text:
# THE STRUCTURE AND MOTIONS OF THE 3C 120 RADIO JET ON SCALES OF 0.6 TO 300 PARSECS

## 1 Introduction

The radio source 3C 120 exhibits structure on all scales from under a parsec to hundreds of kiloparsecs (Walker, Benson, & Unwin, 1987). It is dominated by a variable core that is resolved with Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI). A prominent one-sided jet is seen extending from the core on subparsec scales to about a hundred kiloparsecs. On the largest scales there is a complex, two-sided lobe structure extending to about 14′, or about half a megaparsec for $`z=0.033`$ (Baldwin et al., 1980) and $`H_0=75`$ km s-1Mpc-1, the value that will be used in this paper (this gives a scale of 0.60 pc mas-1). Superluminal motion is observed in the jet which, because of the low redshift, can be studied with greater linear resolution than most other extragalactic superluminal sources. This was one of the first 4 sources in which superluminal motions were found in the early 1970s and it has been studied with VLBI extensively ever since (Seielstad et al., 1979; Walker et al., 1982; Benson et al., 1988; Gómez et al., 2000, and references therein). The standard model for superluminal motion involves relativistic motions in a jet oriented nearly along the line-of-sight (Blandford & Königl, 1979).

The central region of the 3C 120 host galaxy is a strong and variable emitter of radiation at all observed frequencies. Because of the presence of broad emission lines, the galaxy is usually classified as a Seyfert 1 (Burbidge, 1967), although its properties are also consistent with those of a broad line radio galaxy and, to some extent, a low luminosity quasar. The galaxy is of order an arcminute in size, with extensive H II regions that may be ionized by the nucleus (Baldwin et al., 1980). Its morphology does not clearly match either a spiral or an elliptical, and may be the disturbed product of a merger (Moles et al., 1988). Maraschi et al. (1991) give broadband spectra from infrared to X-rays and report on monitoring observations over much of this range. There is a pronounced and variable UV excess which they model with a face-on accretion disk that feeds a $`4\times 10^7M_{\mathrm{}}`$ black hole at a variable rate of somewhat under a solar mass per year. At optical wavelengths, variability is observed in both the continuum (Lyutyi, 1979; Wlerick, Westerlund, & Garnier, 1979; Pollock et al., 1979) and the spectral lines (Oke, Readhead, & Sargent, 1980; Peterson et al., 1998). Reverberation mapping techniques have been used to derive a mass for the central black hole of about $`3\times 10^7M_{\mathrm{}}`$ (Wandel, Peterson, & Malkan, 1999). 3C 120 is a complex and variable X-ray source with the unusual property that the spectral index varies with the intensity (Halpern, 1985; Maraschi et al., 1991). Grandi et al. (1997) find X-ray properties similar to those of a radio quiet Seyfert, including the presence of strong iron lines, indicating that beamed emission does not dominate at these frequencies.

The radio jet is among the few that is seen at other wavelengths. An optical counterpart, extending out to 15″, was reported by Hjorth et al. (1995). The radio-to-optical spectral index is 0.65, about the same as the radio spectral index on the same scales. In addition, there is an X-ray emission knot that is coincident with the 20″ radio knot and is probably explained by synchrotron emission (Harris et al., 1999).

Recent high frequency VLBI observations at 86, 43 and 22 GHz (Gómez et al., 1998; Gómez, Marscher, & Alberdi, 1999; Gómez et al., 2000) have produced high resolution images and a 16-month movie of the innermost features of the jet. The 86 GHz Coordinated Millimeter VLBI Array observations put an upper limit on the core size of $`0.033`$ pc; the core size lies below the resolution of the 86 GHz image which is $`54\mu `$as. The 43 and 22 GHz observations, made with the National Radio Astronomy Observatory’s (NRAO) Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA), show that the inner jet structure is complex and exhibits superluminal motions on very small scales. The movie shows evidence for interaction with a cloud of density and core distance intermediate between typical broad and narrow line clouds. The complexity of the structure at high resolution makes it clear that features in lower resolution observations, such as those presented in this paper, are likely to be blends of smaller scale components. The 43 and 22 GHz observations show that the linear polarization on small scales is variable with some features near the core having magnetic fields across the jet. Polarization percentages of up to 10% are seen, increasing with core distance. Farther from the core, and at much larger scales observed with the VLA (Walker, Benson, & Unwin, 1987), the polarization indicates that the magnetic fields are parallel to the jet. VLBA measurements made in 1996 showed upper limits to circular polarization of about 0.2% (Homan & Wardle, 1999).

Recent studies have begun to apply physical models of jets to observations of 3C 120. The jet shows a variety of knots and side-to-side structures, some reminiscent of helical structures. Hydrodynamical jet theories incorporating shocks have been used to model the moving knots in superluminal sources (Gómez et al., 1997, and references therein). It has been suggested that the motion of the inner jet structure 3C 120 may be described in this way (Gómez et al., 1998). Both moving and stationary features can be accommodated in such models. Helical patterns are expected for some types of jet instabilities (Hardee, 1987, 2000, and references therein). The superluminal motion along a curved trajectory seen in the radio source 3C 345 can be explained by helical jet models (Hardee, 1987; Owen et al., 1989; Steffen et al., 1995).

According to the standard model, the observation of superluminal motions is good evidence that a jet is relativistic. The fact that a large proportion of bright, compact radio sources show superluminal motions suggests that many jets are relativistic on parsec scales, although there are selection effects due to relativistic beaming. It is not clear how far from the core the jets remain relativistic. At larger core distances, they become broader and features are larger, so measurement of small angular velocities is more difficult. Because of its close proximity, 3C 120 has high angular rates of motion compared to other superluminal sources making it a prime candidate for attempts to find motions at large angular distances from the core. So far superluminal motion has been seen in the source to distances of tens of parsecs (Benson et al., 1988). On arc second scales, a radio knot in the jet 4″ from the core has been shown to have an upper limit on its motions of significantly smaller than the speed of light (Muxlow & Wilkinson, 1991; Walker, 1997). This might suggest that the jet has slowed, or moved out of the line-of-sight, by that distance. But the knot could be a stationary feature, perhaps a shock or bend, in a jet that is still relativistic. This possibility is supported by the fact that the large scale structure is two sided, but the jet is still very one sided on the scale of the knot, suggesting that the emission is still beamed on that scale. It is also supported by optical line observations of regions on both sides of the nucleus that show evidence of interaction with the jet (Hua, 1988; Axon et al., 1989). One of the goals of the 1.7 GHz observations presented here is to look for motions on scales intermediate between those usually probed with VLBI and the larger scale structures studied with linked interferometers.

In this paper we present the results obtained from five epochs of 1.7 GHz ($`\lambda `$=18 cm) VLBI observations spanning from 1982 to 1997. We also present 5 GHz ($`\lambda `$=6 cm) VLBI monitoring data which was taken approximately three times per year from 1977 through 1988. A few of the early observations of this sequence were made at 10.7 GHz. With this long series of observations, we can attempt to discern how frequently new components appear, what sort of trajectory they follow, and whether the velocities are constant for a given feature and between features. At 1.7 GHz, the core is not as dominant as at higher frequencies and a wealth of jet structure is observable up to about half an arcsecond from the core.

## 2 The Observations

### 2.1 Monitoring at 5 GHz

Between 1977 and 1988, 3C 120 was observed approximately 3 times per year with VLBI. Until 1981, the observations alternated between 10.7 GHz and 5 GHz. After 1981, it was realized that the motions in the source were sufficiently fast that the interval between same-frequency observations was too long to follow features unambiguously. After that date, nearly all observations were made at 5 GHz. For this paper, the 10.7 GHz images have been convolved to the same resolution as the 5 GHz observations and used as part of the 5 GHz monitoring sequence.

The early observations used the main antennas of the U.S. VLBI Network. As the years progressed, so did the size of the arrays as more U.S. antennas and, especially, as European antennas were added. The first observations involved only 3 antennas. By the time the series was terminated, a typical observation involved 11 antennas. All of these observations used the Mark II VLBI recording system, with a 2 MHz bandwidth and 1 bit sampling (Clark, 1973). Correlation was done on one of the NRAO 3 station correlator, the Caltech 5 station correlator, or the Caltech Block II (16 Mark II stations) correlator, depending on epoch. Results up to 1980.27 were reported by Walker et al. (1982). This paper will not consider the first few observations because of their low quality, but will include observations after 1978.91 in the analysis, even though the first few of those were previously reported. The antennas involved in both these observations and in the 1.7 GHz observations described below are listed in Table 1. The date, frequency, antennas, and image peak flux density per beam for each of the observations at 5 or 10.7 GHz are listed in Table 2.

The 5 and 10.7 GHz observations were calibrated and imaged using standard procedures using either the Caltech VLBI package or AIPS at near the time of the observations. The flux scales are usually based on antenna temperatures measured at one or more of Effelsberg, Green Bank, and Owens Valley. They are probably good to about 10% in most cases. However at least one image (1983.25) seems to have an inconsistent flux density scale relative to the others; the measured fluxes are low. Perhaps this is because that epoch did not include any short baselines. No attempt at correction has been made, partly for lack of an obvious way to determine a correction. But the dip in fluxes at that time should not be believed.

The images, consisting of CLEAN components convolved with a common restoring beam of $`7.0\times 1.0`$ mas in position angle $`10\mathrm{°}`$, are shown in Figures 1 to 3. The extremely elongated beam is the result of the the low declination of the source ($`5\mathrm{°}`$) and fact that nearly all of the antennas available at the time lay along a NE/SW line from Europe to California. For most epochs, the residuals are not included, but this does not make a significant difference at the contour levels used. Some of the more recent images do include the residuals. The quality of the images improved over the years, as is reflected in the differing lowest contour level displayed in each of the figures.

Figure 4 shows the component motions. A straight slice was made in position angle $`105\mathrm{°}`$ along the ridge line of the jet in each of the images. The parts of that slice that appear to be reliable for identification of features were fit using between 2 and 6 Gaussian components. In Figure 4, the amplitudes along each slice are displayed as the width of the shaded structure centered at the date of observation. The fitted Gaussians were used to produce a model for the amplitudes along the slice. This model is shown as the thin lines that appear to outline each of the shaded regions. The fact that the lines appear to outline the shading, rather than either having shading extend outside the lines, or having white space inside the lines, indicates that the Gaussian fits produce a good description of the slice data. Note that the lines only extend over the region where structures are thought to be reasonably reliable, the region over which the fits were made. Especially in some of the earliest, and least reliable epochs, the fits were not extended over all regions that seem to show emission. The fitted position of each component is marked along with an error bar. For the core, that error bar is the maximum of the formal fit error for that component and a somewhat arbitrary minimum error of 0.3 mas meant to account for alignment uncertainties as discussed below. For other features, the error is the geometric sum of the core error and the formal fit errors for the component position. For the stronger features, the errors are dominated by the assumed alignment uncertainty. Thus the error bars are meant reflect the full uncertainty of the position of each component.

The slices have been aligned by shifting each one so that the position of the easternmost Gaussian, which is presumed to represent the core, is set at zero offset. Therefore the positions of other components are relative to the core. Some such alignment scheme is required because, without use of phase calibration using a reference source, there is no absolute position information available. But no alignment scheme will be perfect. The apparent core position can be influenced by emerging jet components while they are still too close to be resolved from the core. Such a component would shift the apparent core toward the jet, which would make the apparent distance to other jet features smaller. The apparent core position can also be influenced by variations in the length of the optically thick region at the base of the jet. This region is expected to be shorter at higher frequencies so the distance to jet features is likely to be higher when measured at 10.7 GHz rather than 5.0 GHz. Examination of Figure 4 shows that the alignment would not be significantly different if it were based on an assumption of linear motions of jet components. This suggests that the apparent core position does not vary significantly. Estimating by eye, the core position probably does not vary by more than about $`0.3`$ mas, and that value is used as the minimum core position error.

Most of the components whose positions are shown in Figure 4 are marked as belonging to a specific feature seen at multiple epochs and labeled with a letter. Such components are marked with closed circles. Components marked with open circles in Figure 4 are not included in any motion analysis. The positions of all components belonging to each moving feature were fit, in a least squares sense, for a feature angular speed and a start date. Straight lines indicating the fitted motion are drawn on the figure. The rates for each feature, along with the formal fit errors, are displayed on the figure. The fit results, including the start dates, are also given in Table 4. The errors on the start date are not symmetric. Typically the uncertainty extends significantly farther toward earlier than toward later times. The quoted errors were determined by exploring Chi-squared as a function of the start date. None of the error bars should be taken too seriously. They are correct under the assumptions that the motion is linear, that the decomposition of the structure into Gaussian components is appropriate, and that the images are reliable even in the regions of relatively weak emission. It is unclear how to incorporate uncertainties related to these assumptions, but a reasonable guess would be that they double the possible rate errors.

It has been noted that, especially during the period between 1981.63 and 1984.40 when the observations occurred at very regular intervals, there is a possible aliasing or “stroboscopic” effect. The data could be explained in terms of features moving toward the core or even by features moving outward at about 3 times the apparent rate. The position fits for such cases are not as good as for the unaliased outward motion and the apparent expansion of the outer envelope of observed emission is not as easily understood. But such cases are not excluded. However at other times, especially late in the project, the spacing of epochs was not so regular and it is reasonably clear that such a stroboscopic effect is not happening. Also the assumed direction and rates are consistent with the 1.7 GHz results presented below and with the high-resolution, frequent-sampling results of Gómez et al. (2000), both of which are much less subject to such effects.

There is what appears to be a gap in the monitoring of features at 5 GHz at the beginning of 1986. That is the result of a couple of circumstances. First, that time was preceded by a period of very low activity in the source so there were no features along the jet with any significant brightness. Second, the core flared at that time, starting new features, but also making it harder to see any more distant features. Finally, due to scheduling and processing problems, there is a full year with no observations. As a result of these factors, the monitoring effectively started from scratch after 1986.

### 2.2 Observations at 1.7 GHz

There have been 5 VLBI observations of 3C 120 at 1.7 GHz as summarized in Table 3. Images from the first two have been published in Benson et al. (1988), although they were remade with more modern imaging methods, such as the use of robust weighting (Briggs, 1995), for this paper. All of these observations involved a large number of antennas. However the low declination of the source, combined with the wide longitude range of the antennas, makes the coverage of the (u,v) plane rather poor, especially for the longer baselines. The beams are not as seriously elongated as at 5 GHz because antennas off the NE/SW line were recruited. But other holes in the coverage remain. See the plots in Benson et al. (1988) for examples. The first 3 observations used the Mark II VLBI system with 2 MHz bandwidth and 1 bit sampling. The 1982.78 data were correlated on the Caltech 5 station correlator. The 1984.26 data were correlated on the NRAO 3 station correlator as part of what has since become known as the “World Radio Array” set of observations of 4 sources. The 1989.85 data were correlated on the Caltech Block II correlator. The final two epochs were recorded on the much wider bandwidth VLBA and Mark IV recording systems. The 1994.44 observation was made with just the 10 antennas of the VLBA (Napier et al., 1994) using a total of 32 MHz bandwidth and 1 bit sampling. The 1997.71 data used a global array and both VLBA and Mark IV recording systems. The total bandwidth was again 32 MHz, but this time 2 bit samples were used. Both the 1994.44 and 1997.71 observations were correlated on the VLBA correlator. The improvement of data quality with the wider bandwidth systems and the better (u,v) coverage of the VLBA is readily apparent in the images.

The 1.7 GHz images are displayed on 3 different scales in Figures 5, 6, and 7. Figure 5 shows images from the two wide bandwidth observations over the full region in which emission was detected. That region extends to about 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$5. These images were made with tapered data to give relatively low resolution to help draw out the larger scale structure. The beam was $`18\times 13`$ mas at position angle $`3\mathrm{°}`$. These images show that the jet is a continuous structure from the core region to at least a 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$5. In fact, it is known to be a continuous structure from milliarcseconds to about 14′ (Walker, Benson, & Unwin, 1987). The current images show much more clearly than before that the jet has a smooth envelope; the edges follow smooth curves. However, there is considerable structure in the emission internal to the jet, with significant side-to-side variations and pronounced knots along the jet.

Figure 6 shows all 5 epochs with a window that includes everything out to 360 mas, including the big bulge at a bit over 200 mas. All images have been made using a Gaussian restoring beam of $`10\times 4`$ mas FWHM elongated in a position angle of $`10\mathrm{°}`$. Note that the larger scale regions are much smoother in the recent images than in the ones based on the older Mark II data. This is not a real effect in the source, but a reflection of the behavior of the CLEAN deconvolution algorithm when dealing with a combination of lower signal-to-noise ratio data, poorer (u,v) coverage (especially missing short spacings), and probably higher closure errors in the older data. The closure errors are violations of the assumption made in self-calibration that all calibration errors are station dependent, affecting all baselines to a station equally. The ridge of low level signal to the south of the core in 1982.77 and the various peaks surrounding the core in 1989.85 are artifacts resulting from closure errors. Also, from the experience gained while making the 1989.85 image, there appeared to be some uniqueness problems in the region of the jet between about 20 and 75 mas, so subtle details in that area should not be taken too seriously.

Figure 6 clearly shows that the bulge at about 200 mas is moving away from the core. The exact motion is hard to determine because the feature is large, without well defined compact components identifiable over the whole time. But estimates based on the outer edge, the southernmost extension, and an eyeballed estimate of the centroid, all constrain the total motion to be between 20 and 32 mas for a rate of $`1.7\pm 0.4`$ mas yr-1, or $`3.5\pm 0.8`$ c for our assumed $`H_0`$.

Figure 7 shows the central regions of the same images shown in Figure 6. For this figure, the vertical spacing between the images is proportional to the time separation between the observations. This explains why the 1982.77 and 1984.26 images have been cropped to allow them to be placed close together. With this vertical placement, any feature moving at constant velocity primarily in the horizontal direction will move along a straight line whose slope gives the speed. The alignment of the images along the jet direction has been done by aligning the image peaks. This is a reasonable choice, although if the peak feature is resolved, there may be a small shift from the optimum position. This may be a concern for 1984.85 and 1997.70. Any such offset should be less than about 2 mas.

In Figure 7, dark vertical lines have been drawn at the presumed core position and at the position of an apparently stationary feature that will be discussed below. Light shaded lines have been drawn to highlight what appear to be moving features. These lines are hand drawn suggestions of how to link up features. Clearly the structure of these images would not lend itself well to the Gaussian fitting procedures used at 5 GHz, especially in the regions more distant from the core. The same would probably be true at 5 GHz with similar quality images that showed the structure at larger core distances. An additional difficulty is that the sampling interval was sufficiently long during the 1984 to 1994 period to make association of features a bit problematic. Therefore the exact evolution of features cannot be precisely specified. But the lines are reasonable suggestions. All have slopes indicating feature speeds of between 2.5 and 3.1 mas yr-1(5.1 and 6.3 c) with uncertainties of about 10%. These speeds are similar to those of the faster 5 GHz features. Given the complexity of the structures and the difficulty of identifying exactly how to track features, these speeds are all the same to within the errors.

Note that two of the suggested features appear to pass through the stationary feature at 81 mas, brightening and moving to the south side of the jet in the process. Also note that the ridge line of the jet follows something of a twisted path that varies less between epochs than do the individual features. In particular, the bright region is along the northern side of the jet in the 60-70 mas region and farther out between 100 and 150 mas. The stationary feature at about 81 mas is brightest toward the southern side of the jet. These sorts of structures will be discussed below in terms of a possible helical path.

## 3 Discussion

The images presented in this study, along with the higher resolution, high frequency images of Gómez et al. (1998), Gómez, Marscher, & Alberdi (1999), and Gómez et al. (2000) make it clear that the 3C 120 jet is a continuous structure with brightness fluctuations that move down the jet at apparent superluminal speeds. The fact that the jet is a continuous structure is especially clear in the later (better) 1.7 GHz images which have a fairly smooth outer envelope despite strong fluctuations of brightness along the jet. Identifiable features in the brightness fluctuations can be followed for long distances as they move along the jet. Feature B was followed at 5 GHz from 1 to 15 mas over 5 years. Feature L7, seen at 1.7 GHz is likely to be a blending of several of the 5 GHz features including B and D and it is tracked to 50 mas from the core. Thus, whatever the brightness fluctuations are, they persist over large fractional core distances, suggesting that they mark a change in some fairly important jet parameter. A likely possibility is that they reflect changes in the amount of material moving down the jet. The enhanced brightness could be simply the result of increased density of emitting material. But it is also possible that a density change sets up conditions for shocks, which might be what is actually observed.

The big bulge seen moving down the jet between 200 and 250 mas at 1.7 GHz may represent an extreme case of a density enhancement. This feature appears almost like a lobe. It is seen best in Figure 5 where it clearly has a well defined outer edge and it has clearly pushed out the envelope of the jet to the south. This is reminiscent of the 15 mas scale jet in 3C 84 (Walker, Romney, & Benson, 1994, and references therein) where a similar lobe-like structure can be traced back to a large flux density increase in about 1959. In both cases, the “lobe” is penetrating into a preexisting jet structure. The changes in jet characteristics are sufficiently pronounced that the appearance winds up similar to a large scale lobe interacting with an external medium. Note that the lobe speed of 1.7 mas yr-1 is somewhat less than the speeds of most of the components measured on smaller scales. This situation is also seen in 3C 84, although that source is not superluminal. This is consistent with the “lobe” structure being a region where material is piling up as it interacts with other, perhaps slower, material in the older jet. If this feature does represent a period of past increased activity, that occurred roughly 100 years ago.

The 5 GHz observations suggest that new superluminal components are emitted from the core of 3C 120 at intervals of under a year. In fact, this interval is mainly determined by a combination of the speed of the jet components and the angular resolution of the observations. At the observed angular rates of motion, features separated by significantly less than a year would not be resolved into separate components in our data. The higher resolution observations of Gómez et al. (1998) clearly show that there is complex structure on scales below our resolution. The birth of the brighter 5 GHz features is indicated by a brightening of the core at around the time of zero separation. This is likely also true for the weaker features, but the effect is disguised in the general variability of the core. After an initial brightening as they leave the core, the 5 GHz features decrease in brightness as they move down the jet. That decrease is monotonic in these data. The main exceptions seen in Figure 4 are the result of what is likely to be the poor amplitude calibration in 1983.25 noted earlier. However note that the 1.7 GHz data presented here and the high frequency data of Gómez et al. (2000) show that a monotonic flux decrease is not a general property of components in the source.

The core is often, but by no means always, the brightest feature in the source. Some of the brightest moving features remain brighter than the core for up to about a year. For this reason, any attempt to do accurate geometric work such as geodesy or astrometry with this source must take structure into account in order to obtain results accurate to better than about 3 mas.

The speeds of features measured from the images presented here suggest that there is some variation in speed between components, but that variation is under a factor of two. At 5 GHz, speeds of between 1.5 and 3.5 mas yr-1 are measured, but that range shrinks to 2.2 to 3.2 if only features seen in more than 3 images are included. The measured speeds are based partly on the assumption that the brightness fluctuations can be modeled as Gaussian components. That is clearly simplistic, and much blending of structures is involved. While the possibility that all features have the same speed is strongly excluded by the formal errors of the fits, it is not absolutely excluded when the reliability of the images and the difficulty of identifying some of the features at larger core distances are taken into consideration. However, note that Feature C, which is formally slower than Feature D, seems to disappear when Feature D catches up, supporting the idea that the speeds really do vary. Also the comparatively low speed of Feature J is reasonably convincing. In the 1.7 GHz images, all of the moving features less than 180 mas from the core have speeds similar to those of the 5 GHz features and to the speeds seen at 22 GHz close to the core in the movie of Gómez et al. (2000). There is a significant change at the 200 mas bulge, discussed above, which is clearly moving more slowly than features closer to the core. There is no clear evidence at either 1.7 or 5 GHz for a change of speed of an individual component.

The 3C 120 jet undergoes a significant bend on small scales. The high resolution images of Gómez et al. (1998) and Gómez, Marscher, & Alberdi (1999) show that it is first seen at submilliarcsecond scales to have a position angle of about $`120\mathrm{°}`$. Our 1.7 GHz images show an angle of roughly $`100\mathrm{°}`$ out to about half an arcsecond. The high resolution images suggest that most of the curvature between these values occurs between about 2 and 5 mas. However our 5 and 1.7 GHz observations suggest that a position angle of near $`105\mathrm{°}`$ is maintained as far as about 30 mas, at least in the more recent data. Some of the apparent curvature between 2 and 5 mas may be the result of internal side-to-side structure such as those at larger scales discussed below. Higher dynamic range, high resolution observations will clarify this.

It would be interesting to know how constant the position angle has been, especially on the small scales near the core. But unfortunately the very poor north-south resolution of the 5 GHz images makes it difficult to obtain accurate position angle measurements. The images of Figures 1, 2, and 3 do show that the position angle did not change much between 1979 and 1988. All images show position angles between the main features of between about $`102`$ and $`108\mathrm{°}`$. A 1999 image at 5 GHz, currently being processed (Benson, private communication), and the high frequency observations cited above, show a similar position angle except on scales of less than about 2 or 3 mas. On the smallest scales, the position angle is $`120\mathrm{°}`$ or more negative. This could indicate that a real change in the position angle of the jet on the smallest scales has occurred. But it could simply show that the newer data, with improved north-south resolution, is better able to determine the position angle on these scales.

The evolution of components at 1.7 GHz is somewhat different from that seen at 5 GHz. The general decrease of brightness along the jet is apparent. But individual features can vary both up and down in brightness. In fact, there may be a pattern to where such variations occur, although the combination of the limited quality of the early epoch images and the poor time sampling make full delineation of such patterns problematic. The most probable case is the bright feature at about 81 mas that is there at some level in all 5 images. It appears that both features L4 and L5 pass through this feature. About 10 mas toward the core from this feature is a region that is relatively weak in all of the images. The bright feature is biased toward the southern side of the jet, while the weaker regions both closer to the core and farther out are to the north. This appears to be a stationary pattern superimposed on the moving jet. An eyeball estimate of the upper limit to the pattern speed is about 0.55 mas/yr or about $`1.1c`$, much slower than the speed of the knots. There are much less convincing hints of a similar pattern near 45 mas from the core. Such stationary patterns could result from a curved trajectory or from standing shocks, perhaps related to interaction with an external medium.

## 4 Implications of a Helical Pattern

The patterns described at the end of the last section are similar to those that would be expected if the brightest part of the jet followed a helical path on a cone. The brightest regions would be on the side where the path approaches closer to the line-of-sight. The brightness would be enhanced both by foreshortening, if the jet is optically thin, and by relativistic beaming, which increases at smaller line-of-sight angles. On the other side of the cone, the path would both be stretched out by projection and the brightness would be decreased because of reduced beaming. Figure 8, to be discussed in more detail later, shows the predicted appearance of a smooth jet following such a helical path. The region of the 3C 120 jet in the vicinity of the 81 mas (49 pc) feature looks much like the model, except that the jet is not smooth and components move along the path passing through the stationary pattern. The helix would be within the overall envelope of the jet since it is indicated by the line of brightest emission, not by the rather smooth outer limits to the jet sides.

Helical patterns are expected to occur in jets as the result of Kelvin-Helmholtz instability (Hardee, 1987, 2000, and references therein), possibly driven by small perturbations near the central engine, so it would not be surprising to see a helical pattern in 3C 120. In this section we will discuss the implications of the observation of a helical pattern. But it should be kept in mind that the present data do not exclude other explanations for the structures seen. For example, shocks are often invoked in discussions of the nature of superluminal features and other brightness fluctuations in jets. It is possible that the structures seen are the result of a combination of moving and stationary shocks. Monitoring at 1.7 GHz is continuing in an effort to improve the observational constraints.

Steffen et al. (1995) have explored the implications of the possible helical paths of superluminal components in 3C 345. They consider the the helical trajectories implied by 4 different cases of conserving 3 of 4 possible quantities; kinetic energy, angular momentum, linear momentum in the jet direction, and jet opening angle. The 3C 345 trajectories open out toward straight lines which are better matched by their Case 3 in which the unconserved quantity is linear momentum along the jet axis. However the 3C 120 morphology, which shows suggestions of multiple cycles of the helix, looks more like their Case 2, which allows the angular momentum to vary. They note that this case is equivalent to that of the hydrodynamic isothermal helical model of Hardee (1987).

The possible observation of a slowly moving, long wavelength, helical pattern has implications for the jet orientation and for the nature of the medium through which the jet propagates. To explore these implications, we first consider a simple morphological model which can be used to deduce some deprojected properties of the jet under the assumption that the helical pattern actually traces the path taken by jet material. We then consider how such a model relates to the flow through a helical pattern deduced from the time dependent linearized fluid equations. The theory suggests that an observed helical pattern may imply larger transverse motion than is experienced by individual fluid elements, thereby relaxing the constraints on the geometry. Finally we consider the implications of a slow pattern speed. A summary of the models considered and their implications is given in Table 5.

### 4.1 A Simple Model

For the simple model, we assume that the jet follows a helix that lies along the surface of a cone and has a wavelength that is a constant multiple of the cone radius, that the pattern is fixed, that the flow follows the pattern, and that the jet is optically thin. This corresponds to Case 2 of Steffen et al. (1995). The observed cone opening angle and helix wavelength constrain the true opening angle and wavelength as a function of the angle of the cone axis (hereafter called the jet axis) to the line-of-sight, $`\theta `$. The observed superluminal motion constrains the jet speed in the direction of the jet axis, since it is an average speed. But the jet material has velocity components in other directions in order to follow the helix, so the required $`\gamma `$ is somewhat higher than the usual $`\gamma \beta _{obs}=v_{obs}/c`$ of a straight jet and is constrained by the geometry as a function of $`\theta `$. With these constraints, the minimum and maximum angles to the line-of-sight of the flow along the pattern, and hence the beaming factors and projection effects, can be determined as a function of $`\theta `$. The implied brightness difference between the brightest and dimmest parts of the pattern is a strong function of $`\theta `$ in this model and so can be compared with the images to constrain that angle.

To match 3C 120 with calculations of the sort described in the next paragraph, we used an apparent (projected) half opening angle of the cone of $`6\mathrm{°}`$, a helix wavelength such that a full cycle occurs between the possible 45 mas feature and the 81 mas feature (27 and 49 pc at the assumed distance), an apparent average speed of 5.7 c, and a ratio of brightnesses of 20. We assumed a typical optically thin jet spectral index of $`\alpha =0.7`$ ($`S\nu ^\alpha `$). A reasonable match to all of these constraints is given if the cone has an intrinsic half opening angle of $`0.16\mathrm{°}`$, is at $`1.5\mathrm{°}`$ to the line-of-sight, has a helix wavelength of $`\lambda =120R`$ (R is the jet radius) and has $`\gamma =9`$. One fairly general property of a helix with the assumed projected wavelength and opening angle is that the path swings almost directly into the line-of-sight on one side.

Figure 8 shows the appearance of a simplified jet with the above properties. The “jet” consists of a continuous stream of unresolved, optically thin emitters following a fixed helical path on the surface of a cone at constant speed. The emitters are started along the jet at equal intervals and are of constant brightness in their rest frames. The position of each emitter, at the time the observed wavefront passes it, is calculated along with its beamed brightness. The crosses in the figure show the “observed” positions of the emitters on the plane of the sky. No attempt has been made to account for brightness evolution as the emitters move down the jet (dimming expected) or to model the brightness variations along the jet that are seen as components in the real data. The beamed flux density from each emitter is convolved with an observing beam, equivalent to that used for the 1.7 GHz images (with our assumed $`H_0`$), and added to the model image. The brightness enhancements where the jet swings into the line-of-sight on the southern side of the jet are obvious as are the dimmer looping structures along the northern side of the jet between the bright regions.

The modeled jet has a high degree of collimation with a pattern that only slightly deviates from longitudinal, but is both broadened and foreshortened by the projection effects of being very close to the line-of-sight. It is considerably closer to the line-of-sight than is required by the usual model for superluminal motion in a straight jet. In the straight jet model, $`\gamma \beta _{obs}`$ and $`\theta `$ is assumed to be about $`1/\gamma `$, although a fairly wide range of angles is possible. For 3C 120, a straight jet would have $`\gamma 5.7`$ and $`\theta 10\mathrm{°}`$ with values up to near $`20\mathrm{°}`$ possible. But for larger angles such as these, a helical jet matching the observed speeds and opening angle would have much too high a brightness contrast between the peaks and regions between the peaks.

There are at least two ways that the brightness contrast might be reduced, thus allowing higher angles to the line-of-sight and less severe collimation. It is possible that not all of the emitting material participates in the helical path, as is suggested by the relatively smooth outer jet boundary. Such emission could dominate between the peaks, reducing the observed brightness ratio. However in that case, it seems likely that the brightness would be distributed more evenly across the jet between the peaks, contrary to the observations. The other possibility is that the observed opening angle of the jet does not reflect the actual deviations of the material flow from the direction of the jet axis. The high pressure, and hence brightest, region may swing more widely than the actual particles as the jet flows through the helix. This would reduce the differential beaming effects and smooth the appearance of the jet. As noted below, physical models suggest that this will be the case.

### 4.2 Physical Theory; Decoupling the Pattern and the Material Paths

Studies involving both physical theory and numerical simulation show that helical patterns are likely to form in jets, including relativistic jets. Hardee (1987, 2000) has shown that helical patterns are an expected result in many circumstances, can induce significant transverse motion without the development of shocks, and can produce asymmetries in Doppler boosted emission if jets are observed at line-of-sight angles on the order of the beaming angle. In particular, the theory has been compared to observations, especially of M 87, which shows helical patterns (Owen et al., 1989). But one difficulty is that the theoretical helical patterns, and those observed in M 87, are much more tightly wound than what we see in 3C 120. The fastest growing unstable modes in these calculations typically have wavelengths of only a few jet radii. These calculations generally assume a hot jet in a hot medium (like a cocoon). But the wavelength of the fastest growing structures increases if the jet sound speed is lower (higher internal Mach number) and/or the Lorentz factor is higher, provided that the ambient (external) sound speed is much less than the jet sound speed. This suggests that the 3C 120 jet resides in a relatively cool medium, and not in a relativistically hot cocoon or lobe.

The linearized time dependent fluid equations give the distribution of pressure and fluid velocity field within the jet as fluid moves through a helical pattern. Typically the highest pressures are near the surface of the jet at an azimuthal position that rotates with the phase of the pattern. The actual jet material need not follow the path of the region of highest pressure. In general the flow lines will follow a smaller diameter helical path than the region of highest pressure. The brightest radio emission is expected to be generated in the region of highest pressure so the observations will trace the path of that region. But one cannot use that path to calculate the relativistic beaming effects because they depend on the vector velocity of the emitting material. In principle, the reduced helical path followed by the material allows for lower brightness variations than are calculated assuming that the apparent path is the material path. A general result of calculations from the fluid equations is that, as one moves to shorter pattern wavelengths, the transverse motions become smaller so the suppression of beaming-induced brightness contrasts becomes larger.

We have modified the simple model described earlier to allow for material following tighter helices than the apparent path of the brightest emission. With this modified scenario, it is possible to find parameters that predict an appearance and apparent velocity that are very similar to the predictions of the model used above to fit the 3C 120 data, but with much wider angles between the average jet axis and the line-of-sight. A fit can be obtained with essentially any angle to the line-of-sight up to at least $`16\mathrm{°}`$. As that angle increases, the required ratio of the radius of the apparent helical path described by the brightest emission to the effective radius of the helical path followed by the material increases. For $`10\mathrm{°}`$ to the line-of-sight, the apparent helical path must be about 2.2 times the effective radius of the helical path followed by the material. For $`16\mathrm{°}`$, the ratio would be about 4.6.

As the angle of the jet to the line-of-sight increases, the helical wavelength required to approximate that seen in projection in the 3C 120 images decreases. To compare with the theory, we need to relate the helical wavelength to the jet radius, and it is no longer obvious how that radius relates to features in the images. But assuming that the path of brightest emission marks the edge of the jet, the wavelengths for the models at $`10\mathrm{°}`$ and $`16\mathrm{°}`$ to the line-of-sight have wavelengths of 33 and 21 times the radius. This is much shorter than that implied by the original model with its very small angle to the line-of-sight, but is still large compared to the situation analyzed for M87. Ultimately, this sort of analysis should be done by including the radio emission, along with beaming effects, in the physical theory or numerical models.

### 4.3 Moving Patterns

One difference between the simple morphological model and a helically twisted jet is that the helical pattern will be moving. Motion of a large scale helical pattern can be computed from the linearized time dependent fluid equations, e.g., Hardee (2000). While in general the pattern speed is a function of the wavelength, at very long wavelengths relative to the most Kelvin-Helmholtz unstable helical wavelength (see eq. \[7b\] in Hardee 2000), the pattern speed may be found from the real part of (eq. \[5a\] in Hardee 2000)

$$\omega /ku\frac{\gamma ^2\eta _{rel}}{1+\gamma ^2\eta _{rel}}\pm i\frac{\gamma \eta _{rel}^{1/2}}{1+\gamma ^2\eta _{rel}}.$$

Here $`\gamma `$ is the Lorentz factor of the underlying flow with speed $`u`$ and $`\eta _{rel}(a_{ex}/a_{jt})^2`$, where $`a_{ex}`$ and $`a_{jt}`$ are the sound speeds external to and inside the jet respectively. The sound speed is $`a[\mathrm{\Gamma }P_0/(\rho _0+[\mathrm{\Gamma }/(\mathrm{\Gamma }1)]P_0/c^2)]^{1/2}`$, where $`4/3\mathrm{\Gamma }5/3`$ is the adiabatic index. The density, $`\rho _0`$ and pressure, $`P_0`$, are measured in the proper fluid frame, and since pressure balance has been assumed $`\eta _{rel}`$ is effectively an enthalpy ratio. At the most unstable wavelength

$$\lambda 3.75\frac{\gamma [M_{jt}{}_{}{}^{2}u^2/c^2]^{1/2}M_{ex}}{[M_{ex}{}_{}{}^{2}u^2/c^2]^{1/2}+\gamma [M_{jt}{}_{}{}^{2}u^2/c^2]^{1/2}}R,$$

the pattern speed is approximately given by (eq. \[7c\] in Hardee 2000)

$$v_w\frac{\gamma [M_{jt}{}_{}{}^{2}u^2/c^2]^{1/2}}{[M_{ex}{}_{}{}^{2}u^2/c^2]^{1/2}+\gamma [M_{jt}{}_{}{}^{2}u^2/c^2]^{1/2}}u,$$

where $`Mu/a`$. In general, we expect that any large scale helical twist and observed helical pattern to have a pattern speed that lies between the values at long wavelength and at the most unstable wavelength. In the absence of a low frequency precession at the central engine, the most unstable wavelength is the one most likely to grow and be seen. Helical wavelengths shorter than the most unstable wavelength will not move the whole jet bodily but can still produce a helical pattern near to the jet surface. In general, the shorter helical wavelengths propagate with much higher pattern speeds.

A long stationary pattern wavelength such as we assume for 3C 120 suggests that $`\eta _{rel}`$ is small and that $`M_{ex}`$ is large, as this sets an upper limit to any helical pattern speed to be significantly less than $`c`$. Because of projection effects, and a speed that is too low to amplify the apparent speed as for superluminal motion, such a pattern would appear to be stationary in our data, consistent with our results. Thus, a cool and not a relativistically hot external cocoon or lobe medium is implied for a long wavelength pattern that is relatively slowly moving. This is the same conclusion that was reached in section 4.2 from the desire to have the most unstable modes be of long wavelength to match the observations.

While the helical pattern is not moving superluminally, the apparent helical wavelength in the observer frame would be affected by any motion. The observed radiation travels nearly parallel to the jet so, in the time it takes to go between points where the pattern is at the same azimuth with respect to the jet axis, the pattern has moved. The apparent observed pattern is stretched as

$$\lambda ^{obs}=(\frac{1}{1\beta _wcos\theta })\lambda $$

where $`\beta _w=v_w/c`$. For example, a helix with a wavelength of $`80R`$ in the pattern frame moving with a pattern speed $`c/3`$ at an angle of $`3^{}`$ to the line-of-sight has an observed wavelength of about $`120R`$. A second effect of a moving helix is that fluid does not need to move as rapidly in the transverse direction to circulate through the helix as the fluid does for a “stationary” helix. The two effects will modify the Doppler boosting somewhat, although the two effects will tend to cancel each other as the stationary helical path has a longer intrinsic wavelength than the moving helical path. To investigate these effects we have computed, from the linearized time dependent fluid equations, the velocity components of material moving through a $`120R`$ nearly stationary helix (pattern speed c/100) and for a $`80R`$ moving helix (pattern speed c/3), both with transverse helical displacement of the jet by 1/2 the jet radius. There is very little difference in the transverse velocity components for the two cases. At least approximately (the flow angle is not exactly the same over the jet cross section), the flow angle with respect to the jet axis is about the same for the stationary helix and for the moving helices. Thus, we expect calculations for a stationary $`120R`$ helix to be only slightly modified if a helical pattern speed is considered. Similar effects would be expected for the shorter wavelengths allowed by the decoupling of the pattern and material paths. One goal of extended monitoring observations is to provide much improved constraints on the pattern speed.

Additional computations help constrain the angle of the jet to the line-of-sight. As noted earlier, the limited brightness contrasts along the pattern cannot be used to do this because transverse motions of the material may be considerably smaller than implied by the observed pattern. But the limits on the observed pattern speed can provide constraints. Larger line-of-sight angles require deprojected helical pattern wavelengths that are shorter than the fastest growing helical wavelength. While we cannot completely rule out shorter somewhat more rapidly moving helical patterns, preliminary computations suggest that the observed pattern wavelength must be longer than the most unstable wavelength if the observed pattern speed is to appear stationary in the data. Given the pattern speed appropriate to the most unstable wavelength, we find that the shortest deprojected wavelength consistent with the measured upper limit to the pattern speed is given by

$$\lambda 3.75\frac{\gamma [M_{jt}{}_{}{}^{2}u^2/c^2]^{1/2}M_{ex}}{[M_{ex}{}_{}{}^{2}u^2/c^2]^{1/2}}R.$$

In the above expression we have assumed that $`cos\theta 1`$ and that $`(1u/c)<<1`$. Models involving line-of-sight angles larger than about $`10\mathrm{°}`$ require a deprojected observed helical wavelength shorter than this limit and thus would show too high a pattern speed. Note that these arguments imply that the tightly wound helix seen in M87 would have a high pattern speed.

### 4.4 Helical and Other Patterns Elsewhere in 3C 120

Patterns reminiscent of a helix are seen on other scales in 3C 120. On scales between about 1 and 15 arcseconds, there are several cycles of an oscillating pattern that could be a helix (Walker, 1997), again with a long wavelength. In fact the 4″ knot, whose motions were the object of study of Walker (1997), could, from morphological grounds, be another feature like the one at 81 mas. This reinforces the idea, mentioned in the introduction, that the lack of motion in this feature does not indicate that the jet material has slowed. Gómez et al. (1998) suggest that the structures observed at 22 and 43 GHz in 3C 120 at about 3 to 5 mas from the core are the result of a helical path on a much smaller scale than what we see at 1.7 GHz. As with our results, the wavelength is long, even in projection, relative to the jet radius. But, more extensive monitoring has suggested another explanation related to interaction with a cloud intermediate in mass between narrow and broad line clouds (Gómez et al., 2000). This provides a cautionary note against over interpreting the current data and shows the need for continued monitoring to clarify the situation.

The 3C 120 jet shows a number of pronounced curves that are probably not part of a helical pattern. The first is in the region of a few mas where the jet bends from a position angle of about $`120\mathrm{°}`$ (Gómez et al., 1998) to the approximately $`100\mathrm{°}`$ seen out to a few arcseconds. At about 6 arcseconds, the jet begins a long gentle curve that eventually takes it through an angle of at least $`120\mathrm{°}`$ over several arcminutes on the sky before the structure becomes difficult to interpret (Walker, Benson, & Unwin, 1987; Walker, 1997). These curves are probably real bends in the jet. Because of projection at the small angle to the line-of-sight, such curves need only be through a few degrees. They may be the result of interaction with an external medium as suggested by the pronounced side-to-side asymmetry between 5 and 25 arcseconds seen in the image in Walker (1997).

## 5 Conclusions

The main conclusions of this study are:

* The 3C 120 jet is a continuous structure with brightness variations. Identifiable features in the brightness structure move down the jet at superluminal speeds. We are able to identify new features appearing at intervals of less than a year (Figure 4, Table 4), an interval that is set mainly by a combination of the jet speed and the angular resolution of the observations. Finer scale structure is known to exist as shown by higher frequency observations by other groups (c.f. Gómez et al. 2000)
* The two best 1.7 GHz images show structure with large variations of brightness along the jet, but a fairly smooth outer envelope of the emitting region (Figure 5).
* The speeds of the 5 GHz components in the region between 1 and 10 mas of the core appear to vary over a range that is well under a factor of two (Table 4). The formal errors strongly exclude the possibility that the speeds are all the same. But because of the limited image reliability and the difficulty in identifying some of the features at larger core distances, that conclusion is not as firm as the formal statistics would suggest.
* On the larger scales sampled by the 1.7 GHz images, most of the moving features have angular rates in the 2.5 to 3.1 mas yr-1 range, and within the uncertainties, could all be the same (Figure 7). This is within the range of speeds seen at higher resolution in our 5 GHz observations and in the 22 and 43 GHz observations of Gómez et al. (1998). The fact that the speeds show the same fairly narrow range between a few tenths of a parsec to about 120 parsecs in projection indicates that there are not large changes in either the underlying speed or angle to the line-of-sight of the jet in that range. The observed superluminal motions place an upper limit on the angle to the line-of-sight of about 20° so the 120 pc deprojects to at least 350 pc with much larger values more likely.
* The outermost feature for which a speed could be determined is the bulge at around 200 mas (Figure 6). It is moving at a rate of 1.7 mas yr-1, which is slower than most of the features closer to the core, especially those with reliable speed measurements. This may be the leading edge of material ejected during a period of enhanced activity. It is now plowing into the older jet material plus expanding the jet, a situation similar to that seen in 3C 84 (Walker, Romney, & Benson, 1994). Such features in radio sources may constitute a fossil record of previous periods of enhanced activity, about 100 years ago in this case.
* The 1.7 GHz data show evidence that there are both moving and stationary features in the same regions (Figure 7). In fact, it appears that moving components can pass through a stationary feature, dimming or brightening as they do so. The stationary features could either be places of interaction with the external medium or could reflect changes in jet direction with corresponding changes in the intensity of the relativistic beaming.
* The stationary brightening regions have structure reminiscent of the feature at 4″ which also appears to be stationary to within the measurement errors (Walker, 1997). This enhances the suspicion that the 4″ knot’s lack of motion does not imply that the underlying jet is not relativistic. The knot may, like the stationary brightening regions in the 1.7 GHz images here, be regions of interaction with the external medium or a result of jet bending, perhaps as part of a helical pattern. The lack of a visible counterjet, despite the presence of a counter lobe on scales of several arcminutes, is further evidence that the jet remains relativistic to large scales.
* Some of the features seen in the 1.7 GHz images suggest that the jet has a helical structure. To match the observed structure, either the jet must be extremely close to the line-of-sight (much closer than the maximum angle allowed by the superluminal motion alone) or there must be an offset between the line traced by the peak brightness and the path of individual fluid elements. The fluid equations (e.g., Hardee 2000) applied to helically twisted jets predict such an offset because the region of high pressure describes a helix of larger transverse amplitude than is followed by the fluid elements. Additional theoretical constraints related to the low pattern speed suggest that the jet is closer to the line-of-sight than about $`10\mathrm{°}`$. For any line-of-sight angle allowed by the superluminal motion, the wavelength of the helix is relatively long, in contrast to the situation in M87 where tightly wound helical patterns are seen. Longer wavelengths are favored when the jet is surrounded by a relatively cool medium.

The picture that emerges is one of a continuous, relativistic jet with much internal structure but a smooth outer envelope. The velocity is maintained from sub-parsec to hundreds of parsec scales. There is some slowing at the largest scale feature whose speed could be measured, but the jet appears to remain relativistic to kiloparsec and larger scales. The structure includes both features that move with the jet, perhaps density enhancements or shocks, and also features that do not move with the flow. The moving features can pass through the stationary features, suggesting that the stationary features do not significantly disrupt the flow. These could be places where there is some interaction with the external medium or they could be the result of variations in the jet path. Individual features are followed for large fractional distances from the core, suggesting that they represent variations in fundamental and enduring parameters of the jet such as density. Possible helical patterns of long wavelength are seen on several scales. Theoretical arguments suggest such wavelengths when the jet is cool and/or of high Lorentz factor and is moving through a cool and not relativistically hot medium.

We would like to thank the staffs of all the observatories listed in the Table 1 and the Caltech, Charlottesville, and Socorro correlators, without whose efforts these observations would not have been possible. While we did not use their data directly in the above text, we often consulted the University of Michigan Radio Astronomy Observatory flux density history available on the Internet for a consistent history of activity in 3C 120. That project is supported by funds from the University of Michigan. T. Hunter and M. Lystrup acknowledge support as summer students at NRAO by the Research Experiences for Undergraduates program of the National Science Foundation. P. Hardee acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation through grant AST-9802955 to the University of Alabama. P. Hardee and C. Walker acknowledge the Aspen Center for Physics where some of this work was performed.


format: text

text:
# The Expected Mass Function for Low Mass Galaxies in a CDM Cosmology: Is There a Problem?

## 1 Introduction

Recent interest in modifying the standard $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM theory of the origin of structure in the universe has been motivated largely by observations on sub-galactic scales. In particular, the most straight-forward interpretation of the results of theoretical calculations appear to be in conflict with the observed characteristics of spheroidal galaxies (i.e., bulges of spirals and small to moderate ellipticals) with respect to their individual physical properties, luminosity function, and clustering properties (Sellwood and Kosowsky 2000, Klypin et al. 2000, Navarro and Steinmetz 2000). These facts have led some authors to turn to alternative models such as quantum isocurvature (Peebles 1999ab), Self-Interacting Dark Matter (Spergel and Steinhardt, 2000), and Warm Dark Matter (Bode et al., 2001).

However, while measurements such as those of the cosmic microwave background radiation can be directly computed from theory in a relatively straight-forward manner, the abundance and clustering of luminous galaxies cannot at the present time be directly calculated with any certainty. Such calculations are hampered by the classic problem of relating light to mass. The simplest way to relate dark matter density to galaxy counts is to assume a proportionality in the fluctuations. This has led to the invention of the “spatial bias parameter $`b`$.” With the increasing sophistication of both theory and observations, we have discovered that bias must depend on both length scale and galactic type (because different types of galaxies have different clustering properties) and possibly on both local density and temperature (Blanton et al., 2000a).

But what is the relation between dark matter halos and galaxies as a function of mass? Is it plausible to assume that each dark matter halo contains a galaxy having stellar mass and light proportional to the dark matter mass? The earliest phenomenological treatments explored this possibility, but observationally it is clearly false. For example, the most massive ($`10^{15}M_{}`$) identifiable dark matter halos — found from large angle arcs and multiply imaged galaxies — correspond to clusters of distinct galaxies and do not contain supergiant galaxies of corresponding baryonic mass ($`10^{13}10^{14}M_{}`$).

For dark matter halos less than or comparable to $`10^{12}M_{}`$, the prevailing belief is that they will typically contain one “galaxy” and several satellites, but whether this description is accurate (and informative rather than definitional) is not known very securely. In the semianalytic treatment of galaxy formation (Somerville and Primack 1999, Lobo and Guiderdoni 1999, Chiu and Ostriker 2000) halos are identified with galaxies by a set of prescriptions that, overall, appears to correspond to reality. But, hydrodynamic simulations tend in this mass range to find several galaxies orbiting within a common halo (Cen and Ostriker, 2000).

For still lower mass galaxies (and presumably lower mass halos), we know that the mass/light ratio becomes large, implying that galaxy formation was inefficient for small systems. Thus, we are led to ask, could the physical bias against low mass systems naturally produce a mass function for galaxies significantly flatter than that of the dark matter halo mass function? If so, some of the apparent discrepancies between CDM cosmologies and observations might disappear.

It may be that some of the other discrepancies, such as those that depend on lensing (Li and Ostriker, 2000), shape (Moore et al. 1999b, Miralda-Escudé 2000, Navarro and Steinmetz 2000), or small scale potential fluctuations (Moore et al., 1999a), will remain and require serious reexamination of the CDM paradigm. But the driving reason for reexamination — the much smaller than expected number density of small galaxies — might simply be a result of well understood physical properties. This has been suggested already (Silk 1977, Lobo and Guiderdoni 1999) on the basis of semianalytical arguments. The purpose of this paper is to see if the mass function of low mass galaxies (“faint” galaxies) is significantly flatter than that for low mass halos, and the evidence from the hydrodynamic simulation examined (Gnedin 2000ab) is *yes*.

The organization of this paper is as follows. In § 2 we describe the hydrodynamical simulation used. In § 3 we show our analysis of the mass functions of the bound systems in the simulation. We discuss the why the galaxy mass function is relatively flat in § 4, and conclude in § 5.

## 2 The Hydrodynamical Simulation

The simulation code used here is based on Smoothed Lagrangian Hydrodynamics and is fully described in Gnedin (2000a). It is an extension of that reported on in Gnedin (1995, 1996), Gnedin and Bertschinger (1996), and Gnedin and Ostriker (1997). In brief, this simulation contains $`128^3`$ dark matter particles, a baryonic mesh of the same size, has a spatial resolution of 1.0 kpc/$`h`$, and a box size of $`4^3`$ (Mpc/$`h`$)3. The baryonic mass resolution is $`10^{5.7}M_{}`$. In addition, the code includes heuristic star formation, with the creation of stellar “particles” whose dynamics only depends on gravity. Finally, reionization by these “stars” is modeled with the local optical depth approach which is able to approximately follow three-dimensional radiative transfer. Because the present day nonlinear scale is larger than the box size, the simulation can not be continued to the present, and was stopped at a redshift $`z=4`$. Bound objects at each epoch are identified through use of the DENMAX (Bertschinger and Gelb, 1991) algorithm. The simulation run analyzed here is the same as the “production run” analyzed in Gnedin (2000ab). The cosmological parameters are $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.3`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b=0.04`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$, $`h=0.7`$, $`n=1`$, and $`\sigma _8=0.9`$ (COBE normalized).

Using results of a similar code, Gnedin and Ostriker (1997) showed that ionization is largely complete for a standard $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model at $`z=7`$. In addition, Gnedin, Norman, and Ostriker (2000) recently showed that when the effects of gas cooling and star formation are included, massive bulges are able to collapse to densities exceeding that of the dark matter, resulting in structures that resemble observed objects in their sizes, shapes, and density profiles.

## 3 Mass Functions of Spheroidal Galaxies

Here, we examine the mass functions of the dark and baryonic components of the bound objects formed in our hydrodynamical simulation. From the simulation results, we calculate the mass function $`n_i(>M_i),`$ the number of objects with mass in component $`i>M_i`$, where $`i=`$dark matter (d), gas (g), or stellar particles (s). If dark matter, gas, and stellar particles all trace each other, then

$$n_i(>M_i)=n_j(>M_j)$$
(1)
with the mass scaling

$$\frac{M_i}{M_j}=\frac{f_i}{f_j},$$
(2)
where $`f_i`$ is the fraction of the mass of the universe in species $`i`$. The dark matter fraction $`f_d=\mathrm{\Omega }_d/\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.867`$ is universal. Baryons are either in the form of gas or stellar particles, so that $`f_g+f_s=0.133`$. The fraction of mass in stellar particles is given in Table 1 as a function of redshift. At all times, less than 4% of the baryons are in the form of stellar particles, so $`f_g`$ remains approximately constant.

The results of the comparison of the mass functions are given in Figures 13. The dark lines are measured from simulations, whereas the gray lines are various fits. The thin grey lines are the dark matter mass functions scaled via equations (1)–(2). The thick gray lines are fits with a Schechter function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(M)_M^{\mathrm{}}m^\alpha \mathrm{exp}(m/m_{})𝑑m`$ for the stellar ($`z=7`$ and $`z=4`$) and gas ($`z=4`$ only) components. The fits consistently give values of $`\alpha 1.2\pm 0.1`$ when fit for objects with $`M_s10^{5.7}M_{}`$ ($`z7`$) or $`M_g10^{6.7}M_{}`$ ($`z4`$). These mass cutoffs were chosen due to numerical resolution considerations ($`1\times `$ and $`10\times `$ baryonic mass resolution for stellar mass and gas mass respectively). The exponential cutoff $`m_{}`$ may not be very accurate, since there is a lack of large scale power due to the small box size of the simulation.

As an additional check, we compared the bound objects’ dark and stellar masses as shown in Figure 4. Also shown are power laws $`M_sM_d^4`$ and $`M_sM_d`$. The motivation for this $`M_d^4`$ power law is the finding by Gnedin (2000b) that in low mass objects, heating consequent to reionization leads to a filtering of the baryonic mass resulting with such a relationship. The power law $`M_sM_d^4`$ is a generally a good fit, while $`M_sM_d`$ clearly fails.

Figure 4 also shows that the “tail” of the distribution around the $`M_d^4`$ relationship is skewed so that for a given stellar mass $`M_s`$, the dispersion towards lower $`M_d`$ is greater than the dispersion towards greater $`M_d`$. Even given this skewed distribution, there are several significant outliers in the tail. In particular, four bound objects with stellar mass $`>10^7M_{}/h`$ have significantly enhanced stellar mass fractions. For these objects, the fraction of mass in stellar particles is greater than even the universal baryon/dark matter mass ratio (shown in gray).

Shown in Figure 5 is the gas mass as a function of the dark matter mass. While the stellar mass showed a clear $`M_d^4`$ dependence for all values of $`M_s`$ for all relevant epochs, the gas mass (consistent with Gnedin 2000b) shows an *evolving* relationship. The gas starts out following the dark matter mass $`M_gM_d`$. After reionization, a relation $`M_gM_d^4`$ develops at low masses, with the mass at which there is a transition to $`M_gM_d`$ increasing with time.

Finally, shown in Figure 6 is the stellar mass as a function of the gas mass of bound objects. Because the gas and dark matter are closely correlated up until $`z7`$, at these epochs, the relationship between stellar mass $`M_s`$ and gas mass $`M_g`$ is similar to that between the stellar mass $`M_s`$ and the dark mass $`M_d`$. However, between $`z=7`$ and $`z=4`$, gas “ejection” from low mass halos is clearly evident. This reduction in the gas mass fraction was noted in the analysis of Gnedin (2000b). In some cases, the mass in gas is less than the mass in stellar particles — i.e., most of the gas in the halo has been converted to stars or ejected.

## 4 Discussion: Why Is the Galaxy Mass Function Flatter Than the Dark Matter Mass Function?

The logarithmic slope $`\alpha 1.2`$ of the galaxy mass function is significantly shallower than the dark matter halo mass function, particularly for low baryonic masses ($`M_g`$ or $`M_s`$ $`10^{89}M_{}/h`$). Therefore identification of low mass halos with low mass galaxies is incorrect. For instance, a one-to-one mapping of dark matter halos to galaxies normalized to high baryonic mass halos would result in an overestimate of the number of low baryonic mass systems by several orders of magnitude. In particular, this slope is comparable to that observed for low mass galaxies (Cross et al. 2000, Blanton et al. 2000b).

The explanation of the value of $`\alpha `$ is easy to explain as a combination of the dark matter halo mass function and the relationship between baryonic mass and dark matter mass in halos. The dark matter mass function follows the steep slope expected from the Press-Schechter (Press and Schechter, 1974) approximation

$`n(M_d)`$ $`=`$ $`M_d^2\rho _0\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _c}{\sigma }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{ln}\sigma ^1}{d\mathrm{ln}M_d}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta _c^2}{2\sigma ^2}}\right)`$ (3)
$``$ $`M_d^2,`$
where $`n(M_d)`$ is the comoving number density per unit mass, $`\rho _0`$ is the mean mass density today, $`\delta _c`$ is the critical linear density for collapse, $`\sigma `$ is the rms mass fluctuation, and we are considering small scale fluctuations where $`\delta _c\sigma `$ and $`\sigma `$ is a very weak function of mass. From Figures 4 and 5, is it clear that

$$M_sM_d^4$$
(4)
for $`z7`$ and

$$M_gM_d^4$$
(5)
for $`z4`$ at low masses. Combining equation (3) with equations (4)-(5) gives

$`n(M_s)`$ $``$ $`M_s^{5/4}\text{for }z7`$ (6)
$`n(M_g)`$ $``$ $`M_g^{5/4}\text{for }z4`$ (7)
for low masses. Thus this simple analytic derivation explains the simulation results: the stellar mass function appears to be flat by $`z=7`$ while the gas mass function evolves from simple scaling with the dark matter for redshifts of $`z=157`$ to a gradual flattening to look like the stellar mass function from $`z74`$.

Without additional analysis, it is difficult to determine whether the similarity in the two mass functions is (a) coincidental — two different mechanisms, (b) correlational — same mechanism of both, or (c) causal — stars $``$ gas. Clearly, though, the key to this question is understanding the origin of the $`M_d^4`$ behavior for both stars *and* gas, and how they are related. Whatever its origin, the result reported above appears to be robust, since Nagamine et al. (2001) found the same flattening in the stellar mass function in a simulation using a completely different numerical treatment of gas (e.g., Eulerian rather than Lagrangian), radiation, and star formation. This work, using very different numerical techniques (but a comparable mass resolution) also found $`\alpha 1.2`$ for the baryonic mass function.

Let us also consider the sensitivity to the star formation efficiency. If the star formation prescription underestimates star formation and all the remaining gas should have turned into stars by $`z=4`$, the stellar mass function would retain largely the same shape, but with a higher normalization. Only if the prescription *over*estimates star formation would the shape change significantly. In this case, the mass function would be even flatter, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM could have the opposite problem of *under*producing low mass galaxies!

In fact, assuming that *all* the gas in halos at $`z=4`$ turns into stars by $`z=0`$ (and neglecting the effects of merging) gives a “turnover” at a circular velocity of $`40`$ km/s. That is, the stellar mass function would follow the dark matter for $`v_c40`$ km/s, and would have a logarithmic slope of $`1.2`$ for $`v_c40`$ km/s. This corresponds closely to the observed circular velocity distribution of galactic satellites as determined by Klypin et al. (2000). Thus, if additional gas ejection is significant between $`z=4`$ and $`z=0`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM could indeed underproduce low mass galaxies!

## 5 Conclusions

We have analyzed the properties of the first bound luminous objects formed in a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM universe, as calculated in the numerical simulation described in Gnedin (2000ab). This simulation is one of only a few full-scale, non-equilibrium hydrodynamical simulations to date which can *individually* resolve the components of spheroids in the low mass range comparable to low mass galaxies (see also Nagamine et al. 2001).

We have found that the galaxy mass function at $`z=4`$ is significantly flatter than the dark matter mass function, whether one considers “galaxies” identified by halos’ stellar particles or gas mass. A flattened low mass end is found for the stellar mass function from $`z=74`$, and for the gas mass function at $`z4`$. Taking into account the uncertainties due to the prescription for star formation, at $`z=4`$ the stellar mass function in a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM universe is predicted to have a low mass logarithmic slope of $`\alpha 1.2`$ *or flatter*. The reason for these shallower baryonic mass functions is a combination of two effects: (a) the dark matter halo (differential) mass function is consistent with the Press-Schechter formulation at low masses of $`n(M)M^2`$ and (b) heating/cooling and ionization processes appear to cause baryons to collect in halos with the relationship $`M_bM_d^4`$ at low masses. Combining (a) and (b) gives $`n(M_b)M_b^{5/4}`$, comparable to the simulation results. Thus, the “underabundance” of low luminosity galaxies relative to halos emerges naturally from these results, implying that no “new physics” is necessarily required to understand the low mass end of the galactic mass function. However, because gravitational clustering is still evolving between $`z=4`$, when the simulation ends, and the present epoch, it remains to be seen whether $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM with the appropriate astrophysics can be reconciled with the observed clustering properties of low mass galaxies.

Discussions with Ken Nagamine are gratefully acknowledged. This work was supported in part by NSF Grant AST-9318185.