4.7 Article

RADIATIVE MODELS OF SGR A* FROM GRMHD SIMULATIONS

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 706, 期 1, 页码 497-507

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/706/1/497

关键词

accretion, accretion disks; black hole physics; Galaxy: center; MHD; radiative transfer

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [AST 00-93091, PHY 02-05155, AST 07-09246]
  2. Richard and Margaret Romano Professorial scholarship
  3. Sony faculty fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using flow models based on axisymmetric general relativistic magnetohydrodynamics simulations, we construct radiative models for Sgr A*. Spectral energy distributions (SEDs) that include the effects of thermal synchrotron emission and absorption, and Compton scattering, are calculated using a Monte Carlo technique. Images are calculated using a ray-tracing scheme. All models are scaled so that the 230 GHz flux density is 3.4 Jy. The key model parameters are the dimensionless black hole spin a(*), the inclination i, and the ion-to-electron temperature ratio T-i/T-e. We find that (1) models with T-i/T-e = 1 are inconsistent with the observed submillimeter spectral slope; (2) the X-ray flux is a strongly increasing function of a(*); (3) the X-ray flux is a strongly increasing function of i; (4) 230 GHz image size is a complicated function of i, a(*), and T-i/T-e, but the T-i/T-e = 10 models are generally large and at most marginally consistent with the 230 GHz very long baseline interferometry (VLBI) data; (5) for models with T-i/T-e = 10 and i = 85 degrees the event horizon is cloaked behind a synchrotron photosphere at 230 GHz and will not be seen by VLBI, but these models overproduce near-infrared and X-ray flux; (6) in all models whose SEDs are consistent with observations, the event horizon is uncloaked at 230 GHz; (7) the models that are most consistent with the observations have a(*) similar to 0.9. We finish with a discussion of the limitations of our model and prospects for future improvements.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据