Astron. Astrophys. 337, 69-79 (1998)
5. Discussion
5.1. Hotspot advance speeds and source age
The fact that the A2 and C2 gaussian components are compact and lie
at the leading edges of the minilobe emission regions strongly argues
that they should be interpreted as hotspots where two oppositely
directed jets terminate (see Fig. 1a,b). In Sect. 4.2 we
considered the relative separation rates of the different components
of 0710+439, and found the highest significance detection to be that
of the apparent separation rate of A2-C2 at .
Since CSOs are dominated by unbeamed emission we expect for a sample
selected on total flux density that the angle between the jet axis and
the sky plane is about . Such an orientation for
0710+439 is compatible with the hotspots appearing at the extreme ends
of the radio emission and not superimposed on the diffuse minilobe,
and is also consistent with a hotspot-core arm-length ratio which is
close to one (Readhead et al 1996c). Given such an orientation we
expect that the average of the two hotspot advance speeds through the
external medium should be only slightly larger than that estimated
from the observed separation rate (i.e. approximately
).
Of prime astrophysical importance is the estimated age of 0710+439.
A simple estimate based on dividing the overall projected size of
0710+439 by the measured projected hotspot separation rate gives
yrs, implying that 0710+439 is a very young
radio source. In assessing the reliability of this estimate we must be
aware that what have actually measured (see Sect. 4.2) is the
instantaneous rate of separation of the two hotspots at the present
epoch; not directly the mean rate of increase of size of the whole
source. Since hotspots are nearly always observed, as in 0710+439, to
lie close to the ends of the lobes in which they are embedded the mean
expansion speed of the whole source must equal the mean separation
rate of the hotspots. However there are several mechanisms which would
cause the instantaneous hotspot advance speeds to vary about
their mean values. Variations in the external density due to
encounters with clouds is one obvious mechanism. Another possibility
is the so-called 'dentist's drill' phenomena (Scheuer 1982) in which
the position of hotspot's working surface moves around either due to
jet precession initiated at the central engine or hydrodynamic
instabilities acting on the incoming jet. In this model the hotspot
executes a corkscrew like-path in space and the mean rate of advance
is significantly smaller than the total instantaneous speed of the
hotspot. Related effects show up in recent three-dimensional numerical
jet simulations (Norman 1996). These simulations also show variations
in hotspot pressures and hence advance speed due to the effects of
vortex shedding and cocoon turbulence acting on the incoming jet which
in turn effect the jet collimation and the area over which the thrust
of the jet is deposited. Due to such effects the simulations predict
that instantaneous forward hotspot advance speeds (i.e. in the
direction of the jet axis) can vary by factors of order two (Norman
1996).
Whatever the physical mechanism that is acting there is empirical
evidence that in 0710+439 instantaneous and mean hotspot speeds are
different. In 0710+439 as in other CSOs the distances from the two
hotspots to the core are very similar, i.e. the ratio of these
distances (the `arm length ratio') is only 0.95 (Readhead et al.
1996c) which implies the mean advance speeds of the two hotspots have
been the same averaged over the history of the source. In contrast as
discussed in Sect 4.4. it is probable that the present instantaneous
advance speeds for A2 and C2 are different from each other. Below we
discuss which of the possible mechanisms is operating in 0710+439 and
its impact on our age estimate.
The simplest explanation for the instantaneous speed variations is
that C2 is presently interacting with a dense cloud while A2 advances
rapidly through an intercloud medium. If around 100 such clouds have
been encountered by each hotspot there would be enough cloud
encounters to explain why the arm length ratio is close to unity, yet
few enough to explain the constant velocity of A2 over 13 years. If
cloud collisions were the reason for hotspot speed variations then our
best estimate for the source age would depend inversely on the
fraction of time, f , the hotspots spent transversing the
intercloud medium. We can argue that since we apparently detect such
an advance in the first CSO for which we have more than a decade of
monitoring f is unlikely to be less than 0.1, and so we obtain
an upper age limit of 11 000 yrs. Arguing against such a cloud
mechanism operating is the expectation that if C2 were embedded within
a dense cloud one might reasonably expect its pressure to
increase in response to the higher density, in fact we observe
that the pressure in C2 is less than in A2. In addition we believe it
is unlikely (although still possible) that the 'dentist's drill'
effect is a significant cause of the apparent speed variations since
as we discuss in Sect 4.1. the change in the apparent A2-C2 vector is
mainly in its length and not its orientation. Except for certain
unlikely orientations of the source and its hotspots in space one
would expect hotspots effected by the dentist drill phenomena to show
significant side-to-side motions.
Our favoured explanation for hotspot speed differences in 0710+439
is that these are simply related to differences in pressures of the
hotspots and hence in the corresponding ram pressure velocities
through a smooth external medium. Such pressure variations and
resulting speed variations are as we have noted predicted by recent
three-dimensional numerical simulations (Norman 1996). Assuming that
A2 is close to its equipartition pressure (supported by the analysis
of the frequency of its Synchrotron Self Absorbed turnover, Conway et
al. 1992) and that the source is orientated not too far from the sky
plane then ram pressure arguments imply an external density of 1.83
cm-3. This value is similar to that
estimated in the CSO 2352+495 (3 - 10 cm-3, Readhead et al.
1996a) and is consistent with what is expected for the NLR intercloud
medium. The data are consistent with C2 having the same external
density as A2 and a lower advance speed simply as a consequence of its
lower pressure. Since the equipartition pressure of C2 is 0.3 of A2,
the expected advance speed for the same external density is 0.55 of
A2, given the A2-C2 separation rate this implies a C2 advance speed of
, which is within of the
observed B2-C2 separation rate of . If hotspot
pressure variations are the cause of the hotspot speed variations then
the observed differences in pressure between the two hotspots within
individual CSOs of between 4 and 6 (see Readhead et al 1996b) imply,
assuming the same external densities around each hotspot, that hotspot
speed variations vary over a factor of about two within each source.
We therefore expect ratios between instantaneous and mean separation
rates to be of the same order and hence estimate an upper limit to the
age of 0710+439 of approximately 3000yrs.
Given our age estimates and estimates of the jet thrust (Readhead
et al. 1996a) we can compare the mechanical luminosity required to
drive the hot spots forward with the radio luminosity and jet power.
For an age of 1100yrs the combined mechanical luminosity of the two
hotspots is erg s-1, while the radio
luminosity of the two hotspots is about erg
s-1. Following the arguments used in Readhead et al.
(1996a) from the measured hotspot sizes and pressures the upper limit
on the total power supplied by the jets is erg
s-1. A lower limit on the total jet power can be obtained
by adding together the radio power and mechanical work. The total jet
luminosity is (for h=0.6) therefore in the range
erg s-1 to erg
s-1 and the efficiency of conversion of jet energy to radio
emission is between 8% and 31%. In contrast for classical FRII
(Fanaroff & Riley 1974) radio galaxies we estimate upper limits on
hotspot radiative efficiencies of a few percent by comparing total
radio luminosities to estimates of the jet luminosities given by
Rawlings & Sanders (1991).
5.2. Implications for CSO models
Our best estimate for the mean hotspot advance speed in 0710+439,
given our observations, i.e , is somewhat larger
than that estimated by other authors for the CSO population in general
(e.g. Readhead et al. 1996b estimates ). If
hotspot pressures and hence advance speeds vary with time it might be
that the true mean advance speeds in 0710+439 are up to a factor of
two less than our best estimate (see Sect. 5.1) but a difference
between predictions and observations still remains. One possibility,
given that one would expect a range in properties from CSO to CSO, is
that 0710+439 lies at the extreme end of the population and is growing
faster than the typical CSO. However, Conway et al. (1994) tentatively
detected, based on two global 5 GHz epochs, mean hotspot advance
velocities of in another CSO, 0108+388. A
similar rate of advance was also detected by Taylor et al (1996) in
the same source. Recently a mean hotspot advance speed of
has been confirmed in 0108+388 by three epoch
global 5 GHz observations (Owsianik et al. 1998). Conway et al. (1994)
also detected a hotspot advance speed of 0.065
in the object 2021+614 which may also be a CSO. Finally for the CSO
2352+495 Readhead et al. (1996a) gives age estimates of 1200 - 1800
yrs based on synchrotron ageing and 1500 - 7500 yrs from energy supply
arguments. For this source of size 120 pc an age
near the lower end of the allowed range, i.e. 1500 yrs gives a mean
hotspot advance speed of .
The lower estimate of hotspot advance speeds for the CSO population
in general ( ) made by Readhead et al. (1996a)
was based on a two part argument, namely: i) it was argued that
hotspot pressures adjusted to the external density so that hotspot
advance speeds are constant. Therefore advance speeds of high pressure
hotspots in young sources transversing the dense ISM are the same as
in the classical double sources; ii) Classical double sources, based
primarily on observations of Cygnus A, have advance speeds of
.
The first part of the above argument was based on detailed
observations of three CSOs, in which the arm-length ratios are close
to one and therefore the mean advance speeds for the two hotspots must
be the same, despite in each case the pressures of the two hotspots
being quite different. Readhead et al. (1996b) explicitly assumed that
the characteristics of the hotspots are constant in time and that the
pressure ratios measured now are typical of the whole history of these
sources. It follows that hotspot advance speeds must be independent of
hotspot pressure. It was postulated that this could be achieved if a
mechanism existed where the hotspot pressure always adjusted to the
external density so that ram pressure balance gave a constant advance
speed.
In contrast 3-D numerical simulations (Norman 1996) indicate that
due to hydrodynamic effects individual hotspots can rapidly vary their
pressures around some mean value as they move outward, with
corresponding variations in their ram-pressure advance speeds.
Differences in pressures between hotspots seen in maps may therefore
be just temporary features of sources. Arm length ratios close to one
are simply explained if external densities and mean hotspot pressures
on each side of the source are the same, so that mean advance speeds
are the same. It follows that no special mechanism is required which
adjusts hotspot pressure to external density in order to explain the
observations. The main motivation which led Readhead et al. (1996b) to
propose a universal constant hotspot advance speed for both CSOs and
classical sources is therefore removed.
In contrast to Readhead et al.'s (1996b) observational approach
Begelman (1996) has calculated the evolution expected for a simple
theoretical model of a source with an over-pressurised cocoon and a
hotspot whose mean pressure is a fixed ratio to that of the cocoon. In
this model the advance speed depends on the density versus distance of
the external medium , such that the advance
speed where l is the source size and
. For n in the plausible range 1.5 to 2.0, then
is in the range -0.17 to 0.0. It is therefore
possible that hotspot advance speeds in CSOs are somewhat faster than
in classical sources. Since CSOs are 1000 times smaller than classical
sources if n were 1.5, we expect advance speeds which are about 3
times faster.
Readhead et al. (1996a) estimated advance speeds in classical
sources to be , mainly based on Cygnus A
results. However it appears that Cygnus A is an unusual source in that
it lies in an unusually dense environment (Barthel & Arnaud 1996,
Reynolds & Fabian 1996). In other FRII's external densities are
estimated to be 30 times smaller (Rawlings & Saunders 1991) yet
hotspot pressures are only 3 times smaller (Readhead et al. 1996b),
implying that typical ram pressure advance speeds in classical sources
might be closer to . Hotspot advance speeds can
also be estimated independently from electron spectral ageing
arguments and from arm-length asymmetries in classical double sources.
Using the first method the data of Rawlings & Saunders (1991)
indicate advance speeds of ; other studies
indicate velocities which are greater than
(e.g. Liu et al. 1992). Such estimates might however be larger then
the real advance speeds since strictly speaking they measure the sum
of the advance speed of the hotspot and the speed of the backflow from
it (see Liu et. al. 1992 and Scheuer 1995). This would be consistent
with the fact that for the same sample of sources observations of
jet/counter-jet side arm length ratios indicate (Scheuer 1995) smaller
advance speeds of . The present data on hotspot
advance speeds does not yet yield a define conclusion but certainly
allows the possibility that these speeds could be a factor of three
larger than estimated by Readhead et al. (1996a).
Combining a typical FRII advance speed of say
with the probable weak evolution of hotspot
advance speeds with source size we find that mean hotspot advance
speeds in CSOs can plausibly be or larger. We
conclude that the size of the measured hotspot speed in 0710+439 is
compatible with the predictions of theoretical models. Such fast
speeds imply that sources have only a short lifetime in the CSO phase.
The fact that up to 10% of sources in flux limited samples at 5 GHz
are CSOs therefore means either that i) not all CSOs evolve into
classical sources; some exhaust their fuel before reaching 100kpc size
(Readhead et al. 1994) or ii) there is strong luminosity evolution in
their radio emission. We favour the second explanation, strong
luminosity evolution of the required amount to explain the source size
distribution is in fact predicted by the theoretical models. For
instance the Begelman (1996) model predicts a radio luminosity
proportional to approximately assuming a
constant jet mechanical power. For the weakly evolving hotspot advance
velocity predicted for an external density of the form
, the predicted number of sources in each decade
of size then exactly matches the observations (Begelman 1996). As
first noted by Readhead et al. (1996a) for 2352+495, and as we find
for 0710+439 (see Sect. 5.1), the limits on the radiative efficiency
for CSOs compared to classical sources empirically demonstrate that
the expected luminosity evolution does in fact occur and with a
magnitude (a factor of 30 from CSO to classical sources) consistent
with that expected by theory. Given this efficiency evolution one
would expect 0710+439 to evolve into a source of radio luminosity
W Hz-1, i.e. a weak FRII. We
conclude that CSOs are probably very young extragalactic radio sources
and that furthermore they probably evolve into lower luminosity FRII
classical double radio sources.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1998
Online publication: August 6, 1998
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |