Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 0905.4294

Feedback from central black holes in elliptical galaxies. II: Can purely mechanical energy feedback models work?

Min-Su Shin·Jeremiah P. Ostriker·Luca Ciotti
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

By using high-resolution 1D hydrodynamical simulations, we investigate the effects of purely mechanical feedback from super massive black holes (SMBHs) in the evolution of elliptical galaxies for a broad range of feedback efficiencies and compare the results to four major observational constraints. In particular, we focus on 1) the central black hole to stellar mass ratio of the host galaxy, 2) the lifetime of the luminous quasar phase, 3) the mass of stars formed in the host galaxy within the last Gyr, and 4) the X-ray luminosity of the hot diffuse gas. As a result, we try to pin down the most successful range of mechanical feedback efficiencies. We find that while low feedback efficiencies result in too much growth of the SMBH, high efficiencies totally blow out the hot interstellar gas, and the models are characterized by very low thermal X-ray luminosity well below the observed range. The net lifetime of the quasar phase is strongly coupled to the mass ratio between SMBH and its host galaxy, while the X-ray luminosity is generally correlated to the recent star formation within the last Gyr. When considering the popularly adopted model of the constant feedback efficiency, the feedback energy deposited into the ambient medium should be more than 0.01% of the SMBH accretion energy to be consistent with the SMBH mass to stellar mass ratio in the local universe. Yet, the X-ray luminosity of the hot gas favors about 0.005% of the accretion energy as the mechanical AGN feedback energy. We conclude that the purely mechanical feedback mode is unlikely to be simultaneously compatible with all four observable tests, even allowing a broad range of feedback efficiencies, and that including both radiative and mechanical feedback together may be a solution to comply the observational constraints. [abridged]

Explore related subjects

astro-ph.GA

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Min-Su Shin, Jeremiah P. Ostriker, Luca Ciotti. 2010-01-22. Feedback from central black holes in elliptical galaxies. II: Can purely mechanical energy feedback models work?. https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637x%2F711%2F1%2F268

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The Entangling of Supernova Feedback Impacts with Coarsening Simulation Resolution

It is often understood that supernova (SN) feedback in galaxies is responsible for regulating star formation (SF) and generating gaseous outflows. However, a detailed look at the small-scale effects of SNe on the interstellar medium (ISM) in simulations shows that the macroscopic processes of SF suppression and outflow generation proceed in distinct channels. We demonstrate this finding in two independent simulations of isolated dwarf galaxies with very high (m_gas ~ Msun) numerical resolution, LYRA and RIGEL. Our findings suggest that the macroscopic effect of a given SN on the galaxy is best predicted by its local density. Outflows are driven by SNe in diffuse regions expanding to their cooling radii on large (~kpc) scales, while dense SF regions are disrupted in a localized (~pc) manner. However, these separate feedback channels are only distinguishable at very high resolutions capable of following mass scales \lesssim 10^2 \msun. When averaging on coarser scales, ISM densities are greatly mis-estimated, and variations between different SF and SNe-affected regions are severely washed out. It therefore cannot be __self-consistently__ determined, from coarse-resolution information __alone__, (1) whether a SN tends to contribute to outflows or direct SF suppression, and (2) the rate of SF in a given region. In particular, commonly used parameters in coarse-resolution (subgrid) models, such as the SN cooling radius and SF density threshold, may require more detailed treatments informed by high-resolution studies.

astro-ph.GA↗
arXiv2026

Computational advances and challenges in simulations of turbulence and star formation

We review recent advances in the numerical modeling of turbulent flows and star formation. An overview of the most widely used simulation codes and their core capabilities is provided. We then examine methods for achieving the highest-resolution magnetohydrodynamical turbulence simulations to date, highlighting challenges related to numerical viscosity and resistivity. State-of-the-art approaches to modeling gravity and star formation are discussed in detail, including implementations of star particles and feedback from jets, winds, heating, ionization, and supernovae. We review the latest techniques for radiation hydrodynamics, including ray tracing, Monte Carlo, and moment methods, with comparisons between the flux-limited diffusion, moment-1, and variable Eddington tensor methods. The final chapter summarizes advances in cosmic-ray transport schemes, emphasizing their growing importance for connecting small-scale star formation physics with galaxy-scale evolution.

astro-ph.GA↗
arXiv2026

How significant is the lensing interpretation of GW231123?

GW231123 is one of the most unusual gravitational-wave (GW) events, with exceptionally large inferred masses and near-extremal spins, offering an opportunity to test whether propagation effects contribute to these properties. We therefore examine whether the data support wave-optics microlensing embedded in a strong-lensing galaxy, whose detection becomes increasingly likely as observations accumulate, whether this interpretation can explain these properties, and how significant the preference remains under detector noise and waveform systematics. We compare six hypotheses: unlensed, isolated point mass, and embedded point-mass (EPM) and binary-lens (EB) effective models in Type-I (minimum) and Type-II (saddle) macro images. The EB Type-I model is most favored. For the most accurate waveform model NRSur7dq4, it gives $\log_{10}B^{\rm EB-I}_{\rm U}=2.60$, versus $0.89$ for Type II, indicating sensitivity to macro-image geometry. Within Type I, however, the binary improves over the point mass by only $\log_{10}B^{\rm EB-I}_{\rm EPM-I}=0.16$ and $Δ\ln\mathcal{L}_{\max}=0.56$, providing no clear evidence for structure beyond a single effective perturber. Moreover, under embedded lensing, waveform-template discrepancies and inferred masses and spins are reduced. However, real O4a backgrounds from numerical-relativity injections show that the apparent lensing evidence is sensitive to waveform systematics and realistic detector noise: although the commonly used waveform IMRPhenomXPHM gives the largest Bayes factor, $\log_{10}B^{\rm EB-I}_{\rm U}=4.52$, it is less exceptional relative to its own background, with a false-alarm probability of $6.5$--$8\%$, whereas NRSur7dq4 gives only $2$--$3\%$. Thus, waveform systematics can amplify apparent lensing evidence, but GW231123 remains an intriguing lensing candidate.

astro-ph.GA↗