4.7 Article

The energetics of AGN radiation pressure-driven outflows

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 476, Issue 1, Pages 512-519

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/sty236

Keywords

black hole physics; galaxies: active; galaxies: evolution

Funding

  1. University of Zurich
  2. ERC [340442, 695671]
  3. STFC [ST/M001172/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/N000927/1, ST/M001172/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The increasing observational evidence of galactic outflows is considered as a sign of active galactic nucleus (AGN) feedback in action. However, the physical mechanism responsible for driving the observed outflows remains unclear, and whether it is due to momentum, energy, or radiation is still a matter of debate. The observed outflow energetics, in particular the large measured values of the momentum ratio ((p) over dot/(L/c) similar to 10) and energy ratio ((E) over dot(k)/L similar to 0.05), seems to favour the energy-driving mechanism; and most observational works have focused their comparison with wind energy-driven models. Here, we show that AGN radiation pressure on dust can adequately reproduce the observed outflow energetics (mass outflow rate, momentum flux, and kinetic power), as well as the scalings with luminosity, provided that the effects of radiation trapping are properly taken into account. In particular, we predict a sublinear scaling for the mass outflow rate ((M) over dot proportional to L-1/2) and a superlinear scaling for the kinetic power (E) over dot(k) proportional to L-3/2), in agreement with the observational scaling relations reported in the most recent compilation of AGN outflow data. We conclude that AGN radiative feedback can account for the global outflow energetics, at least equally well as the wind energy-driving mechanism, and therefore both physical models should be considered in the interpretation of future AGN outflow observations.

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