2001
DOI: 10.1016/s1384-1076(01)00058-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evolution of active galaxies: black-hole mass–bulge relations for narrow line objects

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

19
166
2

Year Published

2004
2004
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 149 publications
(187 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
19
166
2
Order By: Relevance
“…However, we know that, at least at low redshift, the SMBH-bulge mass relation is unlikely to be universal (Mathur et al 2001Graham et al 2011, and references therein). Furthermore, Batcheldor (2010) suggest that selection effects are important in shaping the SMBH-bulge mass relation.…”
Section: Error Budgetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, we know that, at least at low redshift, the SMBH-bulge mass relation is unlikely to be universal (Mathur et al 2001Graham et al 2011, and references therein). Furthermore, Batcheldor (2010) suggest that selection effects are important in shaping the SMBH-bulge mass relation.…”
Section: Error Budgetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All the data and the models have been converted to a common Chabrier (2003) (2012) and Sani et al (2011) report BH masses from multiple sources (please see their papers for details). Finally, we also add another two BH masses from Woo et al (2010) and Mathur et al (2001). Different authors have used different techniques to estimate BH (and bulge) masses, and each technique has its own set of errors.…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Different observations now question that BH-host correlations indeed appear as tight as previously claimed for all types of galaxies (e.g., Hu 2008;Graham 2008;Gültekin et al 2009;Graham & Li 2009). Significant outliers exist (e.g., Mathur et al 2001;Grupe & Mathur 2004;Watson et al 2007), BHs are currently observed also in the centres of bulgeless galaxies (e.g., Ghosh et al 2008;Satyapal et al 2009;Araya salvo et al 2012), and the AGN-starformation correlations disappear for all but highest luminosity AGNs (Shao et al 2010;Grier et al 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In practice, however, width of the [OIII] emission line is often used in stead of stellar velocity dispersion due to observational difficulty of the latter. Using such an approach several groups of authors explored the M BH − σ * relation for NLS1s recently, with conflicting results: Mathur et al (2001), Grupe & Mathur (2004), Bian & Zhao (2004), and Botte et al (2004) found that NLS1s showed a systematically lower M BH /M bulge ratio than normal broad line AGNs, while Wang & Lu (2001), Wandel (2002 did not find a clear difference between the two. The difference may be attributed, at least partly, to the different line widths used by the different authors.…”
Section: Black Hole-bulge Relation In Nls1smentioning
confidence: 99%