1: 

2: 

3: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}

4: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{emulateapj}

5: \documentclass[12pt]{emulateapj}

6: %\usepackage{graphicx}

7: %\usepackage{caption2}

8: %\usepackage{amssymb}

9: %\usepackage{times}

10: %\usepackage{emulateapj}

11: %\usepackage{aasms4}

12: \usepackage{epsfig}

13: 

14: \topmargin=0cm

15: 

16: \newcommand{\ledd}{{\rm L_{Edd}}}

17: \newcommand{\ngc}{NGC~4258}

18: \newcommand{\sgra}{Sgr A$^*$}

19: \newcommand{\oth}{$0^{\rm th}$ order}

20: \newcommand{\astroe}{\textsl{Suzaku}}

21: \newcommand{\xmm}{\textsl{XMM-Newton}}

22: \newcommand{\chandra}{\textsl{Chandra}}

23: \newcommand{\rosat}{\textsl{ROSAT}}

24: \newcommand{\asca}{\textsl{ASCA}}

25: \newcommand{\rxte}{\textsl{RXTE}}

26: \newcommand{\hst}{\textsl{HST}}

27: \newcommand{\beppo}{\textsl{BeppoSAX}}

28: \def\AaA{{\em Astr.~Astrophys.}}

29: \def\AJ{{\em Astr.~J.}}

30: \def\AN{{\em Astron.~Nachr.}}

31: \def\ApJ{{\em Astrophys.~J.}}

32: \def\ApJL{{\em Astrophys.~J.~Lett.}}

33: \def\ApJS{{\em Astrophys.~J.~Suppl.}}

34: \def\ARAA{{\em Ann.~Rev.~Astr.~Astrophys.}}

35: \def\MN{{\em Mon.~Not.~R.~astr.~Soc.}}

36: \def\Nat{{\em Nature}}

37: \def\PASJ{{\em Publ.~astr.~Soc.~Japan}}

38: \def\PASP{{\em Publ.~astr.~Soc.~Pacif.}}

39: \def\PhD{{\em PhD thesis}}

40: \def\Pre{Preprint}

41: \def\PS{{\em Phys.~Scr.}}

42: \def\RMP{{\em Rev.~Mod.~Phys.}}

43: \def\SSR{{\em Space Sci.~Rev.}}

44: \def\etal{{et al.\thinspace}}

45: \def\cf{{\em cf.\ }}

46: \def\eg{{\em e.g.\ }}

47: \def\etc{{\em etc.\ }}

48: \def\ie{{\em i.e.\ }}

49: \def\spose#1{\hbox to 0pt{#1\hss}}

50: 

51: \let\approxlt=\lesssim

52: \let\approxgt=\gtrsim

53: \def\multcent#1{\halign {\centerline{##}\cr #1}}

54: \def\multleft#1{\hbox to size{\vbox {\halign {\lft{##}\cr #1}}\hfill}\par}

55: \def\multright#1{\hbox to size{\vbox {\halign {\rt{##}\cr #1}}\hfill}\par}

56: \def\Mdot{\hbox{$\dot M$}}

57: \def\degmark{^\circ}

58: \def\boxit#1{\vbox{\hrule\hbox{\vrule\kern3pt\vbox{\kern3pt

59:           #1 \kern3pt}\kern3pt\vrule}\hrule}}

60: \font\big=cmr10 scaled\magstep2

61: \font\bigbf=cmbx10 scaled\magstep2

62: \font\bigit=cmti10 scaled\magstep2

63: 

64: %       Simple units

65: 

66: \def\cm{{\rm\thinspace cm}}

67: \def\dyn{{\rm\thinspace dyn}}

68: \def\erg{{\rm\thinspace erg}}

69: \def\eV{{\rm\thinspace eV}}

70: \def\g{{\rm\thinspace g}}

71: \def\ga{{\rm\thinspace gauss}}

72: \def\K{{\rm\thinspace K}}

73: \def\keV{{\rm\thinspace keV}}

74: \def\km{{\rm\thinspace km}}

75: \def\kpc{{\rm\thinspace kpc}}

76: \def\Lsun{\hbox{$\rm\thinspace L_{\odot}$}}

77: \def\m{{\rm\thinspace m}}

78: \def\Mpc{{\rm\thinspace Mpc}}

79: \def\Msun{\hbox{$\rm\thinspace M_{\odot}$}}

80: \def\pc{{\rm\thinspace pc}}

81: \def\ph{{\rm\thinspace ph}}

82: \def\s{{\rm\thinspace s}}

83: \def\yr{{\rm\thinspace yr}}

84: \def\sr{{\rm\thinspace sr}}

85: \def\Hz{{\rm\thinspace Hz}}

86: \def\chisq{\hbox{$\chi^2$}}

87: \def\delchi{\hbox{$\Delta\chi$}}

88: 

89: %       Compound units

90: 

91: \def\cmps{\hbox{$\cm\s^{-1}\,$}}

92: \def\cmsq{\hbox{$\cm^2\,$}}

93: \def\cmcu{\hbox{$\cm^3\,$}}

94: \def\pcmcu{\hbox{$\cm^{-3}\,$}}

95: \def\pcmcuK{\hbox{$\cm^{-3}\K\,$}}

96: \def\dynpcmsq{\hbox{$\dyn\cm^{-2}\,$}}

97: \def\ergcmcups{\hbox{$\erg\cm^3\ps\,$}}

98: \def\ergpcmps{\hbox{$\erg\cm^{-3}\s^{-1}\,$}}

99: \def\ergpcmsqps{\hbox{$\erg\cm^{-2}\s^{-1}\,$}}

100: \def\ergpcmsqpspA{\hbox{$\erg\cm^{-2}\s^{-1}$\AA$^{-1}\,$}}

101: \def\ergps{\hbox{$\erg\s^{-1}\,$}}

102: \def\gpcm{\hbox{$\g\cm^{-3}\,$}}

103: \def\gpcmps{\hbox{$\g\cm^{-3}\s^{-1}\,$}}

104: \def\gps{\hbox{$\g\s^{-1}\,$}}

105: \def\kmps{\hbox{$\km\s^{-1}\,$}}

106: \def\Lsunppc{\hbox{$\Lsun\pc^{-3}\,$}}

107: \def\Msunpc{\hbox{$\Msun\pc^{-3}\,$}}

108: \def\Msunpkpc{\hbox{$\Msun\kpc^{-1}\,$}}

109: \def\Msunppc{\hbox{$\Msun\pc^{-3}\,$}}

110: \def\Msunppcpyr{\hbox{$\Msun\pc^{-3}\yr^{-1}\,$}}

111: \def\Msunpyr{\hbox{$\Msun\yr^{-1}\,$}}

112: \def\pcm{\hbox{$\cm^{-3}\,$}}

113: \def\pcmsq{\hbox{$\cm^{-2}\,$}}

114: \def\pcmK{\hbox{$\cm^{-3}\K$}}

115: \def\phpcmsqps{\hbox{$\ph\cm^{-2}\s^{-1}\,$}}

116: \def\pHz{\hbox{$\Hz^{-1}\,$}}

117: \def\pmpc{\hbox{$\Mpc^{-1}\,$}}

118: \def\pmpccu{\hbox{$\Mpc^{-3}\,$}}

119: \def\ps{\hbox{$\s^{-1}\,$}}

120: \def\psqcm{\hbox{$\cm^{-2}\,$}}

121: \def\psr{\hbox{$\sr^{-1}\,$}}

122: \def\pyr{\hbox{$\yr^{-1}\,$}}

123: \def\kmpspMpc{\hbox{$\kmps\Mpc^{-1}$}}

124: \def\Msunpyrpkpc{\hbox{$\Msunpyr\kpc^{-1}$}}

125: 

126: \newcommand\aproxgt{\mathrel{%

127:       \rlap{\raise 0.511ex \hbox{$>$}}{\lower 0.511ex \hbox{$\sim$}}}}

128: \newcommand\aproxlt{\mathrel{%

129:       \rlap{\raise 0.511ex \hbox{$<$}}{\lower 0.511ex \hbox{$\sim$}}}}

130: 

131: \makeatletter

132: 

133: \makeatother

134: 

135: \begin{document}

136: 

137: \title{Probing the accretion disk and central engine structure of

138: NGC~4258 with {\it Suzaku} and {\it XMM-Newton} observations}

139: 

140: \author{Christopher~S.~Reynolds\altaffilmark{1}, Michael

141: A. Nowak\altaffilmark{2}, Sera Markoff\altaffilmark{3}, Jack

142: Tueller\altaffilmark{4}, Joern Wilms\altaffilmark{5}, Andrew

143: J. Young\altaffilmark{6}}

144: 

145: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Astronomy and the Maryland Astronomy Center for Theory and Computation, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-2421} 

146: \altaffiltext{2}{Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139} 

147: \altaffiltext{3}{Astronomical Institute ``Anton Pannekoek,'', Kruislaan 403, 

148: NL-1098 SJ Amsterdam, Netherlands}

149: \altaffiltext{4}{NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Astrophysics Science Division, Greenbelt, MD 20771}

150: \altaffiltext{5}{Dr. Karl Remeis-Sternwarte, Astronomisches Institut, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Sternwartstrasse, 96049 Bamberg, Germany}

151: \altaffiltext{6}{Department of Physics, University of Bristol, Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8~1TL, UK.}

152: 

153: \begin{abstract}

154: We present an X-ray study of the low-luminosity active galactic

155: nucleus (AGN) in NGC~4258 using data from {\it Suzaku}, {\it

156: XMM-Newton}, and the {\it Swift}/BAT survey.  We find that signatures

157: of X-ray reprocessing by cold gas are very weak in the spectrum of

158: this Seyfert-2 galaxy; a weak, narrow fluorescent-K$\alpha$ emission

159: line of cold iron is robustly detected in both the {\it Suzaku} and

160: {\it XMM-Newton} spectra but at a level much below that of most other

161: Seyfert-2 galaxies.  We conclude that the circumnuclear environment of

162: this AGN is very ``clean'' and lacks the Compton-thick obscuring torus

163: of unified Seyfert schemes.  From the narrowness of the iron line,

164: together with evidence for line flux variability between the {\it

165: Suzaku} and {\it XMM-Newton} observations, we constrain the line

166: emitting region to be between $3\times 10^3r_g$ and $4\times 10^4r_g$

167: from the black hole.  We show that the observed properties of the iron

168: line can be explained if the line originates from the surface layers

169: of a warped accretion disk.  In particular, we present explicit

170: calculations of the expected iron line from a disk warped by

171: Lens-Thirring precession from a misaligned central black hole.

172: Finally, the {\it Suzaku} data reveal clear evidence for large

173: amplitude 2--10\,keV variability on timescales of 50\,ksec as well as

174: smaller amplitude flares on timescales as short as 5--10\,ksec.  If

175: associated with accretion disk processes, such rapid variability

176: requires an origin in the innermost regions of the disk ($r\approx

177: 10r_g$ or less).  Analysis of the difference spectrum between a high-

178: and low-flux state suggests that the variable component of the X-ray

179: emission is steeper and more absorbed than the average AGN emission,

180: suggesting that the primary X-ray source and absorbing screen have

181: spatial structure on comparable scales.  We note the remarkable

182: similarity between the circumnuclear environment of NGC~4258 and

183: another well-studied low-luminosity AGN, M81*.

184: \end{abstract}

185: 

186: \keywords{{black hole physics, galaxies: Seyfert, galaxies: individual

187: (NGC~4258), X-ray: galaxies}}

188: 

189: \section{Introduction}

190: 

191: The low-luminosity active galactic nucleus (LLAGN) \ngc\ is an

192: essential object in our quest to understand the astrophysics of

193: extragalactic supermassive black holes.  Very Large Array (VLA) and

194: Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI) observations have found a set

195: of water masers that trace a nearly edge-on, geometrically-thin gas

196: disk $\sim 0.2-0.3\pc$ from the central black hole (Miyoshi et

197: al. 1995; Herrnstein et al. 1999).  The near-perfect Keplerian

198: velocity curve of these water masers provides one of the strongest and

199: most robust pieces of evidence for the existence of extragalactic

200: supermassive black holes (Miyoshi et al. 1995).  Furthermore, the

201: dynamics of this disk allows precise measurements of the central black

202: hole mass, (outer) accretion disk inclination and warping, \emph{and}

203: its distance ($M = 3.9 \pm 0.3 \times 10^{7}\,\Msun$, $D = 7.2 \pm

204: 0.5$\,Mpc, yielding $r_g \equiv GM/c^2 = 5.8\times 10^{12}\,{\rm cm}$,

205: 1\,pc $=5.4 \times 10^5~r_g$, and 1'' = 35\,pc; Miyoshi et al. 1995;

206: Herrnstein et al. 1999). This is the only AGN for which the black hole

207: mass, distance, and (outer) accretion disk geometry are so accurately

208: known.

209: 

210: Due to the precision with which the black hole mass and distance are

211: known, \ngc\ can be used as a basic test-bed for our models of black

212: hole accretion.  The overall luminosity of the AGN is small compared

213: with the Eddington luminosity of the black hole, $L\sim

214: 10^{-4}\,L_{\rm Edd}$, the cause of which has remained

215: controversial. Is the small luminosity simply due to a very small mass

216: accretion rate through a radiatively-efficient disk, as suggested by

217: modeling the physics of the maser production Neufeld \& Maloney

218: (1995)?  Or does the disk make a transition to a

219: radiatively-inefficient accretion flow (RIAF) at some radius as

220: suggested by the modeling of Lasota et al. (1996) and Gammie, Narayan

221: \& Blandford (1999)?  What is the role of the jet, and how much of the

222: radiative luminosity of the AGN is actually due to the jet (Yuan et

223: al. 2002).  In the bigger picture, what is the fundamental difference

224: among the accretion flows in the most underluminous galactic nuclei

225: (e.g., \sgra), LLAGN and powerful AGN?

226: 

227: Sensitive X-ray observations provide a powerful means of probing both

228: large scale and small scale structures within NGC~4258 and hence

229: addressing these questions.  Soft X-ray thermal emission from hot gas

230: associated with the well known helically twisted jets (the anomalous

231: arms) has been known since the {\it Einstein} days (Fabbiano et

232: al. 1992; also see {\it ROSAT} work of Pietsch et al.  1994; Cecil,

233: Wilson \& De Pree 1995; Vogler \& Pietsch 1999).  However, power-law

234: X-ray emission from the (absorbed) central engine of the AGN itself

235: was not seen until the advent of {\it ASCA} (Makishima et al. 1994;

236: Reynolds, Nowak \& Maloney 2000).  {\it ASCA} clearly revealed

237: variability of both the absorbing column and hard X-ray flux on the

238: timescale of years (Reynolds et al. 2000; hereafter R00), a result

239: supported by short observations of NGC~4258 by {\it XMM-Newton} and

240: {\it Chandra} (Pietsch \& Read 2002; Young et al. 2004; Fruscione et

241: al. 2005).  The most sensitive hard X-ray ($>10\keV$) study of

242: NGC~4258 was conducted by \beppo\ (200\,ksec; Fiore et al. 2001) which

243: detected the AGN emission out to beyond 50\,keV (Fiore et al. 2001).

244: \beppo\ also revealed day-timescale variability of the hard X-ray

245: power-law, setting a firm upper limit of $250\,r_g$ ($5 \times

246: 10^{-4}$\,pc) to the X-ray emission region size.

247: 

248: In this {\it Paper}, we present results from new {\it Suzaku} and {\it

249: XMM-Newton} observations of NGC~4258 which, when supplemented with

250: survey data from the {\it Swift} Burst Alert Telescope (BAT), gives us

251: an unprecedented view of this AGN from 0.3\,keV upto 140\,keV.  These

252: data suggest a circumnuclear environment that is remarkably ``clean''

253: compared with other Seyfert 2 nuclei.  {\it Suzaku} also reveals rapid

254: variability of the AGN emission, allowing us to set new constraints on

255: the size/compactness of the X-ray source.  The plan of this paper is

256: as follows.  Section~2 briefly discusses the data that we utilize and

257: the basic reduction steps.  We present our analysis of the spectrum,

258: as well as spectral variability, in Section~3.  Section~4 discusses

259: the implications of these results for our understanding of the

260: structure of this AGN and the origin of the X-ray emission.  In

261: particular, we argue that the iron line has all of the properties

262: expected if it were to originate from the surface layers of the

263: (warped) accretion disk.  Throughout this paper we quote error bars at

264: the 90\% confidence level for one interesting parameter.  All error

265: bars on figures are displayed at the $1\sigma$ level.

266: 

267: \section{Observations and data reduction}

268: 

269: In this section, we discuss the new observations presented in this

270: paper and the subsequent data reduction.   

271: 

272: {\it Suzaku} observed NGC~4258 for a total of 186\,ksec starting

273: 10-Jun-2006 as part of the Cycle-1 Guest Observer Program (PI: Itoh,

274: US Co-PI: Reynolds).  All four X-ray Imaging Spectrometers (XIS~0--3)

275: as well as the Hard X-ray Detector (HXD) were operational and

276: collecting data, and NGC~4258 was placed at the ``nominal HXD''

277: aimpoint.  Reduction started from the cleaned Version-2 data products,

278: and data were further reduced using FTOOLS version 6.4 according to

279: the standard procedure outlined in the ``Suzaku Data Reduction (ABC)

280: Guide''.  The standard filtering resulted in 88.5\,ksec of ``good''

281: XIS data.  Spectra and lightcurves were extracted from all XISs using

282: a circular region of radius 3.25\,arcmin centered on NGC~4258.

283: Background spectra were obtained from rectangular source free regions

284: (avoiding the calibration sources) around the chip edges.  Response

285: matrices and effective area curves were generated using the {\tt

286: xisrmfgen} and {\tt xissimarfgen} tools, respectively, using the

287: recommended 400,000 photons per energy bin during the construction of

288: the effective area files.  We also utilize HXD data in this paper.

289: Standard filtering resulted in 97.5\,ksec of ``good'' {\it

290: Suzaku}-HXD/PIN data from which a spectrum was constructed.  A PIN

291: background spectrum was produced that included the Cosmic X-ray

292: Background (CXB) plus the latest model of the detector background.  We

293: do not consider HXD/GSO data in this paper due to the fact that the

294: high background of this detector makes a detection of NGC~4258

295: impossible.

296: 

297: The {\it XMM-Newton} data presented in this paper result from a

298: continuous 65\,ksec exposure started on 17-Nov-2006, 160 days after

299: the {\it Suzaku} observation.  All of the European Photon Imaging

300: Cameras (EPIC) were operated in {\tt PrimeFullWindow} mode, and the

301: data were cleaned using the Science Analysis System (SAS) version 7.1

302: following the standard procedure outlined in the ``User's Guide to

303: XMM-Newton SAS''.  We reject data during three background flares (PN

304: count rate $>$50\,ct\,s$^{-1}$).  The final ``good'' exposure time for

305: the EPIC detectors is 55\,ksec.  EPIC spectra were extracted using a

306: circular extraction region of radius 30\,arcsec centered on the bright

307: nucleus of NGC~4258, and background spectra were extracted using a

308: nearby source free circular region of radius 1.5\,arcmin.

309: 

310: The {\it Swift/BAT} is a wide field (2 steradians) coded aperture hard

311: X-ray instrument which, during normal operations, surveys 60\% of the

312: sky each day at $<$20\,milliCrab sensitivity.  The BAT spectrum used

313: here was prepared as part of the 22-month extension to the BAT-survey.

314: The BAT survey spectra are derived from an independent all sky mosaic

315: map in each of nine energy bins averaged over 22 months of data

316: beginning on Dec 5 2004.  The energy bin edges are 14, 20, 24, 35, 50,

317: 75, 100, 150, 195 keV.  The nature of the coded-mask analysis

318: naturally results in a background-subtracted source spectrum.  As

319: discussed in Tueller et al. (2008), fitting of the BAT data was

320: performed using a diagonal response matrix which correctly accounts

321: for instrumental systematics in sources with spectral indices similar

322: to the Crab (photon index $\Gamma\sim 2$).  See Tueller et al. (2008)

323: for more details.

324: 

325: All spectra were binned to a minimum of 20 counts per bin to

326: facilitate $\chi^2$ fitting.  All spectral analysis presented here is

327: performed using XSPECv11.3.2.

328: 

329: 

330: \section{Results}

331: 

332: In this section, we describe the spectral and temporal properties of

333: the X-ray emission from NGC~4258.  Given its superior signal-to-noise

334: and energy band our discussion focuses on the {\it Suzaku} dataset,

335: although we compare and contrast with the new {\it XMM-Newton} dataset

336: where ever appropriate.  In order to extend the energy reach of our

337: time-averaged spectral study (\S\ref{sec:broadspec}), we supplement

338: the {\it Suzaku} data with {\it Swift}/BAT data.  Finally, in order to

339: study long-term variations in the all-important fluorescent iron line,

340: we include data from our new {\it XMM-Newton} observation as well as

341: archival {\it XMM-Newton} and {\it ASCA} data.

342: 

343: \subsection{The 0.3--140\,keV spectrum}

344: \label{sec:broadspec}

345: 

346: \begin{figure}

347: \centerline{

348: \psfig{figure=f1.eps,width=0.48\textwidth}

349: }

350: \caption{The 0.3--140\,keV spectrum of NGC~4258.  Shown here are data

351: from {\it Suzaku}/XIS1 (0.3--10\,keV; black), {\it Suzaku}/PIN

352: (14--30\,keV; orange), and the {\it Swift}/BAT survey (15--140\,keV;

353: gold).  The spectral model consists of two optically-thin thermal

354: plasma component (magenta; unabsorbed apart from the effects of the

355: cold Galactic absorption column of $N_{\rm Gal}=1.45\times

356: 10^{20}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}$), an absorbed power-law (with intrinsic

357: absorption $N_H=9.2\times 10^{22}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}$ and photon index

358: $\Gamma=1.77$), and a narrow 6.4\,keV iron fluorescence line.}

359: \label{fig:spectrum}

360: \vspace{0.3cm}

361: \end{figure}

362: 

363: The combination of the {\it Suzaku}/XISs, the {\it Suzaku}/PIN and the

364: {\it Swift}/BAT allows us to form the spectrum of \ngc\ over the

365: energy range 0.3--140\,keV (see Fig.~\ref{fig:spectrum} which, for

366: clarity, only shows one of the four XISs).  This spectrum extends to

367: significantly higher energy than any previous study of \ngc.  It must

368: be cautioned, however, that the {\it Swift}/BAT data are collected

369: over a 22-month period compared with the {\it Suzaku} ``snapshot''.

370: In this study, we make the assumption that the form/shape of the

371: high-energy ($>10\keV$) spectrum does not change with time even if its

372: normalization does change.  This allows us to perform joint spectral

373: fits of the {\it Suzaku} and {\it Swift}/BAT data in order to study

374: the nature of the X-ray source and the circumnuclear environment.

375: 

376: Guided by previous studies of this source, we model this spectrum as

377: the superposition of optically-thin thermal plasma emission with

378: temperature $T$ (described by the XSPEC model {\tt vmekal}; Mewe et

379: al. 1985; Kaastra 1992; Liedahl et al. 1995), an absorbed power-law

380: (with photon index $\Gamma$ absorbed by a cold column $N_{\rm H}$),

381: and an additional continuum component required to correctly describe

382: the inflection point in the spectrum around 2\,keV where thermal

383: plasma emission and absorbed power-law swap dominance.  There are

384: several possible identifications of this additional continuum

385: component including (1) AGN emission that has scattered around the

386: absorbing matter, (2) AGN emission that has leaked through a patchy

387: absorber, (3) hard X-ray emission associated with X-ray binaries in

388: the galaxy, or (4) thermal emission from very hot gas associated with

389: star formation or the interaction of the AGN jet with the galactic

390: disk.  Both the intrinsic absorption and the Galactic absorption (from

391: a column $N_{\rm H}=1.45\times 10^{20}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}$; Dickey \&

392: Lockman 1990) were described using the {\tt phabs} model.  To obtain a

393: good description of the soft X-ray data, we require that the elemental

394: abundances are allowed to vary relative to solar values (as defined by

395: Anders \& Grevesse 1989) in two groups, Group A (with abundance $Z_A$)

396: consisting of \{C,N,O,Ne,Na,Mg,Al,Si,S,Ar,Ca\}, and group B (with

397: abundance $Z_B$) containing \{Fe,Ni\}.

398: 

399: In our Canonical Spectral Model, the additional continuum component is

400: modeled by a power-law component with photon index equal to that of

401: the main (absorbed) AGN powerlaw ($\Gamma_2=\Gamma$) that is

402: unaffected by the intrinsic absorption.  This is an appropriate

403: spectral model to describe the scattering or leaky absorber scenario.

404: This model provides a decent description of the spectrum ($\chi^2/{\rm

405: dof}=4506/4003$) with best-fitting parameters

406: $\Gamma=1.75^{+0.05}_{-0.04}$, $N_{\rm H}=(9.2^{+0.4}_{-0.3})\times

407: 10^{22}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}$, $kT=0.54\pm 0.01\keV$,

408: $Z_A=0.49^{+0.10}_{-0.08}Z_\odot$, $Z_B=0.27^{+0.05}_{-0.04}Z_\odot$.

409: The normalization of the additional continuum component relative to

410: the main AGN powerlaw is $f=6.0\pm 0.4\%$; this can be interpreted as

411: the scattering or leakage fraction.  If we allow the photon index of

412: the additional continuum component to be free, the fit does not

413: improve and we find that $\Gamma_2$ is very poorly constrained.  Using

414: this spectral model, we deduce an observed 0.5--10\,keV flux $F^{\rm

415: obs}_{0.5-10}=9.7\times 10^{-12}\ergpcmsqps$ and observed 0.5--10\,keV

416: luminosity $L^{\rm obs}_{0.5-10}=6.0\times 10^{40}\ergps$.  Removing

417: the effects of absorption within the model implies an intrinsic

418: 0.5--10\,keV luminosity of $L^X_{0.5-10}=1.4\times 10^{41}\ergps$.

419: The best-fitting normalization of the BAT model is 48\% that of the

420: {\it Suzaku} model.  We interpret this as true variability, i.e., the

421: {\it Suzaku} observation caught the source at a time when the

422: high-energy emission has twice the normalization of the 22-month

423: average spectrum.

424: 

425: The second continuum component can also be described by an additional

426: thermal plasma component; however, while a good fit can be obtained

427: ($\chi^2/{\rm dof}=4501/4004$), a rather hot ($kT>5.5\keV$) and

428: low-metallicity ($Z<0.26Z_\odot$) plasma is required.  Thus, since it

429: is not clear from where such a plasma component would originate, we

430: prefer the power-law description of this additional continuum

431: component.

432: 

433: Our Canonical Spectral Model fit leaves a line-like residue in the

434: 0.5--0.6\,keV range that likely signals soft X-ray complexity beyond

435: the simple one-temperature thermal plasma model.  Adding a second

436: plasma component with an identical abundance pattern but different

437: temperature ($kT=0.22\pm 0.02\keV$) leads to a significant improvement

438: in the goodness of fit ($\chi^2/{\rm dof}=4360/4001$).  However, a

439: robust exploration of these multi-temperature solutions is not

440: possible at XIS-resolutions (e.g., the abundances are poorly

441: constrained) and we defer further discussion of this to a future

442: publications in which high resolution spectral data from the {\it

443:   XMM-Newton}/RGS and a long {\it Chandra}/HETG observation) will be

444: discussed.

445: 

446: The combination of the XIS, PIN and BAT data allows us to examine the

447: hard X-ray spectrum of this source in more detail than previously

448: possible.  For the hard-band study of this paragraph, the data below

449: 3\,keV were formally excluded from the analysis to prevent their

450: high-statistical weight from biasing the high-energy fit.  No

451: significant deviations from a pure absorbed power-law are detected

452: above 3\,keV.  Of course, in order for the observed powerlaw (with

453: $\Gamma<2$) not to possess a divergent energy, it must cut-off or roll

454: over at some high energy.  If the power-law has an exponential cutoff,

455: the characteristic e-folding energy is constrained by our high-energy

456: data to be $E_{\rm fold}>124\keV$.  If we instead assume a pure-power

457: law with cold X-ray reflection (modeled using the {\tt pexrav} code;

458: Magdziarz \& Zdziarski 1995), the constraints on the ``reflection

459: fraction'' ${\cal R}$ are very dependent upon the assumed inclination

460: of the reflector.  If the reflector has a slab geometry with a very

461: high inclination ($i>80^\circ$), as expected if we identify it with

462: the inner accretion disk, then these data provide no meaningful

463: constraints on the reflection fraction.  For more face-on reflection

464: (e.g., the surfaces of discrete cold clouds or the inner wall of a

465: cold torus on the far side of the X-ray source), we find ${\cal

466: R}<0.43$.  If we allow both reflection and an exponential cutoff

467: simultaneously, the limits on the e-folding energy become weaker

468: ($E_{\rm fold}>67\keV$) but constraints on reflection are essentially

469: unaffected.  The implications of this result for the circumnuclear

470: environment in this Seyfert nucleus is discussed in \S4.

471: 

472: An identical analysis of the 0.7--10\,keV {\it XMM-Newton}/EPIC (PN

473: and MOS) data (supplemented with the {\it Swift}/BAT spectrum) gives a

474: similar picture, although there are some quantitative differences.

475: Firstly, the flux of the thermal plasma emission is lower by a factor

476: of two, a simple consequence of the fact that much of this emission

477: lies in the anomalous arms and is outside of the our EPIC extraction

478: region.  The temperature and iron abundance of this emission

479: ($kT=0.58\pm 0.01\keV$, $Z_B=0.17^{+0.08}_{-0.05}Z_\odot$) are very

480: similar to that derived from {\it Suzaku}, although the light metal

481: abundance is slightly lower ($Z_A=0.20^{+0.11}_{-0.06}Z_\odot$).  The

482: most robust differences are with the parameters describing the

483: absorbed power-law; the power-law is flatter ($\Gamma=1.65\pm 0.07$)

484: and less absorbed [$N_H=(7.7\pm 0.5)\times 10^{22}\pcmsq$] in the new

485: {\it XMM-Newton} data as compared with the earlier {\it Suzaku}

486: observation.  Accompanying these changes is a decrease in intrinsic

487: (unabsorbed) 0.5--10\,keV luminosity from $L^X_{0.5-10}=1.4\times

488: 10^{41}\ergps$ to $L^X_{0.5-10}=6\times 10^{40}\ergps$.  We will see

489: below that these long-term changes are in the same sense as short term

490: variability seen within the {\it Suzaku} observation and may be

491: revealing aspects of the spatial structure of the X-ray source and

492: absorber.

493: 

494: \subsection{The Suzaku detection of a weak iron line}

495: 

496: \begin{figure}

497: \centerline{

498: \psfig{figure=f2.ps,width=0.48\textwidth,angle=270}

499: }

500: \caption{XIS residues from the best-fitting continuum model showing

501: the presence of a 6.4\,keV fluorescent line of cold iron.  Data from

502: all XIS are shown (XIS0=black, XIS1=red, XIS2=green, XIS3=blue).}

503: \label{fig:ironline}

504: \vspace{0.3cm}

505: \end{figure}

506: 

507: The width, strength, and variability of the 6.4\,keV K-shell

508: fluorescent line of cold iron is one of the most powerful probes of

509: cold gas in the circumnuclear environment of an X-ray luminous AGN.

510: The {\it Suzaku} spectrum of \ngc\ shows the most robust evidence to

511: date for this iron line in this source (Fig.~\ref{fig:ironline}).

512: Adding a Gaussian line to the Canonical Spectral Model leads to a very

513: significant improvement in the goodness-of-fit ($\Delta\chi^2=-40$ for

514: three additional model parameters) and gives a line energy, width,

515: flux and equivalent width of $E=6.42\pm 0.03\keV$, $\sigma<0.07\keV$

516: (corresponding to a full width half maximum, FWHM$<1.1\times

517: 10^4\kmps$), $F_{\rm K\alpha}=(6.0^{+1.9}_{-1.6})\times 10^{-6}\,{\rm

518: ph}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$ and $W_{K\alpha}=45\pm 17\eV$,

519: respectively.  Assuming Keplerian orbits in an edge-on accretion disk,

520: the limit on the FWHM corresponds to $r>3\times 10^3\,r_g$ ($6\times

521: 10^{-3}\pc$).

522: 

523: We note that the equivalent width of the iron line is entirely

524: consistent with the limits on reflection reported in

525: Section~\ref{sec:broadspec}.  If, for now, we assume that the iron

526: line is produced by isotropic illumination of a planar optically-thick

527: structure, we can use the relations reported in Matt, Fabian \&

528: Reynolds (1997) to infer that the solid angle of the reflector

529: as seen by the X-ray source satisfies

530: \begin{equation}

531: \frac{\Omega}{2\pi}\approx 0.25\frac{\ln 2}{\cos\theta\,\ln(1+1/\cos\theta)},

532: \end{equation}

533: where $\theta$ is the inclination of the slab, we have assumed Anders

534: \& Grevesse (1989) abundances.  Note that the quantity $\Omega/2\pi$

535: can be compared directly with the reflection fraction quoted in

536: Section~\ref{sec:broadspec}.  A more sophisticated treatment of the

537: iron line strength expected via reflection from the surface of the

538: warped accretion disk in NGC~4258 (including all of the relevant

539: geometric effects) will be deferred to Section~4.1.

540: 

541: Once the narrow iron line component has been modeled, there is no

542: evidence in the XIS spectra for an additional broad/relativistic iron

543: line from the inner accretion disk.  However, due to the high

544: inclination angle of the inner disk the limits are not strong.

545: Including a Schwarzschild disk-line (modeled using the fully

546: relativistic code of Brenneman \& Reynolds [2006]) with a rest-frame

547: energy of $E=6.4\keV$ and an emissivity profile $\epsilon\sim r^{-3}$

548: between $r_{\rm in}=6r_g$ and $r_{\rm out}=1000r_g$, we derive an

549: upper limit on the equivalent width of any broad iron line of $W_{\rm

550: broad}<180\eV$ assuming an inner disk inclination of $i=80^\circ$.  By

551: contrast, even if the inner disk is in an optically-thick fluorescing

552: state and irradiated by an isotropic X-ray source, limb-darkening

553: effects would likely reduce the equivalent width of the broad iron

554: line to below 100\,eV (Matt et al. 1997; R00).  Thus, we cannot yet

555: rule out the possibility of an optically-thick X-ray irradiated inner

556: accretion disk.

557: 

558: Despite the lower signal-to-noise, the iron line is also robustly

559: detected in the new {\it XMM-Newton} EPIC data.  Adding a Gaussian

560: line leads to an improvement in the goodness-of-fit of

561: $\Delta\chi^2=-26$ for three additional model parameters, and gives a

562: line energy, width, flux and equivalent width of $E=6.41\pm 0.03\keV$,

563: $\sigma<0.07\keV$, $F_{\rm K\alpha}=(3.3^{+1.2}_{-1.0})\times

564: 10^{-6}\,{\rm ph}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$ and $W_{K\alpha}=53\pm

565: 19\eV$, respectively.  Comparing the {\it XMM-Newton} and {\it Suzaku}

566: iron line fits, we see evidence for a decrease in the flux of the iron

567: line.  Motivated by the desire to use line variability to locate the

568: fluorescing matter, this result prompts us to conduct a more

569: systematic analysis of the long term variability of the iron line.

570: 

571: \subsection{Long term variability of the iron line flux}

572: 

573: Given the weak nature of the iron line in NGC~4258 (which is itself a

574: comparatively X-ray faint AGN), there are relatively few datasets

575: capable of providing good constraints on the line flux.  In addition

576: to the deep {\it Suzaku} and {\it XMM-Newton} observations presented

577: here, we examine five additional datasets from the HEASARC archives; a

578: deep {\it ASCA} observation (15--20 May 1999; 169\,ks of good data),

579: and four shorter {\it XMM-Newton} observations (8-Dec-2000 [21.6\,ks];

580: 6-May-2001 [12.9\,ks]; 17-June-2001 [13.6\,ks]; 22-May-2001

581: [16.5\,ks]).  We note that there is also a 15.2\,ks {\it XMM-Newton}

582: observation on 17-Dec-2001 that we choose to ignore due to it being

583: severely affected by flares in the instrumental background.  The {\it

584: XMM-Newton} data were processed according to the description given in

585: \S2.  Processing of the {\it ASCA} data follows R00 except for the use

586: of the latest version of the FTOOLS/HEADAS package (v6.4) and

587: calibration files.

588: 

589: \begin{figure}

590: \vspace{0.5cm}

591: \centerline{

592: \psfig{figure=f3.ps,width=0.48\textwidth,angle=270}

593: }

594: \caption{Historical variability of the iron line flux (units

595: $10^{-6}\,{\rm ph}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$, equivalent width

596: (units $eV$), and underlying 6--7\,keV continuum (units

597: $10^{-13}\ergpcmsqps$).  A 10\% systematic (calibration uncertainty)

598: has been assumed for all continuum flux measurements.}

599: \label{fig:ironline_vary}

600: \vspace{0.3cm}

601: \end{figure}

602: 

603: Figure~\ref{fig:ironline_vary} shows the iron line flux, equivalent

604: width, and the 6--7\,keV continuum flux for all of the data under

605: consideration.  The superior statistics of the new datasets are

606: evident.  The hypothesis of a constant line flux can be formally

607: rejected at the 95\% level ($\chi^2=12.1$ for 6 degrees of freedom),

608: whereas the data are consistent with a constant equivalent width (a

609: model with $W_{\rm K\alpha}=49\eV$ gives $\chi^2=7.7$ for 6 degrees of

610: freedom).  The evidence for flux variability comes primarily from the

611: new {\it XMM-Newton} dataset (MJD~54056) which coincides with a

612: historical minimum in the 6-7\,keV continuum flux.

613: 

614: Variations of the line flux by almost a factor of two over the course

615: of 160 days (i.e., between the new {\it Suzaku} and {\it XMM-Newton}

616: observations) allows us to place interesting constraints on the

617: location of the fluorescing matter; the light crossing time of the

618: full line emitting region must be no greater than 160 days (and likely

619: significantly smaller).  Thus, we conclude that the line emitting

620: material is within a radius of $0.07\pc$ ($4\times 10^4r_g$) from the

621: central X-ray source.  This strongly suggests that there is cold

622: material (producing fluorescent iron emission) {\it within} the masing

623: portion of the disk (the masers appear to have an inner truncation

624: radius of approximately 0.13\,pc).  

625: 

626: \subsection{The Suzaku flare}

627: 

628: \begin{figure}

629: \vspace{0.3cm}

630: \centerline{

631: \psfig{figure=f4.eps,width=0.48\textwidth}

632: }

633: \caption{Sum of the 0.3--10\,keV light curves from the Front

634: Illuminated XISs (XIS0,2,3).  Also shown are the results of a

635: ``Bayesian block'' analysis with $p=3\times 10^{-5}$ (orange) and

636: $p=0.085$ (red).}

637: \vspace*{0.5cm}

638: \label{fig:lightcurve}

639: \end{figure}

640: 

641: 

642: Significant time variability on a range of characteristic timescales

643: is seen during the {\it Suzaku} observation

644: (Fig.~\ref{fig:lightcurve}).  A broad 100\,ksec hump is centered

645: within the (almost) 200\,ksec observation window.  However, much more

646: rapid variability is apparent.  Applying a Bayesian Blocks

647: analysis\footnote{http://space.mit.edu/CXC/analysis/SITAR/bb\_experiment.html}

648: (based upon earlier work by Scargle 1998), which searches for

649: flare-like structure in lightcurves dominated by Poisson statistics,

650: the overall lightcurve is found to be significantly variable; with

651: robust evidence for 10\% variations on 16\,ksec timescales (false

652: alarm probability $p=3\times 10^{-5}$), and good evidence for the

653: presence of a 5\,ksec flare ($p=8.5\times 10^{-2}$).  

654: 

655: Direct inspection of XIS images confirm that the variable source is

656: located at the nucleus of NGC~4258 to within $20^{\prime\prime}$. This

657: confirms and strengthens the case for rapid variability seen by {\it

658: BeppoSAX} (Fiore et al. 2001), and alleviates the background and

659: confusion concerns expressed by Fruscione et al. (2005) about the {\it

660: BeppoSAX} variability.  In the absence of relativistic beaming

661: effects, light-crossing time arguments allow one to estimate an

662: approximate upper limit to the size of the emitting regions; the large

663: amplitude 50\,ksec variability should originate from a region smaller

664: than about $250r_g$, whereas the corresponding limit for the rapid

665: 5\,ksec flare is just $25r_g$.  If this variability is associated with

666: accretion disk processes, more stringent limits can be set by equating

667: these timescales with the dynamical time of a Keplerian disk

668: $\Omega^{-1}=\sqrt{r^3/GM}$.  Thus, under this disk-origin scenario,

669: the 50\,ksec variability should originate from within $r\approx 40r_g$

670: whereas the 5\,ksec flare should occur in the innermost disk,

671: $r\approx 10r_g$.

672: 

673: We search for any spectral changes during the flare by splitting the

674: {\it Suzaku} observation into a ``low-state'' and a ``high-state''.

675: Only the XIS data have sufficient S/N to permit this exercise.  We

676: define the threshold distinguishing high-state from low state to be a

677: total XIS count rate of $1$\,cps.  Using the Canonical Spectral Model,

678: the low-state XIS0--3 spectra are fit jointly with the high-state

679: XIS0--3 spectra.  The parameters describing the soft thermal plasma

680: emission are fixed between the low- and high-state spectral models.

681: Initially, we also assume that the photon index of the AGN emission

682: and the intrinsic absorption column were also the same for the two

683: states, with only the normalizations of the AGN power-laws being

684: allowed to float between the low- and high-state spectral models.  The

685: resulting best-fit parameters are identical to that found for the full

686: time-averaged spectrum.  We then allow the photon index and the

687: absorbing column density to be different between the low- and

688: high-state.  While there was a hint that both the photon index and the

689: absorbing column density increased in the high-state, the formal

690: improvement in the goodness of fit is {\it not} statistically

691: significant ($\Delta\chi^2=-5$ for the additional of two new model

692: parameters).  Thus, direct spectral modeling of the low- and

693: high-state spectra does not reveal robust evidence of spectral

694: variability.

695: 

696: An alternative methodology is to construct and then model the

697: high$-$low difference spectrum; this is a formally correct procedure

698: (and yields meaningful results) if the physical difference between the

699: high- and low-state is the addition of a new emission component.  We

700: find that the difference spectrum has the form of a pure absorbed

701: power-law; this explicitly demonstrates that, as expected, the soft

702: X-ray thermal plasma component has not changed between the high- and

703: low-state spectra.  Interestingly, both the absorption column and

704: photon index characterizing this variable emission differ from that

705: found in the time-averaged spectrum, $N_{\rm

706: H}=(1.58^{+0.37}_{-0.31})\times 10^{23}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}$ and

707: $\Gamma=2.4\pm 0.5$ [compared with $N_{\rm

708: H}=(9.2^{+0.4}_{-0.3})\times 10^{22}$ and

709: $\Gamma=1.75^{+0.05}_{-0.04}$ for the time-averaged spectrum.]  While

710: these results must be taken as tentative, it appears that the

711: difference spectra are revealing spectral changes that are too subtle

712: to be revealed by direct modeling of the low- and high-state spectra

713: alone.

714: 

715: 

716: \section{Discussion}

717: 

718: \subsection{The origin of the fluorescent iron line}

719: 

720: Our study has found the first significant evidence of iron line flux

721: variability in this source.  Combined with the limits on the velocity

722: width of the iron line, the variability allows us to constrain the

723: line emitting region to the range $3\times 10^3r_g<r<4\times 10^4r_g$

724: ($6\times 10^{-3}\pc<r<7\times 10^{-2}\pc$).  The most obvious

725: candidate for the fluorescing matter on these spatial scales is the

726: accretion disk itself.

727: 

728: \begin{figure}

729: \centerline{

730: \psfig{figure=f5.ps,width=0.48\textwidth,angle=270}

731: }

732: \caption{Radial distribution of iron line emission in the overall best

733: fitting warped disk model of M08 (dashed blue line) and the best

734: fitting gravitationally-stable model of M08 (solid red line).  The

735: quantity shown here $f_L(r)$ is the total observed line flux (in

736: arbitrary units) from a given radius in the accretion disk.}

737: \label{fig:warped_results}

738: \end{figure}

739: 

740: Assuming an isotropic X-ray source at the center of the accretion

741: disk, the expected iron line from the disk can be estimated once we

742: have a model for the 3-dimensional geometry of the warped disk

743: relative to the observer.  Martin (2008; M08) has recently described

744: the maser data for NGC~4258 accretion disk using a model of a disk

745: warped by the General Relativistic frame-dragging effects of central

746: rotating black hole (Bardeen \& Petterson 1975).  As described in the

747: Appendix, we have calculated the expected iron line equivalent width

748: and the radial distribution of iron line emission for both the overall

749: best fitting warped disk model of M08, and the best fitting warped

750: disk model of M08 that is stable to self-gravity.  These two warped

751: disk models have a total warp angle between the inner and outer disk

752: of $\eta=45.8^\circ$ and $85.9^\circ$, respectively. Assuming solar

753: abundances (Anders \& Grevesse 1989), the $\eta=45.8^\circ$ model

754: gives an iron line that is both too weak ($W_{\rm K\alpha}=25\eV$) and

755: originates from too far out in the disk to be compatible with the line

756: variability ($5\times 10^4-1\times 10^5r_g$; see

757: Fig.~\ref{fig:warped_results}).  On the other hand, the gravitational

758: stable warped disk of M08 predicts an iron line of the correct

759: strength ($W_{\rm K\alpha}=51\eV$), originating from a region in the

760: disk that is compatible with both the line width and line variability

761: constraints ($(1-4)\times 10^4r_g$; Fig.~\ref{fig:warped_results}).

762: We note that in addition to the high viewing inclination, the geometry

763: of the warped disk implies that most of the observed iron line

764: emission is driven by highly oblique irradiation of the disk surface.

765: Thus, it is important to account for the dependence of the iron line

766: photon production on the angle of incidence of the irradiating X-ray

767: continuum (see Appendix).  The high viewing inclination and the

768: oblique irradiation means that simple estimates of the line

769: strength based on covering fraction arguments are inappropriate.

770: 

771: \begin{figure*}

772: \hbox{

773: \psfig{figure=f6a.ps,width=0.45\textwidth,angle=270}

774: \hspace{0.5cm}

775: \psfig{figure=f6b.ps,width=0.45\textwidth,angle=270}

776: }

777: \caption{Predicted iron line profiles for the best fitting warped disk

778: model of M08 (dashed blue line) as well as the best fitting

779: gravitationally stable warped disk model (solid red line).  The {\it

780: left panel} shows the line profile for a single $\delta$-function

781: emission line at 6.4\,keV; the symmetry of the redshifts and

782: blueshifts is apparent.  The {\it right panel} shows the expected

783: profile of the Fe-K$\alpha$ doublet (with components at 6.392\,keV and

784: 6.405\,keV and a 1:2 branching ratio.)}

785: \label{fig:warped_profile}

786: \vspace*{0.5cm}

787: \end{figure*}

788: 

789: Thus,we have shown that one can quantitatively understand the

790: properties of the iron line in NGC~4258 if it originates from the

791: surface layers of a warped disk irradiated by a central X-ray source.

792: We do require, however, a severe warp inside of the masing region of

793: the disk of the kind possessed by the M08 best-fitting gravitationally

794: stable model.  Interestingly, as discussed in M08, this model implies a

795: significant mis-alignment between the inner accretion disk and the

796: jet.

797: 

798: The warped disk hypothesis for the origin of the iron line in NGC~4258

799: can be tested by future X-ray spectroscopy by searching for the

800: predicted asymmetric double-peaked line profile.

801: Fig.~\ref{fig:warped_profile} shows the predicted line profiles from

802: the two warped disk models of M08, both for a perfect

803: $\delta$-function emission line at 6.4\,keV (left panel) and the real

804: Fe~K$\alpha$ doublet with component energies of 6.392\,keV and

805: 6.405\,keV and a 1:2 branching ratio (right panel).  Future

806: high-resolution spectrographs (such as the micro-calorimeters on

807: {\it Astro-H} or {\it International X-ray Observatory}) will be able to

808: easily revolve the predicted line profiles.

809: 

810: 

811: \subsection{The circumnuclear environment of NGC~4258}

812: 

813: As discussed above, most if not all of the iron line emission in

814: NGC~4258 can be understood as originating from the warped accretion

815: disk.  This leaves very little room for any iron fluorescence from

816: other (non-disk) cold matter in the system such as the putative

817: molecular torus of unified Seyfert schemes.  Indeed, the circumnuclear

818: environment of this black hole does appear to be significantly

819: ``cleaner'' than the vast majority of Seyfert-2 galaxies.  Dadina

820: (2008) examines a sample of 62 Seyfert 2 galaxies observed with {\it

821: BeppoSAX} and finds a mean reflection fraction of ${\cal R}=0.87\pm

822: 0.14$ (assuming face-on reflection) and a mean iron line equivalent

823: width of $W_{K\alpha}=693\pm 195\eV$.  The strong iron line and

824: Compton reflection signatures in most Seyfert 2 nuclei are readily

825: understood as originating from the obscuring molecular torus (Krolik,

826: Madau \& Zycki 1994).  For NGC~4258, the fact that our almost edge-on

827: view of the central engine suffers absorption at ``only'' the $\sim

828: 10^{23}\pcmsq$ level already rules out a Compton-thick torus that is

829: aligned with the accretion disk.  Furthermore, the very weak X-ray

830: reprocessing features (${\cal R}<0.43$ and $W_{K\alpha}=45\pm 17\eV$

831: from our time-averaged {\it Suzaku} data) rules out the presence of

832: even a misaligned geometrically-thick Compton-thick torus.

833: 

834: \subsection{A comparison with M81* and other AGN}

835: 

836: It is interesting to compare NGC 4258 with the LLAGN M81*, since both

837: seem to have very clean nuclear environments.  M81 is classified as a

838: Seyfert 1.8 / Low-Ionization Emission Line Region (LINER) galaxy, with

839: a central black hole mass of $M = 7 \times 10^7 M_\odot$ (Devereux et

840: al. 2003) accreting at $L \simeq 10^{-5} L_{\rm Edd}$.  M81* shows

841: evidence of a one-sided radio jet emanating from the nucleus

842: (Bietenholz, Bartel \& Rupen 2000).  High-resolution X-ray

843: spectroscopy of M81* with \emph{Chandra} (Young et al. 2007) reveals a

844: number of emission lines, including Fe K$\alpha$, and velocity

845: broadened Si K$\alpha$ and other thermal lines.  The Fe K$\alpha$ line

846: in M81* has an EW of $47^{+25}_{-24}$ eV, almost identical to that of

847: NGC 4258, and there is no evidence of a broad iron line.  Furthermore,

848: the broadened Si K$\alpha$ fluorescence line in M81* is consistent

849: with originating in a disk at $r \sim 10^4 r_g$, assuming the

850: inclination angle is the same as the disk observed with HST, $i =

851: 14^\circ$ (Devereux et al. 2003).  The broadened thermal lines in M81*

852: are consistent with originating at $r < 10^{4-5} r_g$, suggesting that

853: there is hot thermal gas at small radii, possibly in the form of a

854: radiatively inefficient accretion flow or the base of a jet (Markoff

855: et al. 2008).

856: 

857: The inclination angles of the outer accretion disk in NGC 4258 ($ \sim

858: 80^\circ$), and in M81, ($14^\circ$) are significantly different, and

859: this may account for the fact that NGC 4258 has a much larger column

860: density ($\sim 10^{23}$ cm$^{-2}$) than M81 ($\sim 10^{21}$

861: cm$^{-2}$), that maser emission is not seen in M81, and the difference

862: in the obscuration of the broad line region (i.e., the Seyfert types).

863: In M81*, we do not know the geometry of the disk well enough to

864: calculate the strength of the Fe K$\alpha$ line that it would produce.

865: Apart from their different inclination angles, the accretion flows in

866: NGC 4258 and M81* seem to be remarkably similar.

867: 

868: Although we have noted the similarities between the circumnuclear

869: environments of NGC4258 and M81*, it is interesting that these results

870: on NGC4258 and M81* appear to run counter to some general behaviour of

871: the AGN population.  In particular, it has been noted that the

872: strength of the iron emission line across the AGN population is

873: anticorrelated with both the X-ray luminosity (Iwasawa \& Taniguchi

874: 1993) and the Eddington ratio (Winter et al. 2008).  Using the

875: Swift-BAT AGN survey, Winter et al. (2008) show that LLAGN with X-ray

876: Eddington ratios comparable to NGC~4258 ($L_X/L_{\rm Edd}\sim

877: 10^{-5}$) typically possess iron line equivalent widths in excess of

878: 500\,eV.  Thus, on the basis of the iron line equivalent width, the

879: circumnuclear environments of NGC~4258 and M81* appear to have

880: significantly less cold gas than the average LLAGN.   

881: 

882: 

883: \section{Conclusions}

884: 

885: Using {\it Suzaku}, {\it XMM-Newton} and {\it Swift}, we have obtained

886: an unprecedented view of the active nucleus in NGC~4258.  Our

887: principal results are:

888: \begin{enumerate}

889: \item Comparing the {\it Suzaku} data with {\it XMM-Newton} data taken

890: 160 days later, we detect robust flux variability of the 6.4\,keV iron

891: line for the first time.  Together with constraints on the velocity

892: width of the line, and assuming Keplerian motion about the central

893: black hole, we can place the iron line emitting region to be between

894: $3\times 10^3r_g$ and $4\times 10^4r_g$.

895: \item We show that the strength, velocity width and time variability

896: of the iron line can be explained by a model in which the line

897: originates from the surface of a warped accretion disk.  In

898: particular, we present explicit calculations of the expected iron line

899: from a disk warped by Lens-Thirring precession from a severely

900: misaligned central black hole.

901: \item During our {\it Suzaku} observation, we detect high amplitude

902: intraday variability, with fluctuations on timescales as short as

903: 5\,ks.  Corresponding light travel time arguments suggest that the

904: emission region is smaller than $25r_g$.  If we make the stronger

905: assertion that this timescale be longer than the dynamical timescale

906: of the accretion disk at the location it is produced, the upper limit

907: on the radius of the emission is $10r_g$.

908: \item In stark contrast with the vast majority of other Seyfert 2

909: galaxies, there are no indications of a Compton-thick obscuring torus;

910: the weak iron line and the lack of reflection all point to a

911: circumnuclear environment that is remarkable clean of cold gas.  As

912: pointed out by Herrnstein et al. (2005), the intrinsic absorption that

913: we do see in the X-ray spectrum may well arise in the outer layers of

914: the warped geometrically-thin accretion disk, further reducing the

915: need for any cold structure other than the accretion disk itself.

916: \item We highlight the similarities in the circumnuclear environments

917: of NGC~4258 and another LLAGN, M81*.  However, we also note that the

918: remarkably clean circumnuclear environment found in these two LLAGN

919: stand in contrast to the vast majority of LLAGN.

920: \end{enumerate}

921: 

922: We thank Richard Mushotzky for stimulating conversations throughout

923: this work.  CSR thanks the NASA {\it Suzaku} and {\it XMM-Newton}

924: Guest Observer Programs for support under grants NNX06A135G and

925: NNX07AE97G.

926: 

927: \section*{References}

928: 

929: {\small

930: 

931: \noindent Anders E., Grevesse N., 1989, Geochimica et Cosmochimica

932: Acta, 53, 197

933: 

934: \noindent Bardeen J.M., Petterson J.A., 1975, ApJL, 195, L65

935: 

936: \noindent Brenneman L.W., Reynolds C.S., 2006, ApJ, 652, 1028

937: 

938: \noindent Cecil G., Wilson A.~S., De Pree C., 1995, ApJ, 440, 181

939: 

940: \noindent Chiang J. et al., 2000, ApJ, 528, 292

941: 

942: \noindent Dadina M., 2007, A\&A, 461, 1209

943: 

944: \noindent Devereux N., Ford H., Tsvetanov Z., Jacoby G., 2003, AJ,

945: 125, 1226

946: 

947: \noindent Dickey J.M., Lockman F.J., 1990, ARA\&A, 28, 215

948: 

949: \noindent Fabbiano G., Kim D., Trincheieri G., 1992, ApJS, 80, 531

950: 

951: \noindent Fiore F., et al., 2001, ApJ, 556, 150

952: 

953: \noindent Fruscione A., Greenhill L.J., Filippenko A.V., Moran J.M.,

954: Hernnstein J.R., Galle, E., 2005, ApJ, 624, 103

955: 

956: \noindent Gammie C.F., Narayan R., Blandford R.D., 1999, ApJ, 516, 177

957: 

958: \noindent George I.M., Fabian A.C., 1991, MNRAS, 249, 352

959: 

960: \noindent Herrnstein J.R., et al., 1999, Nature, 400, 539

961: 

962: \noindent Herrnstein J.R., Moran J.M., Greenhill L.J., Trotter A.S.,

963: 2005, ApJ, 629, 719

964: 

965: \noindent Kaastra J.S., 1992, An X-ray Spectral Code for Optically

966: Thin Plasmas (Internal SRON-Leiden Report, updated version 2.0)

967: 

968: \noindent Krolik J.H., Madau P., Zycki P.T., 1994, ApJL, 420, L57

969: 

970: \noindent Iwasawa K., Taniguchi Y., 1993, ApJ, 1993, 413, L15

971: 

972: \noindent Lasota J.P., Abramowicz M.A., Chen X., Krolik J., Narayan

973: R., Yi L., 1996, ApJ, 462, 142

974: 

975: \noindent Lee J.C., Fabian A.C., Reynolds C.S., Brandt W.N., Iwasawa

976: K., 2000, MNRAS, 318, 857

977: 

978: \noindent Liedahl D.A., Osterheld A.L., Goldstein W.H., 1995, ApJ, 438, L115

979: 

980: \noindent Makishima K. et al., 1994, PASJ, 46, L77

981: 

982: \noindent Magdziarz P., Zdziarski A.A., 1995, MNRAS, 273, 837

983: 

984: \noindent Markoff S. et al., 2008, ApJ, in press

985: 

986: \noindent Martin R.G., 2008, MNRAS, in press (arXiv0804.1013) [M08]

987: 

988: \noindent Martin R.G., Pringle J.E., Tout C.A., 2007, MNRAS, 381, 1617

989: 

990: \noindent Matt G., Fabian A.C., Reynolds C.S., 1997, MNRAS, 289, 175

991: 

992: \noindent Mewe R., Gronenschild E.H.B.M., van den Oord G.H.J., 1985,

993: A\&AS, 62, 197

994: 

995: \noindent Miyoshi M., Moran J., Herrnstein J., Greenhill L., Nakai N.,

996: iamond P., Inoue M., 1995, Nature, 373, 127

997: 

998: \noindent Neufeld D., Maloney P.R., 1995, ApJ, 447, L17

999: 

1000: \noindent Pietsch W., Vogler A., Kahabka P., Klein U., 1994, A\&A,

1001: 284, 386

1002: 

1003: \noindent Pietsch W., Read A.M., 2002, A\&A, 384, 793

1004: 

1005: \noindent Reynolds C.S., Nowak M.A., Maloney P.R., 2000, ApJ, 540, 143 [R00]

1006: 

1007: \noindent Reynolds C.S., Nowak M.A., 2003, Phys. Rep., 377, 389

1008: 

1009: \noindent Scargle J.D., 1998, ApJ, 504, 405

1010: 

1011: \noindent Scheuer P.A.G., Feiler R., 1996, MNRAS, 282, 291

1012: 

1013: \noindent Tueller J., et al., ApJ, in press (arXiv:0711.4130)

1014: 

1015: \noindent Vogler A., Pietsch W., 1999, A\&A, 352, 64

1016: 

1017: \noindent Wilson A.S., Yang Y., Cecil G., 2001, ApJ, 560, 689

1018: 

1019: \noindent Winter L.M., Mushotzky R.F., Reynolds C.S., Tueller J.,

1020: 2008, ApJ, in press

1021: 

1022: \noindent Yuan F., Markoff S., Falcke H., Biermann P.L., 2002, A\&A,

1023: 391, 139

1024: 

1025: \noindent Young A.J., Wilson A.S., 2004, ApJ, 601, 133

1026: 

1027: \noindent Young A.J., Nowak M.A., Markoff S., Marshall H.L., Canizares

1028: C.R., 2007, ApJ, 669, 830 }

1029: 

1030: 

1031: 

1032: \appendix

1033: 

1034: \section{Iron line emission from a centrally illuminated warped disk}

1035: 

1036: In this Appendix, we describe our calculation of the fluorescent iron

1037: line profiles from a centrally illuminated warped accretion disk.  We

1038: base our considerations on the warped disk model for NGC~4258 of

1039: Martin (2008; also see Martin, Pringle \& Tout 2007).  Martin et

1040: al. (2008; hereafter M08) use the formulism of Scheuer \& Feiler

1041: (1996) to compute the geometry of a steady-state, geometically-thin

1042: viscous disk that is warped due to a misalignment between the angular

1043: momentum of the large scale accretion flow and the spin axis of the

1044: central black hole.  The interesting parameters of the M08 disk model

1045: are the misalignment angle between the angular momentum of the large

1046: scale accretion flow and the spin axis of the central black hole,

1047: $\eta$, the warp radius $R_{\rm warp}$, and the power-law index

1048: describing the radial dependence of the surface density $b$ (with

1049: surface density following $\Sigma\propto R^{-b}$.  Setting $b=2$, M08

1050: show that such a model describes the geometry of the high-velocity

1051: masers in NGC~4258.  Although some degeneracy exists, M08 described

1052: two ``best fitting'' models; the overall best-fit has

1053: $\eta=45.8^\circ$ and $R_{\rm warp}=1.6\times 10^5r_g$ (corresponding

1054: to 5.8\,mas), whereas the best-fitting model given the constrain of a

1055: gravitationally-stable disk is $\eta=85.9^\circ$ and $R_{\rm

1056: warp}=2.47\times 10^4r_g$ (corresponding to 1.3\,mas).

1057: 

1058: A basic premise of this approach is that the disk at a given radius is

1059: a flat ring centered on the black hole.  The different annuli exchange

1060: angular momentum via a process modeled as shear viscosity.  Let ${\bf

1061: l}(R)$ be a unit vector pointing in the direction of the angular

1062: momentum of the disk flow at radius $R$.  In a Cartesian coordinate

1063: system in which the black hole spin is aligned with the $z$-axis, the

1064: fact that the innermost portions of the disk are aligned with the

1065: black hole spin (Bardeen \& Petterson 1975) imply that ${\bf

1066: l}(R)\rightarrow (0,0,1)$ as $r\rightarrow 0$.  We also have ${\bf

1067: l}(R)\rightarrow (\sin\eta,0,\cos\eta)$ as $r\rightarrow \infty$,

1068: where we have aligned our coordinate system such that the angular

1069: momentum of the large scale flow lies in the $x-z$ plane.  As

1070: discussed in Martin, Pringle \& Tout (2007) and M08, the disk warp is

1071: then described by

1072: \begin{equation}

1073: W(R)=\frac{2W_\infty}{\Gamma(\frac{1}{6})}\frac{(-i)^{1/12}}{3^{1/6}}\left(\frac{R_{\rm warp}}{R}\right)^{1/4}\,K_{1/6}\left[\frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}(1-i)\left(\frac{R}{R_{\rm warp}}\right)^{-3/2}\right],

1074: \end{equation}

1075: where $W=l_x+il_y$ is a complex representation of the unit vector

1076: ${\bf l}$, $W_\infty=\sin\eta$, $K_{1/6}$ is the modified Bessel

1077: function of order $1/6$, and $\Gamma$ is the gamma-function.   

1078: 

1079: Within the context of their models, M08 find good fits to the maser

1080: data assuming that both the black hole spin axis and the angular

1081: momentum of the large scale accretion flow lie in the plane of the

1082: sky.  Hence, in the Cartesian coordinate system defined above, our

1083: line of sight to the disk is directed along the y-axis, i.e., in the

1084: direction of the unit vector ${\bf e}_y$.

1085: 

1086: Given the disk geometry relative to the observer, we now proceed to

1087: compute the X-ray irradiation of the disk surface and the resulting

1088: iron line emission.  Suppose that the primary X-ray source is located

1089: at the center of the accretion disk, and emits continuum photons

1090: isotropically at a rate $N_c(E)dE=N_0(E/E_0)^{-\Gamma}$\,dE where, from

1091: now on, $\Gamma$ shall refer to the photon index of the power-law

1092: source.  Following Pringle (1996), we define the angles $\gamma(R)$

1093: and $\beta(R)$ such that 

1094: \begin{equation}

1095: {\bf l}=(\cos\gamma\sin\beta,

1096: \sin\gamma\sin\beta, \cos\beta),

1097: \end{equation}

1098: i.e., $\beta$ is the local angle of tilt of the disk relative to the

1099: $z$-axis and $\gamma$ marks the position of the decending node of the

1100: disk.  We shall also establish a polar coordinate system $(R,\phi)$ on

1101: the surface of the warped disk.  We shall denote as ${\bf x}$ the

1102: position vector of the point on the disk with coordinates $(R,\phi)$;

1103: the corresponding unit vector shall be denoted $\hat{\bf x}$. Pringle

1104: (1996) gives

1105: \begin{equation}

1106: {\bf x}=R(\cos\phi\sin\gamma+\sin\phi\cos\gamma\cos\beta,

1107: \sin\phi\sin\gamma\cos\beta-\cos\phi\cos\gamma, -\sin\phi\sin\beta)

1108: \end{equation}

1109: 

1110: From eqn.~(2.13) of Pringle (1996), the rate at which a patch ${\bf

1111: dS}$ of the disk surface intercepts photons from the central primary

1112: source (neglecting possible shadowing) is

1113: \begin{equation}

1114: dN=\frac{N_c\,dE}{4\pi R^2}|\hat{\bf x}\cdot{\bf dS}|=\frac{N_c\,dE}{4\pi R^2}|R\gamma~^\prime\cos\phi\sin\beta-R\beta^\prime\sin\phi|R\,dR\,d\phi,

1115: \end{equation}

1116: where $\gamma~^\prime\equiv d\gamma/dR$ and $\beta^\prime\equiv

1117: d\beta/dR$.  The angle $\theta_0$ between the irradiating flux and

1118: local disk normal is given by

1119: \begin{equation}

1120: \cos\theta_0=\frac{\hat{\bf x}\cdot {\bf dS}}{|{\bf dS}|}=\frac{R(\cos\phi\sin\beta\gamma~^\prime-\sin\phi\beta^\prime)}{[1+R^2(\cos\phi\sin\beta\gamma~^\prime-\sin\phi\beta^\prime)^2]^{1/2}}.

1121: \end{equation}

1122: 

1123: Given the irradiating continuum photon flux and the incident angle, we

1124: use eqns.~4-7 of George \& Fabian (1991) to compute the number of

1125: fluorescent iron line photons generated by the patch,

1126: $N_lR\,dR\,d\phi$.  We then apply a scaling factor of 1.3 (Matt et

1127: al. 1997) to correct the results of George \& Fabian (1991) to those

1128: expected for Anders \& Grevesse (1989) solar abundances.  Assuming

1129: that these photons are emitting isotropically from the optically-thick

1130: surface of the disk, the iron line photon emission rate from the patch

1131: per unit solid angle towards the observer is

1132: $\cos\theta\,N_lR\,dR\,d\phi/\pi$, where $\theta$ is the angle between

1133: the local disk normal and the observer's line of sight given by.

1134: \begin{equation}

1135: \cos\theta=\frac{{\bf e}_y\cdot {\bf dS}}{|{\bf dS}|}

1136: =\frac{l_y-R(\sin\phi\sin\gamma\cos\beta-\cos\phi\cos\gamma)(\gamma~^\prime\cos\phi\sin\beta-\beta^\prime\sin\phi)}{[1+R^2(\cos\phi\sin\beta\gamma~^\prime-\sin\phi\beta^\prime)^2]^{1/2}}.

1137: \end{equation}

1138: 

1139: The contribution of a given radial range $r\rightarrow r+dr$ to the

1140: observed line emission is given by

1141: \begin{equation}

1142: {\cal N}(R)=\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{N_l\cos\theta}{\pi}Rd\phi,

1143: \end{equation}

1144: and the total number of observed iron line photons is ${\cal N}~_{\rm

1145: tot}=\int_0^{\infty}{\cal N}(R)\,dR$.  The observed equivalent width

1146: is derived by ratioing this against the number of continuum photons

1147: emitted per unit solid angle at the line energy,

1148: \begin{equation}

1149: W_{\rm K\alpha}\frac{{\cal N}~_{\rm tot}}{N_c(E_{\rm K\alpha})/4\pi}.

1150: \end{equation}

1151: 

1152: Finally, to compute a line profile, we need to know the line-of-sight

1153: velocity of a given patch of the disk.  Assuming Keplerian flow, the

1154: velocity of the disk is given by 

1155: \begin{equation}

1156: {\bf v}={\bf l}\times \hat{{\bf x}}\sqrt\frac{GM}{R},

1157: \end{equation}

1158: and the observed line of sight velocity is 

1159: \begin{equation}

1160: v_{\rm los}={\bf e}_y\cdot

1161: {\bf v}

1162: =\sqrt\frac{GM}{R}[\sin\phi\cos\gamma\sin^2\beta+\cos\beta(\cos\phi\sin\gamma+\sin\phi\cos\gamma\cos\beta)].

1163: \end{equation}

1164: 

1165: 

1166: \end{document}

1167: 

1168: