What we talk about when we talk about blazars?

arXiv:1705.10166v1 [astro-ph.HE] 29 May 2017

What we talk about when we talk about blazars? Luigi Foschini INAF – Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, Merate (LC), Italy

May 30, 2017

Abstract After the discovery of powerful relativistic jets from Narrow-Line Seyfert 1 Galaxies, and the understanding of their similarity with those of blazars, a problem of terminology was born. The word blazar is today associated to BL Lac Objects and Flat-Spectrum Radio Quasars, which are somehow different from Narrow-Line Seyfert 1 Galaxies. Using the same word for all the three classes of AGN could drive either toward some misunderstanding, or to the oversight of some important characteristics. I review the main characteristics of these sources, and finally I propose a new scheme of classification.

1

Introduction

The title is borrowed from Haruki Murakami’s What we talk about when we talk about running, who, in turn, borrowed it from Raymond Carver’s What we talk about when we talk about love. Far from competing with those two outstanding authors, I just would like to draw the attention on some recent discoveries about relativistic jets, and how to include them into the unified 1

model of active galactic nuclei (AGN) with jets. I would like to underline that this is not a challenge to the unified model, but rather the request of an evolution and an improvement. It is not the first time that there is an evolution in the terminology of this type of cosmic sources. This should not be looked as a mere fashion about words. It is true that physical objects exist independently on how we name them, but it is also true that using the most proper words makes it easier to study them, by avoiding to remain stuck on a swamp of fake problems and misleading questions. When Gregorio Ricci Curbastro and Tullio Levi-Civita proposed the tensor calculus, many other mathematicians rejected it, because they thought it was just a mere rehash of old maths. When speaking about Ricci Curbastro, Luigi Bianchi told that he preferred to find new things with old methods, rather than to find old things with new methods (cited in [1]). On the opposite, Henri Poincar´e wrote that a proper notation in mathematics has the same importance of a good classification in natural science, because it allows us to connect each other many events without any apparent link (cited in [2]). Back to the topic of this essay, I would like to remind some past changes in terminology about relativistic jets. In 1978, Ed Spiegel proposed the term blazar as a contraction of the words BL Lac Objects and Optically Violently Variable Quasars (OVV) [3]; in 1994-1995, Paolo Padovani and Paolo Giommi proposed to rename radio-selected BL Lac objects (RBL) as low-energy cutoff BL Lacs (LBL), and X-ray selected BL Lac objects (XBL) changed to high-energy cutoff BL Lacs (HBL) [4, 5]; also the Fanaroff-Riley classes of radio galaxies changed to low- and high-excitation radio galaxies (LErG, HErG) [6, 7, 8]. In his opening talk at the conference Quasar at all cosmic epochs (Padova, April 2-7, 2017), Paolo Padovani proposed to stop using radio loud/quiet terms and to start speaking about jetted AGN or not. I was less severe in my thoughts on radio loudness some years ago [9], although I agreed with Padovani. It is time to be resolute in changing

2

terminology. Also Martin Gaskell wrote: “I tell students that classification is one of the first step in science. As science progresses, however, I believe that we need to move toward physically meaningful classification schemes as soon as possible. To achieve this, we need to be willing to modify our definitions, or else we can impede progress” (cited in [10]). This means to move from a purely observational classification to a terminology with more physical grounds. It should be needless to say, but before establishing the type of a cosmic source, it is necessary to study it. A simple measure is the easy way, but it is also the most prone to errors. Today, AGN with jets are unified according to the scheme by Urry & Padovani [11, Table 1], which in turn summarises many years of contributions from pioneers (see the historical review in [10]). Urry & Padovani’s scheme has its pillars in three main factors: viewing angle, optical spectrum, radio emission. They also suggested a fourth factor, the black hole spin, which should be greater for jetted AGN. With reference to jetted AGN only, the Urry & Padovani’s unified model can be divided into two main classes and four subclasses on the basis of viewing angle and optical spectrum [11]: 1. blazar (small viewing angle, beamed sources): (a) flat-spectrum radio quasar (FSRQ), prominent emission lines in the optical spectrum; (b) BL Lac Object, weak emission lines or featureless continuum in the optical spectrum; 2. radio galaxies (large viewing angles, unbeamed sources): (a) HErG, prominent emission lines in the optical spectrum; (b) LErG, weak emission lines or featureless continuum in the optical spectrum;

3

The mass of the central spacetime singularity was generally in the range ∼ 108−10 M⊙ [8, 12, 13], which seemed to fit well with the elliptical galaxies hosting this type of cosmic sources [14]. The limited range meant to neglect the mass when scaling the jet power. Therefore, the main factor regulating the electromagnetic emission became the electron cooling, which is the basis of the so-called blazar sequence [15, 16]. The observed blazar sequence indicated that the spectral energy distribution (SED) of high-power blazar (FSRQs) had the synchrotron and the inverse-Compton peaks at infrared and MeV-GeV energies, respectively, while that of low-power sources (BL Lac Objects) had the peaks shifted to greater energies (UV/X-rays and TeV, respectively) [15]. This was explained as different cooling of relativistic electrons due to different environment, rich of photons or not (physical blazar sequence, [16]). In addition, since no other jetted AGN with smaller masses were known, it was thought that the generation of a relativistic jet required a minimum black hole mass [17, 18]. Truly speaking, the lack of small-mass jetted AGN was a selection bias. For example, in 1979, Miley and Miller [19] studied a sample of 34 quasars with z < 0.7: their sample included also objects with small black hole mass, which resulted to have compact radio morphology. In 1986, Wills and Browne [20] studied a sample of 79 quasars with the same redshift range, but selecting only bright sources (mag < 17): small-mass objects disappeared. Therefore, jets from small-mass AGN were known at least since seventies, but they were disregarded, likely because of the poor instruments sensitivity. The recent technological improvements resulted in an increase of the cases of powerful jets hosted in spiral galaxies (hence, small mass of the central black hole) [21, 22]. Also recent surveys showed that disk/spiral hosts are not just an exception, but they could be a significant fraction of jetted AGN [23, 24]. Particularly, Coziol et al. [24] confirmed the results of [19]: small-mass compact objects have generally weak, and compact radio jets.

4

2

High-Energy Gamma Rays from NarrowLine Seyfert 1 Galaxies

The turning point occurred in 2009, with the detection of high-energy γ rays from Narrow-Line Seyfert 1 Galaxies (NLS1), thus providing evidence of powerful relativistic jets from small-mass AGN [25, 26, 27, 28] (see also [29] for a historical review). NLS1s do have small-mass central black holes (. 108 M⊙ ), high accretion luminosity (close to the Eddington limit), prominent optical emission lines, but relatively weak jet power, comparable to BL Lac Objects [30]. Kinematics of radio components revealed superluminal motion (∼ 10c [31]; see also [32, 33] for more information about radio properties), while infrared colors indicated an enhanced star formation activity [34]. The host galaxy is not yet clearly defined: there is evidence that NLS1 without jets are hosted by spiral galaxies, but γ−ray NLS1 are still poorly known. However, early observations of a handful of sources point to disk galaxy hosts1 , the result of either a recent merger or a secular accretion [37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 35]. All the observed characteristics of NLS1s suggested that this class of AGN could be the low-mass tail of the quasars distribution [25, 30]. Indeed, as proved by Berton et al. [42], the NLS1s luminosity function matches that of FSRQs. The parent population of jetted NLS1s could be that of Compact Steep Spectrum (CSS) HErG [42, 43]. This fits well with the idea that NLS1s are quasars at the early stage of their evolution or rejuvenated by a recent merger [44]. However, I would like to underline that it is not a matter of NLS1s only, but of small-mass AGN. Recent surveys with Fermi/LAT [45, 46] and the Sloan Digital Sky Survey [47] indicated that jetted AGN with small-mass black holes are not restricted to NLS1s-type AGN. The exact observational 1

Two opposite interpretation were proposed for FBQS J1644+2619, a spiral barred host [35], and an elliptical galaxy [36]. However, the former observation seems to be more reliable, because done with a much better seeing than the latter.

5

classification is not the point, but what is important is the relatively small mass of the central spacetime singularity. This confirms once again that the mass threshold to generate the relativistic jet in AGN was just an observational bias.

Figure 1: Unification of relativistic jets. The AGN sample includes FSRQs (red circles), BL Lac Objects (blue squares or arrows for upper limits in disk luminosity), and NLS1s (orange stars). The XRB sample includes different states of some stellar-mass black holes (yellow triangles) and accreting neutron stars (magenta asterisks). HLX-1 is the only known jetted ultraluminous X-ray source with a reliable intermediate-mass black hole. Adapted from [49].

6

3

The unification of relativistic jets

Removing the mass-threshold bias has the important consequence of the unification of relativistic jets from AGN and from Galactic X-ray binaries (XRBs) [48, 49]. As shown in Fig. 1, in a jet power vs disk luminosity graph, NLS1s populate the previously missing branch of small-mass highly-accreting compact objects, the analogous of accreting neutron stars for the XRBs sample (see also [50] for a larger sample of AGN). By applying the scaling relationships elaborated by Heinz & Sunyaev [51], it is possible to merge the AGN and XRBs populations. A residual dispersion of about three orders of magnitudes remain (see [48, 49]): measurements errors could account for about one order of magnitude, while the remaining two could likely to be due to the spin of the compact object [51, 52], whose measure is still missing or largely unreliable (see also [53]).

4

Implications of the unification

Having proved the Heinz & Sunyaev’s scaling theory [51], the jet power vs disk luminosity graph could be used also to understand and to visualise some implications of the unification of relativistic jets (Fig. 2,3). Each population has two branches, depending on the main factor driving the changes in the jet power. The dashed blue rectangle in Fig. 2 summarises the blazar sequence [15, 16]: the black hole masses of blazars are within about one, maximum two, orders of magnitudes, and, therefore, the main changes in the jet power are driven by the electron cooling in different environments. The red rectangle in Fig. 2 refers to similar environments (FSRQs and NLS1s), but largely different masses, which in turn implies that the main change in the jet power is due to the mass of the central black hole [51]. The small-mass black hole is necessary to explain the weak jet power of NLS1s, which is comparable with BL Lac Objects [30]: as the environment of NLS1s is rich of photons like FSRQs, a large black hole mass would mean that relativistic electrons 7

Figure 2: Implications of the unification of relativistic jets: different branches, different mechanisms.

of the jet do no cool efficiently with so many photons, thus contradicting a basic physical law. Indeed, BL Lac Objects have weak jet and large masses, but their environment is photon-starving (see also [53]). The NLS1s branch (red rectangle) also prove that the observational blazar sequence (the dashed blue rectangle only [15]) was due to a bright-source selection bias, although the physical blazar sequence [16] remains valid, as it simply refers to how relativistic electrons cool depending on photon availability. When comparing the AGN with XRBs samples, one can note that the blazar sequence corresponds somehow to the stellar-mass black hole states,

8

Figure 3: Implications of the unification of relativistic jets: cosmological evolution.

but on different time scales. Galactic black holes evolve on human time scales: it is possible to observe a state change of a black hole along months/years of observations. A quasar requires some billion of years to swallow most of the available interstellar gas and to become a BL Lac Object [54, 55, 56]. This opens another implication, namely the cosmological evolution (Fig. 3). The blazar evolutionary sequence [54, 55, 56] suggested that quasar are young AGN, which become BL Lac Objects as they grow. This scenario has to be updated now by adding also NLS1s, which are thought to be a low-redshift analogous of the early quasars [44, 43]. Therefore, one could think at the sequence NLS1s → FSRQs → BL Lac Objects, going from small-mass highly9

accreting to large-mass poorly-accreting black holes, as different stages of the cosmological evolution of the same type of source (young → adult → old, Fig. 3). This view implies that BL Lac Objects have the largest masses, being (perhaps) the final stage of the cosmic lifetime, at odds with the results of some surveys [12]. Again, if one removes the bright sources selection bias, it is possible to find that indeed BL Lacs/LErGs do have masses larger than FSRQs/HErGs [47]. On the other side of the evolution, it is worth noting the presence of strong star formation in NLS1s, with infrared properties similar to UltraLuminous InfraRed Galaxies (ULIRGs) [34]. This points also to some link to the very birth of a quasar and its jet, which in turn could be an essential angular momentum relief valve to enhance the accretion [57]. ULIRGs as early quasar stage were already studied by Sanders et al. [58, 59] and it is interesting to note the presence in his sample of both the NLS1 and the quasar prototypes (I Zw 1, and 3C 273, respectively). It is also worth noting the application of the same sequence to the XRBs population, which implies a transition from accreting neutron stars to stellarmass black holes [60, 61, 62].

5

Conclusion: a renewed unified scheme

The Urry & Padovani’s scheme [11] updated with the addition of NLS1s and their parent population of CSS/HErG is shown in Fig. 4a. However, this generates some problem in terminology. The words blazar and radio galaxy indicate a certain type of cosmic source characterised by a high black hole mass and hosted by an elliptical galaxy. The easy addition of NLS1s and CSS to the above scheme risks to hide important information, as outlined in the previous section (different black hole mass, different host, ...). This is not a negligible detail: remind the misleading research directions caused by the bright sources selection bias, such as the threshold in the jet genera10

tion and the observed blazar sequence. Martin Gaskell wrote: “When you attach different classification to things, it is all too easy to get convinced that they are different things.” (cited in [10]). On the opposite, if you attach the same name to different things, it is all too easy to get convinced that they are the same thing. Therefore, on one side, we need to unify jetted AGN, but, on the other side, we need to keep some information about the roots of this unification to understand the physical processes driving the observational characteristics. The jets of AGN and XRBs are similar, but their power depends on the mass of the compact object, its spin, and its accretion (environment). It is important to note that Fig. 1 was built by using the jet power corrected for beaming. Indeed, it places on the same plane both beamed AGN and XRBs, which are not so beamed, as it is quite difficult for a Galactic jet to point toward the Earth, being both on the same equatorial Galactic plane2 . The addition of HErG/LErG/CSS sources would not change the two-branches structure for each population. Therefore, it should be possible to drop also the distinction beamed/unbeamed. From a physical point of view, the two most important factors in scaling the jet power are the mass of the compact object and the nearby environment (for the electron cooling), which in turn depends on the accretion. As already stated, the spin determines a larger dispersion only [51, 52]. Therefore, a more physicalbased unification could be set up by dividing the sources depending on the mass and on the cooling only (Fig. 4b). The dividing mass is ∼ 108 M⊙ not because of historical reasons, but because no BL Lac Object with small mass is known. Indeed, I have left a question mark on the LMSC (Low Mass Slow Cooling) cell. Current BL Lacs should be the latest stage of the cosmological evolution of jetted AGN, and, therefore, a small-mass BL Lac would mean that there was no evolution. Did such AGN have no matter enough for accretion? As there are other small-mass AGN, which are not necessarily 2

Galactic compact objects with jets are named microquasars, but there is no such thing as a microblazar, i.e. a Galactic jet pointed toward the Earth.

11

NLS1-type [45, 46, 47], it would be interesting to understand if some of them have a photon-starving environment. Perhaps, one intriguing case could be PKS 2004−447 (z = 0.24) that showed observational characteristics somehow different from the other jetted NLS1s [27, 63, 64]. There was also some disagreement on its classification as NLS1s, on the basis of the weakness of the FeII multiplets [65, 66]. It is interesting to point out that it is the only NLS1 (orange star) in the region of BL Lac Objects (blue squares or arrows) in Fig. 1.

(a) Urry & Padovani’s scheme updated.

(b) Physical unification scheme.

Figure 4: Changing terms in the unification scheme. The same terminology adapts well also to the XRB population: in this case, the dividing mass should be ∼ 3M⊙ , which is the minimum for a Galactic black hole. Also in this case, the LMSC cell remains with a question mark, but the question is more intriguing, because of shorter time scales. Could it be filled by pulsars? Similar questions on AGN evolution apply here. I stop here, because these are questions on which I have not thought enough yet. But, I think it is important to stress the different view offered by a terminology change built on more physical ground, rather than to focus on observational details.

Funding This work has been partially supported by PRIN INAF 2014 “Jet and astroparticle physics of gamma-ray blazars” (PI F. Tavecchio).

12

References [1] F. Toscano, Il genio e il gentiluomo. Milano: Sironi, 2004. [2] U. Bottazzini, Il flauto di Hilbert. Torino: UTET, 1990. [3] J. R. P. Angel and H. S. Stockman, “Optical and infrared polarization of active extragalactic objects,” Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., vol. 18, pp. 321–361, 1980. [4] P. Giommi and P. Padovani, “BL Lac Reunification,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 268, p. L51, May 1994. [5] P. Padovani and P. Giommi, “The connection between x-ray- and radioselected BL Lacertae objects,” Astrophys. J., vol. 444, pp. 567–581, May 1995. [6] R. G. Hine and M. S. Longair, “Optical spectra of 3CR radio galaxies,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 188, pp. 111–130, July 1979. [7] R. A. Laing, C. R. Jenkins, J. V. Wall, and S. W. Unger, “Spectrophotometry of a Complete Sample of 3CR Radio Sources: Implications for Unified Models,” in The Physics of Active Galaxies (G. V. Bicknell, M. A. Dopita, and P. J. Quinn, eds.), vol. 54 of Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, p. 201, 1994. [8] S. Buttiglione, A. Capetti, A. Celotti, D. J. Axon, M. Chiaberge, F. D. Macchetto, and W. B. Sparks, “An optical spectroscopic survey of the 3CR sample of radio galaxies with z < 0.3 . II. Spectroscopic classes and accretion modes in radio-loud AGN,” Astron. Astrophys., vol. 509, p. A6, Jan. 2010. [9] L. Foschini, “Accretion and jet power in active galactic nuclei,” Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, vol. 11, pp. 1266–1278, Nov. 2011.

13

[10] M. D’Onofrio, P. Marziani, J. W. Sulentic, and (eds), Fifty Years of Quasars. Heidelberg: Springer, 2012. [11] C. M. Urry and P. Padovani, “Unified Schemes for Radio-Loud Active Galactic Nuclei,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Pacific, vol. 107, p. 803, Sept. 1995. [12] G. Ghisellini, F. Tavecchio, L. Foschini, G. Ghirlanda, L. Maraschi, and A. Celotti, “General physical properties of bright Fermi blazars,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 402, pp. 497–518, Feb. 2010. [13] C. Tadhunter, “Radio AGN in the local universe: unification, triggering and evolution,” Astron. Astrophys. Rev., vol. 24, p. 10, June 2016. [14] A. Olgu´ın-Iglesias, J. Le´on-Tavares, J. K. Kotilainen, V. Chavushyan, M. Tornikoski, E. Valtaoja, C. A˜ norve, J. Vald´es, and L. Carrasco, “The host galaxies of active galactic nuclei with powerful relativistic jets,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 460, pp. 3202–3220, Aug. 2016. [15] G. Fossati, L. Maraschi, A. Celotti, A. Comastri, and G. Ghisellini, “A unifying view of the spectral energy distributions of blazars,” Mon. Not. R. Soc. Astron., vol. 299, pp. 433–448, Sept. 1998. [16] G. Ghisellini, A. Celotti, G. Fossati, L. Maraschi, and A. Comastri, “A theoretical unifying scheme for gamma-ray bright blazars,” Mon. Not. R. Soc. Astron., vol. 301, pp. 451–468, Dec. 1998. [17] A. Laor, “On Black Hole Masses and Radio Loudness in Active Galactic Nuclei,” Astrophys. J., vol. 543, pp. L111–L114, Nov. 2000. [18] M. Chiaberge and A. Marconi, “On the origin of radio loudness in active galactic nuclei and its relationship with the properties of the central supermassive black hole,” Mon. Not. R. Soc. Astron., vol. 416, pp. 917– 926, Sept. 2011.

14

[19] G. K. Miley and J. S. Miller, “Relations between the emission spectra and radio structures of quasars,” Astrophys. J., vol. 228, pp. L55–L58, Mar. 1979. [20] B. J. Wills and I. W. A. Browne, “Relativistic beaming and quasar emission lines,” Astrophys. J., vol. 302, pp. 56–63, Mar. 1986. [21] W. C. Keel, R. E. White, III, F. N. Owen, and M. J. Ledlow, “The Spiral Host Galaxy of the Double Radio Source 0313-192,” Astron. J., vol. 132, pp. 2233–2242, Dec. 2006. [22] R. Morganti, J. Holt, C. Tadhunter, C. Ramos Almeida, D. Dicken, K. Inskip, T. Oosterloo, and T. Tzioumis, “PKS 1814-637: a powerful radio-loud AGN in a disk galaxy,” Astron. Astrophys., vol. 535, p. A97, Nov. 2011. [23] K. J. Inskip, C. N. Tadhunter, R. Morganti, J. Holt, C. Ramos Almeida, and D. Dicken, “A near-IR study of the host galaxies of 2 Jy radio sources at 0.03 . z . 0.5 - I. The data,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 407, pp. 1739–1766, Sept. 2010. [24] R. Coziol, H. Andernach, J. P. Torres-Papaqui, R. A. Ortega-Minakata, and F. Moreno del Rio, “What sparks the radio-loud phase of nearby quasars?,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 466, pp. 921–944, Apr. 2017. [25] A. A. Abdo, et al., and (Fermi/LAT Collaboration), “Fermi/Large Area Telescope Discovery of Gamma-Ray Emission from a Relativistic Jet in the Narrow-Line Quasar PMN J0948+0022,” Astrophys. J., vol. 699, pp. 976–984, July 2009. [26] A. A. Abdo, et al., and (Fermi/LAT Collaboration), “Multiwavelength Monitoring of the Enigmatic Narrow-Line Seyfert 1 PMN J0948+0022 in 2009 March-July,” Astrophys. J., vol. 707, pp. 727–737, Dec. 2009.

15

[27] A. A. Abdo, et al., and (Fermi/LAT Collaboration), “Radio-Loud Narrow-Line Seyfert 1 as a New Class of Gamma-Ray Active Galactic Nuclei,” Astrophys. J., vol. 707, pp. L142–L147, Dec. 2009. [28] L. Foschini, et al., and (Fermi/LAT Collaboration), “Fermi/LAT Discovery of Gamma-Ray Emission from a Relativistic Jet in the Narrow-Line Seyfert 1 Quasar PMN J0948+0022,” in Accretion and Ejection in AGN: a Global View (L. Maraschi, G. Ghisellini, R. Della Ceca, and F. Tavecchio, eds.), vol. 427 of Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, pp. 243–248, Oct. 2010. [29] L. Foschini, “Powerful relativistic jets in narrow-line Seyfert 1 glaxies (review),” in Nuclei of Seyfert galaxies and QSOs – Central engine and conditions of star formation (Seyfert 2012)., p. 10, Proceedings of Science, 2012. [30] L. Foschini, M. Berton, A. Caccianiga, S. Ciroi, V. Cracco, B. M. Peterson, E. Angelakis, V. Braito, L. Fuhrmann, L. Gallo, D. Grupe, E. J¨arvel¨a, S. Kaufmann, S. Komossa, Y. Y. Kovalev, A. L¨ahteenm¨aki, M. M. Lisakov, M. L. Lister, S. Mathur, J. L. Richards, P. Romano, A. Sievers, G. Tagliaferri, J. Tammi, O. Tibolla, M. Tornikoski, S. Vercellone, G. La Mura, L. Maraschi, and P. Rafanelli, “Properties of flatspectrum radio-loud narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies,” Astron. Astrophys., vol. 575, p. A13, Mar. 2015. [31] M. L. Lister, M. F. Aller, H. D. Aller, D. C. Homan, K. I. Kellermann, Y. Y. Kovalev, A. B. Pushkarev, J. L. Richards, E. Ros, and T. Savolainen, “MOJAVE: XIII. Parsec-scale AGN Jet Kinematics Analysis Based on 19 years of VLBA Observations at 15 GHz,” Astron. J., vol. 152, p. 12, July 2016. [32] E. Angelakis, L. Fuhrmann, N. Marchili, L. Foschini, I. Myserlis, V. Karamanavis, S. Komossa, D. Blinov, T. P. Krichbaum, A. Siev16

ers, H. Ungerechts, and J. A. Zensus, “Radio jet emission from GeVemitting narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies,” Astron. Astrophys., vol. 575, p. A55, Mar. 2015. [33] A. L¨ahteenm¨aki, E. J¨arvel¨a, T. Hovatta, M. Tornikoski, D. L. Harrison, M. L´opez-Caniego, W. Max-Moerbeck, M. Mingaliev, T. J. Pearson, V. Ramakrishnan, A. C. S. Readhead, R. A. Reeves, J. L. Richards, Y. Sotnikova, and J. Tammi, “37 GHz observations of narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies,” Astron. Astrophys. (accepted), p. arXiv:1703.10365, 2017. [34] A. Caccianiga, S. Ant´on, L. Ballo, L. Foschini, T. Maccacaro, R. Della Ceca, P. Severgnini, M. J. March˜a, S. Mateos, and E. Sani, “WISE colours and star formation in the host galaxies of radio-loud narrow-line Seyfert 1,” Mon. Not. R. Soc. Astron., vol. 451, pp. 1795–1805, Aug. 2015. [35] A. Olgu´ın-Iglesias, J. K. Kotilainen, J. Le´on Tavares, V. Chavushyan, and C. A˜ norve, “Evidence of bar-driven secular evolution in the gammaray narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxy FBQS J164442.5+261913,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 467, pp. 3712–3722, May 2017. [36] F. D’Ammando, J. A. Acosta-Pulido, A. Capetti, C. M. Raiteri, R. D. Baldi, M. Orienti, and C. Ramos Almeida, “Uncovering the host galaxy of the γ-ray-emitting narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxy FBQS J1644+2619,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 469, pp. L11–L15, July 2017. [37] H. Zhou, T. Wang, W. Yuan, H. Shan, S. Komossa, H. Lu, Y. Liu, D. Xu, J. M. Bai, and D. R. Jiang, “A Narrow-Line Seyfert 1-Blazar Composite Nucleus in 2MASX J0324+3410,” Astrophys. J., vol. 658, pp. L13–L16, Mar. 2007. [38] S. Ant´on, I. W. A. Browne, and M. J. March˜a, “The colour of the narrow line Sy1-blazar 0324+3410,” Astron. Astrophys., vol. 490, pp. 583–587, Nov. 2008. 17

[39] T. S. Hamilton and L. Foschini, “Gamma-ray Bright Narrow Line Seyfert 1s: Their Host Galaxies and Origin,” in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts #220, vol. 220 of American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, p. 335.07, May 2012. [40] J. Le´on Tavares, J. Kotilainen, V. Chavushyan, C. A˜ norve, I. Puerari, I. Cruz-Gonz´alez, V. Pati˜ no-Alvarez, S. Ant´on, A. Carrami˜ nana, L. Carrasco, J. Guichard, K. Karhunen, A. Olgu´ın-Iglesias, J. Sanghvi, and J. Valdes, “The Host Galaxy of the Gamma-Ray Narrow-line Seyfert 1 Galaxy 1H 0323+342,” Astrophys. J., vol. 795, p. 58, Nov. 2014. [41] J. K. Kotilainen, J. Le´on-Tavares, A. Olgu´ın-Iglesias, M. Baes, C. An´orve, V. Chavushyan, and L. Carrasco, “Discovery of a Pseudobulge Galaxy Launching Powerful Relativistic Jets,” Astrophys. J., vol. 832, p. 157, Dec. 2016. [42] M. Berton, A. Caccianiga, L. Foschini, B. M. Peterson, S. Mathur, G. Terreran, S. Ciroi, E. Congiu, V. Cracco, M. Frezzato, G. La Mura, and P. Rafanelli, “Compact steep-spectrum sources as the parent population of flat-spectrum radio-loud narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies,” Astron. Astrophys., vol. 591, p. A98, June 2016. [43] Berton M and et al., “An orientation-based unification of young jetted active galactic nuclei,” in Quasars at All Cosmic Epochs (M D’Onofrio, D Dultzin, A del Olmo, and P Marziani, eds.), p. to be published, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Science, 2017. [44] S. Mathur, “Narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies and the evolution of galaxies and active galaxies,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 314, pp. L17–L20, June 2000. [45] M. S. Shaw, R. W. Romani, G. Cotter, S. E. Healey, P. F. Michelson, A. C. S. Readhead, J. L. Richards, W. Max-Moerbeck, O. G. King, and 18

W. J. Potter, “Spectroscopy of Broad-line Blazars from 1LAC,” Astrophys. J., vol. 748, p. 49, Mar. 2012. [46] L. Foschini, M. Berton, A. Caccianiga, S. Ciroi, V. Cracco, B. M. Peterson, E. Angelakis, V. Braito, L. Fuhrmann, L. Gallo, D. Grupe, E. J¨arvel¨a, S. Kaufmann, S. Komossa, Y. Y. Kovalev, A. L¨ahteenm¨aki, M. M. Lisakov, M. L. Lister, S. Mathur, J. L. Richards, P. Romano, A. Sievers, G. Tagliaferri, J. Tammi, O. Tibolla, M. Tornikoski, S. Vercellone, G. La Mura, L. Maraschi, and P. Rafanelli, “Broad-band properties of flat-spectrum radio-loud narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies,” in Proceedings 28th Texas Symposium on Relativistic Astrophysics, Geneva (Switzerland), 13-18 December 2015, p. arXiv:1602.08227, 2016. [47] P. N. Best and T. M. Heckman, “On the fundamental dichotomy in the local radio-AGN population: accretion, evolution and host galaxy properties,” Mon. Not. R. Soc. Astron., vol. 421, pp. 1569–1582, Apr. 2012. [48] L. Foschini, “The Unification of Relativistic Jets,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 28, p. 1460188, Mar. 2014. [49] L. Foschini, “γ-ray emission from Narrow-Line Seyfert 1 galaxies and implications on the jets unification,” in American Institute of Physics Conference Series (F. A. Aharonian, W. Hofmann, and F. M. Rieger, eds.), vol. 1505 of American Institute of Physics Conference Series, pp. 574– 577, Dec. 2012. [50] V. S. Paliya, M. L. Parker, A. C. Fabian, and C. S. Stalin, “Broadband Observations of High Redshift Blazars,” Astrophys. J., vol. 825, p. 74, July 2016. [51] S. Heinz and R. A. Sunyaev, “The non-linear dependence of flux on black hole mass and accretion rate in core-dominated jets,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 343, pp. L59–L64, Aug. 2003. 19

[52] M. Mo´scibrodzka, H. Falcke, and S. Noble, “Scale-invariant radio jets and varying black hole spin,” Astron. Astrophys., vol. 596, p. A13, Nov. 2016. [53] L. Foschini, Yet another introduction to relativistic astrophysics. arXiv:1703.05575, 2017. [54] A. Cavaliere and V. D’Elia, “The Blazar Main Sequence,” Astrophys. J., vol. 571, pp. 226–233, May 2002. [55] M. B¨ottcher and C. D. Dermer, “An Evolutionary Scenario for Blazar Unification,” Astrophys. J., vol. 564, pp. 86–91, Jan. 2002. [56] L. Maraschi and F. Tavecchio, “The Jet-Disk Connection and Blazar Unification,” Astrophys. J., vol. 593, pp. 667–675, Aug. 2003. [57] E. J. D. Jolley and Z. Kuncic, “Jet-enhanced accretion growth of supermassive black holes,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 386, pp. 989–994, May 2008. [58] D. B. Sanders, B. T. Soifer, J. H. Elias, G. Neugebauer, and K. Matthews, “Warm ultraluminous galaxies in the IRAS survey - The transition from galaxy to quasar?,” Astrophys. J., vol. 328, pp. L35–L39, May 1988. [59] D. B. Sanders, B. T. Soifer, J. H. Elias, B. F. Madore, K. Matthews, G. Neugebauer, and N. Z. Scoville, “Ultraluminous infrared galaxies and the origin of quasars,” Astrophys. J., vol. 325, pp. 74–91, Feb. 1988. [60] K. Belczynski, G. Wiktorowicz, C. L. Fryer, D. E. Holz, and V. Kalogera, “Missing Black Holes Unveil the Supernova Explosion Mechanism,” Astrophys. J., vol. 757, p. 91, Sept. 2012. [61] V. V. Neustroev, A. Veledina, J. Poutanen, S. V. Zharikov, S. S. Tsygankov, G. Sjoberg, and J. J. E. Kajava, “Spectroscopic evidence for 20

a low-mass black hole in SWIFT J1753.5-0127,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 445, pp. 2424–2439, Dec. 2014. [62] A. A. Zdziarski, J. Mikolajewska, and K. Belczy´ nski, “Cyg X-3: a lowmass black hole or a neutron star,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 429, pp. L104–L108, Feb. 2013. [63] A. Kreikenbohm, R. Schulz, M. Kadler, J. Wilms, A. Markowitz, C. S. Chang, B. Carpenter, D. Els¨asser, N. Gehrels, K. Mannheim, C. M¨ uller, R. Ojha, E. Ros, and J. Tr¨ ustedt, “The gamma-ray emitting radio-loud narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxy PKS 2004-447. I. The X-ray View,” Astron. Astrophys., vol. 585, p. A91, Jan. 2016. [64] R. Schulz, A. Kreikenbohm, M. Kadler, R. Ojha, E. Ros, J. Stevens, P. G. Edwards, B. Carpenter, D. Els¨asser, N. Gehrels, C. Großberger, H. Hase, S. Horiuchi, J. E. J. Lovell, K. Mannheim, A. Markowitz, C. M¨ uller, C. Phillips, C. Pl¨otz, J. Quick, J. Tr¨ ustedt, A. K. Tzioumis, and J. Wilms, “The gamma-ray emitting radio-loud narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxy PKS 2004-447. II. The radio view,” Astron. Astrophys., vol. 588, p. A146, Apr. 2016. [65] L. C. Gallo, P. G. Edwards, E. Ferrero, J. Kataoka, D. R. Lewis, S. P. Ellingsen, Z. Misanovic, W. F. Welsh, M. Whiting, T. Boller, W. Brinkmann, J. Greenhill, and A. Oshlack, “The spectral energy distribution of PKS 2004-447: a compact steep-spectrum source and possible radio-loud narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxy,” Mon. Not. R. Soc. Astron., vol. 370, pp. 245–254, July 2006. [66] S. Komossa, W. Voges, D. Xu, S. Mathur, H.-M. Adorf, G. Lemson, W. J. Duschl, and D. Grupe, “Radio-loud Narrow-Line Type 1 Quasars,” Astrophys. J., vol. 132, pp. 531–545, Aug. 2006.

21