Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-5xszh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-27T17:30:36.527Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Dynamics of radiatively inefficient flows accreting onto radiatively efficient black hole objects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2006

Daniel Proga*
Affiliation:
Department Physics, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA email: dproga@physics.unlv.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

I present results from numerical simulations of gas dynamics outside luminous accretion disks in active galactic nuclei. The gas, gravitationally captured by a super massive black hole, can be driven away by the energy and momentum of the radiation emitted during black hole accretion. Assuming axisymmetry, I study how the mass accretion and outflow rates, and the flow dynamics respond to changes in radiation heating relative to radiation pressure.

I find that for a 108 M⊙ black hole with the accretion luminosity of 0.6 of the Eddington luminosity the flow settles into a steady state and has two components: (1) an equatorial inflow and (2) a bipolar inflow/outflow with the outflow leaving the system along the disk rotational axis. The inflow is a realization of a Bondi–like accretion flow. The second component is an example of a non-radial accretion flow which becomes an outflow once it is pushed close to the rotational axis where thermal expansion and radiation pressure accelerate it outward.

The main result of this preliminary work is that although the above two-component solution is robust, its properties are sensitive to the geometry and spectral energy distribution of the radiation field.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2007

References

Arav, N. & Li, Z. Y. 1994, ApJ, 427, 700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Begelman, M. C., McKee, C. F. & Shields, G. A. 1983, 271, 30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castor, J. I., Abbott, D. C., & Klein, R. I. 1975, ApJ, 195, 157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciotti, L. & Ostriker, J. P. 1997, ApJ, 487, L105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciotti, L. & Ostriker, J. P. 2001, ApJ, 551, 131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., Di Matteo, T., Martini, P.Robertson, B. & Springel, V. 2005, ApJ, 630, 705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, A. 2003, ApJ, 596, L27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, N., Quataert, E. & Thompson, T. A. 2005, ApJ, 618, 569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostriker, E. C., McKee, C. F. & Klein, R. I. 1991, ApJ, 377, 5930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Proga, D. & Kallman, T. R. 2002, ApJ, 565, 455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Proga, D. & Kallman, T. R. 2004, ApJ, 616, 688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Proga, D., Stone, J. M. & Kallman, T. R. 2000, ApJ, 543, 686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sazonov, S. Y., Ostriker, J. P., Ciotti, L. & Sunyaev, R. A. 2005, MNRAS, 358, 168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shlosman, I., Vitello, P. A. & Shaviv, G. 1985, ApJ, 294, 96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Springel, V., Di Matteo, T. & Hernquist, L. 2005, ApJ, 620, L79CrossRefGoogle Scholar