The DOI matches its Crossref record.
FEEDBACK FROM CENTRAL BLACK HOLES IN ELLIPTICAL GALAXIES: TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODELS COMPARED TO ONE-DIMENSIONAL MODELS
Open accessAbstract
We extend the black hole (BH) feedback models of Ciotti, Ostriker, and Proga to two dimensions. In this paper, we focus on identifying the differences between the one-dimensional and two-dimensional hydrodynamical simulations. We examine a normal, isolated L * galaxy subject to the cooling flow instability of gas in the inner regions. Allowance is made for subsequent star formation, Type Ia and Type II supernovae, radiation pressure, and inflow to the central BH from mildly rotating galactic gas which is being replenished as a normal consequence of stellar evolution. The central BH accretes some of the infalling gas and expels a conical wind with mass, momentum, and energy flux derived from both observational and theoretical studies. The galaxy is assumed to have low specific angular momentum in analogy with the existing one-dimensional case in order to isolate the effect of dimensionality. The code then tracks the interaction of the outflowing radiation and winds with the galactic gas and their effects on regulating the accretion. After matching physical modeling to the extent possible between the one-dimensional and two-dimensional treatments, we find essentially similar results in terms of BH growth and duty cycle (fraction of the time above a given fraction of the Eddington luminosity). In the two-dimensional calculations, the cool shells forming at 0.1–1 kpc from the center are Rayleigh–Taylor unstable to fragmentation, leading to a somewhat higher accretion rate, less effective feedback, and a more irregular pattern of bursting compared with the one-dimensional case.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Hot Accretion Flows Around Black Holes
Yuan, F., & Narayan, R. (2014) · Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-141003 · Cited by 1,529
Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instability induced flow, turbulence, and mixing. I
Zhou, Y. (2017) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.005 · Cited by 743
Theoretical Challenges in Galaxy Formation
Naab, T., & Ostriker, J. P. (2017) · Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-040019 · Cited by 722
Self-citationActive galactic nuclei: what’s in a name?
Padovani, P., Alexander, D. M., Assef, R. J., De Marco, B., Giommi, P., Hickox, R. C., Richards, G. T., Smolčić, V., Hatziminaoglou, E., Mainieri, V., et al. (2017) · The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review · doi:10.1007/s00159-017-0102-9 · Cited by 666
Observations of feedback from radio-quiet quasars – II. Kinematics of ionized gas nebulae
Liu, G., Zakamska, N. L., Greene, J. E., Nesvadba, N. P. H., & Liu, X. (2013) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1755 · Cited by 349
Metadata
- Authors
- Novak, G. S., Ostriker, J. P., & Ciotti, L.
- Venue
- The Astrophysical Journal
- Publisher
- American Astronomical Society
- Published
- 2011-07-26
- Volume
- 737
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 26
- ISSN
- 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4357
- OpenAlex
- W2085584359
- Cited by
- 264
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: FEEDBACK FROM CENTRAL BLACK HOLES IN ELLIPTICAL GALAXIES: TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODELS COMPARED TO ONE-DIMENSIONAL MODELS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0004-637x/737/1/26
- The paper
- Novak, G. S., Ostriker, J. P., & Ciotti, L. (2011). FEEDBACK FROM CENTRAL BLACK HOLES IN ELLIPTICAL GALAXIES: TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODELS COMPARED TO ONE-DIMENSIONAL MODELS. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637x/737/1/26
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.