4.7 Article

On the stability of shocks in isothermal black hole accretion discs

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 512, Issue 4, Pages 5771-5781

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stac731

Keywords

black hole physics; hydrodynamics; shock waves

Funding

  1. ARC [DP180103022, DP200102130]
  2. Australian Research Council [DP200102130] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates shocks in a thin isothermal black hole accretion flow and finds that the inner shock is always unstable while the outer shock is always stable. The growth/decay rates of perturbations depend on an effective potential and the incoming-outgoing flow difference at the shock location. A prescription of accretion regimes in terms of angular momentum and black hole radius is provided, with unstable outer shocks being implied in much of the parameter space when accounting for viscous angular momentum dissipation.
Most black holes possess accretion discs. Models of such discs inform observations and constrain the properties of the black holes and their surrounding medium. Here, we study shocks in a thin isothermal black hole accretion flow. Modelling infinitesimal viscosity allows the use of multiple-scales matched asymptotic methods. We thus derive the first explicit calculations of isothermal shock stability. We find that the inner shock is always unstable, and the outer shock is always stable. The growth/decay rates of perturbations depend only on an effective potential and the incoming-outgoing flow difference at the shock location. We give a prescription of accretion regimes in terms of angular momentum and black hole radius. Accounting for viscous angular momentum dissipation implies unstable outer shocks in much of parameter space, even for realistic viscous Reynolds numbers of the order approximate to 10(20).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available