895:
1896: \bibitem[Mitsuda et al.(2007)]{Mitsuda2007}
1897: Mitsuda, K., et al.\ 2007, \pasj, 59, S1
1898:
1899: \bibitem[Moffat et al.(2002)]{Moffat2002}
1900: Moffat, A. F. J., et al.\ 2002, \apj, 573, 191
1901:
1902: %%\bibitem[Raymond et al.(1976)]{Raymond1976}
1903: %% Raymond, J. C., Cox, D. P., \& Smith, B. W. 1976, \apj, 204, 290
1904:
1905: \bibitem[Serlemitsos et al.(2007)]{Serlemitsos2007}
1906: Serlemitsos, P. J., et al.\ 2007, \pasj, 59, S9
1907:
1908: \bibitem[Seward et al.(1979)]{Seward1979}
1909: Seward, F.D., Forman, W.R., Giacconi, R., Griffith, R.E., Harnden, F.R Jr.,
1910: Jones, C., \& Pye, J.P.\ 1979, \apj, 234, L55
1911:
1912: \bibitem[Seward \& Chebowski(1982)]{Seward1982}
1913: Seward, F.D., \& Chebowski, T.\ 1982, \apj, 256, 530
1914:
1915: \bibitem[Smith et al.(2000)]{Smith2000}
1916: Smith, N., Egan, M. P., Carey, S., Price, S. D., Morse, P. J., \& Price, P. A.\
1917: 2000, \apjl, 532, L145
1918:
1919: \bibitem[Smith et al.(2001)]{Smith2001}
1920: Smith, R. K., Brickhouse, N. S., Liedahl, D. A., \& Raymond, J. C.\
1921: 2001, \apjl, 556, L91
1922:
1923: \bibitem[Smith et al.(2006)]{Smith2006}
1924: Smith, N.\
1925: 2006, \mnras, 367, 763
1926:
1927: \bibitem[Smith et al.(2007)]{Smith2007}
1928: Smith, N., \& Brooks, K. J.\
1929: 2007, \mnras, 379, 1279
1930:
1931: \bibitem[Snowden et al.(1998)]{Snowden1998}
1932: Snowden, S. L., Egger, R., Finkbeiner, D. P., Freyberg, M. J.,
1933: \& Plucinsky, P. P.\ 1998, \apj, 493, 715
1934:
1935: \bibitem[Str{\"u}der et al.(2001)]{Struder2001}
1936: Str{\"u}der, L., et al.\ (2001), A\&A, 365, 18
1937:
1938: \bibitem[Takahashi et al.(2007)]{Takahashi2007}
1939: Takahashi, T., et al.\ 2007, \pasj, 59, S35
1940:
1941: \bibitem[Townsley et al.(2003)]{Townsley2003}
1942: Townsley, L. K., Feigelson, E. D., Montmerle, T., Broos, Patrick S.,
1943: Chu, You-Hua., \& Garmire, G. P.\ 2003, \apj, 593, 874
1944:
1945: \bibitem[Tsuboi et al.(1997)]{Tsuboi1997}
1946: Tsuboi, Y., Koyama, K., Sakano, M., \& Petre, R.\ 1997, \pasj, 49, 85
1947:
1948: \bibitem[Tsujimoto et al.(1995)]{Tsujimoto1995}
1949: Tsujimoto, T., Nomoto, K., Yoshii, Y., Hashimoto. M., Yanagida. S.,
1950: \& Thielemann, F. -K.\ 1995, \mnras, 277, 945
1951:
1952: %\bibitem[Tsujimoto et al.(2002)]{Tsujimoto2002}
1953: % Tsujimoto, T., Koyama, K., Tsuboi, Y., Miwa, G., \& Kobayashi, N.\
1954: % 2002, \apj, 566, 974
1955:
1956: \bibitem[Tsujimoto et al.(2006)]{Tsujimoto2006}
1957: Tsujimoto, M., Hosokawa, T., Feigelson, E. D., Getman, K. V.,
1958: \& Broos, P. S.\ 2006, \apj, 653, 409
1959:
1960: \bibitem[Tsujimoto et al.(2007)]{Tsujimoto2007}
1961: Tsujimoto, M., Hyodo, Y., \& Koyama, K.\ 2007, \pasj, 59, S229
1962:
1963: \bibitem[Turner et al.(2001)]{Turner2001}
1964: Turner, M.J.L., et al.\ \aa, 365, 27
1965:
1966: \bibitem[Yonekura et al.(2005)]{Yonekura2005}
1967: Yonekura, Y., et al.\ 2005, \apj, 634, 476
1968:
1969: \bibitem[Yusef-Zadeh et al.(2002)]{Yusef-Zadeh2002}
1970: Yusef-Zadeh, F., Law, C., Wardle, M., Wang, Q. D., Fruscione, A.,
1971: Lang, C. C., \& Cotera, A.\ 2002, \apj, 570, 665
1972:
1973: \bibitem[van der Hucht et al.(1981)]{vanderHucht1981}
1974: van der Hucht, K. A., Conti, P. S., Lundstrom, I., \& Stenholm, B.\
1975: 1981, \ssr, 28, 227
1976:
1977: \bibitem[Wang et al.(2002)]{Wang2002}
1978: Wang, Q. D., Gotthelf, E. V., \& Lang, C. C.\ 2002, \nat, 415, 148
1979:
1980: \bibitem[Weaver et al.(1977)]{Weaver1977}
1981: Weaver, R., McCray, R., Castor, RJ., Shapiro, P., \& Moore, R.\ 1997, \apj, 218, 377
1982:
1983: \bibitem[Willingale et al.(2003)]{Willingale2003}
1984: Willingale, R., Bleeker, J. A. M., van der Heyden, K. J.,
1985: \& Kaastra, J. S.\ 2003, \aa, 398, 1021
1986:
1987: \bibitem[Wolk et al.(2002)]{Wolk2002}
1988: Wolk, S. J., Bourke, T. L., Smith, R. K., Spitzbart, B., \& Alves, J.\
1989: 2002, \apj, 850, L161
1990:
1991: %\bibitem[Aauthor et al.(2001)]{key-1}
1992: % Aauthor, A., Bauthor, B., Cauthor, C.\ 2001, PASJ, vol, page
1993: %
1994: %\bibitem[Aauthor \& Author(2001a)]{key-2}
1995: % Aauthor, A., Author, B.\ 2001, Name of Book(Publisher, Tokyo) ch0
1996: %
1997: %\bibitem[Aauthor \& Bauthor(2001b)]{key-3}
1998: % Aauthor, A., Bauthor, B.\ 2001, Name of Book(Publisher, Tokyo) page0
1999: %
2000: %\bibitem[Dauthor(2001)]{key-n}
2001: % Dauthor A. A.\ 2001, in Name of Book,
2002: % ed Editor D.\ Editor(Publisher, Tokyo) page0
2003:
2004: \end{thebibliography}
2005:
2006: \end{document}
2007: