Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 74 references

Time-Dependent Cosmic Ray Halos from Bursty Star Formation and Active Galactic Nuclei: Semi-Analytic Formalism and Galaxy Formation Implications

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Time-dependent injection from bursty star formation or episodic black hole accretion substantially alters cosmic-ray pressure in the outer halos of massive galaxies, and a normalized shifted-Gaussian solution captures the effect.

desk verdict A clean analytic extension to time-dependent CR injection, with the simulation validation as the main soft spot. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.02697 v2 pith:NXMQALMC submitted 2025-09-02 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE

Sam B. Ponnada This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.HE
keywords cosmicrayfeedbackgalaxyhaloscircumgalacticmediumAGNburstystarformationtransportsemi-analyticmodelsCR-MHDsimulations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper relaxes the steady-state assumption in models of cosmic-ray feedback and asks what happens when cosmic rays are injected in bursts, by a star-forming galaxy or by an episodically accreting black hole. It argues that the resulting cosmic-ray pressure profiles in the outer halos of massive galaxies, around and beyond the virial radius, are shallower and more extended than steady-state solutions predict. The central tool is a semi-analytic, energy-conserving shifted-Gaussian approximation to the spherical diffusion-advection equation. The paper shows that this approximation tracks exact numerical solutions and a full cosmological magnetohydrodynamic simulation to within a factor of a few at large radii, while the common steady-state effective-diffusion approximation misses features there. If this is right, sub-grid cosmic-ray feedback models that assume steady state will misplace both pressure and pressure gradients in halo outskirts.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the normalized shifted-Gaussian Green's function (Eq. 6), an approximate solution to the spherical diffusion-advection equation (Eq. 3) for constant effective diffusion coefficient $\kappa_{\rm eff}$ and constant effective streaming or advection speed $v_{\rm eff}$. The shift $r-v_{\rm eff}t'$ carries shells outward while diffusion smears them; a time-dependent normalization factor $A(t)$ is fixed by requiring the approximate kernel to conserve total injected cosmic-ray energy, correcting the overestimate the shifted Gaussian would otherwise make at small radii. Around this kernel the paper builds a finite-volume numerical solver for Eq. 3 and uses it to check the semi-analytic formula. The same kernel is what lets the paper evaluate arbitrary injection histories cheaply, and it is the piece that steady-state $\kappa_{\rm eff}\propto r$ sub-grid treatments lack.

What would settle it

Observe the cosmic-ray pressure profile of a massive galaxy halo with a well-measured bursty star-formation and black-hole accretion history at several redshifts from $z\sim2$ to $z\sim0.5$, using diffuse radio and X-ray emission, and compare the shape and normalization of the outer profile with the time-dependent prediction. If the steady-state $\kappa_{\rm eff}\propto r$ profile fits equally well at all epochs, or if the effective speed inferred from different snapshots disagrees by more than a factor of several, the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that time-dependent injection, not just the transport coefficients, controls where cosmic-ray energy ends up in a galaxy's halo. For a single burst, the pressure is a Gaussian shell whose width grows as the square root of time since injection; for an arbitrary history, the profile is the convolution of that kernel with the injection rate. When an effective outflow or streaming speed $v_{\rm eff}$ is included, the paper writes the profile as a normalized shifted Gaussian (Eq. 6), which conserves injected energy by construction. Compared with a single burst at $z\sim 3$, a realistic or bursty accretion history boosts pressure at $r\lesssim 100$ kpc by late-time injection and flattens the outer profile, so the steady-state scalings $P_{\rm CR}\propto r^{-1}$ (diffusion) and $P_{\rm CR}\propto r^{-2}$ (advection) misrepresent radii beyond the effective travel distance $v_{\rm eff}\tau$. The paper validates this against a cosmological CR-MHD zoom-in simulation at $z=1.299$, finding that the time-dependent model matches the volume-weighted pressure at $r\gtrsim R_{\rm vir}$ within a factor of a few using a constant $v_{\rm eff}=650$ km s$^{-1}$, while the steady-state $\kappa_{\rm eff}\sim r$ model misses outer-halo features by orders of magnitude.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes that cosmic-ray transport through a halo follows one spherical diffusion-advection equation with a constant effective diffusion coefficient and a constant effective outflow speed, tangled magnetic fields, and no cooling or hadronic losses, and the validation fixes the outflow speed by hand to match one simulation snapshot.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Pressure profiles in halo outskirts should be flatter than steady-state models predict whenever injection has declined or varied over the past several gigayears, so diffuse radio and X-ray halos around massive galaxies become probes of integrated injection history.
  • The degeneracy between diffusion-like and streaming/advection-like transport, exact in steady state, is broken by time dependence: bursts leave bumps and sharp gradient features at radii set by the travel distance rather than by the diffusion coefficient alone.
  • Sub-grid cosmic-ray feedback implementations that assume steady state will over-predict pressure inside the effective travel radius and under-predict or miss the extended tail beyond it, which can shift where cosmic-ray-driven winds are launched.
  • According to the paper, cosmic-ray pressure can be dynamically relevant well outside the virial radius of group-mass halos, with consequences for matter clustering, weak lensing, and other large-scale observables.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the validation is a single snapshot, an equally good fit could come from a different combination of injection history and effective speed; comparing two snapshots of the same halo at different redshifts would separate the two and is a natural first test.
  • The model's no-loss assumption should matter most in dense inner regions: if hadronic losses are significant there, the inner-halo boost from late-time injection would shrink, while the outer-halo flattening would survive, so radial profiles separate the two regimes.
  • The same kernel could be adapted to anisotropic or time-varying transport by letting the effective speed run with radius or time, and to non-zero calorimetric fractions by adding an exponential loss factor, though the paper does not do this.
  • The resemblance the paper notes to Odd Radio Circles points to a testable survey prediction: after a strong, recent accretion episode, a massive galaxy should develop an edge-brightened diffuse radio ring at a few hundred kiloparsecs on roughly the travel-time scale, with its rarity set by the balance between diffusion and streaming.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents a semi-analytic and numerical framework for the time-dependent evolution of cosmic ray (CR) pressure in spherical galaxy halos, driven by time-variable injection from star formation and AGN accretion. The authors solve a spherically symmetric diffusion-advection equation for CR pressure with effective coefficients kappa_eff and v_eff, giving Green's function solutions in three limits: pure diffusion, streaming/advection-only, and combined diffusion plus streaming/advection. They show that time-dependent injection flattens CR pressure profiles at large radii compared with steady-state expectations, and that this behavior can be captured by a normalized shifted-Gaussian approximation. They validate the approximate and numerical solutions against each other, and then compare against one snapshot of a FIRE-3 CR-MHD cosmological zoom-in simulation of a massive halo, finding factor-of-few agreement at r greater than about R_vir for a chosen v_eff = 650 km/s, while a steady-state kappa_eff proportional to r approximation misses outer-halo features. The paper concludes with implications for sub-grid CR feedback models and a speculative connection to Odd Radio Circles.

Significance. If the central claim holds, this paper provides a fast, flexible semi-analytic tool for exploring CR transport parameter space and demonstrates that time-dependent injection, rather than steady-state transport, can substantially alter CR pressure in the outer CGM of massive galaxies. The Section II derivation is clean, the finite-volume numerical scheme in Section III is described in enough detail to be credible, and the qualitative conclusions within the stated simplified model are believable. The main weakness is the validation against the full simulation: the good match in Figure 7 is based on a single snapshot, with v_eff tuned after the fact, so the claim that the formalism 'captures' time-dependent behavior of full CR-MHD simulations is not yet established out of sample.

major comments (2)
  1. [IV, Fig. 7] The validation of the central claim is not an out-of-sample test. The injection histories are taken from the same FIRE-3 simulation being compared, v_eff = 650 km/s is selected after inspecting the target profile, and only the z = 1.299 snapshot is shown. A single epoch with a tuned effective speed cannot distinguish a genuinely time-dependent transport feature from a coincidental match, because a steady-state model with a different effective speed could likely also be tuned to factor-of-few agreement at that one epoch. To support the abstract's claim that the formalism 'captures' time dependence, the authors should present predictions at two or more additional epochs (or a second halo) computed with the same fixed v_eff and kappa_eff, and quantify agreement against both the time-dependent model and a re-tuned steady-state model at each epoch.
  2. [II.C, Eq. (6)] The energy-normalization of the shifted-Gaussian solution is described imprecisely. As written, the definition of g0(r,t') omits the exponential kernel and the t'^{-3/2} factor, and the expression for A(t) has inconsistent dimensions. Since subsequent figures (Fig. 4, Fig. 7) rely on this normalization, please give the fully explicit normalized kernel and state the integration limits used for A(t) in all figures.
minor comments (5)
  1. [II.B, Eq. (5)] The predicted scaling P_CR proportional to r^{-2+xi} following Eq. (5) should be derived explicitly. With \dot{E}_{CR} ~ t^{-xi} measured in cosmic time, the characteristic solution gives P_CR proportional to r^{-2} (t - r/v_eff)^{-xi}, whose local slope is -2 + xi (r/(v_eff t)) / (1 - r/(v_eff t)), not a global power law r^{-2+xi}. Please clarify the regime in which the stated scaling applies and define xi accordingly.
  2. [IV, Fig. 7 caption] The caption for Figure 7 contains a garbled steady-state line: 'kappa_eff = 1029 r 0.5 kpc cm s^{-1}' does not clearly match the steady-state kappa_eff ~ r formulation discussed in the text. Please correct this expression.
  3. [I, II] The virial radius R_vir is used throughout but never explicitly defined; please state the definition or reference used for R_vir of the 10^13 solar mass halo.
  4. [III.A, Fig. 4] The semi-analytic solutions in Figure 4 are said to slightly overestimate the numerical solutions at intermediate radii, but no quantitative error metric is given; a brief statement of typical fractional differences would help readers judge the claimed accuracy.
  5. [V.B] The speculation connecting the modeled outer-halo CR pressure features to Odd Radio Circles is clearly labeled as speculative, but it would benefit from a statement of the relevant timescales and whether the modeled features are expected to survive until z ~ 0.2-0.6.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the time-dependent CR pressure results are derived from the stated transport equation and independently specified injection histories; the Figure 7 comparison is explicitly a fit, not a prediction by construction.

full rationale

The derivation chain in Sections II and III is self-contained: Equations 4, 5, and 6 are Green's-function and method-of-characteristics solutions to Equation 3 for prescribed effective transport coefficients (kappa_eff, veff) and source histories E_dot(t), and the paper validates the approximate Equation 6 against direct numerical solutions of Equation 3 (Figs. 2 and 4) without using the target pressure profile as an input. The central qualitative claims about bursty or declining injection flattening outer-halo CR pressure profiles follow analytically from the model equations and do not reduce to any fitted quantity. The only circularity-adjacent passage is the Figure 7 benchmark, where the paper states that profiles 'can be well fit to within a factor of a few' for some chosen veff and selects v_eff = 650 km/s after seeing the simulation snapshot. Because the paper explicitly labels this a fit, uses the simulation's injection histories as inputs rather than fitting to the output profile, and does not present the agreement as an out-of-sample prediction, this is a validation limitation rather than a definitional reduction. Self-citations (e.g., Hopkins et al. 34) are used for context and sub-grid formalism, not as the load-bearing justification for the time-dependent solutions. No equation is equivalent to its input by construction, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model rests on effective transport parameters (kappa_eff, v_eff) that are unknown and chosen by hand, an assumed injection efficiency epsilon_CR,BH = 3e-4, and a loss-free spherical treatment. These are honest simplifications, but they mean the quantitative predictions are conditional on the adopted transport and source assumptions.

free parameters (4)
  • epsilon_CR,BH = 3e-4 (assumed, not fitted)
    Fixed fraction of AGN accretion energy converted to CRs; chosen from prior literature, sets absolute normalization of all pressure profiles, but qualitative time-dependence comparisons use the same value across cases.
  • kappa_eff = 1e29, 1e30, 1e31 cm^2/s (surveyed); 1e29 cm^2/s in validation
    Effective diffusion coefficient, uncertain by orders of magnitude; hand-selected range in Figures 2-6 and a chosen constant in Figure 7 to match the simulation.
  • v_eff = 30-300 km/s in survey; 650 km/s in validation
    Effective advection plus streaming speed, varied by hand; the agreement of the simplified model with the full CR-MHD simulation in Figure 7 is achieved by choosing v_eff = 650 km/s.
  • r_st = 10 kpc (chosen)
    Fixed streaming radius used in the steady-state kappa_eff proportional to r comparison in Figures 5 and 6; it determines where the streaming/diffusion degeneracy is assumed to hold.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption CR transport in the CGM can be described by a spherically symmetric diffusion-advection equation with effective, spatially and temporally constant transport parameters kappa_eff and v_eff.
    Invoked in Section II, Eq. 3, and used for all semi-analytic and numerical solutions; real CGM transport may be spatially/temporally variable and anisotropic.
  • domain assumption Magnetic fields in the CGM are isotropically tangled on large scales, so non-radial streaming components average out and radial effective streaming is a good approximation.
    Section II, paragraph after Eq. 3; this justifies replacing the full transport with radial advection plus diffusion.
  • domain assumption CR losses (hadronic, Coulomb, ionization, adiabatic) are negligible in the CGM (f_cal = 0), so the pressure evolution is loss-free.
    Section IV states f_cal = 0 and only optional streaming loss at v_A = 30 km/s; real calorimetric losses in the inner CGM are order-unity corrections, acknowledged in the text.
  • domain assumption A spatially and temporally constant power-law scattering rate nu_CR gives a constant kappa_eff for GeV CRs in the FIRE-3 simulation used for comparison.
    Section IV, footnote 3; the simulation evolves spectrally-resolved CRs, but the comparison uses a single unweighted kappa_eff for the GeV bin.
  • standard math Standard Green's function solutions and the method of characteristics apply to the linear transport equation.
    Used in Eqs. 4-6; standard result.
  • domain assumption The empirical Trinity average BH accretion history and the FIRE-3 simulation BH/SF histories are representative of massive halo injection histories.
    Figures 1-3; results depend on the chosen source histories, though the qualitative conclusions are robust across the two histories shown.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Time-Dependent Cosmic Ray Halos from Bursty Star Formation and Active Galactic Nuclei: Semi-Analytic Formalism and Galaxy Formation Implications." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NXMQALMC

@misc{pith2026250902697,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Time-Dependent Cosmic Ray Halos from Bursty Star Formation and Active Galactic Nuclei: Semi-Analytic Formalism and Galaxy Formation Implications},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NXMQALMC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.02697}
}
abstract

Cosmic ray (CR) feedback in galaxy evolution has seen a theoretical resurgence in the past decade, but significant uncertainties remain in CR transport through the interstellar and circum-galactic media (ISM and CGM). While several works indicate CR effects may be notable in both star-forming and quenched massive galaxies, modeling the vast CR transport parameter space currently allowed by observations is computationally restrictive to survey. Analytic treatments of CR feedback have provided useful insights to potential ramifications in different regimes, but have relied on time-steady assumptions which may not well characterize CR effects at different cosmic epochs and galaxy mass scales. We present semi-analytic approximations and numerical solutions describing the time-dependent evolution of CR pressure in the CGM under simplified assumptions, which allow for quick evaluation of the vast allowable CR transport parameter space. We demonstrate that time-dependent injection from bursty star formation and/or episodic black hole accretion can substantially alter CR pressure profiles, particularly in the outer halos of massive galaxies ($\gtrsim R_{vir}$). Finally, we benchmark the approximate solutions from our semi-analytic formalism against a cosmic ray-magnetohydrodynamic (CR-MHD) cosmological zoom-in galaxy simulation directly modeling the CR scattering rate and emergent transport in full generality, highlighting the validity of our approach. We conclude by motivating careful consideration of time-dependent ``softening" effects in sub-grid routines for CR feedback, particularly for use in large cosmological volumes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.02697 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Reference CR energy injection histories used for our model comparisons in this study. The simulation injec￾tion histories from BH and stellar contributions (black dashed and blue dotted) are taken from a fully dynamical CR-MHD simulation of a massive halo from the FIRE-3 simulation suite [25, 49]. The empirically motivated injection history (solid line) follows the average black hole accretion rate for Mz=0 halo = 1… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Exact diffusion-only (Eq. 4) and approximate semi-analytic diffusion+streaming/advection (Eq. 6) solutions for PCR in a massive galaxy halo (Mz=0 halo = 1013M⊙) at z = 0.8. Left: Solutions for a single, strongly peaked δ-function injection at z ∼ 3 with ϵCR,BH = 3 × 10−4 . Center: Solutions for a peaked but slowly decaying CR injection history for a massive halo taken from an empirical model for the average black ho… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Analytic streaming/advection-only solutions (Eq. 5) for PCR in galactic halos at z = 0.8. Left: Solutions for a peaked but slowly decaying CR injection history for a massive halo (Mhalo = 1013M⊙ taken from an empirical model for the average black hole accretion rate [50], with ϵCR,BH = 3 × 10−4 . Purple solid, blue dashed, and green dot-dashed line represent different values of constant veff. Black dotted guide line… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Exact numerical and approximate semi-analytic solutions for PCR (Eq. 3) in galactic halos at z = 0.8. Left: Solutions for a peaked but slowly decaying CR injection history for a massive halo taken from an empirical model for the average black hole accretion rate [50], …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Numerical solutions for PCR (Eq. 3) in a massive galactic halo (Mz=0 halo = 1013M⊙) at z = 1.299. Solid multi-color lines show the solutions assuming κeff = κ∥,ISM r 10 kpc (valid in steady-state for continuous injection) with ‘advection/streaming-like’ behavior subsum…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Validation of our simplified modeling of PCR against a fully dynamic, cosmological zoom-in simulation of a massive galactic halo (Mz=0 halo = 1013M⊙) at z = 1.299. The line for a well-fit constant κeff and veff model is shown in dashed blue, and the full simulation res…

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ruszkowski and C

    M. Ruszkowski and C. Pfrommer, Astronomy and Astrophysics Review 31, 4 (2023), aDS Bibcode: 2023A&ARv..31....4R

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    I. S. Butsky and T. R. Quinn, The Astrophysical Journal 868, 108 (2018), aDS Bibcode: 2018ApJ...868..108B

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    P. F. Hopkins, T. K. Chan, S. Garrison-Kimmel, S. Ji, K. Y. Su, C. B. Hummels, D. Kereˇ s, E. Quataert, and C. A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, Monthly Notices of the Royal As- tronomical Society , 3465 (2020), arXiv: 1905.04321 Pub- lisher: Oxford University Press

    arXiv 2020

  4. [5]

    Pfrommer, M

    C. Pfrommer, M. Werhahn, R. Pakmor, P. Girichidis, and C. M. Simpson, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- nomical Society 515, 4229 (2022)

    work page 2022

  5. [6]

    Thomas, C

    T. Thomas, C. Pfrommer, and R. Pakmor, Monthly No- tices of the Royal Astronomical Society521, 3023 (2023), aDS Bibcode: 2023MNRAS.521.3023T

    work page 2023

  6. [7]

    Modak, E

    S. Modak, E. Quataert, Y.-F. Jiang, and T. A. Thompson, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomi- cal Society 524, 6374 (2023), aDS Bibcode: 2023MN- RAS.524.6374M

    work page 2023

  7. [8]

    Rodr´ ıguez Montero, S

    F. Rodr´ ıguez Montero, S. Martin-Alvarez, A. Slyz, J. De- vriendt, Y. Dubois, and D. Sijacki, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 530, 3617 (2024), pub- lisher: OUP ADS Bibcode: 2024MNRAS.530.3617R

    work page 2024

  8. [9]

    S. Ji, T. K. Chan, C. B. Hummels, P. F. Hopkins, J. Stern, D. Keres, E. Quataert, C. A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, and N. Murray, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronom- ical Society 496, 4221 (2020), arXiv: 1909.00003 Pub- lisher: Oxford University Press

    arXiv 2020

Show all 74 references
  1. [10]

    I. S. Butsky, D. B. Fielding, C. C. Hayward, C. B. Hum- mels, T. R. Quinn, and J. K. Werk, The Astrophysical Journal 903, 77 (2020), publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 2020ApJ...903...77B

    2020

  2. [11]

    T. Buck, C. Pfrommer, R. Pakmor, R. J. Grand, and V. Springel, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 497, 1712 (2020), publisher: Oxford University Press

    2020

  3. [12]

    I. S. Butsky, J. K. Werk, K. Tchernyshyov, D. B. Field- ing, J. Breneman, D. R. Piacitelli, T. R. Quinn, N. N. Sanchez, A. Cruz, C. B. Hummels, J. N. Burchett, and M. Tremmel, The Astrophysical Journal 935, 69 (2022), aDS Bibcode: 2022ApJ...935...69B

    2022

  4. [13]

    S. B. Ponnada, G. V. Panopoulou, I. S. Butsky, P. F. Hopkins, S. R. Loebman, C. Hummels, S. Ji, A. Wetzel, C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, and C. C. Hayward, Monthly No- tices of the Royal Astronomical Society516, 4417 (2022), aDS Bibcode: 2022MNRAS.516.4417P

    2022

  5. [14]

    S. B. Ponnada, I. S. Butsky, R. Skalidis, P. F. Hopkins, G. V. Panopoulou, C. Hummels, D. Kereˇ s, E. Quataert, C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, and K.-Y. Su, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 530, L1 (2024), pub- lisher: OUP ADS Bibcode: 2024MNRAS.530L...1P

    2024

  6. [15]

    C. M. Harrison, Nature Astronomy 1, 1 (2017), number: 7 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2017

  7. [16]

    D. J. Croton, V. Springel, S. D. M. White, G. De Lu- cia, C. S. Frenk, L. Gao, A. Jenkins, G. Kauffmann, J. F. Navarro, and N. Yoshida, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 365, 11 (2006), aDS Bib- code: 2006MNRAS.365...11C

    2006

  8. [17]

    Schaye, R

    J. Schaye, R. A. Crain, R. G. Bower, M. Furlong, M. Schaller, T. Theuns, C. Dalla Vecchia, C. S. Frenk, I. G. McCarthy, J. C. Helly, A. Jenkins, Y. M. Rosas- Guevara, S. D. M. White, M. Baes, C. M. Booth, P. Camps, J. F. Navarro, Y. Qu, A. Rahmati, T. Sawala, P. A. Thomas, and...

    2015

  9. [18]

    Pillepich, V

    A. Pillepich, V. Springel, D. Nelson, S. Genel, J. Naiman, R. Pakmor, L. Hernquist, P. Torrey, M. Vogelsberger, R. Weinberger, and F. Marinacci, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 473, 4077 (2018), aDS Bib- code: 2018MNRAS.473.4077P

    2018

  10. [19]

    T. M. Heckman and P. N. Best, Annual Review of As- tronomy and Astrophysics 52, 589 (2014), aDS Bibcode: 2014ARA&A..52..589H

    2014

  11. [20]

    M. J. Hardcastle and J. H. Croston, New Astronomy Re- views 88, 101539 (2020), arXiv:2003.06137 [astro-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  12. [21]

    K.-Y. Su, P. F. Hopkins, G. L. Bryan, R. S. Somerville, C. C. Hayward, D. Angl´ es-Alc´ azar, C.-A. Faucher- Gigu` ere, S. Wellons, J. Stern, B. A. Terrazas, T. K. Chan, M. E. Orr, C. Hummels, R. Feldmann, and D. Kereˇ s, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 507, ...

    2021

  13. [22]

    K.-Y. Su, G. L. Bryan, C. C. Hayward, R. S. Somerville, P. F. Hopkins, R. Emami, C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, E. Quataert, S. B. Ponnada, D. Fielding, and D. Kereˇ s, Unraveling Jet Quenching Criteria Across L* Galaxies and Massive Cluster Ellipticals (2023), publication Title: ar...

    2023

  14. [23]

    K.-Y. Su, G. L. Bryan, P. F. Hopkins, P. Natarajan, S. B. Ponnada, R. Emami, and Y. S. Lu, Modeling Cosmic Rays at AGN Jet-Driven Shock Fronts (2025), arXiv:2502.00927 [astro-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  15. [24]

    Wellons, C.-A

    S. Wellons, C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, P. F. Hopkins, E. Quataert, D. Angl´ es-Alc´ azar, R. Feldmann, C. C. Hay- ward, D. Kereˇ s, K.-Y. Su, and A. Wetzel, Monthly No- tices of the Royal Astronomical Society520, 5394 (2023)

    2023

  16. [25]

    Byrne, C.-A

    L. Byrne, C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, S. Wellons, P. F. Hop- kins, D. Angl´ es-Alc´ azar, I. Sultan, N. Wijers, J. Moreno, and S. Ponnada, The Astrophysical Journal 973, 149 (2024), publisher: The American Astronomical Society

    2024

  17. [26]

    S. B. Ponnada, R. K. Cochrane, P. F. Hopkins, I. S. Butsky, S. Wellons, N. N. Sanchez, C. Hummels, Y. S. Lu, D. Kereˇ s, and C. C. Hayward, The Astrophysical Journal 980, 135 (2025), publisher: The American Astronomical Society

    2025

  18. [27]

    E. G. Zweibel, Physics of Plasmas 20, 055501 (2013)

    2013

  19. [28]

    effective

    demonstrated using order-of-magnitude analytic ar- guments for plausible “effective” CR diffusion/streaming speeds and fractional injection of AGN accretion energy into CRs, CRs may drive outflows on larger scales (be- yond>∼ Rvir) from group-mass halos (Mhalo∼ 1013 M⊙). arXiv...

    2025 arXiv

  20. [29]

    F. M. Ipavich, The Astrophysical Journal 196, 107 (1975), publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 1975ApJ...196..107I

    1975

  21. [30]

    Quataert and P

    E. Quataert and P. F. Hopkins, Cosmic Ray Feedback in Massive Halos: Implications for the Distribution of Baryons (2025), publication Title: arXiv e-prints ADS Bibcode: 2025arXiv250201753Q

    2025

  22. [31]

    Quataert, Y.-F

    E. Quataert, Y.-F. Jiang, and T. A. Thompson, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 510, 920 14 (2022), publisher: OUP ADS Bibcode: 2022MN- RAS.510..920Q

    2022

  23. [32]

    Quataert, T

    E. Quataert, T. A. Thompson, and Y.-F. Jiang, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 510, 1184 (2022), aDS Bibcode: 2022MNRAS.510.1184Q

    2022

  24. [33]

    P. F. Hopkins, E. Quataert, S. B. Ponnada, and E. Silich, Cosmic Rays Masquerading as Hot CGM Gas: An Inverse-Compton Origin for Diffuse X-ray Emission in the Circumgalactic Medium (2025), arXiv:2501.18696 [astro-ph]

    2025

  25. [34]

    I. S. Butsky, S. Nakum, S. B. Ponnada, C. B. Hummels, S. Ji, and P. F. Hopkins, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 521, 2477 (2023), aDS Bibcode: 2023MNRAS.521.2477B

    2023

  26. [35]

    A. L. Muratov, D. Kereˇ s, C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, P. F. Hopkins, E. Quataert, and N. Murray, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society454, 2691 (2015), pub- lisher: OUP ADS Bibcode: 2015MNRAS.454.2691M

    2015

  27. [36]

    P. F. Hopkins, I. S. Butsky, S. Ji, and D. Kereˇ s, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 522, 2936 (2023)

    2023

  28. [37]

    Ulrich, L

    M.-H. Ulrich, L. Maraschi, and C. M. Urry, Annual Re- view of Astronomy and Astrophysics35, 445 (1997), aDS Bibcode: 1997ARA&A..35..445U

    1997

  29. [38]

    Sparre, C

    M. Sparre, C. C. Hayward, R. Feldmann, C.-A. Faucher- Gigu` ere, A. L. Muratov, D. Kereˇ s, and P. F. Hopkins, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 466, 88 (2017), publisher: OUP ADS Bibcode: 2017MN- RAS.466...88S

    2017

  30. [39]

    Kempski and E

    P. Kempski and E. Quataert, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 514, 657 (2022), aDS Bib- code: 2022MNRAS.514..657K

    2022

  31. [40]

    P. F. Hopkins, J. Squire, I. S. Butsky, and S. Ji, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 10.1093/mnras/stac2909 (2022), aDS Bibcode: 2022MN- RAS.tmp.2710H

    2022 doi

  32. [41]

    I. S. Butsky, P. F. Hopkins, P. Kempski, S. B. Ponnada, E. Quataert, and J. Squire, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 528, 4245 (2024), aDS Bibcode: 2024MNRAS.528.4245B

    2024

  33. [42]

    D. B. Fielding, B. Ripperda, and A. A. Philippov, The Astrophysical Journal 949, L5 (2023), publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 2023ApJ...949L...5F

    2023

  34. [43]

    P. F. Hopkins, J. Squire, T. K. Chan, E. Quataert, S. Ji, D. Kereˇ s, and C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 501, 4184 (2021), aDS Bibcode: 2021MNRAS.501.4184H

    2021

  35. [44]

    Kempski, D

    P. Kempski, D. Li, D. B. Fielding, E. Quataert, E. S. Phinney, M. W. Kunz, D. L. Jow, and A. A. Philippov, A Unified Model of Cosmic Ray Propagation and Radio Extreme Scattering Events from Intermittent Interstellar Structures (2024), publication Title: arXiv e-prints ADS Bibc...

    2024

  36. [45]

    Farcy, J

    M. Farcy, J. Rosdahl, Y. Dubois, J. Blaizot, and S. Martin-Alvarez, Monthly Notices of the Royal As- tronomical Society 513, 5000 (2022), aDS Bibcode: 2022MNRAS.513.5000F

    2022

  37. [46]

    T. K. Chan, D. Kereˇ s, P. F. Hopkins, E. Quataert, K. Y. Su, C. C. Hayward, and C. A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 488, 3716 (2019), aDS Bibcode: 2019MNRAS.488.3716C

    2019

  38. [47]

    Arnaud, G

    M. Arnaud, G. W. Pratt, R. Piffaretti, H. B¨ ohringer, J. H. Croston, and E. Pointecouteau, Astronomy & As- trophysics 517, A92 (2010), publisher: EDP Sciences

    2010

  39. [48]

    P. F. Hopkins, I. S. Butsky, G. V. Panopoulou, S. Ji, E. Quataert, C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, D. Kereˇ s, P. F. Hop- kins, I. S. Butsky, G. V. Panopoulou, S. Ji, E. Quataert, C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, and D. Kereˇ s, MNRAS000, 0 (2022), arXiv: 2109.09762

    2022 arXiv

  40. [49]

    P. F. Hopkins, A. Wetzel, C. Wheeler, R. Sanderson, M. Y. Grudi´ c, O. Sameie, M. Boylan-Kolchin, M. Orr, X. Ma, C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, D. Kereˇ s, E. Quataert, K.-Y. Su, J. Moreno, R. Feldmann, J. S. Bullock, S. R. Loebman, D. Angl´ es-Alc´ azar, J. Stern, L. Necib, C. R. C...

    2023

  41. [50]

    P. F. Hopkins, T. K. Chan, J. Squire, E. Quataert, S. Ji, D. Kereˇ s, and C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 501, 3663 (2021), aDS Bibcode: 2021MNRAS.501.3663H

    2021

  42. [51]

    Hairer and G

    E. Hairer and G. Wanner, in Solving Ordinary Differen- tial Equations II: Stiff and Differential-Algebraic Prob- lems, edited by E. Hairer and G. Wanner (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1996) pp. 40–50

    1996

  43. [52]

    Zhang, P

    H. Zhang, P. Behroozi, M. Volonteri, J. Silk, X. Fan, P. F. Hopkins, J. Yang, and J. Aird, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 518, 2123 (2023), publisher: OUP ADS Bibcode: 2023MNRAS.518.2123Z

    2023

  44. [53]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haber- land, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Pe- terson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, S. J. van der Walt, M. Brett, J. Wilson, K. J. Millman, N. Mayorov, A. R. J. Nelson, E. Jones, R. Kern, E. Larson, C. J. Carey, ˙I. Po- lat, Y...

    2020

  45. [54]

    Hairer and G

    E. Hairer and G. Wanner, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 111, 93 (1999)

    1999

  46. [55]

    Girichidis, C

    P. Girichidis, C. Pfrommer, R. Pakmor, and V. Springel, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 510, 3917 (2022), publisher: OUP ADS Bibcode: 2022MN- RAS.510.3917G

    2022

  47. [56]

    Reichherzer, A

    P. Reichherzer, A. F. A. Bott, R. J. Ewart, G. Gre- gori, P. Kempski, M. W. Kunz, and A. A. Schekochi- hin, Nature Astronomy 9, 438 (2025), aDS Bibcode: 2025NatAs...9..438R

    2025

  48. [57]

    Huang and S

    X. Huang and S. W. Davis, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 511, 5125 (2022), aDS Bibcode: 2022MNRAS.511.5125H

    2022

  49. [58]

    B. C. Lacki and T. A. Thompson, The Astro- physical Journal 717, 196 (2010), aDS Bibcode: 2010ApJ...717..196L

    2010

  50. [59]

    R. P. Norris, H. T. Intema, A. D. Kapi´ nska, B. S. Korib- alski, E. Lenc, L. Rudnick, R. Z. E. Alsaberi, C. Ander- son, G. E. Anderson, E. Crawford, R. Crocker, J. En- glish, M. D. Filipovi´ c, T. J. Galvin, A. M. Hopkins, N. Hurley-Walker, S. Inoue, K. Luken, P. J. Macgre- g...

    2021 arXiv

  51. [60]

    Armillotta, E

    L. Armillotta, E. C. Ostriker, C.-G. Kim, and Y.-F. Jiang, Cosmic-Ray Acceleration of Galactic Outflows in Multiphase Gas (2024), arXiv:2401.04169 [astro-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  52. [61]

    Yamasaki, K

    S. Yamasaki, K. C. Sarkar, and Z. Li, Are Odd Radio Cir- cles virial shocks around massive galaxies? Implications for cosmic-ray diffusion in the circumgalactic medium (2023), arXiv:2309.17451 [astro-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  53. [62]

    We leave an extensive survey of injection + transport conditions to future work (Butsky & Ponnada et al

    – indeed heuristically the features we see naturally emerge from bursty SF/AGN injection transported out via streaming/advection in Figure 7 bear resemblance to such structures at large radii, albeit at different redshift. We leave an extensive survey of injection + transport ...

  54. [63]

    R. P. Norris, E. Crawford, and P. Macgregor, Galaxies 9, 83 (2021), arXiv:2111.01269 [astro-ph.GA]. 15

    2021 arXiv

  55. [64]

    Lin and H

    Y.-H. Lin and H. Y. K. Yang, AGN jet-inflated bubbles as possible origin of odd radio circles (2024), publication Ti- tle: arXiv e-prints ADS Bibcode: 2024arXiv240108207L

    2024

  56. [65]

    DES Collaboration, A. Amon, D. Gruen, M. Troxel, N. MacCrann, S. Dodelson, A. Choi, C. Doux, L. Secco, S. Samuroff, E. Krause, J. Cordero, J. Myles, J. DeRose, R. Wechsler, M. Gatti, A. Navarro-Alsina, G. Bernstein, B. Jain, J. Blazek, A. Alarcon, A. Fert´ e, P. Lemos, M. Rave...

    2022

  57. [66]

    Dav´ e, D

    R. Dav´ e, D. Angl´ es-Alc´ azar, D. Narayanan, Q. Li, M. H. Rafieferantsoa, and S. Appleby, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 486, 2827 (2019), aDS Bib- code: 2019MNRAS.486.2827D

    2019

  58. [67]

    Y. Ni, T. Di Matteo, S. Bird, R. Croft, Y. Feng, N. Chen, M. Tremmel, C. DeGraf, and Y. Li, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 513, 670 (2022)

    2022

  59. [68]

    N. A. Henden, E. Puchwein, S. Shen, and D. Sijacki, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 479, 5385 (2018), arXiv:1804.05064 [astro-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  60. [69]

    Feldmann, E

    R. Feldmann, E. Quataert, C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, P. F. Hopkins, O. C ¸ atmabacak, D. Kereˇ s, L. Bassini, M. Bernardini, J. S. Bullock, E. Cenci, J. Gensior, L. Liang, J. Moreno, and A. Wetzel, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 522, 3831 (2023), pub- lisher: ...

    2023

  61. [70]

    Ramesh, D

    R. Ramesh, D. Nelson, and P. Girichidis, IllustrisTNG + Cosmic Rays with a Simple Transport Model: From Dwarfs to L $ˆ\star$ Galaxies (2024), aDS Bibcode: 2024arXiv240918238R

    2024

  62. [71]

    Sharma, E

    K. Sharma, E. Krause, V. Ravi, R. Reischke, P. R. S, and L. Connor, A hydrodynamical simulations-based model that connects the FRB DM–redshift relation to suppres- sion of the matter power spectrum via feedback (2025), arXiv:2504.18745 [astro-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  63. [72]

    Zhang, J

    Y. Zhang, J. Comparat, G. Ponti, A. Meloni, K. Nandra, F. Haberl, N. Locatelli, X. Zhang, J. Sanders, X. Zheng, A. Liu, P. Popesso, T. Liu, N. Truong, A. Pillepich, P. Predehl, and M. Salvato, The Hot Circum-Galactic Medium in the eROSITA All Sky Survey I. X-ray Surface Bright...

    2024 arXiv

  64. [73]

    R. J. van Weeren, F. de Gasperin, H. Akamatsu, M. Br¨ uggen, L. Feretti, H. Kang, A. Stroe, and F. Zan- danel, Space Science Reviews 215, 16 (2019)

    2019

  65. [74]

    Kempski, D

    P. Kempski, D. B. Fielding, E. Quataert, A. K. Gal- ishnikova, M. W. Kunz, A. A. Philippov, and B. Rip- perda, Cosmic ray transport in large-amplitude tur- bulence with small-scale field reversals , Tech. Rep. (2023) publication Title: arXiv e-prints ADS Bibcode: 2023arXiv2304...

    2023

  66. [75]

    Lemoine, Journal of Plasma Physics 89, 175890501 (2023), aDS Bibcode: 2023JPlPh..89e1701L

    M. Lemoine, Journal of Plasma Physics 89, 175890501 (2023), aDS Bibcode: 2023JPlPh..89e1701L

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.