1: \documentstyle[psfig,epsf]{mn}
2: %\documentstyle[epsf,amstex,referee]{mn}
3: %\onecolumn
4: %
5: \newcommand{\ltaraw}{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}
6: \newcommand{\lta}{\lower.5ex\hbox{\ltaraw}}
7: \newcommand{\gtaraw}{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$}
8: \newcommand{\gta}{\lower.5ex\hbox{\gtaraw}}
9: % UNITS:
10: \newcommand{\km}{{\rm\,km}}
11: \newcommand{\kms}{{\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}}
12: \newcommand{\kpc}{{\rm\,kpc}}
13: \newcommand{\mpc}{{\rm\,Mpc}}
14: \newcommand{\Mpc}{{\rm\,Mpc}}
15: \newcommand{\msun}{{\rm\,M_\odot}}
16: \newcommand{\lsun}{{\rm\,L_\odot}}
17: \newcommand{\hubunits}{{\rm km\,s^{-1}\,Mpc^{-1}}}
18: \newcommand{\cm}{{\rm\,cm}}
19: \newcommand{\Gyr}{{\rm\,Gyr}}
20:
21: \newcommand{\ffffff}[1]{\mbox{$#1$}}
22: \newcommand{\scnd}{\mbox{\ffffff{''}\hskip-0.3em.}}
23: \newcommand{\scmd}{\mbox{\ffffff{''}}}
24:
25: \loadboldmathitalic
26: \title [SCUBA observations of Hawaii 167]
27: {SCUBA observations of Hawaii 167}
28: \author[G. F. Lewis \& S. C. Chapman]
29: {Geraint F. Lewis$^{1}$ \& S. C. Chapman$^{2}$\\
30: $^{1}$
31: Anglo-Australian Observatory, P.O. Box 296, Epping, NSW 1710, Australia:
32: Email \tt{gfl@aaoepp.aao.gov.au}\\
33: $^{2}$
34: Carnegie Observatories, 813 Santa Barbara Street, Pasadena, CA 91101, U.S.A.:
35: Email \tt{schapman@ociw.edu}
36: }
37: \date{\today}
38: \begin{document}
39: \maketitle
40: \begin{abstract}
41: We present the first submillimetre observations of the z=2.36 broad
42: absorption line system Hawaii~167. Our observations confirm the
43: hypothesis that Hawaii~167 contains a massive quantity of dust, the
44: optical depth of which is sufficient to completely extinguish our
45: ultraviolet view of a central, buried quasar. Hawaii~167's
46: submillimetre luminosity and associated dust mass are similar to the
47: ultraluminous class of infrared galaxies, supporting the existence of
48: an evolutionary link between these and the active galaxy population.
49: Hawaii~167 appears to be a young quasar which is emerging from its
50: dusty cocoon.
51: \end{abstract}
52: \begin{keywords}
53: Ultraluminous Galaxies: Quasars; Individual Hawaii 167
54: \end{keywords}
55:
56: \newcommand{\hawaii}{Hawaii~167}
57: \newcommand{\iras}{FSC~10214+4724}
58:
59: \section{Introduction}\label{introduction}
60: \hawaii\ was identified in the Hawaii K-band survey (Songalia et al.
61: 1994). Displaying a rest-frame ultraviolet spectrum of a young
62: stellar population at z=2.34, \hawaii\ also possesses broad absorption
63: troughs of both high and low ionized species, consistent with the
64: presence of bulk outflows (Cowie et al. 1994). While such features
65: are characteristic of the Broad Absorption Line (BAL) class of
66: quasars, the broad emission lines indicative of an AGN core are not
67: seen in the ultraviolet spectrum. Infrared spectroscopy, however,
68: does reveal both broad ${\rm H_\alpha}$ and ${\rm H_\beta}$ (Cowie et
69: al. 1994; Egami et al. 1996), with a redshift of $z=2.36$. These
70: observations indicate a substantial Balmer-decrement (Hall et al.
71: 1997), suggesting that \hawaii\ is an example of a dust enshrouded
72: quasar; thought to represent an early evolutionary stage, such systems
73: would appear as fully fledged quasars once all the dust has been
74: removed. During the transition from one phase to another, as dust is
75: blown from a central obscuring torus, the system will appear as a
76: BAL-type quasar. It appears, therefore, that \hawaii\ provides us
77: with a view of an embryonic quasar. The limited data available on
78: \hawaii, however, means that an accurate determination of dust mass,
79: total luminosity and its true evolutionary status is not currently
80: possible.
81:
82: In this paper we present submillimetre observations of \hawaii,
83: probing the emission from a dusty component. These were obtained as
84: part of a survey of the dust properties of BAL quasars (Lewis \&
85: Chapman 2000 in preparation). In Section~\ref{observations} the
86: details of the observations are presented, while
87: Section~\ref{discussion} discusses the dust content and evolutionary
88: status of \hawaii. The conclusions to this study are presented in
89: Section~\ref{conclusions}.
90:
91: \section{Observations}\label{observations}
92: We observed \hawaii\ with the Submillimetre Common-User Bolometer
93: Array (SCUBA) on the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope~\footnote{The James
94: Clerk Maxwell Telescope is operated by The Joint Astronomy Centre on
95: behalf of the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council of the
96: United Kingdom, the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research,
97: and the National Research Council of Canada.} on Mauna Kea, Hawaii.
98: We used the PHOTOMETRY three bolometer chopping mode described in
99: Chapman et al.~(2000) and Scott et al.~(2000) to keep the source in a
100: bolometer throughout the observation. This mode has the additional
101: advantage of allowing a check on the apparent detection of a source
102: over three independent bolometers. The observations were taken in May
103: 2000, using the 450$\mu$m and 850$\mu$m arrays simultaneously. The
104: alignment of the 450$\mu$m and 850$\mu$m arrays is not perfect, and we
105: did not include the 450$\mu$m offbeams in our final flux estimate,
106: except to check that the source had offbeam flux consistent with the
107: detection in the primary bolometer.
108:
109: For our double-difference observations there are instantaneously
110: $N\,{=}\,3$ beams, with the central beam having an efficiency of unity
111: and the two off beams having
112: \begin{equation}
113: \epsilon=-0.5\exp\left(-{d^2\over2\sigma_{\rm b}^2}\right),
114: \end{equation}
115: where $d$ is the angular distance of the off-beam centre from the
116: source, and $\sigma_{\rm b}$ is the Gaussian half-width of the beam.
117: For the secondary bolometer the beam efficiency is simply
118: 0.5. However, distortion in the field results in our chosen third
119: bolometer being slightly offset from the source position, resulting in
120: a beam efficiency of 0.44. Our detection level increases from
121: ${\simeq}\,3.0\sigma$ to 3.7$\sigma$, after folding in the negative
122: flux density from the two offbeam pixels.
123:
124: The effective integration time on source was 1900\,ks. The secondary
125: was chopped at 7.8125\,Hz with a chop throw at 53 arcsec to keep the
126: source on bolometer at all times. Pointing was checked before and
127: after the observation on blazars and a sky-dip was performed to
128: measure the atmospheric opacity directly. The rms pointing errors were
129: below 2 arcsec, while the average atmospheric zenith opacities at
130: 450$\mu$m\ and 850$\mu$m\ were 1.5 and 0.22 respectively. The data
131: were reduced using the Starlink package SURF (Scuba User Reduction
132: Facility, Jenness \& Lightfoot~1998) and our own reduction routines to
133: implement the three bolometer chopping mode. Spikes were first
134: carefully rejected from the data, followed by correction for
135: atmospheric opacity and sky subtraction using the median of all the
136: array pixels, except for obviously bad pixels and the source pixels.
137: The data were then calibrated against standard planetary and compact
138: \hbox{H\,{\sc ii}~} region sources, observed during the same
139: night. The resulting fluxes were 6.04$\pm$1.65~mJy at 850$\mu$m and
140: 66.0$\pm$20.7~mJy at 450$\mu$m.
141:
142: \begin{figure*}
143: \centerline{ \psfig{figure=fig1.ps,height=14.5cm,angle=270.0} }
144: \caption{The spectral energy distributions of Hawaii~167 (z=2.36) as
145: compared to the gravitationally lensed, ultraluminous galaxy FSC
146: 10214+4724 (z=2.28); no correction for gravitational lensing
147: magnification has been made to this data. The data presented in this
148: paper are donated with error bars. The curves on each plot represent
149: the dust-enshrouded quasar models of Granato et al. (1996). From top
150: to bottom, these represent viewing angles of polar, $45^o$ and
151: equatorial respectively. The emission frequency corresponds to
152: z=2.36.}
153: \label{SED}
154: \end{figure*}
155:
156: \section{Discussion}\label{discussion}
157:
158: \subsection{Luminosity and Dust Content}\label{dustcontent}
159: Figure~\ref{SED} presents the extant data of \hawaii, including the
160: SCUBA data discussed in Section~\ref{observations}. Also included for
161: comparison is the spectral energy distribution (SED) of the z=2.28
162: ultraluminous infrared galaxy \iras\ (Rowan-Robinson et al. 1993);
163: this system is also thought to harbour a dust enshrouded quasar (e.g.
164: Barvainis et al. 1995). Gravitational lensing has significantly
165: boosted the apparent luminosity of \iras\ (e.g. by 30$\times$ in the
166: IR; Broadhurst \& Lehar 1995), although no correction for
167: magnification has been made to its data points in the figure.
168:
169: Emission from a dusty component can be modeled as a greybody of the
170: form
171: \begin{equation}
172: {\rm
173: F_\nu \propto \frac{ \nu^3 }{exp^{\left(\frac{h\nu}{kT}\right)} - 1}
174: \left[ 1 - exp^{ -\left(\frac{\nu}{\nu_o}\right)^\beta} \right]
175: }
176: \label{benford}
177: \end{equation}
178: where ${\rm \nu_o}$ is the frequency at which the source becomes
179: optically thick (Benford et al. 1999); the shape of the greybody is
180: only mildly sensitive to the value of ${\rm \nu_o}$ and we adopt the
181: value of ${\rm 2.4THz}$ (Hughes et al. 1993). The \hawaii\ data is
182: consistent with a greybody temperature of ${\rm T=88\pm25K}$ and ${\rm
183: \beta=2.8\pm1.1} $; while these values differ from `typical' greybody
184: fits to AGN, which result in values of ${\rm T=50K}$ and ${\rm
185: \beta=1.5}$ (Benford et al. 1999), the differences are not significant
186: given the errors.
187:
188: Following the recipe of McMahon et al. (1999), the 850$\mu$m flux was
189: use to calculate the following physical properties~\footnote{${\rm
190: (\Omega_o=1, \Lambda_o=0, H_o=50h_{50}\ km/s/Mpc}$ assumed
191: throughout${\rm )}$}; a far infrared luminosity of ${\rm
192: L_{FIR}\sim1.1\times10^{13}\ h_{50}^{-2} L_\odot}$ and an associated
193: dust mass of ${\rm M_d=3.3\times10^{8}\ h_{50}^{-2} M_\odot}$
194: (assuming a dust temperature of 50K). Such values place \hawaii\
195: firmly in the ultraluminous class of infrared galaxies (Sanders \&
196: Mirabel 1996). If the observed infrared emission were solely due to
197: stars, it would correspond to a star formation rate of ${\rm
198: \sim1000~M_\odot/yr}$ (this is an upper limits as \hawaii\ obviously
199: contains a central AGN source which also acts to heat the dust).
200: \hawaii\ displays no evidence of gravitational lensing, appearing
201: point-like at a PSF-scale $0\scnd5$ (Cowie et al. 1994), and hence its
202: inferred properties have not been magnified and we can conclude that
203: \hawaii\ is truly an ultraluminous system.
204:
205: While we have added to the SED of \hawaii, the data are still sparse
206: and a detailed determination of the underlying physical properties and
207: geometry is unwarranted. Instead, we compare its SED to published
208: models of dust enshrouded quasars. The lines in Figure~\ref{SED}
209: represent such models for ultraluminous infrared galaxies (Granato,
210: Danese \& Franceseschini 1996). Consisting of a optically thick torus
211: of dust, extending over several hundred parsecs from the AGN core,
212: each curve represents a differing viewing angle; the dot-dashed line
213: is an equatorial view which maximally extinguishes the optical-UV
214: light from the quasar, which the treble-dot-dashed line is a polar
215: view with an unobstructed view of the AGN core. The dotted line
216: represents an intermediate case, with a viewing angle of $\sim45^o$. A
217: substantial portion of the radiation from the central quasar is
218: reprocessed into submm/IR by dust in the torus. Such models reasonably
219: reproduce the SED characteristics of \iras\ (equatorial view), as well
220: as other ultraluminous systems such as the cloverleaf quasar,
221: H1413+117 (polar view) and IRAS~09104+4109 \& IRAS~FSC~15307+3252
222: (intermediate view). In Figure~\ref{SED}, these curves have been
223: normalized to the data presented in this paper. It is important to
224: note that Egami et al. (1996) conclude that the (rest-frame) UV
225: emission in \hawaii\ arises solely in a stellar population, with no
226: contribution from the AGN core due to complete obscuration by the
227: circumnuclear dust. As all the models of Granato et al. (1996) predict
228: that {\it some} radiation from the central regions must be visible in
229: the UV, none can accurately describe the SED of \hawaii, but this may
230: be due to the parameter set employed in the modeling; the inclusion of
231: more dust, or changing the opening angle of the torus may bring better
232: agreement between the models and the data. It is apparent, however,
233: that combining the submillimetre and infrared data favours a model
234: with an intermediate viewing angle on to the obscuring torus. Again,
235: scaling from the models, the resulting dust mass in \hawaii\ is ${\rm
236: \sim 3\times 10^7\ M_\odot}$. Without more data over the SED of
237: \hawaii, this value possesses a significant uncertainty, but does
238: indicate that \hawaii\ harbours a vast quantity of dusty material.
239:
240: \subsection{Broad Absorption Lines}\label{BAL}
241: The nature of the broad absorption lines seen in the rest frame UV of
242: \hawaii\ presents an interesting problem. In the `standard model' of
243: BAL quasars the prominent absorption lines are the result of the
244: central continuum emission being observed through material which is
245: ablated from an obscuring torus by the action of the central quasar
246: (e.g. Barvainis et al. 1995). In \hawaii\ the UV view of the central
247: quasar is completely obscured and the AGN radiation cannot be
248: responsible for accelerating the BAL material. A potential solution,
249: however, is that the BAL material is driven from the outer dusty
250: regions by hot young stars. The requirement of two sources for the
251: driving force of the BAL material during different stages of the
252: systems evolution does, however, seem a little contrived, but we can
253: currently offer no solution to the problem.
254:
255: \subsection{Evolutionary State and Further Study}\label{Evolution}
256: In terms of infrared luminosity, and hence associated dust mass,
257: \hawaii\ is similar to other ultraluminous systems (Rowan-Robinson
258: 2000), and it is only the detection of broad emission lines in the
259: infrared that directly reveals the presence of a quasar at its
260: core. Such a picture is consistent with their being an evolutionary
261: link between the two populations (e.g. Sanders \& Mirabel 1996).
262: Here, an initial burst of star formation is triggered by the merger
263: between two gas-rich systems. The merger channels gas into the
264: central regions of the remnant, forming and feeding an quasar
265: core. This AGN, however, is obscured by dust, the detritus of the star
266: burst; it is at this stage which we find \hawaii. The dust is ablated
267: from the torus due to radiation from the quasar core, eventually
268: clearing and revealing an `normal' quasar.
269:
270: Further clues to the nature and geometry of \hawaii\ will be gleaned
271: from polarization studies. As demonstrated with \iras\ (Goodrich et
272: al. 1996), such observations can reveal the presence broad emission
273: features, and hence an AGN core, the light of which has been scattered
274: from a exterior region (Barvainis et al. 1995). The identification of
275: a scattered view of the central engine will imply that the AGN core is
276: not completely obscured.
277:
278: \section{Conclusions}\label{conclusions}
279: We have presented new submillimetre photometry of the high redshift,
280: broad absorption line system \hawaii. These observations confirm that
281: this system consists of a quasar which is enshrouded in a massive
282: (${\rm \sim 10^7\rightarrow10^8\ M_\odot}$) quantity of dust. With an
283: inferred infrared luminosity of ${\rm \sim
284: 10^{13}~h_{50}^{-2}~L_\odot}$, \hawaii\ is a member of the
285: ultraluminous class of infrared galaxies. The more extreme members of
286: this family, namely \iras\ and H~1413+117, have been found to be
287: gravitational lenses. Hence, their apparent luminosities have been
288: significantly magnified. Considering this, \hawaii\ represents an
289: intrinsically more luminous source than these objects.
290:
291: The identification of \hawaii\ as an ultraluminous infrared galaxy
292: provides more supporting evidence for there being an evolutionary link
293: between these and the AGN family. While presenting us with the rare
294: view of a embryonic quasar in the process of shedding its dusty
295: cocoon, data on \hawaii\ are currently quite sparse and more
296: observations are required before detailed modeling can be undertaken.
297:
298: \section*{Acknowledgements}
299: We thank the staff of the JCMT for their assistance with the SCUBA
300: observations, and the weather for being so cooperative. GFL thanks
301: the Australian Nuclear Science \& Technology Organization (ANSTO) for
302: financial support.
303:
304: \begin{thebibliography}{DUM}
305: %
306: \bibitem[Barvainis, et al.(1995)]{Barvainis1995}
307: Barvainis, R., Antonucci, R., Hurt, T., Coleman, P. {\&} Reuter, H.-P.
308: 1995, ApJ, 451, L9
309: %
310: \bibitem[Benford et al.(1999)]{B1999}
311: Benford, D. J., Cox, P., Omont, A., Phillips, T. G. \& McMahon, R. G.
312: 1999, ApJ, 518, L65
313: %
314: \bibitem[Broadhurst {\&} Lehar(1995)]{B1995}
315: Broadhurst, T. {\&} Lehar, J.
316: 1995, ApJL, 450, L41
317: %
318: \bibitem[Chapman et al.(2000)]{chapman2000}
319: Chapman, S. C., Scott, D., Steidel C. C., Borys, C., Halpern, M.,
320: Morris, S., Adelberger K., Dickinson, M., Giavalisco M. \& Pettini, M.
321: 2000, MNRAS, in press
322: %
323: \bibitem[Cowie, et al.(1994)]{Cowie, et al.1994}
324: Cowie, L. L., et al.
325: 1994, ApJ, 432, L83
326: %
327: \bibitem[Egami, et al.(1996)]{Egami, et al.1996}
328: Egami, E., Iwamuro, F., Maihara, T., Oya, S. {\&} Cowie, L. L.
329: 1996, AJ, 112, 73
330: %
331: \bibitem[Granato, Danese {\&} Franceschini(1996)]{Granato1996}
332: Granato, G.\ L., Danese, L.\ {\&} Franceschini, A.
333: 1996, ApJ, 460, L11
334: %
335: \bibitem[Groodrich, et al.(1996)]{Goodrich1996}
336: Goodrich, R. W., Miller, J. S., Martel, A., Cohen, M. H., Tran, H. D.,
337: Ogle, P. M. {\&} Vermeulen, R. C.
338: 1996, ApJ, 456, 9
339: %
340: \bibitem[Hall, Martini, Depoy {\&} Gatley(1997)]{Hall, et al.1997}
341: Hall, P. B., Martini, P., Depoy, D. L. {\&} Gatley, I.
342: 1997, ApJ, 484, L17
343: %
344: \bibitem[Hughes, Robson, Dunlop {\&} Gear(1993)]{Hughes, et al.1993}
345: Hughes, D.\ H., Robson, E.\ I., Dunlop, J.\ S.\ {\&} Gear, W.\ K.
346: 1993, MNRAS, 263, 607
347: %
348: \bibitem[Jenness {\&} Lightfoot(1998)]{Jenness1998}
349: Jenness, T.\ {\&} Lightfoot, J.\ F.
350: 1998, ASP Conf.\ Ser.\
351: 145: Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems VII, 7, 216
352: %
353: \bibitem[McMahon, et al.(1999)]{McMaho1999}
354: McMahon, R. G., Priddey, R. S., Omont, A., Snellen, I. {\&} Withington, S.
355: 1999, MNRAS, 309, L1
356: %
357: \bibitem[Rowan-Robinson et al.(1993)]{RR93}
358: Rowan-Robinson, M., et al.
359: 1993, MNRAS, 261, 513
360: %
361: \bibitem[Rowan-Robinson(2000)]{RR00}
362: Rowan-Robinson, M.
363: 2000, {\it astro-ph/9912286}
364: %
365: \bibitem[Sanders {\&} Mirabel(1996)]{Sander1996}
366: Sanders, D. B. {\&} Mirabel, I. F.
367: 1996, ARA{\&}A, 34, 749
368: %
369: \bibitem[Scott et al.(2000)]{scott2000}
370: Scott, D., Lagache, G., Borys, C., Chapman, S. C., Halpern, M.,
371: Sajina, A., Ciliegi, P., Clements, D. L., Dole, H., Oliver, S.,
372: Puget, J.-L., Reach, W. T. \& Rowan-Robinson, M.
373: 2000, A\&A, 357, L5
374: %
375: \bibitem[Songaila, Cowie, Hu {\&} Gardner(1994)]{Songaila, et al.1994}
376: Songaila, A., Cowie, L. L., Hu, E. M. {\&} Gardner, J. P.
377: 1994, ApJS, 94, 461
378: %
379: \end{thebibliography}
380: \end{document}
381: