Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T16:05:13.215Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The story of one Seyfert: from intriguingly ultrasoft to unremarkably average

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2015

R. L. C. Starling
Affiliation:
University of Leicester, Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK email: [email protected]
C. Done
Affiliation:
Dept. of Physics, Durham University, Durham DH1 3LE, UK
C. Jin
Affiliation:
Dept. of Physics, Durham University, Durham DH1 3LE, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We use 4 broadband SEDs spanning 7 years to study the spectral shape and long term variability of RE J2248-511: an unusual AGN discovered in the extreme-UV by the ROSAT Wide Field Camera. This implies a large ultrasoft X-ray flux, which is typical of narrow-line Seyfert 1s, yet its optical lines are clearly broader than the NLS1 definition allows. Here we show that the continuum SED for the brightest epoch dataset is consistent with the mean SED of a standard quasar, and matches well to that from an XMM–SDSS sample of AGN with M/M ~ 108 and L/LEdd ~ 0.2. All the correlated optical and soft X-ray variability can be due entirely to a major absorption event. The only remarkable aspect of this AGN is that there is no measurable intrinsic X-ray absorption column in the brightest epoch dataset. The observed FUV flux is determined by the combination of this and the fact that the source lies within a local absorption hole. RE J2248-511, which once defied classification, demonstrates that characterisation of such objects requires multi-epoch, multi-wavelength campaigns.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2015 

References

Breeveld, A. A., Puchnarewicz, E. M., & Otani, C. 2001, MNRAS, 325, 772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Done, C., Davis, S. W., Jin, C., Blaes, O., & Ward, M. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 1848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, J. P., Crenshaw, D. M., Kraemer, S. B., & Trippe, M. L. 2008, AJ, 136, 1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, J. P., Crenshaw, D. M., Kraemer, S. B., & Trippe, M. L. 2010, ApJ, 713, 900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jin, C., Ward, M., Done, C., & Gelbord, J. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 1825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jin, C., Done, C., Middleton, M., & Ward, M. 2013, MNRAS, 436, 3173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pounds, K. A.et al. 1993, MNRAS, 260, 77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puchnarewicz, E., Branduardi-Raymont, G., Mason, K., & Sekiguchi, K. 1995, MNRAS, 276, 1281Google Scholar
Starling, R. L. C.et al. 2014, MNRAS, 437, 3929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasudevan, R. V. & Fabian, A. C. 2009, MNRAS, 392, 1124CrossRefGoogle Scholar