1: % The first item in a LaTeX file must be a \documentstyle command to
2: % declare the overall style of the paper. The \documentstyle lines
3: % that are relevant for the AASTeX macros are shown; one is uncommented out
4: % so that the file can be processed.
5:
6: %\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
7: \documentclass{aastex}
8:
9: \newcommand{\ha}{\hbox{H$\alpha$}}
10: \newcommand{\nii}{\hbox{[{\ion{N}{2}}]}}
11: \newcommand{\oiii}{\hbox{[{\ion{O}{3}}]}}
12: \newcommand{\nix}{$\cdot\cdot\cdot$}
13:
14: % The eqsecnum style changes the way equations are numbered. Normally,
15: % equations are just numbered sequentially through the entire paper.
16: % If eqsecnum appears in the \documentstyle command, equation numbers will
17: % be sequential through each section, and will be formatted "(sec-eqn)",
18: % where sec is the current section number and eqn is the number of the
19: % equation within that section. The eqsecnum option can be used with
20: % any substyle.
21:
22: %\documentstyle[11pt,eqsecnum,aaspp4]{article}
23:
24: % Authors are permitted to use the fonts provided by the American Mathematical
25: % Society, if they are available to them on their local system. These fonts
26: % are not part of the AASTeX macro package or the regular TeX distribution.
27:
28: %\documentstyle[12pt,amssym,aasms4]{article}
29:
30: % Here's some slug-line data. The receipt and acceptance dates will be
31: % filled in by the editorial staff with the appropriate dates. Rules will
32: % appear on the title page of the manuscript until these are uncommented
33: % out by the editorial staff.
34:
35: \received{July 28, 2000}
36: \accepted{September 18, 2000}
37:
38: \slugcomment{To be published in the Astrophysical Journal (Letters)}
39:
40:
41: % Authors may supply running head information, if they wish to do so, although
42: % this may be modified by the editorial offices. The left head contains a
43: % list of authors, usually three allowed---otherwise use et al. The right
44: % head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters. Running heads
45: % are not printed.
46:
47: \shorttitle{Magnetic Fields in Cygnus A}
48: \shortauthors{Wilson, Young \& Shopbell}
49:
50: % This is the end of the "preamble". Now we wish to start with the
51: % real material for the paper, which we indicate with \begin{document}.
52: % Following the \begin{document} command is the front matter for the
53: % paper, viz., the title, author and address data, the abstract, and
54: % any keywords or subject headings that are relevant.
55:
56: \begin{document}
57:
58: \title{Chandra Observations of Cygnus A: Magnetic Field Strengths in the Hot
59: Spots of a Radio Galaxy}
60:
61: \author{A. S. Wilson\altaffilmark{1}, A. J. Young}
62: \affil{Astronomy Department, University of Maryland, College Park,
63: MD 20742; wilson@astro.umd.edu, ayoung@astro.umd.edu}
64:
65: \and
66:
67: \author{P. L. Shopbell}
68:
69: \affil{Department of Astronomy, Mail Code 105-24,
70: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125; pls@astro.caltech.edu}
71:
72: % Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
73: % are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. The actual alternate
74: % affiliation information is typeset in footnotes at the bottom of the
75: % first page, and the text itself is specified in \altaffiltext commands.
76: % There is a separate \altaffiltext for each alternate affiliation
77: % indicated above.
78:
79: \altaffiltext{1}{Adjunct Astronomer, Space Telescope Science Institute,
80: 3700 San Martin Drive,
81: Baltimore, MD 21218; awilson@stsci.edu}
82:
83: % The abstract environment prints out the receipt and acceptance dates
84: % if they are relevant for the journal style. For the aasms style, they
85: % will print out as horizontal rules for the editorial staff to type
86: % on, so long as the author does not include \received and \accepted
87: % commands. This should not be done, since \received and \accepted dates
88: % are not known to the author.
89:
90: \begin{abstract}
91: We report X-ray observations of the powerful radio galaxy Cygnus A with the
92: Chandra X-ray Observatory. This letter focuses on the radio hot spots, all
93: four of which are detected in X-rays with a very similar morphology to their
94: radio structure. X-ray spectra have been obtained for the two brighter hot
95: spots (A and D). Both are well described by a power law with photon index
96: $\Gamma$ = 1.8 $\pm$ 0.2 absorbed by the Galactic column in the direction of
97: Cygnus A. Thermal X-ray models require too high gas densities and may be ruled
98: out. The images and spectra strongly support synchrotron self-Compton models
99: of the X-ray emission, as proposed by Harris, Carilli \& Perley on the basis
100: of ROSAT imaging observations. Such models indicate that the magnetic field
101: in each of the brighter hot spots is 1.5 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ gauss, with an
102: uncertainty of a few tens of percent. This value is close to the equipartition
103: field strengths assuming no protons are present. The
104: possibility that the X-rays are synchrotron radiation is briefly discussed, but
105: not favored. We speculate that production of the $\gamma$ $\sim$ 10$^{7}$
106: electrons necessary for X-ray synchrotron radiation from hot spots is
107: inhibited when the external gas density is high, as is the case when the
108: radio galaxy is within a cooling flow.
109:
110: \end{abstract}
111:
112: % The different journals have different requirements for keywords. The
113: % keywords.apj file, found on aas.org in the pubs/aastex-misc directory,
114: % contains a list of keywords used with the ApJ and Letters. These are
115: % usually assigned by the editor, but authors may include them in their
116: % manuscripts if they wish.
117:
118: \keywords{galaxies: active -- galaxies: individual (Cygnus A)
119: -- galaxies: jets -- galaxies: nuclei -- magnetic fields
120: -- X-rays: galaxies}
121:
122:
123: % That's it for the front matter. On to the main body of the paper.
124: % We'll only put in tutorial remarks at the beginning of each section
125: % so you can see entire sections together.
126:
127: % In the first two sections, you should notice the use of the LaTeX \cite
128: % command to identify citations. The citations are tied to the
129: % reference list via symbolic KEYs. We have chosen the first three
130: % characters of the first author's name plus the last two numeral of the
131: % year of publication. The corresponding reference has a \bibitem
132: % command in the reference list below.
133: %
134: % Please see the AASTeX manual for a more complete discussion on how to make
135: % \cite-\bibitem work for you.
136:
137: \newpage
138: \section{INTRODUCTION}
139:
140: The spectral emissivity of optically thin synchrotron radiation is proportional
141: to n$_{\rm e0}$B$^{\rm (p + 1)/2}$, where n$_{\rm e0}$
142: is the constant in the relativistic
143: electron number density spectrum
144: (n$_{\rm e}(\gamma)d\gamma$ = n$_{\rm e0}{\gamma^{-\rm p}} \rm d\gamma$,
145: $\gamma$ = E/m$_{\rm e}$c$^{2}$) and B is the
146: magnetic field strength. Observations of synchrotron sources allow this
147: product to be determined, but not n$_{\rm e0}$ and
148: B separately. It is common practice
149: to quote the equipartition magnetic field, B$_{\rm eq}$, the field
150: for which the
151: energies in relativistic particles and magnetic field are equal; this field is
152: close to that at which the total energy in relativistic particles plus magnetic
153: field is a minimum. This inability to obtain a direct measurement of the
154: magnetic field strength has seriously hampered progress in understanding cosmic
155: synchrotron sources.
156:
157: The relativistic electrons will inevitably scatter any photons in the source
158: through the inverse Compton process. The emissivity of inverse Compton
159: radiation depends on the electron energy spectrum and the radiation spectrum,
160: the latter being an observable quantity for an isotropic source.
161: Detection of inverse Compton radiation thus permits n$_{\rm e0}$
162: to be measured and
163: hence B from the synchrotron spectrum. If the photons being scattered are the
164: synchrotron radiation itself, the resulting emission is called
165: synchrotron self-Compton (SSC) radiation.
166:
167: For a typical extended non-thermal radio source, much of the inverse Compton
168: emission is expected to be radiated at X-ray energies. Unfortunately, the
169: existence of other mechanisms that generate X-rays - thermal and synchrotron
170: emissions - and the poor spatial and spectral resolutions of previous X-ray
171: observatories has precluded the use of this method to measure magnetic
172: field strengths in either supernova remnants or extragalactic radio sources.
173:
174: In this paper, we present the first results of a study of the nearby
175: (z = 0.0562), powerful radio galaxy Cygnus A with the Chandra X-ray Observatory.
176: We focus on the X-ray emission of the radio hotspots. Previously,
177: Harris, Carilli \& Perley (1994, hereafter HCP) detected soft X-ray emission
178: from the dominant western and eastern hot spots (termed A and D by
179: Hargrave \& Ryle 1974) with the High Resolution Imager of the ROSAT
180: Observatory. They compared the measured X-ray fluxes with predictions of SSC
181: models and argued that the magnetic fields in the hot spots are quite close to
182: the equipartition values, calculated assuming no contribution from relativistic
183: protons. The angular resolution of the ROSAT HRI was $\simeq$
184: 5$^{\prime\prime}$, so the point spread function included both weaker
185: radio structures (such as the fainter hot spots B and E - cf. Perley, Dreher
186: \& Cowan 1984) and thermal emission from the cluster gas. More significantly,
187: the detector had almost no spectral resolution so HCP were unable to measure
188: the X-ray spectra of the hot spots. The Chandra observations overcome these
189: limitations. The sub arc second angular resolution and high sensitivity
190: of Chandra have allowed detection and spatial resolution of X-ray emission from
191: all four hot spots. We also report the X-ray spectra of the two brightest
192: hot spots (A and D), finding excellent agreement with the predictions of the
193: SSC model. This agreement strongly favors the SSC model, but does not rule
194: out a contribution from X-ray synchrotron emission, as we briefly discuss.
195: We use H$_{0}$ = 50 km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ and q$_{\rm 0}$ = 0 throughout.
196: Other aspects of the Chandra results on Cygnus A will be discussed elsewhere.
197:
198: \section{OBSERVATIONS AND REDUCTION}
199:
200: Cygnus A was observed by the Chandra X-ray Observatory on May 21 2000
201: (sequence number 700032, obsid 360) using the Advanced CCD Imaging
202: Spectrometer (ACIS) spectroscopic array. The nucleus was centered
203: 20$^{\prime\prime}$ in the --Y direction from the location of best focus on
204: chip S3. All of the regions of radio emission from Cyg A were imaged on
205: S3. The total good time interval was 34.7 ksecs taken with the default frame
206: time of 3.2 secs.
207: The data extraction and
208: analysis have been performed using version 1.1.3 of the CIAO software and
209: version 11.0 of XSPEC.
210: A new level 2 events file, with the correct gain map
211: (acisD2000-01-29gainN0001.fits), was made from the events file supplied by
212: the Chandra Science Center. The data were inspected for bad aspect
213: and high background times, but none were found.
214: The response matrix file
215: and ancillary response file were initially obtained from calibration data
216: obtained with the chip at -110C. The spectra were recalculated with
217: calibration data for a temperature of -120C (the temperature during
218: the observations) when these became available, but were insignificantly
219: different from those obtained with the -110C calibration. The counts used
220: to obtain the spectra of hot spots A and D were taken from circular regions of
221: radii 2\farcs3 and 2\farcs2, respectively, with background taken from annular
222: regions of width $\simeq$ 2$^{\prime\prime}$ concentric with the source region.
223:
224: \section{RESULTS}
225:
226: \subsection {Morphology}
227:
228: Fig. 1 is a grey scale plot of the X-ray emission from the region of the
229: radio source. The Chandra astrometry shows that the nuclear X-ray source
230: agrees with the nuclear radio source to within 1\farcs4. When the X-ray
231: and radio nuclei are aligned, the compact X-ray sources at the SE and NW
232: edges of Fig. 1 coincide with the corresponding
233: radio hot spots to within 0\farcs5. Fig 2
234: shows X-ray contours on a grey scale of a 6 cm image with
235: resolution 0\farcs35 (Perley, Dreher \& Cowan 1984; Carilli \& Barthel 1996)
236: in the vicinities of the western
237: (A and B) and eastern (D and E) hot spots.
238:
239: As may be seen in Fig. 2, the extents and morphologies of the X-ray and radio
240: hot spots are very similar, with the directions of elongation agreeing to
241: within a few degrees. Despite the somewhat lower resolution of the X-ray image,
242: it is clear that the X-ray emission comes from essentially the same region
243: as the radio
244: emission in each hot spot.
245:
246: \subsection {Spectra}
247:
248: Hot spots B and E are too weak to obtain reliable X-ray spectra, so we focus
249: on A and D. The results of modelling each spectrum with an absorbed power
250: law are shown in Table 1. In both cases, the absorbing column is
251: N$_{\rm H}$ = 3.3 $\times$ 10$^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$, in excellent agreement
252: with the Galactic column (3.3 $\times$ 10$^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$, HCP) in the
253: direction of Cygnus A. The photon indices are similar at
254: $\Gamma$ = 1.8 $\pm$ 0.2. Alternatively, the spectra may be well described
255: by a Raymond-Smith thermal plasma model with temperatures 4.9 keV (A) and
256: 6.0 keV (D).
257:
258: \subsection {X-ray Emission Mechanism}
259:
260: A thermal model requires a density of 0.5 cm$^{-3}$ in each hot spot. This
261: value is 10$^{3}$ times larger than the upper limit to the internal density
262: in the hot spots from the absence of Faraday depolarization (Dreher, Carilli
263: \& Perley 1987). It is also hard to understand how such a high density could
264: be produced in the hot spots given that the density of the intracluster medium
265: near them is only $\simeq$ 0.01 cm$^{-3}$ (HCP; Reynolds \& Fabian 1996).
266: We conclude that a thermal model for the X-ray emission of the hot spots
267: is untenable.
268:
269: In view of the success of a SSC model in reproducing the intensity
270: of the soft X-ray emission (HCP), it is natural to check whether the model
271: can also reproduce the X-ray spectra. From the radio spectra of the hot spots
272: (Carilli et al. 1991), we first calculated the internal radiant energy
273: density in the hot spots, modelled as uniformly emitting spheres,
274: from $\epsilon_{\rm R}$ = 3L$_{\rm R}$R/4cV, where L$_{\rm R}$ is the total
275: radio luminosity, R and V are the radius and volume of the hot spot, and
276: c is the speed of light. The results are $\epsilon_{\rm R}$ $\simeq$
277: 3 $\times$ 10$^{-11}$ erg cm$^{-3}$ for each hot spot. These values are
278: $\simeq$ 100 times larger than the energy density of the microwave
279: background ($\epsilon_{\rm M}$ $\simeq$ 4 $\times$ 10$^{-13}$ erg cm$^{-3}$),
280: showing that an SSC model is indeed appropriate.
281: The radiant energy densities in the hot spots
282: are, however, $\simeq$ 100 times smaller than that in the magnetic field
283: ($\epsilon_{\rm B}$ $\simeq$ 3 $\times$ 10$^{-9}$ erg cm$^{-3}$) assuming
284: equipartition and no relativistic
285: protons. Thus the rate of energy loss by the electrons to synchrotron
286: radiation will be $\simeq$ 100 times
287: larger than to SSC radiation.
288:
289: To calculate the SSC spectra, we have
290: used the code of Band \& Grindlay (1985, 1986)
291: which assumes spherical geometry. Following Carilli et al. (1991), the radio
292: spectrum of each hot spot was modelled as a broken power law with spectral index
293: $\alpha$ = 0.55 (hot spot A, S $\propto$ $\nu^{-\alpha}$) and 0.50
294: (hot spot D) below the break frequency and 1.05 (A) and 1.0 (D) above it.
295: Such a change in slope of 0.5 is expected in models of continuous injection of
296: electrons accompanied by synchrotron losses (Kardashev 1962). The emitting
297: region was taken to be a uniform sphere in each case.
298:
299: The results of the modelling are given in Table 2 and compared with the
300: Chandra spectra in Figs 3a and b. As may be seen, the predicted SSC radiation
301: is in excellent agreement with the Chandra-observed spectrum for a magnetic
302: field of 1.5 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ gauss in each hot spot, in good agreement
303: with the results of HCP based on the X-ray intensity. This value may be compared
304: with the equipartition values of 2.8 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ gauss (hot spot A)
305: and 2.5 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ gauss (D), calculated assuming no relativistic
306: protons, the broken power-law spectra of Carilli et al. (1991), low
307: frequency cut-offs at 10 MHz and high frequency cut-offs at 400 GHz. The
308: calculated field is insensitive to the precise cut-off frequencies.
309: The SSC model predicts spectral steepening towards higher energies within the
310: Chandra band. We have searched for this effect, finding a hint of
311: a larger value of $\Gamma$ in the 2.5 - 6 keV band than in the 0.7 - 2.5
312: keV band for hot spot D. However, this difference in photon indices is not
313: significant.
314:
315: Uncertainty in the magnetic field obtained with the SSC model results from
316: a number of factors, including a) the idealisation of the hot spots as
317: uniform spheres of known radii, b) the errors in the Chandra-measured
318: spectra, and c) modelling the radio spectrum of each hot spot as a
319: broken power law, with sharp changes in the slopes of both the electron
320: energy
321: and the synchrotron radiation spectra at the break energy and
322: frequency. Comparison
323: of the formulae for synchrotron and inverse Compton radiation indicates that
324: changing the volume by a factor of 2 changes B by $\sim$ 30\%. The normalisation
325: of the Chandra spectra are uncertain by $\simeq$ 17 - 28\% (Table 1).
326: An error of 25\% in SSC flux changes B by $\simeq$ 15\%. Lastly, the idealised
327: treatment of the electron energy and synchrotron spectra around the
328: break is estimated to contribute $\lesssim$ 10\% uncertainty. The precise
329: locations and shapes of the high energy cut-offs have little effect on the SSC
330: spectra in the Chandra band. We conclude that the error in the magnetic
331: fields derived from the SSC model amounts to a few tens of percent.
332:
333: \section{CONCLUDING REMARKS}
334:
335: The X-ray spectra of the two brightest radio hot spots (A and D) of Cygnus A
336: are in excellent agreement with an SSC model in which the magnetic field is
337: 1.5 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ gauss. This value is close to the equipartition
338: fields of 2.8 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ and 2.5 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ gauss for hot spots
339: A and D respectively, calculated assuming no relativistic protons are present
340: (i.e. the ratio of the energy density in relativistic protons to that in
341: electrons, K = 0).
342: The most straightforward interpretation is that the relativistic gas is an
343: electron-positron plasma and is close to equipartition with the magnetic
344: field. If, on the other hand, there is significant energy in relativistic
345: protons
346: (e.g. K $\sim$ 100, a value appropriate to the relativistic protons and
347: electrons observed at the top of the Earth's atmosphere)
348: and the X-rays are still SSC radiation, the energy density in relativistic
349: protons
350: must exceed that in the magnetic field. It is notable that the magnetic field
351: cannot be less than 1.5 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ gauss since the SSC radiation would
352: then exceed the observed X-radiation.
353:
354: The alternative is that B $>$ 1.5 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ gauss in which case the
355: predicted SSC emission would be too weak to account for the observed X-ray
356: emission. The X-rays would then have to be synchrotron radiation, as we
357: have recently argued for the jet and hot spot of Pictor A (Wilson, Young
358: \& Shopbell 2001). Synchrotron X-ray emitting electrons in hundreds of
359: microgauss strength magnetic fields have synchrotron half lives of order
360: years. They must thus be continuously accelerated within the hot spots.
361: Here, again, there are two options - direct electron acceleration to
362: $\gamma$ $\simeq$ 10$^{7}$ - 10$^{8}$ or a ``proton-induced cascade''.
363: In the latter process (e.g. Mannheim, Kr\"ulls \& Biermann 1991;
364: Biermann 1996), ultrahigh energy protons ($\gamma_{\rm p}$ $\sim$ 10$^{11}$),
365: perhaps shock accelerated, interact with photons to initiate a cascade, which
366: eventually yields relativistic electron-positron pairs. The peak of the
367: radiation from this process is at $\sim$ MeV energies,
368: and the
369: spectral index predicted in the Chandra band
370: is $\alpha$ $\simeq$ 0.7
371: (Mannheim, Kr\"ulls \& Biermann 1991), in agreement with the spectral
372: index observed. Observations
373: at higher energies than the Chandra band, where the
374: proton-induced cascade predicts a harder spectrum than the SSC model, are needed
375: to distinguish the two processes.
376:
377: X-ray emission has now been detected from a number of hot spots in radio
378: galaxies. For three galaxies - 3C 123 (Hardcastle 2000), 3C 295 (Harris et al.
379: 2000) and Cygnus A (present paper), the X-ray emission is well explained
380: by SSC emission from the radio synchrotron-emitting electrons with a magnetic
381: field close to equipartition for K = 0. In three other galaxies - Pictor A
382: (Wilson, Young \& Shopbell 2001), 3C 120 (Harris et al. 1999) and 3C 390.3
383: (Harris, Leighly \& Leahy 1998) - the X-ray emission is orders of magnitude
384: too strong to be SSC emission with an equipartition magnetic field. Further,
385: the X-ray spectrum of Pictor A predicted by the SSC model disagrees with
386: that observed. In these cases, the X-rays are probably synchrotron
387: radiation from $\gamma$ $\sim$ 10$^{7}$ electrons. It is notable that 3C 295
388: and Cygnus A are in clusters with prominent cooling flows, while 3C 123 is in a
389: cluster with strong, extended X-ray emission and thus may be within a cooling
390: flow. In contrast, Pictor A, 3C 120 and 3C 390.3 are not in cooling flows.
391: It is tempting to speculate that the presence of high density surrounding gas
392: may inhibit production of X-ray synchrotron emitting electrons
393: in hot spots. Several processes may be relevant to this effect, e.g. hot
394: spots propagating into the dense gas of a cooling flow should have lower
395: outward velocities, and there may be more entrainment of thermal gas into the
396: jet and hot spot. Such effects may reduce the efficiency with which
397: $\gamma$ $\sim$ 10$^{7}$ electrons are accelerated. Future
398: Chandra X-ray observations of additional radio galaxies should shed light on
399: this issue.
400:
401: We are grateful to Rick Perley for providing the VLA 6 cm map of Cygnus A
402: in numerical form.
403: We also wish to thank the staff
404: of the Chandra Science Center, especially Dan Harris and Shanil
405: Virani, for their help.
406:
407: \begin{references}{}
408:
409: \reference{}
410:
411: \reference{} Band, D. L. \& Grindlay, J. E. 1985, ApJ, 298, 128
412:
413: \reference{} Band, D. L. \& Grindlay, J. E. 1986, ApJ, 308, 576
414:
415: \reference{} Biermann, P. L. 1996, in ``Cygnus A - Study of a Radio Galaxy'',
416: Eds. C. L. Carilli \& D. E. Harris, p 139 (Cambridge University Press)
417:
418: \reference{} Carilli, C. L., Perley, R. A., Dreher, J. W. \& Leahy, J. P.
419: 1991, ApJ, 383, 554
420:
421: \reference{} Carilli, C. L. \& Barthel, P. D. 1996, A\&A Review, 7, 1
422:
423: \reference{} Dreher, J. W., Carilli, C. L. \& Perley, R. A. 1987, ApJ, 316, 611
424:
425: \reference{} Hardcastle, M. 2000, talk given at meeting ``Particles and Fields
426: in Radio Galaxies'', Oxford, U. K. Aug. 3 - 5.
427:
428: \reference{} Hargrave, P. J. \& Ryle, M. 1974, MNRAS, 166, 305
429:
430: \reference{} Harris, D. E., Carilli, C. L. \& Perley, R. A. 1994, Nature, 367,
431: 713 (HCP)
432:
433: \reference{} Harris, D. E., Leighly, K. M. \& Leahy, J. P. 1998, ApJ, 499, L149
434:
435: \reference{} Harris, D. E., Hjorth, J., Sadun, A. C., Silverman, J. D. \&
436: Vestergaard, M. 1999, ApJ, 518, 213
437:
438: \reference{} Harris, D. E. et al. 2000, ApJ, 530, L81
439:
440: \reference{} Kardashev, N. S. 1962, Sov. Astr. (AJ), 6, 317
441:
442: \reference{} Mannheim, K., Kr\"ulls, W. M. \& Biermann, P. L. 1991, A\&A,
443: 251, 723
444:
445: \reference{} Meisenheimer, K., Yates, M. G. \& R\"oser, H.-J. 1997,
446: A\&A, 325, 57
447:
448: \reference{} Perley, R. A., Dreher, J. W. \& Cowan, J. J. 1984, ApJ, 285, L35
449:
450: \reference{} Reynolds, C. S. \& Fabian, A. C. 1996, MNRAS, 278, 479
451:
452: \reference{} Wilson, A. S., Young, A. J. \& Shopbell, P. L. 2001, ApJ,
453: 546 (in press for Jan 10 2001 issue)
454:
455:
456: \end{references}
457:
458: \vfil\eject
459:
460: \clearpage
461:
462: \begin{deluxetable}{lllll}
463: \tablecolumns{5}
464: \tablewidth{0pc}
465: \tablecaption{Spectral fits to the X-ray emission of the
466: hot spots\tablenotemark{a}}
467: \tablehead{
468: \colhead{Hot spot} & \colhead{$\rm N_{\rm H}$\tablenotemark{b}} &
469: \colhead{$\Gamma$} & \colhead{Normalization\tablenotemark{c}} &
470: \colhead{$\chi^2$ / d.o.f.}}
471: \startdata
472: A & $3.26^{+0.74}_{-0.61}$ & $1.84^{+0.22}_{-0.19}$ &
473: $\left(2.93^{+0.81}_{-0.63}\right)\times10^{-5}$ & 27 / 27 \\
474: D & $3.30^{+0.63}_{-0.26}$ & $1.75^{+0.19}_{-0.17}$ &
475: $\left(4.40^{+0.97}_{-0.77}\right)\times10^{-5}$ & 31 / 39 \\
476: \tablenotetext{a}{Errors are 90\% confidence for single parameter of
477: interest.}
478: \tablenotetext{b}{$10^{21}$ atom cm$^{-2}$.}
479: \tablenotetext{c}{Photons keV$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$
480: s$^{-1}$ at 1\,keV.}
481: \enddata
482: \end{deluxetable}
483:
484: \begin{deluxetable}{lllllll}
485: \tablecolumns{7}
486: \tablewidth{0pc}
487: \tablecaption{Parameters of synchrotron self-Compton models}
488: \tablehead{
489: \colhead{Hot spot} & \colhead{$B$} & \colhead{$n_{\rm e0}$} &
490: \colhead{$\alpha$} &
491: \colhead{$\gamma_{\rm break}$} & \colhead{$\gamma_{\rm max}$}&
492: \colhead{Radius} \\
493: \colhead{} & \colhead{(Gauss)} & \colhead{(cm$^{-3}$)} & \colhead{} &
494: \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \colhead{(kpc)}}
495: \startdata
496: A & $1.5\times10^{-4}$ & $1.9\times10^{-3}$ & 0.55 &
497: $3.5\times10^3$ & $5.0\times10^4$ & 2.0 \\
498: D & $1.5\times10^{-4}$ & $5.5\times10^{-4}$ & 0.50 &
499: $5.5\times10^3$ & $5.0\times10^4$ & 2.2 \\
500: \enddata
501: \end{deluxetable}
502:
503: \vfil\eject
504:
505: \clearpage
506:
507:
508: \figcaption[fig1.ps]
509: {A grey scale representation of the Chandra X-ray image of Cygnus A. The
510: shading is proportional to the square root of the intensity. Coordinates
511: are for epoch J2000.0 both here and in Fig. 2.
512: \label{Figure 1}}
513:
514: \figcaption[fig2.ps]
515: {(a) X-ray emission (contours) superposed on a 6 cm VLA radio map (grey scale)
516: of the region of the western hot spots (A, the brighter, and B, $\simeq$
517: 6$^{\prime\prime}$ SE of A). Contours are plotted at 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24 and 32
518: counts per pixel (0\farcs5 $\times$ 0\farcs5). The grey scale is proportional
519: to the square root of the radio brightness. (b)
520: As Fig. 2a, but for the eastern hot spots (D, the brighter, and E,
521: $\simeq$ 4$^{\prime\prime}$W of D). Contours are plotted at
522: 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56 counts per pixel.
523: \label{Figure 2}}
524:
525: \figcaption[fig3.ps]
526: {(a) Spectrum of hot spot A.
527: The points show the radio fluxes and the line through
528: them the model of the synchrotron radiation. The ``bow tie'' is the Chandra
529: measured boundary of the X-ray spectrum (these error lines are 90\%
530: confidence after freezing N$_{\rm H}$ at its best fit value, which coincides
531: with the Galactic column). The solid line is the predicted SSC spectrum
532: for $\gamma_{\rm min}$ = 1 and the dashed line for
533: $\gamma_{\rm min}$ = 100. (b) As Fig. 3a, but for hot spot D.
534: The near infrared and optical upper limits
535: are from Meisenheimer, Yates \& R\"oser (1997), including their allowance
536: for obscuration.
537: \label{Figure 3}}
538:
539: \clearpage
540:
541: \end{document}
542: