1: %\documentclass{aastex}
2: %\usepackage{aastexug}
3: %\documentstyle[12pt,aasms4]{article}
4: \documentstyle[11pt,aaspp4]{article}
5: %\documentstyle[aas2pp4]{article}
6:
7: %\slugcomment{slugcomment}
8:
9: \begin{document}
10:
11: \title{Day-Scale Variability of 3C~279 and Searches for
12: Correlations in Gamma-Ray, X-Ray, and Optical Bands}
13:
14: \author{R.~C.~Hartman\altaffilmark{1,2},
15: M.~Villata\altaffilmark{3},
16: T.~J.~Balonek\altaffilmark{4},
17: D.~L.~Bertsch\altaffilmark{1},
18: H.~Bock\altaffilmark{5},
19: M.~B\"ottcher\altaffilmark{6,7},
20: M.~T.~Carini\altaffilmark{18},
21: W.~Collmar\altaffilmark{8},
22: G.~De~Francesco\altaffilmark{3},
23: E.~C.~Ferrara\altaffilmark{9},
24: J.~Heidt\altaffilmark{5},
25: G.~Kanbach\altaffilmark{8},
26: S.~Katajainen\altaffilmark{10},
27: M.~Koskimies\altaffilmark{10},
28: O.~M.~Kurtanidze\altaffilmark{17},
29: L.~Lanteri\altaffilmark{3},
30: A.~Lawson\altaffilmark{12},
31: Y.~C.~Lin\altaffilmark{13},
32: A.~P.~Marscher\altaffilmark{14},
33: J.~P.~McFarland\altaffilmark{9},
34: I.~M.~McHardy\altaffilmark{12},
35: H.~R.~Miller\altaffilmark{9},
36: M.~Nikolashvili\altaffilmark{11},
37: K.~Nilsson\altaffilmark{10},
38: J.~C.~Noble\altaffilmark{14},
39: G.~Nucciarelli\altaffilmark{15},
40: L.~Ostorero\altaffilmark{3},
41: T.~Pursimo\altaffilmark{10},
42: C.~M.~Raiteri\altaffilmark{3},
43: R.~Rekola\altaffilmark{10},
44: T.~Savolainen\altaffilmark{10},
45: A.~Sillanp\"a\"a\altaffilmark{10},
46: A.~Smale\altaffilmark{16},
47: G.~Sobrito\altaffilmark{3},
48: L.~O.~Takalo\altaffilmark{10},
49: D.~J.~Thompson\altaffilmark{1},
50: G.~Tosti\altaffilmark{15},
51: S.~J.~Wagner\altaffilmark{5},
52: J.~W.~Wilson\altaffilmark{9}}
53:
54: \altaffiltext{1}{Code 661, NASA/GSFC, Greenbelt, MD 20771}
55: \altaffiltext{2}{rch@egret.gsfc.nasa.gov}
56: \altaffiltext{3}{Osservatorio Astronomico di Torino, Strada
57: Osservatorio 20, I-10025 Pino Torinese, Italy}
58: \altaffiltext{4}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Colgate University,
59: 13 Oak Drive, Hamilton, NY 13346-1398}
60: \altaffiltext{5}{Landessternwarte K\"onigstuhl, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany}
61: \altaffiltext{6}{Department of Space Physics and Astronomy, Rice
62: University, Houston, TX 77005-1892}
63: \altaffiltext{7}{Chandra Fellow}
64: \altaffiltext{8}{Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Extraterrestrische Physik,
65: P.O. Box 1603, 85740 Garching, Germany}
66: \altaffiltext{9}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Georgia State
67: University Atlanta, GA 30303}
68: \altaffiltext{10}{Tuorla Observatory, V\"ais\"al\"antie 20,
69: FIN-21500 Piikki\"o, Finland}
70: \altaffiltext{11}{Abastumani Observatory, 383762 Abastumani,
71: Republic of Georgia}
72: \altaffiltext{12}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of
73: Southampton, UK}
74: \altaffiltext{13}{W. W. Hansen Experimental Physics Laboratory, Stanford
75: University, Stanford, CA 94305}
76: \altaffiltext{14}{Institute for Astrophysical Research, Boston
77: University, 725 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, MA 02215}
78: \altaffiltext{15}{Osservatorio Astronomico di Perugia, Via Bonfigli,
79: 06123 Perugia, Italy}
80: \altaffiltext{16}{Code 662, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center,
81: Greenbelt, MD 20771}
82: \altaffiltext{17}{Astrophysikalisches Institut Potsdam, An der Sternwarte
83: 16, 14482 Potsdam, Germany}
84: \altaffiltext{18}{Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, Western Kentucky
85: University, 1 Big Red Way, Bowling Green, KY 42104}
86:
87:
88: \begin{abstract}
89:
90: Light curves of 3C~279
91: are presented in optical (R-band), X-rays (RXTE/PCA), and
92: $\gamma$~rays (CGRO/EGRET) for 1999 Jan--Feb and 2000 Jan--Mar. During
93: both of those epochs the $\gamma$-ray levels were high, and all three
94: observed bands demonstrated substantial variation, on time scales as
95: short as one day. Correlation analyses provided no consistent pattern,
96: although a rather significant optical/$\gamma$-ray correlation was seen
97: in 1999, with a $\gamma$-ray lag of $\sim$2.5~days, and there are other
98: suggestions of correlations in the light curves. For comparison,
99: correlation analysis is also presented for the $\gamma$-ray and X-ray
100: light curves during the large $\gamma$~ray flare in 1996 Feb and the two
101: $\gamma$-bright weeks leading up to it; the correlation at that time was
102: strong, with a $\gamma$-ray/X-ray offset of no more than 1 day.
103:
104: \end{abstract}
105:
106: \keywords{quasars: individual (3C~279)}
107:
108: \section{Introduction}
109:
110: The discovery by the EGRET instrument on the Compton Gamma Ray
111: Observatory (CGRO) that blazars can be strong $\gamma$-ray emitters
112: posed an intriguing question: what is the mechanism responsible for
113: this previously unknown and sometimes dominant high-energy emission?
114: Obvious candidates are the well-known synchrotron-self-Compton
115: (SSC), and external-Compton (EC) models; in both of these suggested
116: processes, the synchrotron-emitting relativistic electrons would
117: energize soft photons via the inverse-Compton process. In this
118: scenario, the principal
119: matter of debate is the origin of the soft photons, the
120: choices being synchrotron photons alone (SSC; e.g. Marscher \& Gear
121: 1985; Maraschi et al. 1992; Bloom \& Marscher 1996), photons of
122: different provenance, i.e., accretion disk (ECD; Dermer et al. 1992;
123: Dermer \& Schlickeiser 1993; Sikora et al. 1994) or broad-line
124: region (ECR; Blandford \& Levinson 1995; Ghisellini \& Madau 1996;
125: Dermer et al. 1997), or a combination of those possibilities.
126:
127: Other possibilities, which have not yet been as carefully explored,
128: are the proton-driven models. In the proton-initiated cascade (PIC)
129: scenario (Mannheim 1993), very high-energy
130: protons initiate photopion production, resulting in a
131: $\gamma$-ray/electron/positron cascade. More recently, other
132: proton-driven models have been discussed (e.g. Protheroe 1996a,
133: 1996b, Rachen 2000, Aharonian 2000, M\"ucke \& Protheroe 2001).
134: These seem to be more readily applied to the lower-luminosity
135: blazars (often described as high-frequency-peaked blazars, HBL's),
136: but might also be adaptable for
137: higher-luminosity blazars such as 3C~279.
138:
139: Since the models predict different relationships between variations
140: in the different observing bands, intensive simultaneous monitoring
141: in several widely-spaced bands can provide crucial information on
142: the radiation mechanisms and the structure of the jet. For that
143: reason, several coordinated multiwavelength campaigns have been
144: carried out in the last years on EGRET-detected blazars.
145:
146: We present here the results of simultaneous monitoring in three
147: bands, GeV $\gamma$~rays (from the CGRO/EGRET instrument),
148: X-rays (from the PCA instrument
149: on the RXTE satellite), and R-band optical (from a number of
150: observers and ground-based observatories). For comparison, we
151: also show a similar analysis of the $\gamma$-ray and X-ray
152: light curves from the three weeks leading up to and including
153: the large $\gamma$-ray flare in early February of 1996 (Wehrle
154: et al. 1998). There was little optical coverage at that time, but
155: the $\gamma$~rays and X-rays were strongly correlated.
156:
157: \section{Observations}
158:
159: The campaigns were centered around the following observation
160: sequences:
161:
162: 1996 Jan 16 -- Feb 06 (CGRO viewing periods 511.0, 511.5)
163:
164: 1999 Jan 20 -- Feb 01 (CGRO viewing periods 806.5, 806.7)
165:
166: 2000 Feb 09 -- Mar 01 (CGRO viewing periods 910.0, 911.1)
167:
168: CGRO viewing period 806.5 was an observation of 3C~273 during which
169: EGRET was scheduled to be off. Because of the optical brightness of
170: 3C~279, EGRET was turned on in full-field-of-view-mode to see if
171: 3C~279 was detectable in the EGRET energy range. It was indeed bright,
172: which led to the implementation of a target-of-opportunity observation,
173: viewing period 806.7, with 3C~279 better centered in the field of view.
174:
175: CGRO viewing period 910.0 was a 3C~279 target of opportunity, based on
176: optical activity and brightness. Viewing period 911.1 was an
177: observation of 3C~273 during which EGRET was scheduled to be off;
178: due to the high $\gamma$-ray level seen in vp 910.0, EGRET was left
179: on for vp 911.1, and was switched to full-field-mode to maximize
180: the sensitivity to 3C~279, which was well off-axis.
181:
182: \subsection{Optical}
183:
184: R-band observations were made at a number of observatories, as
185: described below, during both the 1999 and the 2000 campaigns. The
186: coverage thus provided was the best
187: ever obtained on a flat-spectrum radio quasar (FSRQ) during an EGRET
188: observation. Most of the observations were made from European
189: observatories. Several of the authors and observatories are members
190: of the WEBT consortium.
191:
192: 3C~279 was observed during 1999 Jan 18 -- Feb 13 and
193: 2000 Jan 29 -- Feb 19 at the Abastumani Astrophysical Observatory
194: (Republic of Georgia) using a Peltier-cooled ST-6 CCD camera
195: attached to the Newtonian focus of the 70~cm meniscus telescope (1/3).
196: The full frame field of view is 14.9$\times$10.7~arcmin$^2$.
197: All observations are performed using combined filters of glasses which
198: match the standard B, V (Johnson) and $R_C, I_C$ (Cousins) bands well.
199: Because the scale of the CCD and the meniscus telescope resolution are
200: 2.3$\times$2.7~arcsec$^2$ per pixel and 1.5~arcsec respectively, the images
201: are undersampled; therefore the frames were slightly defocused to satisfy
202: the sampling theorem. A full description of the Abastumani blazar
203: monitoring program is given in Kurtanidze \& Nikolashvili (1999).
204:
205: Observations in 2000 were made with the 60~cm KVA telescope on La Palma,
206: Canary Islands, using a ST-8 CCD camera with BVR filters. The data
207: reduction was done using IRAF (with bias and flatfield corrections).
208:
209: Observations were taken with the 1.2~m telescope of Calar Alto
210: Observatory, Spain and with the 0.7~m telescope of the
211: Landessternwarte Heidelberg. Both telescopes are equipped with
212: $LN_2$-cooled CCD cameras. Observations in Heidelberg are carried
213: out with a Johnson R band filter. The Calar Alto observations were
214: carried out in Johnson R (in 2000) and R\"oser R (in earlier years).
215: Standard de-biasing and flat-fielding was carried out before
216: performing differential aperture photometry. (Finding charts and
217: comparison sequences are available at
218: http://www.lsw.uni-heidelberg.de/projects/extragalactic/charts.html
219: for 3C~279, along with many other blazars.)
220:
221: Observations were performed using Lowell Observatory's 42~inch
222: Hall telescope and the 24~inch telescope of the Mount Stromlo /
223: Siding Spring Observatories. Both telescopes are equipped with a
224: direct CCD camera and an autoguider. The observations were made
225: through VRI filters. Repeated exposures of 90~s were obtained
226: for the star field containing 3C~279 and several comparison stars
227: (Smith et al. 1985). These comparison
228: stars were internally calibrated and are located on the same CCD
229: frame as 3C~279. They were used as the reference standard stars in
230: the data reduction process. The observations were reduced following
231: Noble et al. (1997), using the method of Howell and Jacoby
232: (1986). Each exposure is
233: processed through an aperture photometry routine which reduces the
234: data as if it were produced by a multi-star photometer. Differential
235: magnitudes can then be computed for any pair of stars on the frame.
236: Thus, simultaneous observations of 3C~279, several comparison stars,
237: and the sky background will allow one to remove variations which may be
238: due to fluctuations in either atmospheric transparency or extinction.
239: The aperture photometry routine used for these observations is the
240: {\it phot} task in IRAF.
241:
242: Observations were taken with the 2.5~m Nordic Optical Telescope (NOT)
243: on La Palma, Canary Islands, Spain, using the ALFOSC instrument with
244: a 2000$\times$2000 CCD camera (0.189~arcsec per pixel), and V and R-filters.
245: Data reduction (including bias and flat field corrections) were made
246: either with standard IRAF or MIDAS (J. Heidt) routines.
247:
248: Observations at the Perugia Observatory were carried out with the
249: Automatic Imaging Telescope (AIT). The AIT is based on an
250: equatorially mounted 40~cm f/5 Newtonian reflector. A CCD camera
251: and Johnson-Cousins $BVR_cI_c$ filters are
252: utilized for photometry (Tosti et al. 1996). The data were reduced
253: using aperture photometry with the procedure described in that
254: reference.
255:
256: Observations at the Torino Observatory were done with the 1.05~m REOSC
257: telescope. The equipment includes an EEV CCD camera (1296$\times$1152
258: pixels, 0.467~arcsec per pixel) and standard (Johnson-Cousins) $BVRI$
259: filters. Frames are reduced by the Robin procedure locally developed
260: (Lanteri 1999), which includes bias subtraction, flat fielding, and
261: circular Gaussian fit after background subtraction. The magnitude
262: calibration was performed according to the photometric sequence by
263: Raiteri et al. (1998). Magnitudes were converted to fluxes by using a
264: B-band Galactic extinction of 0.06 mag and following Rieke \& Lebofsky
265: (1985) and Cardelli et al. (1989).
266:
267: \subsection{X-Rays}
268:
269: 3C~279 was the target for a series of 36 RXTE monitoring observations
270: during 1999 January 2 -- February 16, for a total on-source time
271: of 67~ks. The X-ray data presented here were obtained using the
272: Proportional Counter Array (PCA) instrument in the Standard 2 and Good
273: Xenon configurations, with time resolutions of 16~s and $<1\mu$s
274: respectively. Only PCUs 0, 1, and 2 were
275: reliably on throughout the observations, and we limit our analysis to
276: data from these detectors.
277:
278: A further sequence of 28 monitoring observations was performed with
279: RXTE in 2000 February, using the same instrumental configurations, for
280: a total on-source time of 104~ks. For this sequence we utilized
281: data from PCUs 0 and 2.
282:
283: Data analysis was performed using RXTE standard analysis
284: software, FTOOLS 5.0. Background subtraction of the PCA data was
285: performed utilizing the ``L7-240'' models generated by the RXTE
286: PCA team. The quality of the background subtraction was checked in
287: two ways: (i) by comparing the source and background spectra and light
288: curves at high energies (50--100~keV) where the source itself no longer
289: contributes detectable events; and (ii) by using the same models to
290: background-subtract the data obtained during slews to and from the
291: source.
292:
293: \subsection{Gamma Rays}
294:
295: The EGRET instrument is sensitive to $\gamma$~rays in the energy
296: range 30 to 30,000~MeV. Its capabilities and calibration are described
297: in Thompson et al. (1993), Esposito et al. (1999), and Bertsch
298: (2001). Point source data are analyzed using likelihood techniques
299: (Mattox et al. 1996). The choice of one day as the unit of
300: integration is dictated by the sensitivity of the EGRET detector
301: and the general level of the emission during the time intervals
302: of these observations. In TeV $\gamma$~rays, significant variations
303: have been seen on time scales well under one hour (REFS),
304: and may very well be present in 3C~279 in GeV $\gamma$-rays also.
305:
306: The 1999 and 2000 $\gamma$-ray data presented here have been shown
307: previously in a preliminary form in Hartman et al. 2001a \& 2001b.
308: Unfortunately, in both of those references, there was a 1-day error in
309: the Julian Dates for the $\gamma$-ray observations. Thus the
310: $\sim$3.5-day optical to $\gamma$-ray lag in 1999 tentatively
311: reported there corresponds to the $\sim$2.5-day lag discussed here.
312:
313: \subsection{Light Curves}
314:
315: The light curves resulting from the observations described above are
316: shown in Figures 1 and 2.
317:
318: \section{Correlation Analysis and Results}
319:
320: Although the $\gamma$-ray observations were continuous, both the R-band
321: and X-rays were only sampled, sometimes irregularly and/or sparsely;
322: thus the discrete correlation
323: function (DCF), which was designed for analysis of unevenly sampled
324: data (Edelson \& Krolik 1988), was used for this analysis. Because of
325: the large statistical errors on the EGRET data points, the initial
326: analysis was done using equation (3) of Edelson \& Krolik (1988); this
327: resulted in unphysical normalization in the correlation results.
328: According to J.~Krolik (private communication), this is a known but
329: unresolved effect in DCF analyses. Reanalysis ignoring the errors on
330: the EGRET data points resulted in reasonable normalizations, and
331: produced equally significant correlations. Therefore the correlation
332: results shown below all ignore the EGRET errors.
333:
334: Figures 3 and 4 show the results of the DCF analyses for the 1999 and
335: 2000 light curves, respectively. The following is a summary of the
336: evidence found for correlations.
337:
338: \subsection{1999}
339:
340: \subsubsection{$\gamma$-ray/X-ray}
341:
342: Two possible correlations are found, in which the
343: $\gamma$~rays lag the X-rays by about 10 and 5-6 days. The first links
344: the highest two X-ray points with the two $\gamma$-ray peaks; the second
345: links the first $\gamma$-ray peak with the second X-ray high point and
346: the second (sharp) $\gamma$-ray peak with a time period with little
347: X-ray coverage.
348: While mathematically possible, these correlations are unconvincing
349: because of the very limited X-ray coverage around the relevant times.
350: In addition, the long delays are probably difficult to account for
351: theoretically.
352:
353: \subsubsection{$\gamma$-ray/optical}
354:
355: If a 2--3 day $\gamma$-ray lag is assumed, the
356: $\gamma$-ray light curve is very similar to that in the R-band, and
357: the DCF analysis finds this to be a rather strong correlation. It
358: is the most convincing correlation found in the six DCF analyses
359: for 1999 and 2000.
360:
361: A negative correlation with an 8--9 day optical lag links the first
362: $\gamma$-ray peak with the R-band minimum around TJD 210 and the second
363: $\gamma$-ray peak in the optically unsampled TJD 213--218 interval.
364: In addition to being unconvincing because of coverage limitations,
365: this seems quite unphysical.
366:
367: \subsubsection{X-ray/optical}
368:
369: A possible correlation with a 2.5-day optical lag
370: requires that the two optical peaks around TJD 194 and 198 be linked to
371: the two highest X-ray points, and ignores the strongest and sharpest
372: optical feature, placing it in the weak X-ray minimum of TJD 202.
373: This is unconvincing because of the very limited coverage around the
374: two X-ray high points, and also because the most prominent optical
375: feature is ignored.
376:
377: A fairly significant correlation with an 7--8 day optical lag links the
378: two highest X-ray points with the optical peaks at about TJD 198.5
379: and 204.0 . This is conceivable, but in addition to the poor X-ray
380: sampling around the relevant times, the 7--8 day offset seems
381: difficult to accommodate theoretically.
382:
383: \subsection{2000}
384:
385: \subsubsection{$\gamma$-ray/X-ray}
386:
387: At zero time-delay, there is a sharp peak in the DCF; its statistical
388: significance is only about 1.8$\sigma$, but the correlated pattern
389: is obvious to the eye in the light curves, not only around the sharp
390: peaks, but in the entirety of both light curves.
391:
392: The variations seen here are more complicated than those seen in both
393: $\gamma$-rays and X-rays in 1996 Jan--Feb, when a zero time-delay
394: was also seen.
395:
396: \subsubsection{$\gamma$-ray/optical}
397:
398: No significant correlation was found.
399:
400: \subsubsection{X-ray/optical}
401:
402: A possible correlation with a one-day optical lag seems
403: plausible, but ignores the X-ray peak around TJD 585.
404:
405: Another possible correlation is seen with an 11-day X-ray lag.
406: This is rather unconvincing because of X-ray variations that do not
407: show up in the optical, and is also somewhat implausible physically.
408:
409: \subsection{1996 High State and Large Flare}
410:
411: For comparison, DCF analysis is presented of the $\gamma$-ray and X-ray
412: light curves for the three weeks in 1996 Jan--Feb leading up to and
413: including the large $\gamma$-ray flare. The light curves, adapted
414: from Wehrle et al. 1998, are shown in Figure 5.
415: To the eye, the $\gamma$~rays and X-rays appear well-correlated, with
416: no apparent lag;
417: this is confirmed by the DCF analysis, the results of which are shown
418: in Figure 6.
419:
420: \section{Discussion and Conclusions}
421:
422: In the 1999 and 2000 light curves,
423: the correlation that is most apparent to the eye is that in 1999
424: between the $\gamma$~rays and the optical, with a $\sim$2.5-day
425: $\gamma$-ray lag. With the $\gamma$-rays, peaked around TJD 206.5,
426: apparently correlating with the optical peak around TJD 204, it is
427: not easy to imagine a scenario that could produce such a sequence
428: (a discussion on various
429: possibilities can be found in Hartman et al. 2001a, 2001b).
430:
431: Another correlation that seems apparent to the eye, that of the
432: X-rays and $\gamma$~rays in 2000, gives a disappointingly weak
433: effect ($\sim$2$\sigma$ for zero delay) when analyzed with the DCF,
434: as noted above. Examination of the autocorrelations in those
435: two bands (Figure 7)
436: provides some assistance in interpreting the results. Although
437: the X-ray autocorrelation is fairly routine, that for the
438: $\gamma$-rays is unusual. Apparently this is due to the two
439: one-day high points separated by a day for which the best $\gamma$-ray
440: flux estimate is zero, albeit with substantial statistical errors
441: on all of the points. (Examination of the photon maps for the
442: three days under discussion verifies that the $\gamma$-rays do
443: disappear during the middle day.)
444:
445: Thus there is no consistent pattern found. This could be because
446: the emission in the three bands investigated really does have no
447: persistent relationship, or merely because the data are not
448: adequate, in coverage and/or statistical accuracy, to bring out such
449: relationships.
450:
451: What correlations and time delays are to be expected here?
452: Detailed predictions about the theoretically expected light
453: curves are difficult because of the multitude of physical
454: processes potentially involved in the formation and evolution
455: of the particle and photon spectra, in particular in
456: FSRQ's. While detailed modeling of
457: variability patterns expected in high-frequency peaked
458: BL Lac objects (which are well modeled with pure SSC
459: models) has been done (e.g., Takahashi et al. 1996,
460: Georganopoulos \& Marscher 1998, Kusunose, Takahara \& Li 2000,
461: Li \& Kusunose 2000), detailed theoretical work relevant to the
462: short-term variability of the multi-component spectra probably
463: present in the high-energy emission from FSRQ's is still in its
464: very early stages (see, e.g., Sikora et al. 2001). Thus we
465: must restrict the discussion of the expected time lags to
466: order-of-magnitude estimates at this point.
467:
468: Frequency-dependent time lags in the short-term variability of
469: FSRQ's like 3C~279 are likely to be related to either the electron
470: cooling in the effectively emitting region, or the dynamical time
471: scale on which the soft seed photon fields for Compton scattering
472: are changing in the frame of the relativistically moving emitting
473: region. The time scale for acceleration of relativistic electrons
474: might be of the order of the time scale for Fermi acceleration,
475: $\tau_{\rm acc} \sim {2 \pi r_L / c} \sim 3.6 \times 10^{-7}
476: \gamma B$~s in the co-moving frame of the emitting region
477: (where $r_L$ is the Larmor radius, $\gamma$ is the electron Lorentz
478: factor, and $B$ is the magnetic field in G), or
479: $\tau^{\ast}_{\rm acc} = {\tau_{\rm acc} / D}$ in the observer's
480: frame (where $D \sim $10 is the Doppler boosting factor determining
481: the time contraction between the co-moving and the observer's
482: frame). Thus, for any reasonable value of the magnetic field,
483: variability on the acceleration time scale will be smeared out by
484: light travel time effects, and would be too short to be resolvable
485: with current multiwavelength observations anyway.
486:
487: Based on the multi-epoch multiwavelength spectral fits to 3C~279
488: presented in Hartman et al. (2001c), we can estimate the typical
489: electron cooling time scale in the emitting region, assuming that
490: (as indicated by the spectral fits) electron cooling is dominated
491: by inverse-Compton scattering of external radiation fields. Taking
492: into account both the contributions from direct accretion disk
493: radiation and from reprocessing of this radiation within the broad
494: line region, we find the observed cooling time is
495: $$ \tau_{\rm cool}^{\ast} = \left( {4 \over 3} \, c \, \sigma_T
496: {u_s \over m_e c^2} \, \gamma \, D \right)^{-1} \, ,$$
497: where $\sigma_T$ is the Thomson cross section, and the energy density
498: of soft photons in the emitting region is given by
499: $$ u_s \approx {L_D \over 4 \pi c} \left( {1 \over z^2 \, \Gamma^2} +
500: {\Gamma^2 \, \tau_{\rm blr} \over r_{\rm blr}^2} \right) \, .$$
501: Here $L_D$ is the accretion disk luminosity, $z$ is the distance
502: of the emitting region from the central engine, $\Gamma$
503: is the bulk Lorentz factor of the emitting region, and
504: $\tau_{\rm blr}$ and $r_{\rm blr}$ are the radial Thomson depth
505: of the broad line region and its average distance
506: from the central engine, respectively.
507: For reasonable values of the parameters ($L_D \sim 10^{46}$~erg/s,
508: $z \sim 0.025$~pc, $\Gamma \sim 10$, $\tau_{\rm blr} \sim 0.003$,
509: and $r_{\rm blr} \sim 0.1$~pc), we find that the cooling time scale
510: relevant to electrons emitting in the EGRET energy regime
511: ($\gamma \gtrsim 10^4$) is of the order of one to several hours,
512: while for particles emitting predominantly at X-ray and optical
513: frequencies ($\gamma \lesssim 100$), it is expected to be one
514: to several days,
515: which would then be the relevant time scale determining time lags
516: between different energy bands.
517:
518: If time lags are dominated by the dynamical time scale on which the
519: soft seed photon fields (for Compton scattering, to produce the
520: high-energy radiation) are changing, we would expect
521: typical time lags of
522: $$ \tau_{\rm dyn}^{\ast} \sim {\Delta z (1 - \beta_{\Gamma} \cos\theta )
523: \over c} \, .$$
524: For typical values of the parameters ($\Delta z \sim 0.1$~pc,
525: $D \sim \Gamma \sim 10$, and $\cos\theta \sim \beta_{\Gamma}$,
526: this gives delays of a few days. Thus, in both cases the expected
527: time lags between different photon energy bands would be of the
528: order of 1 to a few days.
529:
530: In HBL's, proton-driven models can produce time delays of the order of
531: a day or less (A. M\"ucke, private communication). This is probably
532: true also of the more complicated FSRQ's such as 3C~279,
533: but so far there has been no theoretical study demonstrating this.
534:
535: It should be noted that, despite the similar flux levels and variations
536: in 1999 and 2000, Hartman et al. (2001c) have shown evidence that
537: conditions in the inner region of 3C~279 may have been substantially
538: different in 2000 than in 1999. In particular, the strength of the
539: broad line emission may have been much weaker in 2000.
540:
541: Several strong implications for future investigations such as this
542: are clear:
543:
544: $\gamma$~rays - Two necessary improvements are obvious:
545: considerably better statistics and longer observation intervals.
546: Both of these requirements will be met by the GLAST mission, planned
547: for launch in 2006:
548: (1) The GLAST observation plan (at least for the first year or two), is
549: to operate in a scanning mode, so that a large fraction of the sky will
550: be covered during each orbit. Objects near the equator, such as 3C~279,
551: will receive good exposure on every orbit during the scanning part of
552: the mission, and the entire sky will receive significant coverage over
553: one day; (2) Its larger effective area, larger field of view, and
554: better point spread function (compared with EGRET), will provide much
555: better statistics and sensitivity than are available from EGRET.
556:
557: The Italian $\gamma$-ray telescope AGILE (Vercellone et al. 1999),
558: planned for launch in
559: 2002-2003, will have sensitivity comparable to that of EGRET, but
560: with significantly better angular resolution. Its observing
561: program will permit longer observations than were usually possible
562: with EGRET.
563:
564: X-rays - The obvious need here is for more uniform coverage.
565: Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the RXTE satellite, with its
566: very flexible scheduling, will be operating by the time of the GLAST
567: launch. The big X-ray missions expected to be operating in parallel
568: with GLAST are likely to be less flexible and accessible than RXTE.
569: They will, however, have much greater sensitivity, permitting
570: investigation of dimmer objects than RXTE.
571: The X-ray monitors on HETE II and Swift may be able to provide some
572: assistance, but their availability and applicability are unclear at
573: the present time.
574: Thus good X-ray time-sampling during the GLAST era appears uncertain at
575: present.
576:
577: Optical - Although the optical coverage was good during most of the time
578: during and around the EGRET observations used here, there were some
579: substantial holes that allowed the DCF to suggest unlikely
580: correlations. Future investigations of this type will certainly
581: need to improve upon this. Some of the intensive optical monitoring
582: presented here utilized automated telescopes. Hopefully, additional
583: automated systems, at sites throughout the world, will be available
584: by the time of the GLAST launch.
585:
586: The WEBT (Whole Earth Blazar Telescope; Mattox 1999a, 1999b;
587: Villata et al. 2000) is a
588: different approach to intensive optical monitoring. It is a
589: consortium of about twenty optical observatories around the world,
590: formed to facilitate 24-hour high-time-density blazar observations
591: during multiwavelength campaigns. For additional information see
592: http://swampfox.fmarion.edu/~jmattox/webt/ .
593:
594: \acknowledgments
595:
596: The work at Torino Observatory and Perugia University Observatory
597: was partly supported by the Italian
598: Ministry for University and Research (MURST) under grant Cofin98-02-32
599: and by the Italian Space Agency (ASI).
600:
601: The Nordic Optical Telescope is operated on the island of La Palma
602: jointly by Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden in the
603: Spanish Observatorio del Roque de
604: Los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias.
605: The Tuorla Observatory authors wish to thank The Finnish Academy for
606: support.
607:
608: H. Bock, J. Heidt and S.J. Wagner acknowledge support by the DFG
609: (SFB 328 and 439), and CAHA/DSAZ
610: for support during several observing runs on Calar Alto.
611:
612: O.M. Kurtanidze thanks the Astrophysikalisches Institute Potsdam for
613: support.
614:
615: The Georgia State University authors wish to thank Lowell and
616: Mount Stromlo / Siding Spring Observatories for allocations of
617: observing time. This work has been supported in part by an award
618: from GSU's RPE Fund to PEGA, and by grants from the Research
619: Corporation and NASA (NAGW-4397).
620:
621: The work of M.~B\"ottcher is supported by NASA through Chandra
622: Postdoctoral Fellowship Award No. 9-10007, issued by
623: the Chandra X-ray Center, which is operated by the
624: Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory for and on behalf
625: of NASA under contract NAS 8-39073.
626:
627: IRAF is distributed by the National
628: Optical Astronomy Observatories, which is operated by the Association
629: of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative
630: agreement with the National Science Foundation.
631:
632:
633: \clearpage
634:
635: \begin{references}
636:
637: \reference{} Aharonian, F.A. 2000, New Astron., 5, 377
638: \reference{} Bertsch, D.L. 2001, poster presentation at ``Gamma 2001''
639: conf.; to be published in proceedings (AIP)
640: \reference{} Blandford, R.D., \& Levinson, A. 1995, \apj, 441, 79
641: \reference{} Bloom, S.D., \& Marscher, A.P. 1996, \apj, 461, 657
642: \reference{} Cardelli J.A., Clayton G.C., Mathis J.S., 1989, \apj, 345, 245
643: \reference{} Dermer, C.D., Schlickeiser, R., \& Mastichiadis, A.
644: 1992, A\&A, 256, L27
645: \reference{} Dermer, C.D., \& Schlickeiser, R. 1993, \apj, 416, 458
646: \reference{} Dermer, C.D., Sturner, S.J., \& Schlickeiser, R.
647: 1997, \apjs, 109, 103
648: \reference{} Edelson, R.A., \& Krolik, J.H. 1988, \apj, 333,646
649: \reference{} Esposito, J.A., et al. 1999, \apjs, 123, 203
650: \reference{} Georganopoulos, M., \& Marscher, A.P. 1998, \apj, 506, L11
651: \reference{} Ghisellini, G., \& Madau, P. 1996, \mnras, 280, 67
652: \reference{} Hartman, R.C., et al. 2001a, Mem. Soc. Astron. Ital.
653: (in press)
654: \reference{} Hartman, R.C., et al. 2001b, in Probing the Physics of
655: Active Galactic Nuclei by Multiwavelength Monitoring, ed.
656: B.M. Peterson, R.S. Polidan, \& R.W. Pogge (San Francisco:
657: Astronomical Society of the Pacific), (in press)
658: \reference{} Hartman, R.C., et al. 2001c, \apj, 553 (in press)
659: \reference{} Howell, S.B., \& Jacoby, G.J. 1986, PASP, 98, 802
660: \reference{} Katajainen, S., Takalo, L.O., \& Sillanp\"a\"a, A., et al.
661: 2000, A\&AS, 143, 357
662: \reference{} Kurtanidze, O.M., \& Nikolashvili, M.G. 1999, Proc.
663: of the OJ-94 Annual Meeting 1999, Blazar Monitoring Toward the
664: Third Millennium, ed. Raiteri, C.M., Villata, M., \& Takalo,
665: L.O. (Pino Torinese:Osservatorio Astronomico di Torino)
666: \reference{} Kusunose, M., Takahara, F., \& Li, H. 2000, \apj, 536, 299
667: \reference{} Lanteri, L., 1999, in OJ-94 Annual Meeting 1999, Blazar
668: Monitoring towards the Third Millennium, ed. Raiteri, C.M.,
669: Villata, M., \& Takalo, L.O.(Pino Torinese:Osservatorio
670: Astronomico di Torino), 125
671: \reference{} Li, H., \& Kusunose, M. 2000, \apj, 526, 729
672: \reference{} Mannheim, K. 1993, A\&A, 269, 67
673: \reference{} Maraschi, L., Ghisellini, G., \& Celotti, A.
674: 1992, \apj, 397, L5
675: \reference{} Marscher, A.P., \& Gear, W. 1985, \apj, 298, 114
676: \reference{} Mattox, J.R., et al. 1996, \apj, 461, 396
677: \reference{} Mattox, J.R., et al. 1999a, in OJ-94 Annual Meeting 1999,
678: Blazar Monitoring towards the Third Millennium, ed.
679: Raiteri, C.M., Villata, M., \& Takalo, L.O.
680: (Pino Torinese:Osservatorio Astronomico di Torino), 44
681: \reference{} Mattox, J.R., et al. 1999b, PASPC, 189, 95
682: \reference{} M\"ucke, A., \& Protheroe, R.J. 2001, Astropart. Phys, 15, 121
683: \reference{} Noble, J. C., Carini, M. T., Miller, H. R., \& Goodrich, B.
684: 1997, \aj, 113, 1995
685: \reference{} Protheroe, R.J. 1996a, Adelaide Univ. preprint ADP-AT-96-4
686: \reference{} Protheroe, R.J. 1996b, Adelaide Univ. preprint ADP-AT-96-7
687: \reference{} Rachen, J.P. 2000, in ``GeV-TeV Astrophysics: Toward a
688: Major Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescope V'', eds. B.D. Dingus
689: et al., AIP Conf. Proc., Vol 515, (AIP:Snowbird),41
690: \reference{} Raiteri, C.M., Villata, M., Lanteri, L., Cavallone, M.,
691: Sobrito, G. 1998, A\&AS, 130, 495
692: \reference{} Rieke, G.H., \& Lebofsky, M.J. 1985, \apj, 288, 618
693: \reference{} Sikora, M., Begelman, M.C., \& Rees, M.J.
694: 1994, \apj, 421, 153
695: \reference{} Sikora, M., Blazejowski, M., Begelman, M. C., \&
696: Moderski, R., 2001, \apj (in press)
697: \reference{} Smith, P. S. 1985, \aj, 90, 1184
698: \reference{} Takahashi, T., et al. 1996, \apj, 470, L89
699: \reference{} Thompson, D.J., et al. 1993, \apjs, 86, 629
700: \reference{} Tosti, G., Pascolini, S., \& Fiorucci, M. 1996,
701: PASP, 108, 706
702: \reference{} Vercellone, S., et al. 1999, in OJ-94 Annual Meeting 1999,
703: Blazar Monitoring towards the Third Millennium, ed.
704: Raiteri, C.M., Villata, M., \& Takalo, L.O.(
705: Pino Torinese:Osservatorio Astronomico di Torino), 138
706: \reference{} Villata, M., et al., 2000, A\&A 363, 108
707: \reference{} Wehrle, A., et al. 1998, \apj, 497, 178
708:
709: \end{references}
710:
711: \clearpage
712: \begin{figure}
713: \figurenum{1}
714: \epsscale{1.5}
715: \plotfiddle{f1.eps}{430pt}{0}{75}{75}{-250pt}{-60pt}
716: \caption{3C~279 light curves for early 1999 in $\gamma$~rays, X-rays,
717: and R-band optical}
718: \end{figure}
719:
720: \clearpage
721: \begin{figure}
722: \figurenum{2}
723: \epsscale{1.5}
724: \plotfiddle{f2.eps}{430pt}{0}{75}{75}{-250pt}{-60pt}
725: \caption{3C~279 light curves for early 2000 in $\gamma$~rays, X-rays,
726: and R-band optical}
727: \end{figure}
728:
729: \clearpage
730: \begin{figure}
731: \figurenum{3}
732: \epsscale{1.5}
733: \plotfiddle{f3.eps}{430pt}{0}{75}{75}{-250pt}{-50pt}
734: \caption{3C~279 correlation functions (DCF) for 1999}
735: \end{figure}
736:
737: \clearpage
738: \begin{figure}
739: \figurenum{4}
740: \epsscale{1.5}
741: \plotfiddle{f4.eps}{430pt}{0}{75}{75}{-250pt}{-50pt}
742: \caption{3C~279 correlation functions (DCF) for 2000}
743: \end{figure}
744:
745: \clearpage
746: \begin{figure}
747: \figurenum{5}
748: \epsscale{1.5}
749: \plotfiddle{f5.eps}{200pt}{0}{75}{75}{-300pt}{-50pt}
750: \caption{3C~279 light curves for early 1996 in $\gamma$~rays and
751: X-rays}
752: \end{figure}
753:
754: \clearpage
755: \begin{figure}
756: \figurenum{6}
757: \epsscale{1.5}
758: \plotfiddle{f6.eps}{250pt}{0}{80}{80}{-300pt}{-50pt}
759: \caption{3C~279 $\gamma$-ray/X-ray correlation function (DCF) for
760: 1996}
761: \end{figure}
762:
763: \clearpage
764: \begin{figure}
765: \figurenum{7}
766: \epsscale{1.5}
767: \plotfiddle{f7.ps}{420pt}{0}{100}{100}{-300pt}{-200pt}
768: \caption{3C~279 $\gamma$-ray and X-ray autocorrelations for 2000}
769: \end{figure}
770:
771: \end{document}
772: