Models for jet power in elliptical galaxies: a case for rapidly spinning black holes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The power of jets from black holes is expected to depend on both the spin of the black hole and the structure of the accretion disc in the region of the last stable orbit. We investigate these dependencies using two different physical models for the jet power: the classical Blandford–Znajek (BZ) model and a hybrid model developed by Meier. In the BZ case, the jets are powered by magnetic fields directly threading the spinning black hole while in the hybrid model, the jet energy is extracted from both the accretion disc as well as the black hole via magnetic fields anchored to the accretion flow inside and outside the hole's ergosphere. The hybrid model takes advantage of the strengths of both the Blandford–Payne and BZ mechanisms, while avoiding the more controversial features of the latter. We develop these models more fully to account for general relativistic effects and to focus on advection-dominated accretion flows (ADAFs) for which the jet power is expected to be a significant fraction of the accreted rest mass energy. We apply the models to elliptical galaxies, in order to see if these models can explain the observed correlation between the Bondi accretion rates and the total jet powers. For typical values of the disc viscosity parameter α∼ 0.04 –0.3 and mass accretion rates consistent with ADAF model expectations, we find that the observed correlation requires j≳ 0.9; that is, it implies that the black holes are rapidly spinning. Our results suggest that the central black holes in the cores of clusters of galaxies must be rapidly rotating in order to drive jets powerful enough to heat the intracluster medium and quench cooling flows.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".