1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: %\documentclass{emulateapj}
3: \documentclass[onecolumn]{emulateapj}
4: \usepackage{lscape}
5: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
6:
7: %%\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
8:
9: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
10:
11: % \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
12:
13:
14: \shorttitle{Suzaku Observation of MeV blazar J0746}
15: \shortauthors{Watanabe et al.}
16:
17:
18: \begin{document}
19:
20:
21: \title{Suzaku Observations of extreme MeV blazar SWIFT J0746.3+2548}
22:
23:
24: \author{Shin Watanabe\altaffilmark{1,2},
25: Rie Sato\altaffilmark{1},
26: Tadayuki Takahashi\altaffilmark{1,2},
27: Jun Kataoka\altaffilmark{3},
28: Greg Madejski\altaffilmark{4},\\
29: Marek Sikora\altaffilmark{5},
30: Fabrizio Tavecchio\altaffilmark{6},
31: Rita Sambruna\altaffilmark{7},
32: Roger Romani\altaffilmark{4},
33: Philip G. Edwards\altaffilmark{8,1} \\ and
34: Tapio Pursimo\altaffilmark{9}}
35: \email{watanabe@astro.isas.jaxa.jp}
36:
37: \altaffiltext{1}{Institute of Space and Astronautical Science/JAXA, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 229-8510, Japan}
38: \altaffiltext{2}{Department of Physics, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan}
39: \altaffiltext{3}{Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Meguro, Tokyo, 152-8551, Japan}
40: \altaffiltext{4}{Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA}
41: \altaffiltext{5}{Nicolaus Copernicus Astronomical Center, Bartycka 18, 00-716, Warsaw, Poland}
42: \altaffiltext{6}{INAF-Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, Via Bianchi 46, l-23807, Merate (LC), Italy}
43: \altaffiltext{7}{NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA}
44: \altaffiltext{8}{Australia Telescope National Facility, CSIRO, Locked Bag 194, Narrabri NSW 2390, Australia}
45: \altaffiltext{9}{Nordic Optical Telescope, Apdo 474, 38700 Santa Cruz de La Palma, Spain}
46:
47:
48: \begin{abstract}
49: We report the $Suzaku$ observations of the high luminosity blazar SWIFT J0746.3+2548 (J0746)
50: conducted in November 2005. This object, with $z = 2.979$, is
51: the highest redshift source observed in the
52: $Suzaku$ Guaranteed Time Observer (GTO) period, is likely to show
53: high gamma-ray flux peaking in the MeV range.
54: As a result of the good photon statistics and high signal-to-noise ratio spectrum,
55: the $Suzaku$ observation clearly confirms that J0746 has an extremely hard spectrum in the energy
56: range of 0.3--24~keV,
57: which is well represented by a single power-law with a photon index of
58: $\Gamma_{\rm ph} \simeq 1.17$ and Galactic absorption. The multiwavelength
59: spectral energy distribution of
60: J0746 shows two continuum components, and is well modeled assuming that the high-energy
61: spectral component results from Comptonization of the broad-line region photons.
62: In this paper we search for the bulk Compton spectral features predicted to be
63: produced in the soft X-ray band by scattering external optical/UV photons by cold
64: electrons in a relativistic jet. We discuss and provide constraints on the pair
65: content resulting from the apparent absence of such features.
66: \end{abstract}
67:
68:
69:
70: \keywords{galaxies:active, quasars:individual (J0746.3+2548), X-rays:galaxies}
71:
72:
73: \section{Introduction}
74: Blazars are a sub-category of Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN) whose jet
75: emission is pointing close to our line of sight \citep[e.g.,][]{urr95, ulr97}.
76: Generally, the overall
77: spectra of blazar sources (plotted in the log$(\nu)$-log$(\nu F_{\nu})$
78: plane, where $F_{\nu}$ is the observed spectral flux energy density)
79: have two pronounced continuum components: one peaking between IR and
80: X-rays and the other in the $\gamma$-ray regime \citep[see, e.g.,][]{kub98, ghi98}.
81: The lower energy component is believed
82: to be produced by the synchrotron radiation of relativistic electrons
83: accelerated within the outflow, while inverse Compton (IC) emission by
84: the same electrons is most likely responsible for the formation of the
85: high energy $\gamma$-ray component. The spectral energy distributions
86: (SEDs) of blazars form a sequence in luminosity, with more luminous
87: sources having both peaks at lower energies than their fainter
88: counterparts \citep{fos98,ghi98}. In this
89: sequence, flat-spectrum radio quasars (FSRQs) are the most luminous objects.
90: It is widely believed, in addition, that the IC emission from FSRQs
91: is dominated by the scattering of soft photons external to the jet
92: (external Compton process, ERC). Those photons, in turn, are produced
93: by the accretion disk, and interact with the jet either directly or
94: indirectly, after being scattered or reprocessed in the broad-line region
95: (BLR) or a dusty torus
96: \citep[see, e.g.,][]{der93,sik94}.
97: Other sources of seed photons can also contribute to the
98: observed IC component; in particular, those can be the synchrotron photons
99: themselves, radiating via the synchrotron self-Compton (SSC) process
100: \citep{sok05}.
101: In FSRQs, the synchrotron emission peaks around IR frequencies, and thus
102: the nonthermal X-ray emission is relatively weak compared to that of other
103: types of blazar sources. These spectral features suggest that FSRQs are
104: well-suited for searching for the bulk Compton (BC) spectral component,
105: which is produced by Comptonization of external UV radiation by cold
106: electrons in a jet
107: \citep{beg87,sik00,mod04,cel07}.
108: Using $Suzaku$ data of PKS1510$-$089, \citet{kat08} argued that the observed soft X-ray
109: excess below 1~keV and the plausible one at $\sim 18$~keV may be such bulk-Compton
110: features produced by inhomogeneities prior to their collision and shock formation
111: (the latter being the site of particle acceleration and production
112: of the nonthermal radiation).
113:
114: SWIFT J0746.3+2548 (J0746) was identified with an optically faint
115: quasar at $z = 2.979$ detected in the 15--200~keV energy band the
116: Burst Alert Telescope \citep[BAT;][]{bar05} on board the $Swift$
117: satellite. Its broadband spectrum is representative of other FSRQs,
118: which have two continuum components: one peaking at IR wavelengths
119: and the other at MeV energies. This qualifies J0746 as a likely new member
120: of the MeV blazar class \citep{sam06}. The X-ray spectrum observed
121: by $Swift$ XRT was hard in the 0.5--8 keV with a photon index $\Gamma_{\rm ph}
122: \sim 1.3$. Moreover, $Swift$ data showed spectral hardening at energies $<$1~keV,
123: which \citet{sam06} interpreted as an excess absorption over the
124: Galactic value, or a flatter power-law component, implying a sharp
125: ($\Delta\Gamma_{\rm ph}\sim1.1$) spectral break at $\sim$4~keV. It has been
126: argued that a clear distinction between the two possibilities can be made
127: by $Suzaku$, due to its broad bandpass, good photon statistics and low background data.
128:
129: In 2005 November, simultaneous observations were performed with the Very Large Array
130: (VLA; radio), the 26 m diameter University of Michigan Radio Astronomy Observatory
131: (UMRAO; radio), the 14 m diameter Mets$\ddot{a}$hovi radio-telescopes (radio),
132: the Hobby-Eberly Telescope (HET; optical), the 2.56m Nordic Optical Telescope(NOT;
133: optical), $Swift$ XRT and UVOT (optical-UV, X-ray) and $Suzaku$ (X-ray).
134: \citet{sam06} presented some of the simultaneous observations in addition
135: to the description of J0746 discovery with $Swift$. In this paper, we report
136: a detailed analysis of the $\sim 100$~ks $Suzaku$ observation of J0746 as a part
137: of the SWG (science working group) program. Moreover, we present the multiband
138: analysis using all simultaneous observations. This paper is organized as follows.
139: In $\S$2, we described the $Suzaku$ observation and data reduction. In $\S$3,
140: we report the optical and radio results, which were not reported
141: in \citet{sam06}. In $\S$4, we present the spectral analysis of the $Suzaku$
142: X-ray data as well as multiband analysis. Finally, we discuss the constraints on the
143: content of the jet inferred from the X-ray spectrum in $\S$5. Throughout this
144: paper, we adopt the cosmological parameters $H_0 = 71$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$,
145: $\Omega_{\rm M} = 0.27$ and $\Omega_{\Lambda} = 0.73$.
146:
147:
148: \section{Suzaku Observation and Data Reduction}
149:
150: \subsection{Observation}
151:
152: J0746 was observed with $Suzaku$ \citep{mit07} from 2005 November 4 at 08:20 UT
153: until November 6 14:04 UT, during the performance verification (PV) phase.
154: Table 1 summarizes the start and end times, and the exposures of the $Suzaku$ observation
155: (sequence number 700011010). $Suzaku$ has four sets of X-ray telescopes \citep{ser07}
156: each with a focal-plane X-ray CCD camera \citep[X-ray Imaging Spectrometer(XIS);][]{koy07}
157: that are sensitive in the energy range of 0.3--12~keV.
158: Three of the XIS (XIS 0, 2, 3) detectors have front-illuminated (FI) CCDs,
159: while the XIS 1 utilizes a back-illuminated (BI) CCD.
160: The merit of the BI CCD is its improved sensitivity in the soft X-ray energy band below 1~keV.
161: $Suzaku$ also features a non-imaging collimated Hard X-ray Detector \citep[HXD;][]{tak07},
162: which covers the 10--600~keV energy band with Si PIN photodiodes and GSO scintillation detectors.
163: $Suzaku$ has the two default pointing positions, XIS nominal position and HXD nominal position.
164: In this observation, we used the HXD nominal position, in which the effective area of the HXD
165: is maximized, whereas that of the XIS is reduced to $\sim$~88\% on the average.
166:
167: \subsubsection{XIS Data Reduction}
168:
169: The XIS data used in this paper were version 1.2 of the cleaned data.
170: The screening is based on the following criteria:
171: (1) ASCA-grade 0, 2, 3, 4, and 6 events were accumulated, and the CLEANSIS script was used to remove
172: hot or flickering pixels,
173: (2) data collected within 256~s of passage through the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA)
174: were discarded, and
175: (3) data were selected to be 5\arcdeg ~ in elevation above the Earth rim
176: (20\arcdeg ~ above the day-Earth rim).
177: After this screening, the net exposure for good time intervals is 100.5~ksec.
178:
179: The XIS events were extracted from a circular region with a radius of 2.6\arcmin ~
180: centered on the source peak, whereas the background was accumulated in an annulus with inner
181: and outer radii of 2.6\arcmin ~ and 4.3\arcmin, respectively.
182: The response (RMF) files used in this paper are the standard RMF files
183: (ae\_xi\{0,1,2,3\}\_20060213.rmf), provided by the XIS instrumental team.
184: The auxiliary (ARF) files are produced using the analysis tool XISSIMARFGEN developed
185: by the $Suzaku$ team, which is included in the software package HEAsoft version 6.2.
186:
187: \subsubsection{HXD/PIN Data Reduction}
188:
189: The PIN source spectra were extracted from cleaned version 1.2 HXD/PIN event files.
190: Data were selected according to the following criteria:
191: (1) More than 500~s from a South Atlantic Anomaly passage, (2) cut-off rigidity above 8~GV, and
192: (3) day- and night-Earth elevation angles each 5\arcdeg.
193: After this screening and the dead time correction using "pseudo-events" \citep{kok07},
194: the net exposure for good time intervals becomes 74.0~ksec.
195:
196: The PIN spectrum is dominated by the time-variable instrumental background
197: induced by cosmic-rays and trapped charged particles in the satellite orbit.
198: The HXD instrument team has developed an effective method \citep{wat07}
199: of modeling the time-dependent non-X-ray background (NXB) by making use of the PIN
200: upper discriminator (UD) signal that monitors passing charged particles
201: through the silicon PIN diode. The background spectrum is generated based on a database
202: of NXB observations accumulated to date during night- and day-earth observations.
203: The current NXB model is shown to be accurate within $\sim$~4\%. \citep{miz06}.
204:
205: Another component of the HXD PIN background is the Cosmic X-ray background (CXB).
206: The form of the CXB was taken as
207: 9.0$\times$10$^{-9}$(E/3~keV)$^{-0.29}$$\exp$($-$E/40~keV)~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$ \citep{gru99}.
208: The CXB spectrum observed with HXD/PIN was simulated by using a PIN response file
209: for isotropic diffuse emission (ae\_hxd\_pinflat\_20060809.rsp).
210: However, \citet{kok07} reported that the PIN returns a $\sim$13--15\% larger
211: normalization than the XIS based on the most recent calibration using the Crab Nebula.
212: Additionally, it was reported that the XIS normalization of the Crab Nebula agrees
213: with the conventional Crab Nebula flux derived from previous satellites.
214: Therefore, we introduced a scaling factor of 1.13 to normalize the CXB spectrum.
215:
216: We used the response files version ae\_hxd\_pinxinom\_20060814.rsp, provided by
217: the HXD instrumental team. As reported in \citet{kok07}, the response file
218: returns 15\% larger flux at the HXD nominal position pointing than the XIS flux.
219: Therefore, we corrected the normalization of the HXD/PIN in the spectral analysis ($\S$3.2).
220:
221: Figure~\ref{fig:pin_spec} shows the time averaged HXD/PIN spectrum. The NXB model,
222: the CXB model and the 4\% level of the NXB are also plotted in the spectrum.
223: The hard X-ray emission of J0746 was detected in the energy range from 12~keV
224: to 24~keV, assuming the 4\% accuracy of the current NXB model. Above 24~keV, the
225: upper limit of flux could be derived from the accuracy of the NXB model.
226: We also note here that the source was not detected in the GSO data.
227:
228: \section{Optical and Radio Observations}
229:
230: \subsection{Hobby-Eberly Telescope (HET)}
231:
232: The optical spectra were obtained with the 9.2m Hobby-Eberly telescope \citep[HET;][]{ram98}
233: Marcario Low Resolution Spectrograph \citep[LRS;][]{hil98}.
234: Observations were made from 2005 November 5 to November 6
235: covering $\lambda$420--1000~nm at 1.6~nm resolution. The seeing was
236: variable during the integrations and so spectrophotometry was not
237: attempted. However, observations were taken with the slit along the
238: parallactic angle and at constant air mass and, using white-light pre- and post-
239: spectrum direct images, indicating that the source faded by 0.17 magnitudes
240: between the observations. Using this information, we correct for the
241: differential slit losses, adjusting the first (worse-seeing) spectrum to
242: that of November 6. The resulting spectra are shown in Figure \ref{fig:opt_spec},
243: after standard calibrations and correction for an estimated Galactic extinction
244: of E(B$-$V)=0.07.
245:
246: Overall, the spectra do not differ dramatically from the
247: spectrum of the blazar available from the SDSS archive. However, there
248: is clearly a fading component in the continuum. In the first spectrum,
249: a power-law fit to the continuum to the red of Ly$\alpha$ gives
250: $F_\nu=6.6\times 10^{-28}(\nu/10^{14.7}{\rm Hz})^{-0.8}{\rm erg/cm^2/s/Hz}$;
251: during the second observation the continuum flux was
252: $F_\nu=5.6\times 10^{-28}(\nu/10^{14.7}{\rm Hz})^{-0.6}{\rm erg/cm^2/s/Hz}$,
253: the residual slit losses leave a $\sim 10$\% uncertainty in the absolute fluxes.
254: The broad-line flux is, as expected, nearly constant on this timescale,
255: confirming the relative spectral normalization estimated from the direct images.
256: The difference spectrum between the two epochs is nearly pure continuum,
257: with a spectral index of $\alpha$~$\sim$~2--2.5, suggesting that a fading
258: synchrotron component is contributing to the optical flux during the
259: tail of the outburst. These two observations were obtained only a month after the
260: observations reported by \citet{sam06}, conducted on 2005 October 10 - also
261: with the LRS on the HET - reported by \citet{sam06}, and the continuum flux
262: (at 6500 angstrom) is about twice of the average of the two of our flux measurements
263: taken in November 2005.
264:
265: \subsection{Nordic Optical Telescope (NOT)}
266:
267: We carried out the photometric observations of J0746 at the 2.56 m Nordic Optical Telescope (NOT)
268: at La Palma (Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos, Canary Islands)
269: on 2005 November 5 using ALFOSC (Andalucia Faint Object Spectrograph and Camera).
270: The data have been reduced using the "standard" IRAF procedures
271: (de-biasing and flat-fielding were applied for all images)
272: and the magnitudes were measured using IRAF/apphot-package.
273: The magnitudes of the object and the comparison stars
274: were measured using a relatively small aperture (about the size of the seeing disc)
275: and the final brightness of the object via differential photometry.
276: In order to flux calibrate the comparison stars, the magnitudes were measured
277: using a large aperture (19\arcsec diameter).
278: The brightnesses of the comparison stars were determined using
279: two different techniques:
280: (1) using the published SDSS g'and r' magnitudes and transforming these magnitudes to V and R, respectively,
281: (2) using Landolt standard stars (PG2213$-$006 and Mark\_A) \citep{lan92} observed earlier the night having
282: about the same airmass as the target.
283: Galactic extinction was corrected by using \citet{sch98}.
284: The R-band and the V-band photometric measurements were made
285: with an exposure of 200~seconds. The R-band and V-band fluxes of J0746 were
286: 18.9 and 19.2 magnitudes, respectively. The detailed results are given in Table~\ref{tab:notobs}.
287:
288: \subsection{The Very Large Array (VLA)}
289:
290: We observed J0746 with the Very Large Array (VLA) between 11:25 and
291: 13:25 UT on 2005 November 3, at the end of the reconfiguration period from
292: DnC array to D array. In D configuration, the most compact array, the
293: maximum baseline is 1.03~km. A total of 22 antennas were available for the
294: observations, which were made at 1.425, 4.860, 8.460, 14.940, 22.460 and
295: 43.340~GHz. 3C138 (J0521+1638) was used as the primary flux density
296: calibrator. J0746 was observed in three blocks, with each block
297: containing a $\sim$170 second scan at each frequency. Between each block,
298: a similar block of observations of 3C138 was carried out, using scans of
299: 100 seconds. The 15, 22 and 43~GHz scans, for both J0746 and 3C138,
300: were preceded by a 270 second pointing scan on source at 8~GHz to
301: determine a pointing offset for the higher frequencies, following the
302: standard VLA reference pointing procedure.
303:
304: The data were amplitude calibrated in AIPS using the scans on 3C138 to set
305: the flux density scale. At the three highest frequencies the source models
306: for 3C138, supplied with the data, were used. After amplitude calibration
307: the data were written out and read into {\tt Difmap}. After initial phase
308: self-calibration, the data were modeled by a point source. Inspection of
309: the correlated flux density as a function of ($u,v$) distance confirmed
310: this assumption was valid at all frequencies for J0746 in this array
311: configuration. The individual scans were also independently model-fit, but
312: no evidence for significant variability over the $\sim$2 hour period was
313: apparent. The results are given in Table~\ref{tab:vlaobs}.
314:
315: The 1.4~GHz flux density is almost 10\% less than measurements from
316: $\sim$10 years earlier in the NVSS \citep{con98} and FIRST \citep{bec95} catalogs, however the 4.9~GHz
317: flux density is significantly higher than the 0.48$\pm$0.04~Jy in the GB6 \citep{gre96}
318: catalog. The inverted spectrum between 1.4 and 4.9~GHz, $\alpha =$0.56
319: ($S \propto \nu^{+\alpha}$ suggests the presence of strong self-absorption
320: at the lowest frequency. Above 4.9~GHz the spectral index is $-$0.40,
321: although the 15~GHz and, to a lesser extent, 22~GHz flux densities
322: deviate from a single spectral index fit.
323:
324: \section{Analysis and Results}
325:
326: \subsection{Temporal analysis}
327:
328: Figure~\ref{fig:xis_lc} shows the averaged light curves of the XIS/FIs
329: in three energy bands: 0.5--2~keV ($upper$ panel), 2--10~keV ($middle$ panel),
330: and total (0.5--10~keV; $bottom$ panel), respectively.
331: Since the count rate variations of the HXD/PIN detector were less clear due to limited
332: photon statistics and uncertainly of the NXB modeling, in the following we concentrate on the temporal variability
333: of the XIS data only, below 10~keV.
334: Figure~\ref{fig:corr} compares the count-rate correlation between
335: the soft X-ray (0.5--2~keV) and the hard X-ray energy bands (2--10~keV).
336: We can see that there is no significant correlation between the soft X-ray flux and
337: the hard X-ray flux, which indicates that the variability in the soft and hard X-ray bands
338: are not well synchronized.
339: Although $Suzaku$ X-ray light curve shows some variability, it is not nearly
340: as strong as that measured by $Swift$, where \citet{sam06} reported
341: that the $Swift$ XRT detected a factor of $\sim2$ flux change in a few hours.
342: We try to evaluate the variability by calculating the variability amplitude relative to the mean
343: count rate corrected for effects of random errors \cite[e.g.,][]{ede02}:
344: $F_{\rm var} = 1/\overline{x} \sqrt{S^2 - \overline{\sigma_{\rm err}}^2}$,
345: where $S^2$ is the total variance of the light curve,
346: $\overline{\sigma_{err}}^2$ is the mean error squared and $\overline{x}$
347: is mean count rate.
348: The variability amplitude of J0746 is $F_{\rm var,soft} \sim 0.033\pm0.018$
349: and $F_{\rm var,hard} \sim 0.026\pm0.013$, and the energy-dependence of variability is flat.
350:
351: \subsection{Spectral Analysis}
352:
353: The XIS and HXD/PIN background subtracted spectra were fitted using XSPEC v11.3.2,
354: including data within the energy range 0.3--24~keV. The Galactic absorption toward
355: J0746 is taken to be $N_H$~=~4.04~$\times$~10$^{20}$~cm$^{-2}$ \citep{dic90}.
356: Note that our best-fitting value for the column density, $N_H=(4.89\pm0.50)\times10^{20}$~cm$^{-2}$ (Table 4),
357: which is approximately consistent with the Galactic value and there is no significant excess absorption.
358: All errors are quoted at the 68.3\% (1$\sigma$) confidence level for the parameters.
359: The fits are restricted to the energy range 0.5--10~keV (XIS 0, 2, 3: FI chips),
360: 0.3--7~keV (XIS 1: BI chip) and 11--24~keV (HXD/PIN), respectively.
361: In the following analysis, we fixed the relative normalization of the XISs and PIN at 1.15
362: (see $\S$ 2.1.1).
363:
364: Figure~\ref{fig:xispin_fit_spec} ($left$) shows four XISs and HXD/PIN background-subtracted
365: spectra with residuals to the power-law with the Galactic column density, determined using the data
366: from 0.3~keV to 24~keV (model 1). We obtained the photon index of $\Gamma_{\rm ph}$=1.17,
367: but this model did not represent the spectra well yielding a $\chi^{2}$/dof of 1238/1112.
368: Some scatter in the residual panel in Figure~\ref{fig:xispin_fit_spec} ($left$) indicates
369: that the spectral normalization among the XISs is not constant.
370: To represent the shape of the observed X-ray spectra, we adjusted the normalization factor
371: among the four XISs relative to XIS 0 (model 2).
372: Since \citet{ser07} reported that the spectral normalizations are slightly (a few percent)
373: different among the CCD sensors based on the contemporaneous fit of the Crab spectra,
374: the few percent adjustment of the relative normalization is reasonable.
375: This model well reproduced the spectra with the best $\chi^{2}$/dof of 1113/1109
376: (Figure~\ref{fig:xispin_fit_spec}: $right$).
377: For this model the photon index is $\Gamma_{\rm ph} = 1.18$ with Galactic absorption, and
378: the 2--10~keV flux of XIS0 is (3.07~$\pm$~0.03)~$\times$~10$^{-12}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$.
379: This corresponds to the $Swift$ XRT flux of $\sim3\times10^{-12}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$.
380: All of the spectral fitting results are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:spec}.
381: We conclude that the X-ray spectra of J0746 within the energy range 0.3--24 keV
382: are well described by an extremely hard power-law ($\Gamma_{\rm ph}=1.17$) with the Galactic absorption.
383:
384: \subsection{Spectral energy distribution}
385:
386: Figure~\ref{fig:nufnu} shows the spectral energy distribution (SED) of
387: J0746 during the 2005 November campaign.
388: Blue and red represent simultaneous data of the radio, UV, optical and X-ray
389: observations.
390: Historical data taken from radio (NED),
391: and $\gamma$-ray \citep[EGRET upper limit;][]{sam06} observations are also plotted
392: in cyan and black, respectively.
393: %
394: Figure~\ref{fig:nufnu} implies that the synchrotron component of
395: J0746 most likely peaks around $\sim 10^{11}-10^{12}$ Hz in the observer frame.
396: Meanwhile, $Swift$ UVOT data show the steep optical-UV emission
397: as the high-energy tail of the ``blue bump''
398: which is thought to be produced via thermal emission by the accretion disk
399: and/or corona near the central black hole of J0746 \citep{sun89}.
400: Apparently, these optical-UV data do not join smoothly with
401: the X-ray-to-$\gamma$-ray spectrum, which is likely due to the nonthermal
402: External Compton jet radiation (ERC) or due to synchrotron-self-Compton
403: emission (SSC) \citep[e.g.,][]{bal02}.
404:
405: In order to model the SED of J0746, we applied the synchrotron-inverse Compton (IC) emission
406: model described in \citet{mar03},
407: where both synchrotron
408: and external photons are considered as seed radiation fields contributing
409: to the IC process.
410: The electron distribution is modeled as a smoothed broken power-law;
411: %
412: \begin{equation}
413: n_e(\gamma) = K \gamma^{-n_1} \left(1 + \frac{\gamma}{\gamma_{\rm brk}} \right)^{n_1 - n_2},
414: \end{equation}
415: %
416: where $K$ (cm$^{-3}$) is a normalization factor, $n_1$ and $n_2$ are the spectral
417: indices below and above the break Lorentz factor $\gamma_{\rm brk}$.
418: The electron distribution extends within the limits
419: $\gamma_{\rm min} < \gamma < \gamma_{\rm max}$.
420:
421: We assume that the blazar radiation originates in a region located at a distance $r$ from the
422: black hole, well within the Broad Line Region but sufficiently far above the accretion disk
423: that the radiation energy density from the latter can be neglected.
424: The external radiation field can then be simply modeled,
425: \begin{equation}
426: U_{\rm diff} \simeq \frac{L_{\rm BLR}}{4 \pi r_{\rm BLR}^2 c},
427: \end{equation}
428: where $r_{\rm BLR}$ is the size of the broad-line-region.
429:
430: Figure~\ref{fig:nufnu} shows the best-fit model for J0746 data,
431: combining of the synchrotron, the SSC, and the ERC components \citep{tav08},
432: plus the blue bump emission.
433: The spectrum can be completely fitted with the model parameters;
434: the emission region is modeled as a sphere with radius $R = 3.2\times10^{16}$
435: cm moving with a bulk Lorentz factor $\Gamma = 20$ at an angle $\theta = 0.05$ rad
436: between the line of sight and the jet axis, and filled by tangled magnetic field $B=1.8$ G
437: and relativistic electrons.
438: The Doppler beaming factor is
439: $\delta \equiv 1/[\Gamma (1 - \beta \cos{\theta})] \sim 20$.
440: Parameters of the electron distribution are
441: $n_1=1.34$, $n_2=3.8$, $\gamma_{\rm min} = 1$,
442: $\gamma_{\rm brk} = 27$, $\gamma_{\rm max} = 10^3$, respectively.
443: The size of the BLR is assumed to be $r_{\rm BLR}=6.5\times10^{17}$ cm, and the
444: luminosity of broad emission lines $L_{\rm BLR}=2\times10^{45}$~ergs~s$^{-1}$.
445: The disk blue bump has a luminosity $L_{\rm disk} \simeq 1.8\times10^{47}$~ergs~s$^{-1}$
446: and temperature $kT_{\rm UV} = 10$~eV (redshifted temperature 2.5~eV).
447:
448: \section{Discussion}
449:
450: \subsection{$Suzaku$ results of J0746}
451:
452: In previous sections, we presented temporal and spectral analysis of $Suzaku$ observation
453: of J0746 in 2005 November.
454: Using the high-sensitivity, broadband instruments onboad $Suzaku$, we found
455: the following characteristics of J0746:
456: (1) The variability amplitude of soft (0.5--2~keV) and hard (2--10~keV) bands are
457: both $F_{\rm var,soft} \sim F_{\rm var,hard} \simeq 0.03$. There seems to be
458: no significant energy-dependence of the variability.
459: (2) The observed X-ray spectrum is well-described by
460: a hard power-law ($\Gamma_{\rm ph} = 1.17$)
461: with the Galactic absorption.
462: Thanks to the good photon statistics and spectral response of $Suzaku$ XIS, we clearly
463: confirmed that J0746 has an intrinsically hard spectrum and can exclude the possibility
464: that the spectral hardening results from the excess absorption as reported
465: by \citet{sam06}.
466: Such differences of the spectrum between $Swift$ and $Suzaku$ are probably due to
467: (1) low statistics of $Swift$ XRT compared to $Suzaku$, and
468: (2) \citet{sam06} combining the X-ray spectra obtained at
469: 4 different epochs, with different exposures.
470: %
471: The observed photon index is extremely hard, similar to those observed
472: in several high-luminosity blazars \citep[e.g.,][]{tav00}.
473: As long as the X-ray emission is due to the low-energy end of the ERC spectral component,
474: the observed photon index $\Gamma_{\rm ph} = 1.17$ corresponds to the electron distribution
475: $n_e(\gamma) \propto\gamma^{-1.34}$, where $\gamma$
476: is the Lorentz factor of the ultrarelativisitic electrons.
477: A likely explanation of such a flat electron distribution
478: is discussed by \citet{sik02} who assume a two-step acceleration process:
479: the harder portion is produced by a pre-acceleration mechanism,
480: e.g., involving instabilities driven by shock-reflected ions \citep{hos92} or
481: magnetic reconnection \citep{rom92},
482: while the high energy tail by the standard first-order Fermi process operating over the shock front.
483:
484: \subsection{Constraint on Bulk Compton emission}
485:
486: As the cold electrons/positrons, before reaching the blazar dissipative site,
487: are transported from the black hole vicinity by a jet with a bulk Lorentz
488: factor $\Gamma_{\rm jet} \sim$~10--20,
489: they upscatter the accretion disk and broad emission line photons to energies
490: %
491: \begin{equation}
492: h \nu_{\rm BC,obs} \simeq \Gamma_{\rm jet} \delta_{\rm jet} h\nu_{\rm diff}/(1+z) \,
493: \end{equation}
494: %
495: where $h\nu_{\rm diff} \sim 10$~eV. This is expected to produce a hump in the
496: X-ray spectra of blazars with luminosity
497: %
498: \begin{equation} \label{eq:lbc}
499: L_{BC} \simeq N_e \vert dE_e/dt \vert (\delta_{\rm jet}^3/\Gamma_{\rm jet}) \simeq \frac{4}{3} \sigma_T U_{BLR} r_{BLR} \dot N_e \Gamma_{\rm jet} \delta_{\rm jet}^3 ,
500: \end{equation}
501: %
502: where $\vert dE_e/dt \vert = (4/3) c \sigma_T U_{BLR} \Gamma_{\rm jet}^2$ and
503: $N_e \simeq \dot N_e r_{BLR}/c$ is the number of electrons
504: enclosed in the jet within a distance range corresponding with the scale of
505: the broad emission line region.
506:
507: For our observation of J0746, the soft X-ray excess which would indicate the
508: BC feature is not detected.
509: However, since the $Suzaku$ observation of J0746 was performed in a relatively low state
510: with an average flux of $F_{\rm 2-10 keV} \sim 3\times 10^{-12}$ {\rm erg cm}$^{-2}$ {\rm s}$^{-1}$,
511: we can put a stringent upper limit on the BC emission.
512: The limit is presented in Figure~\ref{fig:LBC}. It is obtained
513: using $Suzaku$ data fitted with power-law determined in \S~4.2 plus black-body
514: approximation of the bulk-Compton component.
515: As an example, a comparison between the model and the data is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:comparision}, and,
516: some of the fitting results are also listed in Table~\ref{tab:spec} (model 3-1 and model 3-2).
517: In Figure~\ref{fig:LBC}, the marked 'allowed region'
518: corresponds with a temperature range $kT$~=~0.40--1.0~keV which, in turn,
519: corresponds with $\Gamma_{\rm jet} = \delta_{\rm jet}$~$\sim$~10--20. In this region the upper
520: limit of BC luminosity is $L_{\rm BC} \leq 6.6\times10^{45}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ .
521:
522:
523: It should be noted here that in the case of the popular internal shock model
524: \citep[e.g.,][]{spa01} the bulk-Compton radiation is produced by
525: two cold inhomogeneities/shells.
526: In this case production of any nonthermal flare by the internal shock
527: should be proceded by a pair of X-ray precursors: one produced by
528: a faster shell at larger energies and lasting shorter; and one produced
529: by a slower shell at lower energies and lasting longer.
530: Radiative bulk-Compton features from such systems are very complex,
531: are variable and depend on the model details \citep{mod04}. However,
532: a small amplitude of variability in J0746 (see Figure~\ref{fig:xis_lc}) suggests that if
533: the primary dissipative events are driven by internal shocks, what we observe
534: is an overlap of radiation contributed by several shocks. Then the upper
535: limits for the bulk-Compton emission
536: calculated using the 'steady state' may be a reasonable approximation.
537:
538:
539:
540: \subsection{Constraint on particle content in the jet of J0746}
541: Noting that the energy flux carried by the cold electrons is
542: %
543: \begin{equation} \label{eq:le}
544: L_{e, \rm cold} \simeq n_e m_e c^3 \Gamma^2_{\rm jet} \pi R_{\rm jet}^2 \equiv \dot N_e m_e c^2 \Gamma_{\rm jet},
545: \end{equation}
546: %
547: where $R_{\rm jet}$ is the cross-section radius of a jet, one can find after combining Eq.~(\ref{eq:lbc}) and Eq.~(\ref{eq:le}) that
548: %
549: \begin{equation}
550: L_{\rm BC} \simeq \frac{4 \sigma_{\rm T}}{3 m_e c^2} ~U_{\rm BLR} ~r_{\rm BLR} ~\delta_{\rm jet}^3 ~L_{e, \rm cold}.
551: \end{equation}
552: %
553: For the upper limit for $L_{\rm BC}$ given by $Suzaku$ data (see \S~{5.2}) this gives
554: %
555: \begin{equation}
556: L_{e,\rm cold} \leq 1.0\times10^{44}
557: ~\biggl(\frac{r_{\rm BLR}}{6.5\times10^{17}~{\rm cm}} \biggr)
558: ~\biggl(\frac{\delta_{\rm jet}}{20} \biggr)^{-3}
559: ~\biggl(\frac{L_{\rm BLR}}{1.8\times10^{45}~{\rm erg}~{\rm s}^{-1}} \biggr)^{-1}
560: ~{\rm erg} ~{\rm s^{-1}}.
561: \end{equation}
562: %
563:
564: Meanwhile, the ERC modeling of J0746 presented in the previous section ($\S$~4.3)
565: implies the jet power carried by the ultrarelativisitic (non-thermal, or 'hot') electrons
566: $L_{e,\rm hot} \simeq \dot N_e m_ec^2 \bar \gamma_e \Gamma_{\rm jet} \sim 4 \times 10^{45}$~erg~s$^{-1}$,
567: where $\bar \gamma_e$ is the average random Lorentz factor of electrons/positrons.
568: However, if a jet is free of protons and the only source of the energy is
569: the bulk energy of cold pairs, then from the energy conservation
570: one can deduce that $L_{e, \rm hot} < L_{e, \rm cold}$. This is in a clear disagreement
571: with the obtained upper limit for $L_{e,\rm cold}$ and the model value of $L_{e,\rm hot}$.
572:
573: Such situation may be avoided if one assumes that there are cold protons
574: which carry significant power $L_p > L_{e, \rm hot} \gg L_{e,\rm cold}$. In this case
575: $L_{e,\rm hot}/(L_{e,\rm cold}+L_{p,\rm cold}) \lesssim 1$, and, provided that jet kinetic luminosity
576: $L_{\rm jet} \simeq L_{p,\rm cold}$, the pair content reads as
577: %
578: \begin{equation}
579: \frac{n_e}{n_p}
580: = \frac{m_p}{m_e} \frac{L_{e,\rm cold}}{L_{p, \rm cold}}
581: \simeq \frac{m_p}{m_e} \frac{L_{e,\rm cold}}{L_{\rm jet}}.
582: \end{equation}
583: %
584: Noting that the luminosity of the observed high energy ($\gamma$-ray) emission can be related
585: to the jet kinetic luminosity via the relation
586: $L_{\gamma} \simeq \eta_{\gamma} (\delta_{\rm jet}^3 / \Gamma_{\rm jet}) L_{\rm jet}$,
587: where $\eta_{\gamma}$ is the efficiency of the high energy $\gamma$-ray production, we finally find
588: that the upper limit for the pair content of the J0746 jet is
589: %
590: \begin{equation}
591: \frac{n_e}{n_p} \leq 7.3 \times
592: ~\biggl(\frac{\eta_{\rm \gamma}}{0.1}\biggr)
593: ~\biggl(\frac{r_{\rm BLR}}{6.5\times10^{17}~{\rm cm}}\biggr)
594: ~\biggl(\frac{\Gamma_{\rm jet}}{20} \biggr)^{-1}
595: ~\biggl(\frac{L_{\rm BLR}}{1.8\times10^{45}~{\rm erg}~{\rm s}^{-1}} \biggr)^{-1}
596: ~\biggl(\frac{L_{\rm \gamma}}{10^{48}~{\rm erg}~{\rm s}^{-1}} \biggr)^{-1}.
597: \end{equation}
598: %
599: For J0746, we only have an upper limit on the gamma-ray flux of
600: $L_{\gamma} \sim 10^{48}$~erg~s$^{-1}$. With this, and $L_{\rm BLR} \sim 1.8\times10^{45}$~erg~s$^{-1}$,
601: we obtained $n_e \leq 7.3 ~(\eta_{\gamma}/0.1) ~n_p$.
602: This may indicate a rather low pair content in quasar jets. However, it
603: should be noted that J0746 has an exceptionally hard X-ray spectrum.
604: For blazars with softer X-ray spectra a lack of bulk-Compton features
605: put weaker constraints, $n_e/n_p \le $ tens, But the inertia of such jets
606: is still dominated by protons \citep{sik00}.
607:
608:
609:
610: \section{Summary}
611:
612: We have presented a detailed analysis of $Suzaku$ observation for the radio-loud
613: quasar J0746 at $z=2.979$ in 2005 November. Our results are the following:
614:
615: \begin{enumerate}
616: \item The variability amplitude of soft and hard bands as measured by $Suzaku$
617: is equivalent and there is no significant energy-dependence of the variability,
618: in contrast to the much larger (factor of 2) variability reported from the Swift data.
619: \item The observed X-ray spectrum of J0746 is well-described by a single, extremely hard
620: power-law ($\Gamma_{\rm ph} = 1.17$) with the Galactic absorption;
621: we do not require spectral hardening at the lowest energies seen by \citet{sam06}.
622: With this, we can exclude excess absorption (which would otherwise have to be
623: rapidly variable!) to cause
624: the spectral hardening, one of the possibilities considered by \citet{sam06}.
625: \item A lack of bulk Compton features in the X-ray spectra indicates
626: a low electron-positron pair content and strong dominance jet inertia by protons.
627: \end{enumerate}
628:
629:
630:
631: \acknowledgments
632: We thank the anonymous referee for her/his valuable comments that helped
633: to improve this paper.
634:
635: The National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) is a facility of the
636: National Science Foundation operated under cooperative agreement by
637: Associated Universities, Inc. NRAO is thanked for the provision of
638: Target of Opportunity time for the observations, and Barry Clark is
639: thanked for assistance is the preparation of observing files.
640: The research described here we supported in part by the
641: Department of Energy contract to SLAC no. DE-AC3-76SF00515, and NASA
642: grant to Stanford University no. NNX07AB05G.
643: Based on observations made with the Nordic Optical Telescope, operated
644: on the island of La Palma jointly by Denmark, Finland, Iceland,
645: Norway, and Sweden, in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los
646: Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias.
647:
648: \clearpage
649:
650: \begin{thebibliography}{}
651:
652: \bibitem[Barthelmy et al.(2005)]{bar05} Barthelmy, S. D., et al. 2005, \ssr, 120, 143
653:
654: \bibitem[Ballo et al.(2002)]{bal02} Ballo, L., et al. 2002, \apj, 567, 50
655:
656: \bibitem[Becker et al.(1995)]{bec95} Becker, R.~H., White, R.~L., \& Helfand, D.~J.\ 1995, \apj, 450, 559
657:
658: \bibitem[Begelman \& Sikora(1987)]{beg87} Begelman, M. C., \& Sikora, M. 1987, \apj, 322, 650
659:
660: \bibitem[Celotti, Ghisellini \& Fabian(2007)]{cel07} Celotti, A., Ghisellini, G., \& Fabian, A. C. 2007, \mnras, 375, 417
661:
662: \bibitem[Condon et al.(1998)]{con98} Condon, J.~J., Cotton, W.~D., Greisen, E.~W., Yin, Q.~F., Perley, R.~A., Taylor, G.~B., \& Broderick, J.~J.\ 1998, \aj, 115, 1693
663:
664: \bibitem[Dermer \& Schlickeiser(1993)]{der93} Dermer, C. D., \& Schlickeiser, R. 1993, \apj, 416, 458
665:
666: \bibitem[Dickey \& Lockman(1990)]{dic90} Dickey, J. M., \& Lockman, F. J. 1990, \araa, 28, 215
667:
668: \bibitem[Edelson et al.(2002)]{ede02} Edelson, R., Turner, M.~J.~L.,Pounds, K., Vaughan, S., Markowitz, A., Marshall, H., Dobbie, P., \& Warwick, R. 2002, \apj, 568, 61
669:
670: \bibitem[Fossati et al.(1998)]{fos98} Fossati, G., Maraschi, L., Celotti, A., Comastri, A., \& Ghisellini, G. 1998, \mnras, 299, 433
671:
672: \bibitem[Ghisellini et al.(1998)]{ghi98} Ghisellini, G., Celotti, A., Fossati, G., Maraschi, L., \& Comastri, A. 1998, \mnras, 301, 451
673:
674: \bibitem[Gregory et al.(1996)]{gre96} Gregory, P.~C., Scott, W.~K., Douglas, K., \& Condon, J.~J.\ 1996, \apjs, 103, 427
675:
676: \bibitem[Gruber et al.(1999)]{gru99} Gruber, D. E., Matteson, J. L., Peterson, L. E., \& Jung, G. V. 1999, \apj, 520, 124
677:
678: \bibitem[Hill et al.(1998)]{hil98} Hill, G.J., Nicklas, H.E., MacQueen, P.J., Tejada, C. Cobos Duenas, F.J. \& Mitsch, W. 1998, \procspie, 3355, 375
679:
680: \bibitem[Hoshino et al.(1992)]{hos92} Hoshino, A., Arons, J., Gallant, Y. A., \& Langdon, A. B. 1992, \apj, 390, 454
681:
682: \bibitem[Jorstad et al.(2005)]{jor05} Jorstad, S. G., et al. 2005, \aj, 130, 1418
683:
684: \bibitem[Landolt (1992)]{lan92} Landolt, A. 1992, \aj, 104, 340
685:
686: \bibitem[Maraschi \& Tavecchio(2003)]{mar03} Maraschi, L., \& Tavecchio, F. 2003, \apj, 593, 667
687:
688: \bibitem[Malkan \& Moore(1986)]{mal86} Malkan, M. A., \& Moore, R. L. 1986, \apj, 300, 216
689:
690: \bibitem[Mitsuda et al.(2007)]{mit07} Mitsuda, K., et al. 2007, \pasj, 59, 1
691:
692: \bibitem[Mizuno et al.(2006)]{miz06} Mizuno, T., et al. 2006, Suzaku Memo, JX-ISAS-SUZAKU-MEMO-2006-42
693:
694: \bibitem[Moderski et al.(2004)]{mod04} Moderski, R., Sikora, M., Madejski, G. M., \& Kamae, T. 2004, \apj, 611, 770
695:
696: \bibitem[Kataoka et al.(2008)]{kat08} Kataoka, J., et al. 2008, \apj, 672, 787
697:
698: \bibitem[Kokubun et al.(2007)]{kok07} Kokubun, M., et al. 2007, \pasj, 59, 53
699:
700: \bibitem[Koyama et al.(2007)]{koy07} Koyama, K. et al. 2007, \pasj, 59, S23
701:
702: \bibitem[Kubo et al.(1998)]{kub98} Kubo, H., Takahashi, T., Madejski, G., Tashiro, M., Makino, F., Inoue, S., \& Takahara, F. 1998, \apj, 504, 693
703:
704: \bibitem[Pian \& Treves(1993)]{pia93} Pian, E. \& Treves, A. 1993, \apj, 416, 130
705:
706: \bibitem[Ramsey et al.(1998)]{ram98} Ramsey, L.W. et al. 1998, \procspie, 3352, 34
707:
708: \bibitem[Romanova \& Lovelace(1992)]{rom92} Romanova, M. M., \& Lovelace, R. V. E. 1992, \aap, 262, 26
709:
710: \bibitem[Sambruna et al.(2006)]{sam06} Sambruna, R., et al. 2006, \apj, 646, 23
711:
712: \bibitem[Spada et al.(2001)]{spa01} Spada, M., Ghisellini, G., Lazzati, D., \& Celotti, A. 2001, \mnras, 325, 1559
713:
714: \bibitem[Schlegel, Finkbeiner \& Davis(1998)]{sch98} Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., \& Davis, M. 1998, \apj, 500, 525
715:
716: \bibitem[Serlemitsos et al.(2007)]{ser07} Serlemitsos, P. J., et al. 2007, \pasj, 59, 9
717:
718: \bibitem[Sikora et al.(1994)]{sik94} Sikora, M., Begelman, M. C., \& Rees, M. J., 1994, \apj, 421, 153
719:
720: \bibitem[Sikora \& Madejski(2000)]{sik00} Sikora, M. \& Madejski, G. M. 2000, \apj, 534, 109
721:
722: \bibitem[Sikora et al.(2002)]{sik02} Sikora, M., B\l a\.zejowski, M., Moderski, R., \& Madejski, G. M. 2002, \apj, 577, 78
723:
724: \bibitem[Sokolov \& Marscher(2005)]{sok05} Sokolov, A., \& Marscher, A.P. 2005, \apj, 629, 52
725:
726: \bibitem[Sun \& Malkan(1989)]{sun89} Sun, W.-H., \& Malkan, M. A. 1989, \apj, 346, 68
727:
728: \bibitem[Takahashi et al.(2007)]{tak07} Takahashi, T. et al. 2007, \pasj, 59, S35
729:
730: \bibitem[Tavecchio et al.(2000)]{tav00} Tavecchio, F., et al. 2000, \apj, 543, 535
731:
732: \bibitem[Tavecchio \& Ghisellini(2008)]{tav08} Tavecchio, F., \& Ghisellini, G. 2008, \mnras, 386, 945
733:
734: \bibitem[Ulrich, Maraschi \& Urry(1997)]{ulr97} Ulrich, M-H., Maraschi, L., \& Urry, C. M. 1997, \araa, 35, 445
735:
736: \bibitem[Urry \& Padovani(1995)]{urr95} Urry, C. M., \& Padovani, P. 1995, \pasp, 107, 803
737:
738: \bibitem[Watanabe et al.(2007)]{wat07} Watanabe, S., et al. 2007, Suzaku Memo, JX-ISAS-SUZAKU-MEMO-2007-01
739:
740:
741: \end{thebibliography}
742:
743: \clearpage
744:
745:
746:
747: \clearpage
748:
749: \begin{deluxetable}{cccc}
750: \tablecaption{2005 Suzaku observation log of J0746. \label{tab:obs}}
751: \tablewidth{0pt}
752: \tablehead{
753: \colhead{Start (UT)} & \colhead{Stop (UT)} & \colhead{Exposure (ks)} & \colhead{Exposure (ks)} \\
754: \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \colhead{XIS} & \colhead{HXD/PIN}
755: }
756: \startdata
757: Nov. 04 08:20 2005 & Nov. 06 14:04 2005 & 100.5 & 74.0 \\
758: \enddata
759: \end{deluxetable}
760:
761:
762: \begin{table}
763: \begin{center}
764: \caption{NOT photometric observations of J0746.\label{tab:notobs}}
765: \begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
766: \tableline\tableline
767: Band & Flux (mag) & std\tablenotemark{a} & photerr\tablenotemark{b} & calibration\tablenotemark{c} & exposure (second) & time (UT) \\
768: \tableline
769: R-band & 18.888 & 0.006 & 0.011 & (1) & 200 & 2005 November 5 \\
770: & 18.937 & 0.017 & 0.011 & (2) & & 05:38:37 \\
771: \tableline
772: V-band & 19.232 & 0.024 & 0.010 & (1) & 200 & 2005 November 5 \\
773: & 19.233 & 0.005 & 0.010 & (2) & & 05:44:05 \\
774: \tableline
775: \end{tabular}
776: \\
777: \tablenotetext{a}{Standard deviation of the target brightness estimates.}
778: \tablenotetext{b}{The apphot error estimate for the target.}
779: \tablenotetext{c}{
780: (1): using the published SDSS g'r' magnitudes and transforming these magnitudes to V and R.
781: (2): using Landolt standard stars (PG2213$-$006 and Mark\_A).}
782: \end{center}
783: \end{table}
784:
785: \begin{table}
786: \begin{center}
787: \caption{VLA observations of J0746.\label{tab:vlaobs}}
788:
789: \begin{tabular}{cc}
790: \tableline\tableline
791: Frequency (GHz) & Flux density (Jy) \\
792: \tableline
793: 1.425 & 0.38 \\
794: 4.860 & 0.76 \\
795: 8.460 & 0.61 \\
796: 14.940 & 0.44 \\
797: 22.460 & 0.43 \\
798: 43.340 & 0.32 \\
799: \tableline
800: \end{tabular}
801: \end{center}
802: \end{table}
803:
804: \clearpage
805:
806: \begin{landscape}
807: \begin{deluxetable}{llccccc}
808: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
809: \tablecaption{Results of the spectral fits to the $Suzaku$ spectra.\label{tab:spec}}
810: \tablewidth{0pt}
811: \tablehead{
812: \colhead{Component} & \colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{model 1} & \colhead{model 2} & \colhead{model $2^{\prime}$} &
813: \colhead{model 3-1} & \colhead{model 3-2}
814: }
815: \startdata
816: Absorption & $N_{\rm H}$ ($10^{20}$cm$^{-2}$) & 4.04 (fixed) & 4.04 (fixed) & 4.89$\pm$0.50 & 4.04 (fixed) & 4.04 (fixed) \\
817: Power-law & $\Gamma_{\rm ph}$ & 1.17$\pm$0.01 & 1.18$\pm$0.01 & 1.20$\pm$0.01 & 1.17 (fixed) & 1.17 (fixed) \\
818: & $F_{2-10~\rm keV}$ ($10^{-12}$~erg~s$^{-1}$~cm$^{-2}$) & 3.10$\pm$0.02 & 3.07$\pm$0.03 & 3.06$\pm$0.04 & 3.08$\pm$0.02 & 3.05$\pm$0.04 \\
819: Constant & XIS 0 & 1.00 (fixed) & 1.00 (fixed) & 1.00 (fixed) & 1.00 (fixed) & 1.00 (fixed) \\
820: & XIS 1 & 1.00 (fixed) & 0.91$\pm$0.01 & 0.91$\pm$0.01 & 1.00 (fixed) & 1.00 (fixed) \\
821: & XIS 2 & 1.00 (fixed) & 1.04$\pm$0.01 & 1.04$\pm$0.01 & 1.00 (fixed) & 1.00 (fixed) \\
822: & XIS 3 & 1.00 (fixed) & 1.05$\pm$0.01 & 1.05$\pm$0.01 & 1.00 (fixed) & 1.00 (fixed) \\
823: & HXD/PIN & 1.15 (fixed) & 1.15 (fixed) & 1.15 (fixed) & 1.15 (fixed) & 1.15 (fixed) \\
824: Black-Body & Temperature (keV) & - & - & - & 0.4 (fixed) & 1.0 (fixed) \\
825: (Bulk-Compton) & Luminosity($10^{45}$~erg~s$^{-1}$) & - & - & - & 0.8 (0.0--1.6) & 3.9 (1.0--6.6) \\
826: \tableline
827: $\chi^{2}$/d.o.f ($\chi_{\rm red}^2$) & & 1238/1112 (1.11) & 1113/1109 (1.00) & 1110/1108 (1.00) & 1238/1112 (1.11) & 1237/1112 (1.11) \\
828: \enddata
829: \tablecomments{Errors correspond to 1~$\sigma$ confidence level.}
830: \end{deluxetable}
831: \clearpage
832: \end{landscape}
833:
834: \begin{figure}
835: \begin{center}
836: \epsscale{.80}
837: \plotone{f1.eps}
838: \end{center}
839: \caption{The time averaged HXD/PIN spectra. The red and the black show the observed data and
840: the non X-ray background (NXB) model spectrum, respectively. The background model spectrum
841: including NXB and CXB is plotted in blue. After the background subtraction, the detected spectrum
842: and the upper limit assuming the 4\% accuracy of the NXB model are plotted in green and cyan, respectively.
843: \label{fig:pin_spec}}
844: \end{figure}
845:
846: \begin{figure}
847: \begin{center}
848: \epsscale{.70}
849: \plotone{f2.eps}
850: \caption{Optical spectra of J0746 during 2005 November observations.
851: \label{fig:opt_spec}}
852: \end{center}
853: \end{figure}
854:
855: \begin{figure}
856: \begin{center}
857: \epsscale{.80}
858: \plotone{f3.eps}
859: \caption{Light curves of J0746 during 2005 November observations in the three energy bands:
860: 0.5--2~keV ($upper$), 2--10~keV ($middle$), and total 0.5--10~keV ($bottom$).
861: All the light curves were binned at 5760 s, corresponding to the period of the Suzaku orbit.
862: \label{fig:xis_lc}}
863: \end{center}
864: \end{figure}
865:
866: \begin{figure}
867: \begin{center}
868: \epsscale{.80}
869: \plotone{f4.eps}
870: \caption{Correlation of XIS/FI count rates between 0.5--2~keV and 2--10~keV.
871: \label{fig:corr}}
872: \end{center}
873: \end{figure}
874:
875:
876: \begin{figure}
877: \begin{center}
878: \epsscale{1.}
879: \plottwo{f5a.eps}{f5b.eps}
880: \caption{$Left$: Broadband (0.3--24~keV; XIS[0--3] + HXD/PIN) Suzaku spectra of J0746.
881: The black, red, green and blue points show the XIS0,1,2,3 spectra, respectively.
882: The cyan points are HXD-PIN spectrum.
883: The upper panel shows the background subtracted spectra, plotted with an absorbed power-law model
884: of photon index $\Gamma_{\rm ph}=1.17$ and a column density 4.04~$\times$~10$^{20}$~cm$^{-2}$
885: (Galactic value).
886: The lower panel shows the residuals to this power-law model fit. Some scatter in the residual
887: panel shows that spectral normalization is not consistent.
888: $Right$: the spectrum plotted against the best-fit model composed of an absorbed power-law
889: with constant factors.
890: \label{fig:xispin_fit_spec}}
891: \end{center}
892: \end{figure}
893:
894: \begin{figure}
895: \begin{center}
896: \epsscale{0.80}
897: \plotone{f6.eps}
898: \caption{Overall SED of J0746 constructed with multiband data obtained
899: during the November 2005 campaign (red and blue).
900: The red filled circles and lines show the observation results presented in this paper:
901: radio (VLA), optical-UV(NOT; filled circles and HET; lines) and X-ray ($Suzaku$).
902: For the HET data, the difference spectrum between the two epochs is shown in the red dotted line.
903: The blue filled circles and lines show the data presented by \citet{sam06}:
904: radio (Metsahovi and UMRAO), optical-UV ($Swift$ UVOT) and X-ray ($Swift$ XRT).
905: The data plotted with cyan triangles are from NED,
906: while the GeV upper limit shows the EGRET data analyzed by \citet{sam06}.
907: The green solid line shows the jet continuum calculated
908: with the jet emission model described in $\S$ 4.3, as a sum of various emission components:
909: synchrotron (dotted line), blue bump (dashed line), SSC (long dashed line) and ERC (dot dashed line).
910: Moreover, the sensitivity of one year GLAST observation is also plotted for reference.}
911: \label{fig:nufnu}
912: \end{center}
913: \end{figure}
914:
915:
916: \begin{figure}
917: \begin{center}
918: \epsscale{0.80}
919: \plotone{f7.eps}
920: \caption{The 1 $\sigma$ upper limit of the BC component luminosity estimated
921: from $Suzaku$ data fitting with power-law + black-body model.
922: \label{fig:LBC}}
923: \end{center}
924: \end{figure}
925:
926: \begin{figure}
927: \begin{center}
928: \epsscale{0.80}
929: \plotone{f8.eps}
930: \caption{A comparison between the model (continuum + bulk Compton component) and the data.
931: As the the bulk-Compton component, a black-body with a temperature of 1.0~keV is assumed, and
932: the 1 $\sigma$ upper limit is plotted.}
933: \label{fig:comparision}
934: \end{center}
935: \end{figure}
936:
937: \end{document}
938: