text:
# FIRBACK: III. Catalog, Source Counts, and Cosmological Implications of the 170 𝜇𝑚 ISOBased on observations with ISO, an ESA project with instruments funded by ESA Member States (especially the PI countries: France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom) and with the participation of ISAS and NASA. Deep Survey

## 1 Introduction

The European Space Agency’s Infrared Space Telescope, ISO Kessler et al. (1996); Kessler (2000) performed about 1000 programs between 1995 and 1998, including the deepest extragalactic observations ever made in the mid- and far-infrared range with an unprecedented sensitivity (for a review see Genzel & Cesarsky (2000)). Most of these deep cosmological observations aim at probing galaxy formation and evolution, mainly by resolving the Cosmic Infrared Background (CIB) into discrete sources, but also by studying the CIB fluctuations.

Understanding and observing the sources contributing to the extragalactic background at all wavelengths has become one of the most rapidly evolving fields in observational cosmology since the discovery of the CIB Désert et al. (1995); Puget et al. (1996). In particular, deep observations from space with ISO, and from the ground with SCUBA on the JCMT and MAMBO on the IRAM 30m telescope, respectively in the infrared, submillimeter and millimeter range, together with observations at other wavelengths for source identification (in the radio and optical / NIR range), begin to provide a global view of galaxy evolution. The long wavelength observations reveal galaxies through their dust emission, providing a complementary and significantly different view to that of optical and UV observations.

The ISO legacy regarding galaxy evolution includes a number of significant studies. About a dozen deep surveys have been conducted in the mid infrared with ISOCAM Cesarsky et al. (1996), reaching sensitivity levels of $`30\mu Jy`$ at 15 $`\mu m`$Altieri et al. (1999); Elbaz et al. (1999); Aussel et al. (1999); Désert et al. (1999); Flores et al. (1999). The major results of the mid-infrared surveys involve source counts obtained by combining a number of surveys. These exhibit strong evolution with a steep slope up to $`2.4\pm 0.2`$ Elbaz et al. (1999) in the integral logN-logS diagram. Multiwavelength identifications and redshift distributions constrain the nature of the sources Flores et al. (1999); Aussel et al. (1999); Chary and Elbaz (2001): most of them are Luminous Infrared Galaxies, LIRG’s, at a median redshift of 0.8.

In the far-infrared, the 60 - 240 $`\mu m`$ spectral domain was explored using the imaging capabilities of ISOPHOT (PHT) Lemke et al. (1996). As indicated in Figure 1 of Gispert et al. (2000), this domain corresponds to the maximum emission of the extragalactic background . The main surveys published were carried out in the Lockman Hole on $`1.1`$ sq. deg. at 90 and 170 $`\mu m`$ by Kawara et al. (1998), in the FIRBACK Marano field at 170 $`\mu m`$ by Puget et al. (1999) and in the entire FIRBACK survey by Dole et al. (1999), in SA57 on $`0.4`$ sq. deg. at 60 and 90 $`\mu m`$ by Linden-Vornle et al. (2000), and in 8 small fields covering nearly $`1.5`$ sq. deg. at 90, 120, 150 and 180 $`\mu m`$ by Juvela et al. (2000). A shallower survey was performed over an area of $`11.6`$ sq. deg. at 90 $`\mu m`$ by Efstathiou et al. (2000) as part of the ELAIS survey. The ISOPHOT Serendipity Survey at 170 $`\mu m`$Stickel et al. (1998, 2000) took advantage of ISO slews between targets to detect about 1000 sources between 1 and 1000 Jy.

In the 60 to 120 $`\mu m`$ spectral windows, the `C_100` camera, with its $`3\times 3`$ array of Ge:Ga detectors, was subject to strong transients and spontaneous spiking, limiting the sensitivity (which is a few times better than IRAS); fortunately, new attemps to overcome these problems with a physical model of the detector seem promising (Coulais et al., 2000; Lari & Rodighiero, 2001). At 60 and 90 $`\mu m`$, no clear evolution in the source counts is observed, since both non-evolution and moderate evolution models can still fit the data Linden-Vornle et al. (2000); Efstathiou et al. (2000). Furthermore, the K-correction111K-correction is defined as the ratio: $`\frac{L(\nu ^{})}{L(\nu )}`$ where $`L(\nu )`$ is the luminosity at frequency $`\nu `$, and $`\nu =(1+z)\nu ^{}`$. Thus, $`K(z)=\frac{L(\nu \times [1+z])}{L(\nu )}`$. (Figure 1 from the model of Dole (2000) and Lagache et al. (2001)) between 30 and 120 $`\mu m`$ is not favorable for probing galaxy evolution up to redshifts $`z1`$. With the ELAIS survey, Serjeant et al. (2001) were able to derive the luminosity function of galaxies up to redshift $`z0.3`$.

At longer wavelengths (120-240 $`\mu m`$), the `C_200` camera, a $`2\times 2`$ array of stressed Ge:Ga detectors, is more stable and most of the detectors’ behaviour can be characterized and, if needed, properly corrected Lagache & Dole (2001). The K-correction at 170 $`\mu m`$ (Figure 1), as well as in the mid-infrared around 15 $`\mu m`$, is favorable and becomes optimal at redshifts around 0.7. The first analysis of deep surveys at 170 $`\mu m`$ showed a large excess in source counts over predictions of no-evolution models at flux levels below 200 mJy Kawara et al. (1998); Puget et al. (1999), suggesting strong evolution. Recent work by Juvela et al. (2000) is in agreement with this picture, and includes the far-infrared colors of the sources.

The FIRBACK survey (acronym for Far Infrared BACKground) was designed to broaden our understanding of galaxy evolution with its accurate source counts and its catalog allowing multiwavelength follow-up. It also enabled studies of the CIB fluctuations (first detected in the first area surveyed in the FIRBACK program by Lagache & Puget (2000)). FIRBACK is one of the deepest surveys made at 170 $`\mu m`$ and the largest at this depth. This survey used about 150h of observing time, corresponding to the $`8^{th}`$ largest ISO program Kessler (2000).

The aim of this paper is to provide the catalogs and the source counts of the FIRBACK survey. Preliminary FIRBACK source counts were published by Lagache et al. (1998) and Puget et al. (1999) on the $`0.25`$ sq. deg. Marano 1 field, and by Dole et al. (2000) on the entire survey. An overview of this paper is as follows. Section 2 presents the observational issues of the FIRBACK survey and Section 3 summarizes the data processing and the calibration (a complete description can be found in Lagache & Dole (2001)). Section 4 explains the extensive simulations and the source extraction technique. Section 5 details the flux measurement by aperture photometry, analyses the photometric and astrometric noise of the sources and provides estimates of accuracies. In section 6 we present the final FIRBACK catalog ($`S>4\sigma _s`$), and the complementary catalog ($`3\sigma _s<S<4\sigma _s`$) extracted for follow-up purposes. Section 7 describes the corrections that have been applied (completeness, Malmquist-Eddington effect) and presents the final FIRBACK source counts at 170 $`\mu m`$. Section 8 compares our results to other observations as well as models, and discusses the cosmological implications of the FIRBACK source counts: strong evolution and resolution of the CIB.

## 2 The FIRBACK survey: Fields & Observations

### 2.1 Fields

FIRBACK is a survey at 170 $`\mu m`$ covering four square degrees in three high galactic latitude fields, called FIRBACK South Marano (FSM), FIRBACK North 1 (FN1) and FIRBACK / ELAIS North 2 (FN2) (see Table 1). They were chosen to have foreground contaminations as low as possible: the typical HI column-density is less than or equal to $`N_H10^{20}cm^2`$, and the 100 $`\mu m`$ brightness is less than 1.7 MJy/sr on DIRBE maps. In addition, FN1 and FN2 were chosen to match some fields from the European Large Area ISO Survey, ELAIS Oliver et al. (2000), which had been covered at 15 $`\mu m`$ with ISOCAM Serjeant et al. (2000) and at 90 $`\mu m`$ with ISOPHOT Efstathiou et al. (2000). FN2 observation time is a collaboration between the ELAIS and FIRBACK consortia.

### 2.2 Observations

Observations were carried with ISO, using the ISOPHOT spectro-photo-polarimeter. We used the `C_200` $`2\times 2`$ pixel photometer and `C_160` broadband filter centered at $`\lambda =170\mu m`$. Scanning the sky was done in raster map mode, AOT P22, with one pixel offset between each pointing, to provide the redundancy. Individual rasters were shifted with respect to each other by a fraction of a pixel to provide proper sampling where possible. Table 2 summarizes the observational characteristics of the fields.

The FSM field is composed, for historical reasons, of four individual fields, called FSM1, 2, 3 and 4 (Figure 6 in Lagache & Dole (2001)). FSM1 on the one hand, and FSM2, 3 and 4 on the other, have been observed continuously: transient effects are thus reduced and no rotation of the field occurs between different rasters (same roll angle). FSM1 rasters are offset by two pixels in order to maximise redundancy and establish the ISOPHOT sensitivity for such observations, whereas FSM2, 3 and 4 are offset by a half pixel in both Y and Z directions to increase oversampling.

The FN1 field is composed of eleven individual fields (Figure 7 in Lagache & Dole (2001)), observed twice. Observations were not performed continuously, so that each individual raster has a different roll angle, giving a sampling of the sky that is non uniform.

The FN2 field is composed of nine individual fields (Figure 8 in Lagache & Dole (2001)), observed twice. The other characteristics are the same as for FN1.

## 3 Data Reduction, Instrumental Effects, Calibration, Maps

The complete process of data reduction and calibration is described in Lagache & Dole (2001). Here, we merely summarize the different steps.

### 3.1 Interactive Analysis

We made use of the PHT Interactive Analysis package (PIA) version 7.2.2 Gabriel et al. (1997) in the IDL version 5.1 environment, to process the raw data (named ERD: Edited Raw Data) into brightnesses (named AAP: Astronomical and Application product). After linearizing and deglitching the ramps, we applied the orbit-dependent dark and reset interval corrections. We calibrated the data with the two bracketing FCS lamps (Fine Calibration Source) values, using the mean value in order not to induce baseline effects.

### 3.2 Glitches, Long Term Transients, Flat Fielding

Cosmic particles hitting the detector are easy to detect at the time of their impact, but they may cause response variations. On 224 different measurements (that is 56 independent rasters observed by 4 pixels), we report only 13 such cases, which are corrected. Furthermore, thanks to the high redundancy of each raster, a glitch cannot mimic a source because the same piece of the sky is observed independently by the four pixels of the photometer at different times.

Some long term transients (LTT) are seen in the data, and are understood to be the consequence of step fluxes seen by the photometer. During the FIRBACK observations, ISOPHOT was looking at relatively flat fields with low background, but was on more complex fields during the preceding observations. Our best data occur where the observations were made continuously. We correct for the LTT by forcing all the pixels to follow the time variations of the most stable pixel, which is assumed to represent the sky. This correction is found to be linear, and never exceeds 10 %.

We then compute a flat field using the redundancy and apply the necessary corrections. The detector behaviour is highly reproducible, leading to constant flat field values: $`1.04\pm 0.02`$, $`0.91\pm 0.02`$, $`1.09\pm 0.02`$ and $`0.94\pm 0.02`$ for pixels 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively.

### 3.3 Photometric Correction

There is a difference of 11% between the solid angle value of the PHT footprint at 170 $`\mu m`$ used by PIA and the value derived by calibration observations around Saturn and the model. We thus apply a multiplicative correcting factor of 0.89 to the brightness values given by PIA to take into account the real profile of the footprint.

### 3.4 Maps

For a given raster measurement, we project the signal from each pixel on a regular grid defined by the raster. Between each pointing, we make an interpolation and check that the photometry is not changed by more than 1%. Then we sum all these signals on a celestial coordinate grid to get the final map.

### 3.5 Calibration of Extended Emission

Using the knowledge of the average interstallar dust emission spectrum, the zodiacal light emission at the time of the observations, and the Cosmic Infrared Background values derived from COBE, together with HI data on our fields, we derive a brightness value at 170 $`\mu m`$ for each of our fields. This extrapolated brightness at 170 $`\mu `$m for the three fields is in remarkable agreement with the measured ISOPHOT brightness. Furthermore, the rejection level of straylight up to $`60^{}`$ off-axis observed by ISO during total solar eclipse by the Earth, is better than $`10^{13}`$, implying that there is no significant contribution to the measured flux coming from the far sidelobes. This confirms that ISO is able to make absolute measurements of the extended emission and gives a high degree of confidence to our photometric calibration.

## 4 Source Extraction, Simulations

An important part of the present work is the extraction of the sources, the simulation of point source observations and the analyses of noise. After detecting sources on a median-filtered-like map, we measure the fluxes on the final maps with aperture photometry. Our simulation tool validates the flux determination as well as the noise analysis.

### 4.1 Source Extraction

Our original maps are dominated by the fluctuations of the background at 170 $`\mu m`$, at all spatial scales, mainly due to the cirrus confusion noise and the CIB fluctuations Lagache & Puget (2000). Because of this, classical extraction algorithms based on thresholding and local background determination mostly fail: it is not easy to use a robust detection algorithm on maps dominated by structures at all scales. On the contrary, flat background maps allow reliable detection with the available processing techniques, like gaussian fitting methods, e.g. for faint ISOCAM sources by Désert et al. (1999). Because of the undersampling of the PHT Point Spread Function together with a highly fluctuating background, CLEAN-like methods Hogbom (1974) are difficult to use. Wavelet decomposition, e.g. for ISOCAM by Starck et al. (1999), is not easily implementable because of the poor spatial dynamics of our maps (“big pixels and small maps”). To overcome these difficulties we have developed the following method by combining some well-known techniques for source extraction and flux determination:

* background is subtracted in the one dimensional time data (AAP level, brightness as a function of time) using a median filter (size: 5 positions) to create source time data
* source time data are processed to create 2-dimensional source maps (Figure 2) through the FIRBACK pipeline as decribed in Section 3
* source detection is performed on the source maps using SExtractor Bertin & Arnouts (1996)
* flux measurements are performed on the unfiltered maps, using aperture photometry at the positions found by the source detection only if there are at least 4 different observations, and make a temporary version of the source catalog
* by subtracting iteratively the brightest sources from the temporary catalog using a CLEAN-like method on the final maps, we remeasure with better accuracy the flux of the sources which have bright neighbours. This gives the final catalog after two more corrections: short term transient of 10%, and flux offset of about 15% derived from simultation (see Section 5).

Source detection is performed using SExtractor version 2.1.0 on the source maps with the parameters given in Table 3. Note that we do not use the background estimator and set it to a constant value because source maps are flat maps containing fluctuations due to resolved sources, since the background has been filtered. Only the positions in the map of the detected sources will be used in the output catalog computed by SExtractor (e.g. not the flux). We discard the edges by considering only parts of the sky that have been observed at least 4 times. This reduces the total area by about 5%.

### 4.2 Simulations

We have developed a simulation tool of point sources in order to validate the flux determinations and study source completeness of our survey. Kawara et al. (1998) did not make such simulations and Juvela et al. (2000) only tested the significance of their source detection because of a lack of redundancy in their observations. The work of Efstathiou et al. (2000) included large simulations at 90 $`\mu m`$, but the source detection is performed by eye.

Thanks to the quiet behaviour of the `C200` camera at 170 $`\mu m`$, together with redundancy, the detector noise as well as effects induced by glitches can be neglected to first order with respect to the confusion noise. (This is unlike conditions applying to the `C100` camera Linden-Vornle et al. (2000).)

Here, we present a summary of our simulation process, followed by some details concerning the addition of the sources and the validation:

* select a random sky position for a simulated source inside a FIRBACK field
* add the source in each raster in AAP level which has observed the source itself or its wings
* process maps through the FIRBACK pipeline
* extract sources with SExtractor
* identify the extracted sources by comparing the coordinates with the input catalog
* compute a flux with aperture photometry using the effective footprint (defined in Section 5.1)
* validate on different flat backgrounds
* validate on real data: different input fluxes and positions

#### 4.2.1 Adding the Sources

We use the best footprint available for PHT at 170 $`\mu m`$Lagache & Dole (2001) to simulate a source with a known input flux; its spatial extension is taken to be a five pixel square, that is about $`7.7^{}\times 7.7^{}`$ (note that the PIA footprint profile given in the calibration files extends to only 4.2 arcminutes). This simulated source is added in the one dimensional time data (AAP level). To avoid biases due to specific positions in the fields, we select random positions.

Because we have either 2 or 4 different raster observations of the same parts of the sky, the randomly-selected sky position may fall e.g. on the edge of a pixel in one raster, and at the center of another pixel in another raster. We thus make the following approximation: we cut each PHT pixel in 9 square sub-pixels of about $`30.7\times 30.7`$ square arcseconds. We compute the pixelized footprint for the nine configurations corresponding to the cases where the source center falls on one of the sub-pixels.

We make separate realizations for 8 input fluxes (100, 150, 200, 300, 500, 650, 800 and 1000 mJy) and create maps using the FIRBACK pipeline. We add only between 6 and 20 sources per square degree at a time depending on their flux, in order to avoid changing the confusion level when sources are added in the data. We compute the needed number of maps to get 1200 realizations for each flux in each field, or 28800 sources in total, in order to have a statistically significant sample. We finally get about $`2\times 1230`$ different simulated maps per field (1 final map + 1 source map for each realization) taking about 14 Gbyte, after about one week of computation under IDL on a MIPS R12000 at 300MHz SGI. Fig. 3 shows an example of added sources.

#### 4.2.2 Validation

We extract sources on the final maps and compute fluxes as explained below by aperture photometry. The aperture photometry filter parameters have been optimized to obtain the best signal to noise ratio using the simulations.

The validation is performed on flat background maps with different surface brightness values (0.01, 3 and 10 MJy/sr), to check that the recovered flux does not depend on the background. The difference between the input and recovered flux is less than 1% on an individual raster when the source is centered on a pixel. When using random positions of the sources and 2 or 4 rasters co-added, the recovered fluxes have a dispersion explained by the “edge effect” (due to the dilution of the flux in other pixels when the source falls on the edge of a pixel) and by the poor sampling of the sky, leading to an overall uncertainty of 10%.

## 5 Photometry, Noise Analysis, Accuracy

### 5.1 Flux Measurements by Aperture Photometry

Once a detection is obtained on source maps, fluxes have to be measured in final maps. Simulations of point sources on a flat background permit derivation of the effective average footprint on the map, which results from the PHT footprint and the final pixeling obtained in a given field, which depends on the exact timing of the observations (roll angle).

We check that strong sources in the data have a profile in agreement with the effective footprint. The growth curve of the effective footprint is plotted in Fig. 4. The determination of the parameters for the aperture photometry filter is performed by measurements of the flux of simulated sources through different sets of apertures.

We find that the following values minimize the noise: an internal radius of 90 arcseconds for measuring the source and an external radius of 120 arcseconds to estimate the background. The determination of the flux takes into account the fact that at these radii we select only a part of the effective footprint, and includes the appropriate correction.

In order not to be biased by a nearby strong source which could affect the estimate of the local background in a measurement, we used a CLEAN-like procedure. We first compute a temporary catalog that we sort by decreasing flux. Then we measure the brightest source, and remove it, and repeat this process through the whole catalog. Note that this procedure is not used to extract faint sources but only to improve the photometry of sources detected before applying the CLEAN procedure.

At the end of the process, we add 10% to the source flux to account for the transient behaviour of the detector. This value is derived from our absolute measurement in the FSM1 (using AOT P25) in which the instantaneous response and the following transient, as well as the final flux after 256 seconds, are observed Lagache & Dole (2001).

### 5.2 Confusion Noise

We made 10000 measurements on each field at random positions, and obtained distributions which are shown on figures 5, 6 and 7. These distributions represent the probability of measurements by aperture photometry on a field with sources and dominated by confusion. They are fitted in their central part by a gaussian, whose dispersion is an estimate of the confusion noise. The distributions are plotted in Fig. 5 to 7. The assymetric part at high flux levels reflects the counts of bright sources. We finally derive $`\sigma _c45`$ mJy for the confusion noise in all of the FIRBACK fields (41 mJy for FSM, 44 for FN1 and 46 mJy for FN2). The $`3\sigma _c`$ level is thus 135 mJy and $`4\sigma _c`$ 180 mJy.

This estimate is compatible with the classical definition of the confusion, by computing the number of independent beams in all the FIRBACK fields: with a FWHM of 94 arcseconds at 170 $`\mu m`$in a $`3.89`$ sq. deg. surface, we have about $`5700`$ independent beams. At the $`3\sigma `$ limit, that is above 135 mJy, we have 196 sources (see Sect. 6), there are about 29 beams per source — in good agreement with the classical definition of the confusion of 30 independent beams per source for sources brighter that $`3\sigma _c`$. If we have a catalogue cutoff at $`4\sigma _c`$ (resp. $`5\sigma _c`$), we obtain 54 (resp 91) independents beams per source. Our analysis is compatible with the simulations of Hogg (2000), who shows that 30 beams per source is a minimum where source counts are steep, and suggests a threshold at about 50 beams per source.

The cirrus fluctuations have a low probability of creating spurious sources at this level of HI column-density, as shown in previous works, such as Gautier et al. (1992), Lagache (1998), Kawara et al. (1998), Puget et al. (1999), and Juvela et al. (2000).

### 5.3 Detector Noise

The first field to be observed in our investigations was FSM1, and the goal was to demonstrate the ability of doing a deep far infrared survey limited by confusion rather than detector noise. With four independent rasters mapping exactly the same sky, that is 16 independent measurements, Lagache (1998) and Puget et al. (1999) show that the detector noise level is about 3 mJy $`1\sigma `$, i.e. far below the confusion noise and thus neglected.

### 5.4 Photometric Accuracy

The histograms of the ratio of recovered flux to input flux of the simulated sources are used to estimate the offset and the error of the fluxes. One of these histograms is shown in figure 8 for the FN1 field and 500 mJy sources.

One can see a systematic offset of the distribution’s peak with respect to the input flux. This offset is constant for a given field, and equals 16%, 19%, 18% and 16% for the FN1, FN2, FSM1 and FSM234 fields, respectively. The possible explanations for this offset are (1) the variation of the effective footprint inside the field (due to an inhomogeneous sampling of the sky) and (2) the loss of flux at the edges of the pixels. We apply this correction on the source fluxes.

The standard deviation of the fitted gaussian, $`\sigma _s`$, estimates the dispersion of the source flux measurements. Figure 10 shows the variation of $`\sigma _s`$ in mJy as a function of the source flux in Jy, in the FN1 field; the variation is similar in the other fields. $`\sigma _s`$ can be decomposed in two components:

* a constant component due to confusion noise $`\sigma _c`$
* a component ($`\sigma _p`$) proportional to the source flux, due to the difference between the mean effective footprint and the local effective footprint.

The data points are fitted by the quadratic sum of the constant and the proportional component $`\sqrt{\sigma _c^2+\sigma _p^2}`$.

The source flux uncertainties are computed for each field; however, there is little field-to-field variation. The uncertainty in the source flux is about 25% near $`3\sigma _c`$ at low fluxes, about 20% near $`5\sigma _c`$ and decreases to about 10% at high flux levels(near 1 Jy).

### 5.5 Positional Accuracy

The identification of the sources in the simulations allows us to derive the positional accuracy. We neglect the telescope absolute pointing error of 1” Kessler (2000). Fig. 11 shows the distribution of the distance offset between the input source and the extracted source positions. All sources brighter than 500 mJy — i.e. where the sample is complete (see Sect. 7.1) — are recovered inside a 65” radius: the mean recovered distance is 15”, and 90% of the sample falls inside 28”. Taking all the sources with flux levels brighter than 180 mJy, 90% of the sample is recovered inside a radius of 42”. We conclude that 99% (respectively 93%) of the sources are found in a circle of radius of 50”, and 98% (respectively 90 %) in 42” when the sample is complete, above 500 mJy (respectively 180 mJy).

## 6 FIRBACK Source Catalogs

### 6.1 ISO FIRBACK Source Catalog

The final catalog, the ISO FIRBACK Source Catalog (IFSC), contains 106 sources with fluxes between 180 mJy ($`4\sigma `$) and 2.4 Jy. The catalog is given for each field in tables 7 to 10. All the sources have been checked for detection in all individual measurements. It is interesting to note that above $`5\sigma _c`$ the source density is constant in the fields, with 16 sources in FSM, 15 in FN2, and 32 sources in FN1 which is twice the size of the other fields. The source density is thus $`16\pm 4`$ sources brighter than 225 mJy per square degree. At the $`4\sigma _c`$ limit, the source density is $`27\pm 5`$ sources brighter than 180 mJy per square degree, with a larger field-to-field dispersion. The brightest sources in FSM lie at 497 and 443 mJy, in FN1 at 838, 597 and 545 mJy, and in FN2 at 2377, 1251, 803, 682, 666 and 522 mJy.

### 6.2 Complementary ISO FIRBACK Source Catalog

Sources with flux levels above the $`3\sigma _c`$ limit are higher redshift candidates and they can be used for statistical study of the nature of 170 $`\mu m`$ sources. Nevertheless, the lower signal to confusion-noise ratio leads to lower flux accuracy — reduced to about 25% at 135 mJy — and may include spurious sources: this larger uncertainty suggests avoiding the use of these sources, e.g. in the counts.

Candidates for $`z>1`$ may be selected on the basis of photometric redshift using the FIR-radio correlation Condon (1992); Helou et al. (1985) and the submillimetre-radio correlation Carilli & Yun (2000). The success of recent submillimetre detections of FIRBACK sources with SCUBA at the JCMT (Scott et al., 2000, with an rms sensitivity of 2 mJy, ) and with MAMBO at IRAM-30m (with an rms sensitivity better than 0.5 mJy, Lagache et al., in prep) in the millimetre range confirms the relevance of this technique.

In this frame of mind, we compile a Complementary ISO FIRBACK Source Catalog (CIFSC, tables 11 to 13 for each field) which contains 90 sources whose flux levels lie in the range 135 to 180 mJy (3 to $`4\sigma _c`$). All the sources have been checked for detection in all individual measurements. There are 15 sources in FSM, 47 in FN1, and 28 in FN2. As an example, Fig 9 shows of the detected sources in the FN1 field. At this flux level, the source density is not constant between the fields and fluctuates at about $`23\pm 8`$ sources per square degree in the range 135 - 180 mJy.

## 7 Source Counts

### 7.1 Completeness

Simulations allow us to derive the completeness, that is the ratio at a given flux between the number of added sources and the number of detected ones. The completeness is plotted in Fig. 12. Our sample is complete above 500 mJy, and is about 90% (respectively about 85%) complete above 225 mJy (respectively 180 mJy). We thus correct the surface source density for this incompleteness.

### 7.2 Malmquist-Eddington Bias

Uncertainties in the flux determination introduce an excess in the number of counts, known as the Malquist-Eddington bias. We characterize it with the results of the simulations, by comparing the effect of a flux dispersion on a known input source count model: a simple power law. Fig. 13 shows the ratio of an input source count model, to the simulated observations of this model. We apply the appropriate correction to the data: at 225 mJy (respectively 180 mJy) the raw counts have to be decreased by 20% (respectively 30%). We check that these values are not more sensitive than 5% (respectively 10%) at $`5\sigma _c`$ (respectively $`4\sigma _c`$) to the power law of the input model in the range 3.0 - 3.6.

### 7.3 FIRBACK Source Counts

Figure 14 shows the differential source counts at 170 $`\mu m`$ coming from the FIRBACK survey ($`3.89`$ sq. deg.), with 106 sources between 180 ($`4\sigma `$) and 2400 mJy. The horizontal error bar gives the flux uncertainty, and the vertical error bar the poisson noise in $`\sqrt{n}`$ where $`n`$ is the number of sources in the bin.

The statistics of sources used for source counts before any correction is given in Table 4. The integral (respectively differential) source count values are given in Table 5 (respectively Table 6). Note that for the differential counts we took only 5 sources in the last flux box, corresponding to highest fluxes (between 500 and 700 mJy).

The two points at high flux levels are compatible with no evolution since we can adjust a horizontal line inside the error bars. The slope of the differential source counts is not constant, but can reasonably be fitted by a linear of slope $`3.3\pm 0.6`$ between 180 and 500 mJy.

## 8 Discussion

### 8.1 Comparison with other Work

Kawara et al. (1998) estimated the confusion level to be 45 mJy, and extracted 45 sources brighter than 150 mJy ($`3\sigma _c`$) in the $`1.1`$ sq. deg. Lockman Hole field. Juvela et al. (2000) found $`\sigma _c=44`$ mJy, and detected 55 sources brighter than 150 mJy in $`1.5`$ sq. deg. Both these estimates are consistent with our measurements.

Our raw results are in agreement with the pioneering work on $`1/16^{th}`$ of the area of the entire FIRBACK survey by Lagache (1998) and Puget et al. (1999). Without completeness or Malmquist-Eddington bias correction, our catalogs are similar. Of the 24 sources of Puget et al. (1999), we detect 18. The six missing sources are: (1) on the edges of the field with fewer observations than required in our procedure of extraction for three of their sources, and (2) in more confused regions for the other three.

For the 18 common sources, the photometry is in excellent agreement (except for one source which is near the edge of the field). Both analyses find 13 sources at fluxes higher than 150 mJy in this field.

In our preliminary work Dole et al. (1999, 2000), we detected the sources by eye and used the same photometry as Puget et al. (1999) for consistency, but we did not remove bright sources to measure the fainter sources. Statistically, these efforts are compatible with our current source counts.

### 8.2 Comparison with Models

The semi-analytical model from Guiderdoni et al. (1998) was used in the FIRBACK proposal to justify the integration time and surface coverage, and has been improved recently Devriendt & Guiderdoni (2000). Our phenomenological model Dole et al. (2000) was developed by taking into account all the observational constraints in the infrared and submillimetre range, and is based on strong evolution of a bright population of galaxies. Both models are presented in Fig. 15. The models of Franceschini et al. (1998), with and without evolution, are shown in Fig. 16 together with the pure luminosity evolution model of Rowan-Robinson (2001).

The data unambiguously reject models without evolution or with low evolution at flux levels fainter than 500 mJy. The no-evolution model of Franceschini et al. (1998) (dots in Fig. 16) and the model without ULIRGs Sanders & Mirabel (1996) of Guiderdoni et al. (1998) (dotted line in Fig. 15) are incompatible with the data: they predict between 5 and 10 times fewer sources than observed.

Model E of Guiderdoni et al. (1998) with strong evolution and an addition of ULIRGs underestimates the source counts by a factor of 2, and predicts a lower slope than the observations. Nevertheless, the agreement within a factor of 2 between model E and the final observed source counts is quite remarkable: this model was developed to account for the CIB, and was used for predicting the FIRBACK source counts at the time of submission of this observing program. The phenomenological model of Dole et al. (2000) fits the data at faint fluxes, as well as the model of Rowan-Robinson (2001).

Other semi-analytical models like e.g. Blain et al. (1999), or phenomenological models like e.g. those of Tan et al. (1999), Xu et al. (2000), and Pearson (2000), also try to reproduce the spectrum of the CIB as well as the source counts in the whole spectral domain from the mid infrared (sometimes optical) to the sub-millimeter (sometimes centimeter) range. It is beyond the scope of this paper to compare all these models with our observations, but scenarios without strong evolving populations of LIRGs are uniformly unable to reproduce the data.

### 8.3 Resolving the Cosmic Infrared Background at 170 $`\mu m`$

We now ask what fraction of the CIB is contributed by sources brighter than 135 mJy at 170 $`\mu m`$ ? Since the flux integral is dominated by sources at lower flux levels, it is rather simple to compute its value on the assumption that source counts have a constant slope. We estimate that $`4\pm 1`$% of the CIB is resolved into sources brighter than 135 mJy.

Using the model of Dole et al. (2000), we show that 7% of the CIB is resolved in sources brighter than 135 mJy.

Thus, the population of individually observed sources in the FIRBACK survey does not dominate the CIB at this wavelength.

We can also ask at which flux levels the CIB will be largely resolved at 170 $`\mu m`$ ? The observed slope of the source counts may be extrapolated to lower flux levels to predict a convergence. The expected flattening of the source counts close to the convergence is neglected, and thus the derived values give an upper limit. With this proviso, we find that the 170 $`\mu m`$ background should be resolved at flux levels in the range 10 to 20 mJy, an order of magnitude fainter than the ISO sensitivity.

Using our model presented in Fig. 15, we predict that 80 to 90% of the CIB should be resolved in the range 2 to 5 mJy.

The required sensitivity at 170 $`\mu m`$, about 60 times better than ISO, is not reachable with the 1m-class space infrared observatories such as NASA’s SIRTF. SIRTF should be able to break about 15-30% of the background into discrete sources at 160 $`\mu m`$. 4m-class ESA’s Herschel (former FIRST) should be able to break the bulk of the background.

### 8.4 Survey Optimisation and Confusion

While the confusion is found to be identical in the 3 FIRBACK fields at about 45 mJy (regardless of sampling), the FSM fields have been observed twice as frequently as the northern fields. This means that the confusion limit was reached faster than expected. Two years after the end of the observations, and five years after the launch of ISO, our analysis shows that the best (ideal) observational strategy would have been to repeat the individual observations (rasters) 4 times to obtain enough redundancy (done in the FSM field) with less integration and proper oversampling. With this optimisation, we could have gained 25% more surface with the earned time, or performed complementary observations at another wavelength.

An early proper determination of the confusion level is thus a key factor for extragalactic infrared surveys from space, since the confusion is high due to the strong evolution, and limits the surveys. It is challenging, given the relatively short time spend in the “Performance Verification” or “In Orbit Checkout” phases that normally predece routine astronomical observations in space.

## 9 Conclusion & Summary

The analysis of the FIRBACK ISO deep survey sources at 170 $`\mu m`$ is presented. After a process of data reduction and calibration of extended emission Lagache & Dole (2001), we performed extensive simulations to validate our source extraction process, and studied the sources of noise and accuracy in photometry and astrometry. The confusion $`\sigma _c`$ equals 45 mJy.

We compiled the ISO FIRBACK Source Catalog ($`S_{170}>4\sigma _c`$) and the Complementary ISO FIRBACK Source Catalog ($`3\sigma _c<S_{170}<4\sigma _c`$, for follow-up purposes) containing 196 sources. It is important to note that the extended source calibration is in excellent agreement with DIRBE and the point source calibration is in agreement with IRAS. The differential source counts show a steep slope of $`3.3\pm 0.6`$ between 180 and 500 mJy, and a significant excess of faint sources with respect to low or moderate evolution expectations.

The steep slope of the source counts has important consequences on the sensitivity limits of the deep surveys conducted in the far infrared: the confusion noise is large, as it will be for future observatories, and will impact dramatically on the future IR deep surveys.

One important intention of the FIRBACK survey was to probe the nature of the extragalactic far-infrared sources. According to most of the models, the steep slope of the source counts is due to a strongly evolving population of LIRGs. Our model shows that the effect of the K-correction alone is insufficient to explain the observations. To definitively investigate this question, one has to identify the sources and understand their nature. Discussions of the nature of the FIRBACK sources is beyond of the scope of this paper and will be discussed elsewhere. The multiwavelength follow-up performed at 1.4 GHz, 1.3 mm, 850 & 450 $`\mu m`$, as well as other ISO and optical / NIR data, seems to show that most of the sources (typically 50%) are local ($`z<0.3`$), and about 10% at high redshift ($`z>1`$). Massive star formation seems also to be dominant. Nevertheless, identifying FIRBACK sources is not easy because of the uncertainty in the positions at 170 $`\mu m`$.

The summary of the FIRBACK survey is as follows:

* observation of about $`4`$ sq. deg. in 3 high galactic latitude fields: FSM, FN1 & FN2
* ISOPHOT AOT P22 raster map mode with the `C_200` array and the `C_160` filter at 170 $`\mu m`$
* 128 or 256 seconds of integration per sky pixel
* extraction of instrumental effects: long and short term transients, photometric correction
* calibration of extended emission: excellent agreement between PHT and DIRBE
* calibration of point sources compatible with IRAS
* instrumental noise: 3 mJy $`1\sigma `$
* confusion noise: 45 mJy $`1\sigma `$; $`4\sigma _c`$ sensitivity: 180 mJy
* ISO FIRBACK Source Catalog: 106 sources between 180 mJy and 2.4 Jy
* Complementary ISO FIRBACK Source Catalog: 90 sources between 135 and 180 mJy
* Flux uncertainty error: 25% at $`3\sigma _c`$, 20% at $`5\sigma _c`$, and reduced to 10% at higher flux levels
* positional error: 100 arcsecond diameter circle (99% of the sources)
* source density for $`S_{170}>225`$ mJy: $`16\pm 4`$ sources per square degree
* source density for $`S_{170}>180`$ mJy: $`27\pm 5`$ sources per square degree degree
* slope of the differential source counts: $`3.3\pm 0.6`$ between 180 and 500 mJy
* 4 to 7% of the Cosmic Infrared Background at 170 $`\mu m`$ is resolved into sources brighter than 135 mJy
* Prediction that the CIB will be resolved at flux levels in the range 1 to 10 mJy at 170 $`\mu m`$
* Catalogs, images, and plots available on line at: `http://wwwfirback.ias.u-psud.fr`

###### Acknowledgements.

HD, GL & JLP appreciate discussions with Rene Laureijs and Carlos Gabriel at Vilspa and Ulrich Klaas at Heidelberg. We also are greatful to Alain Abergel, Alain Coulais & Marc-Antoine Miville-Deschênes at IAS, for stimulating and helpful discussions through the analysis of the FIRBACK data. Thanks also go to Martin Kessler and his team who did a great job in planning ISO observations so efficiently. MH acknowledges support of his participation on ISO through NASA grants and contracts. DE acknowledges support from NASA grant NAG5-8218.


format: text

text:
# Deep Sky Objects and the X-ray Background

## 1. Introduction

Observations with Chandra and XMM are revolutionizing our understanding of the X-ray Background (XRB). Chandra has at last resolved the 2–7 keV part of the hard XRB (Mushotzky et al 2000; Garmire et al 2000; Giacconi et al 2000). Since the 2–7 keV spectrum of the Background attaches smoothly onto the rest of the spectrum up to its $`\nu F_\nu `$ peak at about 30 keV, we may fairly say that the X-ray Background is now beginning to be understood. The soft X-ray Background was of course resolved by ROSAT (Hasinger et al 1998), but the spectrum below 1 keV is much steeper than that of the harder background and dominated by different components.

In the 2–7 keV band the sources at flux levels of $`10^{15}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$ appear to be roughly one third normal quasars, one third galaxies and the remaining third are optically faint (Mushotzky et al 2000; Barger et al 2000). It is plausible that all are powered by active galactic nuclei (AGN), since the luminosities are all much greater than for the distributed binaries etc in galaxies and starbursts (such sources do however appear at lower flux levels). The nucleus itself must be obscured in the second two classes of object. Obscured AGN have been a major component of most models for the XRB since first proposed by Setti & Woltjer in 1989. The reason is the spectrum of the XRB which is flatter than any known class of extragalactic X-ray source (see Boldt 1987; Fabian & Barcons 1992). A range of absorption and redshift in the sources can result in the observed spectrum (Madau et al 1994; Matt & Fabian 1994; Comastri et al 1995; Wilman & Fabian 1999).

In this talk I shall concentrate on the absorbed sources. First I briefly review nearby obscured AGN, then summarise Chandra results which show that the optically faint sources are likely obscured quasars. Next I show that most accretion power is in distant obscured AGN and that the obscuring medium must cover most of the Sky subtended at such nuclei. Finally I show that a model for galaxy formation in which a significant fraction of the central matter in a galaxy remains in the form of X-ray absorbing gas which is eventually blown away by a wind from the central quasar when it is powerful enough, can explain the development of both black holes in galaxy bulges and the XRB.

## 2. Obscured AGN

### 2.1. Seyfert II galaxies

Obscured AGN, in which the power source lies behind a significant column density of gas which is local to the nucleus, are common and generally known as Seyfert II galaxies. Strictly speaking, the name refers to the optical appearance of the object (ie absence of broad lines and presence of narrow lines characteristic of photoionized gas) but I shall use Type II to denote any object where the nucleus is absorbed (i.e. even so absorbed that no narrow lines from photoionized gas are detectable). The column densities range from below $`10^{22}`$ to above $`10^{25}\mathrm{cm}^2`$. The PDS instrument on BeppoSAX has played an important role here in probing the higher column density regime (e.g. Maiolino et al 1998). There appear to be at least as many Compton-thick Seyfert IIs ($`N_\mathrm{H}>1.5\times 10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2`$) as Compton thin ones ($`N_\mathrm{H}<1.5\times 10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2`$).

Just how common Seyfert II galaxies are is uncertain. Optical-based estimates suggest about 3 times that of Seyfert I galaxies, but they are often insensitive to the Compton-thick ones with high covering fraction. Unfortunately there is as yet no survey of the hard X-ray sky which can sort this out in a definitive way. This is a task for EXIST (Grindlay 2000). For now we can make use of rough arguments such as that of Matt et al (2000). We note there that the 3 nearest AGN with luminosities above $`10^{40}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ – NGC4945, the Circinus galaxy and Cen A – all lie within 4 Mpc and have absorbed nuclei. The column density for Cen A $`10^{23}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ and those for NGC4945 and Circinus are 2 and $`4\times 10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ respectively. Two of the three are therefore Compton thick. NGC4945 only appears to host an AGN at hard X-ray wavelengths. The X-ray luminosity function for unabsorbed AGN (Miyaji et al 1998) predicts that there is only a 5 per cent chance of detecting an object within a radius 4 Mpc. The probability of 3 or more is $`2\times 10^5`$! Only if obscured AGN outnumber unobscured ones by about a factor of 10 to one does the probability exceed two percent. Even though we are using only 3 objects it is highly likely that Type II objects are common, and present in about 10 per cent of all $`L^{}`$ galaxies. At least one half of all local ultraluminous IRAS galaxies (ULIRGs) are then obscured AGN.

### 2.2. Obscured quasars – Type II quasars?

If most local AGN hide behind large columns of absorbing material, is it also true for more distant and powerful ones, like the quasars? Although it might at first thought seem obvious that the answer has been known for ages, it is not. There is no clear optically-identified population resembling a more powerful version of the Seyfert II galaxies. A few objects began to emerge from ASCA and BeppoSAX hard imaging, but whether they have quasar luminosity is debatable (Halpern et al 1999). I suspect that such luminous objects are either unabsorbed or highly absorbed ($`N_\mathrm{H}10^{22}\mathrm{cm}^2`$). Perhaps the radiation pressure and winds from quasars are powerful enough to blow away intermediate column density material.

The situation is now changing with Chandra data, which routinely shows a few powerful obscured AGN per image. A simple example is the brightest serendipitous source in the field of the lensing cluster A2390. This hard X-ray source has a photometric redshift of about one, an intrinsic $`N_\mathrm{H}10^{23}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ and a 2-10 keV luminosity (unabsorbed) of $`3\times 10^{44}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ making it a Type II quasar. The optical/near infrared appearance and colours show no sign of the active nucleus. Such sources are common (Crawford et al 2000; Barger et al 2000).

It is only in the mid infrared that the central power of the object in the A2390 field (Fabian et al 2000) is revealed since it is detected by ISO (Lemonon et al 1998). The emission at 7.5 and 15 microns is far above that expected from the starlight of the host galaxy and is consistent with that absorbed from the X-ray emitting nucleus (Wilman et al 2000). The MIR colours indicate that the reradiating dust is warm to hot (200 – 1500 K) so probably close to the nucleus. It should peak its emission at about 60 microns. The infrared connection is important in showing that we are dealing with absorption of a quasar in the X-ray band and not some new class of source with a ‘funny’ spectrum.

It is also plausible that Type II quasars outnumber normal Type I quasars. Only then can the spectrum and source counts of the hard XRB be accounted for. Simple correction of the spectrum of the XRB for absorption leading to the intrinsic energy density of radiation due to accretion (Fabian & Iwasawa 1999) agrees with the local mean density of massive black holes (Magorrian et al 1998; Merritt & Ferrarese 2000), if the accretion efficiency is the 10 per cent typical of radiatively efficient accretion discs. This implies that about 85 per cent of accretion power has been absorbed (Fabian & Iwasawa 1999). In turn this means that the absorbing material covers most of the sky, as seen by the accreting black holes. To build a massive black hole by efficient accretion by redshift 2 requires that a quasar-like luminosity is emitted (Fabian 1999). In conclusion, obscured quasars must be common.

## 3. The central black hole and galaxy formation

The observed correlation between black hole mass and the stellar mass of the host bulge (Magorrian et al 1998), and more recently with the velocity dispersion of that bulge (Gebhardt et al 2000; Ferrarese & Merritt 2000), implies some link between the growth of a massive black hole and the growth of its host galaxy (or at least the bulge of that galaxy). If the XRB is revealing the growth of massive black holes, albeit obscured ones, then it should also convey information on the growth of bulges. Quite how to decipher that information is not yet clear.

One possibility is that the bulge and black hole grow from gas together, with the process terminated when a wind from the quasar becomes powerful enough (Silk & Rees 1998; Fabian 1999). Consider an isothermal bulge of velocity dispersion $`v`$ in which a significant fraction $`f`$ of the cooled gas remains in the form of cold dusty clouds, instead of forming stars. Let the central black hole grow by accretion and blow a wind of velocity $`v_\mathrm{w}`$ with power fraction $`a`$ of the Eddington limit, i.e. $`L_\mathrm{w}=aL_{\mathrm{Edd}}`$. Analogous to the Eddington limit for point masses, a wind can eject matter from a distributed mass if the force is large enough (Fabian 1999; Silk & Rees 1998 use an energy argument). A column density of gas is ejected if

$$L_\mathrm{w}>v^4v_\mathrm{w}f/G.$$

This happens when the mass of the hole

$$M_\mathrm{h}\frac{v^4\sigma _\mathrm{T}}{4\pi G^2m_p}\frac{v_\mathrm{w}}{c}\frac{f}{a},$$

which agrees well with the Gebhardt et al (2000) relation if $`\frac{v_\mathrm{w}}{c}\frac{f}{a}1`$ and the expulsion of the gas also stops the growth of the bulge, as well as the hole. At the point of expulsion the column density of cold gas $`N\sigma _\mathrm{T}^1`$, so the growth of the hole is Compton thick.

The expulsion phase can be identified with broad absorption line quasars, BALQSO, suggesting that $`v_\mathrm{w}30,000\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. A normal, unobscured quasar is only seen after gas expulsion and is presumably due to the draining of the remaining centrifugally-supported gas close to the hole.

As mentioned in the Introduction, there have been many detailed attempts to explain the XRB in terms of AGN with various amounts of absorption over a range of redshifts. Usually the observed present-day distribution has been extrapolated backwards in time. Richard Wilman, Paul Nulsen and I (2000) have tried to build a model based on a simple semi-analytic model for galaxy formation where we work forward in time from a redshift of about ten. All dark matter haloes initially contain a seed black hole of mass $`M_{\mathrm{seed}}`$. To make stars the gas component in the haloes has to cool. Initially the cooling time is less than the free-fall time throughout the halo producing what we term a dwarf galaxy (supernova feedback prevents all gas cooling into stars). Such dwarfs merge until what we term a normal galaxy is built. This is a galaxy within which the cooling time of its gas exceeds the free-fall time, so that a hot halo occurs. The central black hole, which is now many tens of $`M_{\mathrm{seed}}`$ then accretes from that hot gas (which also progressively cools to make stars) via Bondi accretion. We assume that the radiative efficiency of accretion is always 10 per cent and the 2–10 keV luminosity is 3 per cent of the total. Accretion is terminated by i) exhaustion of the hot gas supply, ii) a new collapse or iii) the wind from the central quasar exceeding the above force balance. The last possibility dominates in practice.

If the star formation is inefficient so that $`f0.37`$, $`M_{\mathrm{seed}}1.6\times 10^6\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and there is a final unobscured phase lasting $`9\times 10^7\mathrm{yr}`$ we find that we can account for the spectrum of the XRB, the X-ray luminosity function of quasars and also the X-ray source counts fairly well (Wilman et al 2000). The model does however give a spectral excess below 3 keV. This can be fixed by assuming that gas expulsion is anisotropic, leaving behind a torus of gas (say that which is centrifugally supported). Otherwise we only have Compton thick and unobscured objects. We also fail to have many massive black holes. This is mainly because we do not treat mergers of normal galaxies and galaxies in groups and clusters.

The reasonable success of this model does not of course prove that it is correct, but it does show that models can be built. We used accretion of hot gas since it must occur and is relatively easy to model. It also overcomes the angular momentum problems in the accretion of cold gas. Other models involving more realistic merger histories and accretion of cold gas need to be tried. In our model the black hole plays an important part in the evolution of the galaxy in that it expels the gas which both fuels the quasar and from which stars form, thereby ending further star formation.

## 4. The power of accretion

The total power radiated by (obscured) AGN may be 10–50 per cent of that radiated by stars. If accompanied by winds (as seen in BALQSO) considerable mechanical energy may result, which is presumably thermalized in the host galaxy and the intergalactic and intra-group and -cluster media. Indeed it may be important for shifting the cluster X-ray luminosity–temperature relation from the gravitational collapse $`L_\mathrm{x}T^2`$ scaling to the observed $`T^3`$ one (Wu et al 2000). For ten per cent accretion efficiency, a mean black hole density of $`\rho _{\mathrm{BH}}=6\times 10^5\mathrm{M}_{}\mathrm{Mpc}^3`$ corresponds to $`6\times 10^{58}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{Mpc}^3`$ or $`3.7\mathrm{keV}`$ particle<sup>-1</sup> if $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{baryon}}=0.08,h=0.5`$.

The gravitational binding energy of a galactic bulge, where the velocity dispersion of the bulge is $`300v_{300}\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, is $`E_{\mathrm{bulge}}2\times 10^6v_{300}^2M_{\mathrm{bulge}}c^2`$. The energy from the central black hole $`E_{\mathrm{AGN}}5\times 10^4M_{\mathrm{bulge}}c^2`$. So only one per cent of that energy can have a major effect on the formation of that bulge. Of course, the energy needs to be in the right form. Radiation if ionizing can be damaging, but most is reradiated quickly. Relativistic jets are probably too fast to couple to the medium in the bulge well (this could explain why black holes in radio galaxies grow to be so massive). An uncollimated fast wind is perhaps the most effective agent.

## 5. Final thoughts

Many deep sky X-ray sources are absorbed AGN. The absorption occurs in dusty gas and is reradiated in the mid- to far-infrared bands. Chandra probably will not detect many Compton-thick AGN; XMM may do better if it can go deep in the band above 7 keV. The presence of the most massive black holes in the most massive local galactic bulges means that the most powerful absorbed AGN will be in the most massive early-type hosts at higher redshifts. The locally observed relation $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}v^4`$ can be obtained from wind ejection, supporting evidence that powerful uncollimated winds are common in quasars. Local Seyfert galaxies may either by younger or rejuvenated black holes, which may not provide a good guide to the dominant sources of the XRB. Ultradeep X-ray images may not prove to be the best way to study the accretion history of the Universe, they may instead reveal more about the X-ray foreground, i.e. nearby galaxies. Larger numbers of sources are found by images reaching to the break in the source counts at $`10^{14}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$, the more distant of which may prove to be the more interesting. There is lots of power due to accretion in the Universe, most of it obscured and most only directly accessible to hard X-ray observations.

## References

Barger A., Cowie L.L., Mushotzky R.F., Richards E.A., 2000, ApJ, in press

Comastri A., Setti G., Zamorani G., Hasinger G., 1995, A&A, 296, 1

Cowie L.L., et al. 2001, ApJ submitted

Crawford C.S., Fabian A.C., Gandhi P., Wilman R.J., Johnstone R.M., 2000., MNRAS in press

Fabian A.C., Iwasawa K., 1999, MNRAS, 303 L4

Fabian A.C., 1999, MNRAS, 308, L39

Fabian A.C., et al, 2000, MNRAS, 315, L8

Ferrarese L., Merritt D., 2000, ApJ, 539, L9

Garmire G., et al 2000, preprint

Gebhardt K. et al, 2000, ApJ, 539, L13

Giacconi R., et al, 2000, preprint

Grindlay J., 2000, preprint

Hasinger G., Burg R., Giacconi R., Schmidt M., Trumper J., Zamorani G., 1998, A&A, 329, 482

Lemonon L., Pierre M., Cesarsky C.J., Elbaz D., Pello R., Soucail G., Vigroux L., 1998, A&A, 334 L21

Madau P., Ghisellini G., Fabian A.C., 1994, MNRAS, 270, L17

Maiolino R., et al, 1998, A&A, 338, 781

Matt G., Fabian A.C., Guainazzi M., Iwasawa K., Bassani L., Malaguti G., 2000, MNRAS, 318, 173

Matt G., Fabian A.C., 2000, MNRAS, 267, 187

Merritt D., Ferrarese L., 2000, astro-ph 0009076

Miyaji T., Hasinger G., Schmidt M., 2000, A&A, 353, 25

Mushotzky R.F., Cowie L.L., Barger A.J., Arnuad K.A., 2000, Nature, 404, 459

Silk J., Rees M.J., 1998, A&A, 331, L1

Wilman R.J., Fabian A.C., Gandhi P., 2000a, MNRAS, 318, L11

Wilman R.J., Fabian A.C., Nulsen P.E.J., 2000b, MNRAS, 319, 583

Wu K.K.S., Fabian A.C., Nulsen P.E.J., 2000, MNRAS, 318, 889