Cited by 122Astrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research

Sagittarius A* Polarization: No Advection-dominated Accretion Flow, Low Accretion Rate, and Nonthermal Synchrotron Emission

Open access
Agol, Eric·2000·The Astrophysical Journal

Abstract

The recent detection of polarized radiation from Sgr A* requires a nonthermal electron distribution for the emitting plasma. The Faraday rotation measure must be small, placing strong limits on the density and magnetic field strength. We show that these constraints rule out advection-dominated accretion flow models. We construct a simple two-component model that can reproduce both the radio-to-millimeter spectrum and the polarization. This model predicts that the polarization should rise to nearly 100% at shorter wavelengths. The first component, possibly a black hole-powered jet, is compact, low density, and self-absorbed near 1 mm with ordered magnetic field, relativistic Alfvén speed, and a nonthermal electron distribution. The second component is poorly constrained, but may be a convection-dominated accretion flow with ~ 10 -9 M ☉ yr -1 , in which feedback from accretion onto the black hole suppresses the accretion rate at large radii. The black hole shadow should be detectable with submillimeter VLBI.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/312818

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Different theoretical models for the accretion flow produce an accretion rate in the range of 10^-9-10^-8 M⊙/yr.

    “Different theoretical models for the accretion flow 9 produce an accretion rate in the range of 10 -9 -10 -8 M ⊙ yr -1 (Agol 2000; Quataert & Gruzinov 2000; Yuan et al. 2004; Marrone et al. 2007; Sharma et al. 2007).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Agol, E.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Agol, Eric
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Published
2000-08-01
Volume
538
Issue
2
Pages
L121-L124
ISSN
0004-637X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2062803596
Cited by
122
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
7.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Astrophysical Journal (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysical Phenomena and Observations
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Astrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Pulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Keywords
Sgr A*, advection-dominated accretion flow, nonthermal electron distribution, synchrotron radiation, Faraday rotation, accretion rate, black hole shadow, two-component model

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review