1. Molecular outflows and feedback in the local universe
Eckhard Sturm (MPE)
for the SHINING Team *)
AGN winds 2017
*) A. Contursi, R. Davies, R. Genzel, E. Gonzalez-Alfonso, J. Gracia-Carpio, J. Fischer, A. Janssen, D. Lutz, R. Maiolino , A. Poglitsch, A. Sternberg, L. Tacconi, S. Veilleux and Collaborators

2. Molecular outflows and feedback in the local universe
Tracers (OH, CO, CII)
Evidence, statistics, simple correlations
Outflow masses and energetics
(masses, outflow rates, momentum, luminosities)
Does it have an effect?
(mass loading, depletion times)
Source and mechanism
(AGN and/or Star formation, momentum and/or energy)
Positive feedback (= star formation IN the outflow) ?
Eckhard Sturm (MPE)
for the SHINING Team *)
*) A. Contursi, R. Davies, R. Genzel, E. Gonzalez-Alfonso, J. Gracia-Carpio, J. Fischer,
A. Janssen, D. Lutz, R. Maiolino , A. Poglitsch, A. Sternberg, L. Tacconi, S. Veilleux
and Collaborators

3. I) OH
OH P-Cygni
1200 km/s
wavelength (mm)
Fischer+2010, Sturm+2011

4. The SHINING outflow sample spans a broad range:
20 cool (f25/f60<0.2) pre-merger ULIRGs
18 warm (f25/f60>0.2) late-stage ULIRGs
5 „classic“ IR-faint QSOs
52 hard X-ray selected BAT AGN
Fischer+2010 (Mrk 231),
Sturm+2011 (5 ULIRGs + NGC253)
Veilleux (38 ULIRGs + 5 PG QSOs)
Stone (+52 BAT AGN)
See also Spoon (24 (fainter) ULIRGs)

5. Massive molecular outflows detected in
70% of ULIRGs
9% of BAT AGNs
Inflow:
11% of ULIRGs
17% of BAT AGNs
Outflows ubiquitous in ULIRGs  not a pencil beam (radio jet) effect
(see also EWs)
Fischer+2010 (Mrk 231),
Sturm+2011 (5 ULIRGs + NGC235)
Veilleux (38 ULIRGs + 5 PG QSOs)
Stone (+52 BAT AGN)
See also Spoon (24 (fainter) ULIRGs)

6. outflow velocity v84 [km/s]
Velocities, and their correlation with host galaxy properties (SFR, M*, LAGN, …)
Sturm+2011, Veilleux+2013, Stone : 43 ULIRGs and PG QSOs, 52 BAT AGN (see also Spoon+ 2013)
outflow velocity v84 [km/s]
400
-400
-800 9 10 11 12 13
log (LAGN/L)
BAT AGN
ULIRG
NGC7479
Outflow velocity LAGN ~

7. Modeling and energetics
OH119
OH79
OH84
OH65
OH119
OH79
OH84
OH65
Radiative Transfer Modelling: 
Radius and covering factor r, f
outflow mass Mout
outflow rate Ṁout = Mout v/r
Mass loading η = Ṁout / SFR
Momentum flux: Ṗ = Ṁv
Mechanical luminosity: E = 0.5 Ṁv2 * .
González-Alfonso

8. * Modeling results, and: Does it matter?
Outflow masses: M = (100 – 2900) 106M
Mass outflow rate Ṁout = 200 – 1500 M /yr
Mass loading: η = Ṁout / SFR = 1 – 10
Gas consumption time tcon = M(H2) / SFR
Gas depletion time tdep = M(H2)/ Ṁout *
tcon / tdep = 1.5 – 15 *)
*) assuming continuous flow
and no replenishment

9. AGN- or Starburst-driven? Momentum-conserving or energy-conserving?
Starburst99 (Leitherer ): starbursts supply a maximum momentum of ~3.5 L*/c
(including ram pressure of winds and radiation pressure on dust grains) (Heckman+2015)
AGN may supply a maximum momentum of ~2 LAGN/c

10. AGN- or Starburst-driven? Momentum-conserving or energy-conserving?
Starburst99 (Leitherer ): starbursts supply a maximum momentum of ~3.5 L*/c
(including ram pressure of winds and radiation pressure on dust grains) (Heckman+2015)
AGN may supply a maximum momentum of ~2 LAGN/c

11. AGN- or Starburst-driven? Momentum-conserving or energy-conserving?
L=LAGN
L=L*
< LAGN
< L*
Supernovae and stellar winds can provide a mechanical luminosity of up to ~1.8% of L*
(Leitherer , Veilleux+2005, Harrison+ 2014) of which less than ¼ will go into bulk motion of the ISM  energy-conserving winds from the starburst unable to drive the observed molecular outflows, at least in the strong outflow cases.
Energy-conserving bubbles created by AGN winds supply up to ~5% of LAGN (e.g. King&Pounds 2015) with ½ going into bulk motion of the ISM (Faucher-Giguère & Quataert 2012)

12. II) CO

13. Mrk 231
OH P-Cygni
1200 km/s
wavelength (mm)
Feruglio+ 2010

14. IRAS F08572+3915 H-band image (Scoville et al. 2000).
OH119
IRAS F
H-band image (Scoville et al. 2000).
Janssen b (PhD Thesis)

15. Janssen + 2016 b (PhD Thesis)
Main outflow: biconical outflow with a large opening angle, inclined w.r.t. line-of-sight. vmax close to the maximum observed velocity in the outflow: 1200 km s-1.
The second redshifted outflow matches the description of an individual cloud.
H2: Rupke&Veilleux 2013a OSIRIS / Keck
Hα and Na I D: Rupke & Veilleux 2013b GMOS/Gemini
Janssen b (PhD Thesis)

16. Masses derived from OH, CO and CII agree within a factor ~2 (αCO=0
Masses derived from OH, CO and CII agree within a factor ~2 (αCO=0.8 M(K km s-1 pc2)-1)
SFR = 61 M /yr , η = 6
Janssen b (PhD Thesis)

17. 5.9kpc Momentum rate: 20 LAGN/c Kinetic power: 3.6% of LAGN
Momentum boost of a factor 20 suggests that the outflow is (mainly) energy-driven.
Depletion time: tdep = 3.6 Myr (cp. OH: 2 Myr). But: episodic
Red blob:
M = 5 * 107 M
flow time: 6 * 106 yr
5.9kpc
Cp. observational evidence for AGN variability (e.g. Hickox+ 2014)
AGN models predict variability on time scales of years
Janssen b (PhD Thesis)

18. Cicone, Maiolino, Sturm + 2014
log Ṁ (M/yr)
Cicone, Maiolino, Sturm

19. Comparison CO - OH
González-Alfonso

20. III) [CII]

21. M82, velocity dispersion
Contursi

22. CII as tracer of (molecular) outflows
IRAS CII
FWHM=856km/s
22 SHINING ULIRGs
15/22 exhibit broad [CII] components
All ULIRGs with broad [CII] also show an OH outflow: 13/15, one is an inflow, one OH non-detection due to S/N
13/16 OH outflow objects also show broad [CII]. Non-detections of [CII] mostly for objects with low outflow velocities
Janssen+ 2016

23. Outflow masses – OH vs. [CII]
1:1
Janssen

24. SDSS J1148+5152, z=6.4189 [CII]158μm Maiolino + 2012 Cicone + 2015
IRAM
[CII]158μm
Capak+2015, Gallerani+2016, Pallottini+ 2016,
See also Riechers+2014 (z=5.3 SMG)

25. IV) Positive feedback
Several recent models1) predict that such massive outflows may ignite star formation
within the outflow itself.
This star-formation mode, in which stars form with high radial velocities, could contribute to
the morphological evolution of galaxies
the evolution in size and velocity dispersion of the spheroidal component of galaxies
the population of high-velocity stars, which could even escape the galaxy.
Such star formation could provide
in situ chemical enrichment of the circumgalactic and intergalactic medium (through supernova explosions of young stars on large orbits),
and some models also predict it to
contribute substantially to the star-formation rate observed in distant galaxies.
1) e.g. Ishibashi, Fabian+ 2012, 2013; Zubovas+ 2013, 2014; Silk 2013,
ESO science release 1710:

26. within the outflow itself.
Several recent models1) predict that such massive outflows may ignite star formation
within the outflow itself.
This star-formation mode, in which stars form with high radial velocities, could contribute to
the morphological evolution of galaxies
the evolution in size and velocity dispersion of the spheroidal component of galaxies
the population of high-velocity stars, which could even escape the galaxy.
Such star formation could provide
in situ chemical enrichment of the circumgalactic and intergalactic medium (through supernova explosions of young stars on large orbits),
and some models also predict it to
contribute substantially to the star-formation rate observed in distant galaxies.
1) e.g. Ishibashi, Fabian+ 2012, 2013; Zubovas+ 2013, 2014; Silk 2013,

27. Star formation inside a galactic outflow
Maiolino+ 2017
IRAS F23128−5919, ULIRG merger at z= , southern nucleus hosts an AGN
approaching
outflow
(weak) receding

28. X-shooter spectra: detailed optical and near-IR diagnostics
approaching
outflow
(weak) receding
X-shooter spectra: detailed optical and near-IR diagnostics
Maiolino+ 2017

29. decomposition between narrow and broad components, as well as the
Subsections of continuum-subtracted X-shooter spectra, extracted from the central region, around some of the relevant emission lines, showing the
decomposition between narrow and broad components, as well as the
non-detection of coronal lines
Maiolino+ 2017

30. Maiolino+ 2017

31. Maiolino+ 2017

32. They are inconsistent with schock or AGN excitation
The outflow line ratios are consistent with those observed in star-forming galaxies
They are inconsistent with schock or AGN excitation
The presence of young stars is clearly revealed in the ultraviolet Hubble Space Telescope (HST) images.
BUT: from imaging alone it is not possible to disentangle putative young stars in the outflow from young stars in the galaxy disks, whose ultraviolet radiation field can potentially ionize the gas in the outflow (externally) and produce the line ratios observed in the outflow.
Maiolino+ 2017

33. Even better evidence for stars formed in the outflow is the direct detection of a young stellar population with the kinematical fingerprints of formation inside the outflow
Maiolino+ 2017

34. Kinematics Together with the nebular diagnostics
quiescent gas (disk)
kinematics
of stars formed
in the outflow
(falling back)
outflowing gas
gaseous
outflow
kinematics
of stars formed
in the outflow
(escaping)
trajectories of
stars formed in
the outflow
host galaxy
disk+bulge
Together with the nebular diagnostics
provide further evidence to the scenario of SF in outflows

35. Hα (outflow) SFR(outflow) > (2x) 15 M compare: SFR(total) = 115 M
Chabrier IMF
Hα (outflow) SFR(outflow) > (2x) 15 M
compare: SFR(total) = 115 M
Maiolino+ 2017

36. SUMMARY
- In a sample of ~50 ULIRGs and ~50 AGN: detections of massive molecular outflows in
70% of ULIRGs and 9% of BAT AGNs; inflows in 11% of ULIRGs and 17% of BAT AGNs
- Outflows ubiquitous in ULIRGs  not a pencil beam effect
- Outflow velocity LAGN, vmax > 1000km/s,
- Outflow dominated by AGN, at least for luminous AGN
- Combined momentum from AGN and starburst can drive the outflows in
weak and moderate cases.
- The strongest outflows require energy-driven AGN mechanism
- tcon / tdep = 1.5 – 15, Mass loading η =
- Momentum rates of about 20 LAGN/c are common among the AGN-dominated sources
in our sample.
- CO results agree very well with OH results
- OH outflow velocities and [CII] FWHM are correlated
- Outflowing masses derived from [CII] and from OH are
similar and show the same trends
- Strong evidence found for star formation IN the outflow of
IRAS F23128−5919
Fischer+2010, Sturm+2011, Veilleux , Cicone+ 2014, Stone+ 2016, Janssen , 2017, Maiolino+ 2017 ~