4.7 Article

AGN feedback and cooling flows: Problems with simple hydrodynamic models

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 645, Issue 1, Pages 83-94

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/504029

Keywords

cooling flows; galaxies : active; galaxies : formation; galaxies : jets; hydrodynamics; X-rays : galaxies : clusters

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In recent years it has become increasingly clear that active galactic nuclei, and radio galaxies in particular, have an impact on large-scale structure and galaxy formation. In principle, radio galaxies are energetic enough to halt the cooling of the virialized intracluster medium (ICM) in the inner regions of galaxy clusters, solving the cooling flow problem and explaining the high-mass truncation of the galaxy luminosity function. We explore this process through a series of high-resolution, three-dimensional hydrodynamic simulations of jetted active galaxies that act in response to cooling-mediated accretion of an ICM atmosphere. We find that our models are incapable of producing a long-term balance of heating and cooling; catastrophic cooling can be delayed by the jet action but inevitably takes hold. At the heart of the failure of these models is the formation of a low-density channel through which the jet can freely flow, carrying its energy out of the cooling core. It is possible that this failure is due to an oversimplified treatment of the fast jet (which may underestimate the dentist drill effect). However, it seems likely that additional complexity (large-angle jet precession or ICM turbulence) or additional physics (magnetohydrodynamic effects and plasma transport processes) is required to produce a spatial distribution of jet heating that can prevent catastrophic cooling. This work also underscores the importance of including jet dynamics in any feedback model, as opposed to the isotropically inflated bubble approach taken in some previous works.

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