ALMA 300 pc resolution imaging of a z=6.79 quasar: no evidence for supermassive black hole influence on the [C II] kinematics

TL;DR

This study uses high-resolution ALMA imaging to analyze a z=6.79 quasar, finding no evidence that the supermassive black hole influences the [C II] gas kinematics, suggesting the black hole may be less massive or emission peaks are offset.

Contribution

First high-resolution ALMA observations of a z=6.79 quasar showing dispersion-dominated gas kinematics with no black hole influence evidence.

Findings

[C II] emission is enclosed within 500 pc radius.

Velocity dispersion is constant at 137 km/s, indicating no central black hole influence.

Black hole mass is constrained to be less than 6.5×10^8 solar masses.

Abstract

We present Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) [C II] 158 $\mu \rm{m}$ and dust continuum observations of the $z=6.79$ quasar J0109--3047 at a resolution of $0."045$ ($\sim$300 pc). The dust and [C II] emission are enclosed within a $\sim 500\, \rm{pc}$ radius, with the central beam ($r<144\ \rm{pc}$) accounting for $\sim$25\% (8\%) of the total continuum ([C II]) emission. The far--infrared luminosity density increases radially from $\sim$5 $\times 10^{11} L_\odot\ \rm{kpc}^{-2}$ to a central value of $\sim$70 $\times 10^{11} L_\odot\ \rm{kpc}^{-2}$ (SFRD $\sim$50-700 $M_\odot\ \rm{yr}^{-1}\ \rm{kpc}^{-2}$). The [C II] kinematics are dispersion-dominated with a constant velocity dispersion of $137 \pm 6 \,\rm{km\ s}^{-1}$. The constant dispersion implies that the underlying mass distribution is not centrally peaked, consistent with the expectations of a flat gas mass profile. The lack of an upturn in velocity dispersion within the central beam is inconsistent with a black hole mass greater than $M_{\rm{BH}}<6.5\times 10^{8}\ M_\odot\ (2\sigma$ level), unless highly fine-tuned changes in the ISM properties conspire to produce a decrease of the gas mass in the central beam comparable to the black hole mass. Our observations therefore imply either that a) the black hole is less massive than previously measured or b) the central peak of the far-infrared and [C II] emission are not tracing the location of the black hole, as suggested by the tentative offset between the near-infrared position of the quasar and the ALMA continuum emission.