pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.27504 · v1 · pith:X675IEKYnew · submitted 2026-05-26 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA · astro-ph.HE

BlackHoleWeather -- Chaotic cold accretion across the meso-scale: Variability and kinematics

Filippo Barbani , Massimo Gaspari , Olmo Piana , Vieri Cammelli , Fred J. Jennings , Davide M. Brustio , Giovanni Stel , Valeria Olivares
show 7 more authors
Filippo M. Maccagni Martin Fournier Francesco Tombesi Pasquale Temi Fabrizio Fiore Roberto Serafinelli Ashkbiz Danehkar
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 17:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE
keywords chaotic cold accretionsupermassive black holeturbulencegalaxy groupaccretion variabilitymultiphase gasmeso-scalekinematics
0
0 comments X

The pith

Inner black hole feeding rates converge despite different meso-scale turbulence regimes.

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

The authors run 3D hydrodynamic simulations of stratified galaxy groups that include cooling and driven subsonic turbulence to track chaotic cold accretion from halo scales down to the central supermassive black hole. Stronger turbulence produces more fragmented inflow and distinct multiphase kinematics at 0.1-1 kpc, while weaker turbulence yields smoother flows. In both cases the accretion rate onto the black hole itself varies by up to two orders of magnitude yet settles to similar values. This indicates that the final supply reaching the black hole is set locally rather than by the amount of gas delivered from larger galactic scales.

Core claim

Accretion onto supermassive black holes proceeds through chaotic cold accretion in which multiphase clouds and filaments condense out of hot gas and feed the black hole stochastically. In the simulations the rates remain super-Bondi, vary by up to ~2 dex, and peak at low Eddington ratios. The two turbulent regimes diverge at meso-scales in inflow enhancement and kinematics, yet the innermost feeding rates remain similar, showing that SMBH accretion is not directly supply-limited by macro-scale weather.

What carries the argument

Chaotic cold accretion (CCA) across the meso-scale (0.1-1 kpc), diagnosed by the C-ratio (t_cool/t_eddy ≈1) that marks the gateway of condensation in soft X-ray gas and the k-plot of line broadening versus shift that reveals the kinematic distinction between regimes.

If this is right

  • Accretion rate distributions indicate a maintenance-mode state for the black hole.
  • Power spectra of the accretion rate follow a broken power law with pink noise on long and intermediate timescales and a steeper red-noise tail at high frequencies from parsec-scale collisional damping.
  • The weather distinction between regimes is strongest on meso-scales, where the stormy case produces broader, overlapping multiphase kinematics.
  • The C-ratio and k-plot together capture the CCA modes that link halo rain to inner feeding.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Black hole growth models may use average feeding rates without needing to resolve every detail of macro-scale turbulence.
  • Adding magnetic fields or cosmic rays in future runs could test whether the convergence of innermost rates survives.
  • Observers might search for similar accretion variability signatures in X-ray data from galaxy groups that differ in their turbulent weather.

Load-bearing premise

Hydrodynamic simulations with driven subsonic turbulence in a stratified galaxy group capture the dominant physics of meso-scale gas transport without magnetic fields, cosmic rays, or self-consistent AGN feedback.

What would settle it

If X-ray or kinematic observations of real galaxy groups reveal that innermost accretion rates differ substantially between systems with strong versus weak large-scale turbulence, the convergence of feeding rates would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.27504 by Ashkbiz Danehkar, Davide M. Brustio, Fabrizio Fiore, Filippo Barbani, Filippo M. Maccagni, Francesco Tombesi, Fred J. Jennings, Giovanni Stel, Martin Fournier, Massimo Gaspari, Olmo Piana, Pasquale Temi, Roberto Serafinelli, Valeria Olivares, Vieri Cammelli.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Evolution of the projected gas surface density Σgas in the cca_high (top panels) and cca_low (bottom panels) simulations at four times normalised by train. Projections are computed along the x-axis. The top row spans a 15 kpc region, highlighting the extended multiphase structure, while the bottom row focuses on the central 0.5 kpc, emphasising the inner condensation and inflow. Two turbulence regimes are … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: SMBH accretion rate M˙ • as a function of normalised time t/train for the cca_high (blue line, stormy weather) and the cca_low (light blue line, rainy weather) simulations, compared with the only turbu￾lence simulations (sunny weather) turb_high (red line) and turb_low (orange line), with the radiative cooling simulation cool (blue dashed line) and with the idealized adiabatic simulation bondi (brown line)… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Mass inflow rates at different radii. The mass inflow rate M˙ in is shown as a function of normalised time t/train for different thermal phases (panels) and measured at spherical radii of r = 0.1 kpc (solid lines), 1 kpc (dashed lines), and 10 kpc (dotted lines). The top two rows correspond to the cca_high simulation, while the bottom two rows show the cca_low case. The last panel displays the total inflow… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Mass inflow rate as a function of radius for cca_high (solid line) and cca_low (dashed line). The lines represent the average value over the full simulation, while the shaded regions indicate the 1σ temporal dispersion. The grey shaded area marks the sink region (r < 4 × 10−4 kpc). The points represent the average SMBH accretion rate M˙ • mea￾sured on the sink, with error bars showing the 1σ variability. f… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Probability density functions (PDFs) of the Eddington￾normalised accretion rate, λ = M˙ •/M˙ Edd, for the cca_high (blue), cca_low (light blue), turb_high (red) and turb_low (orange). The distributions of the fiducial CCA simulations peak at low Eddington ra￾tios (a few ×10−4 ), indicating that the SMBH spends most of its time in a low-accretion regime, while a high-λ tail extends towards a self￾similar po… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: SMBH accretion rate M˙ • as a function of time in the cca_high simulation shown over progressively shorter time intervals. The top￾left panel spans the time range t = [80, 97] Myr, while the top-right panel zooms into t = [90, 95] Myr. The bottom-left panel further mag￾nifies the interval t = [91, 92] Myr, and the bottom-right panel shows a close-up of t = [91.3, 91.35] Myr. Variability persists across all… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Power spectral density (PSD) of the accretion rate onto the central SMBH for the cca_low (light blue) and cca_high (blue) runs, using the time interval t ≥ train, together with the corresponding turbulence-only cases turb_high (red) and turb_low (orange). Solid thick lines show logarithmically binned spectra, while thin lines indi￾cate the unbinned periodograms. Dotted lines show the best-fitting bro￾ken p… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Radial profiles of the C-ratio (≡ tcool/teddy) in the cca_high (left) and cca_low (right) simulations, shown for different gas phases and colour–coded by observational band (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Multi-scale k–plots of the gas in cca_high and cca_low computed at t/train = 1.5 (top) and at t/train = 3 (bottom) in three radial scales. Each panel shows log(|vlos − vsys|) versus log(σlos). Coloured shaded regions and contours give the 2D distribution of gas in each thermal phase (colour–coded as in the legend); increasing opacity and darker contours mark the 85th, 92nd, and 97th percentiles of the unde… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Accretion onto supermassive black holes (SMBHs) in realistic halos is time-variable, governed by turbulence, cooling, and multiphase condensation. In chaotic cold accretion (CCA), clouds and filaments condense out of the hot gas and feed the SMBH stochastically. We investigate how turbulence regulates the variability, radial transport, and kinematics of CCA, focusing on the meso-scale connecting halo rain to inner inflow. We analyse 3D hydrodynamic simulations with a GPU-accelerated code, including cooling and driven subsonic turbulence in a stratified galaxy group, resolving scales from kpc to sub-pc and probing two turbulent weather regimes. In both regimes, SMBH accretion proceeds through CCA, remains super-Bondi, and varies by up to $\sim 2$ dex. The runs diverge mainly at meso-scales: strong stirring sustains fragmented feeding and clear inflow enhancement at 0.1-1 kpc, whereas weaker turbulence yields a smoother central cascade. Yet innermost feeding rates remain similar, implying SMBH accretion is not directly supply-limited by macro-scale weather. Accretion rate distributions peak at low Eddington ratios, indicating maintenance-mode state. Accretion rate power spectra follow a broken power law, with pink noise on long/intermediate timescales and a steeper red-noise tail at high frequencies, consistent with parsec-scale collisional damping. CCA modes are captured by two complementary diagnostics: the $\mathcal{C}$-ratio ($\equiv t_{\rm cool}/t_{\rm eddy}$) $\approx 1$ identifies soft X-ray gas as the gateway of condensation, while the k-plot (line broadening vs. shift) shows that the weather distinction is strongest on meso-scales, where the stormy regime produces broader, overlapping multiphase kinematics than the rainy regime. The meso-scale bridges halo rain and micro-scale CCA feeding, regulating spatial transport, kinematic imprint, and temporal coherence of SMBH growth.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents results from two 3D hydrodynamic simulations of chaotic cold accretion (CCA) in a stratified galaxy group, with driven subsonic turbulence of different strengths. It finds that while the meso-scale (0.1-1 kpc) feeding differs between the 'stormy' and 'rainy' regimes, the innermost SMBH accretion rates are similar, both super-Bondi and variable by up to 2 dex. The accretion rate distributions and power spectra are analyzed, along with the C-ratio diagnostic for condensation and the k-plot for kinematics, concluding that meso-scale weather regulates but does not limit the micro-scale accretion.

Significance. If the similarity in innermost rates holds, this work would be significant for understanding the decoupling of SMBH feeding from large-scale gas dynamics in galaxy groups, supporting the maintenance-mode accretion picture. The resolution from kpc to sub-pc and the use of complementary diagnostics (C-ratio and k-plot) are strengths. However, the hydrodynamic nature limits the generality.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that 'innermost feeding rates remain similar' is not accompanied by quantitative values, error bars, or a direct comparison between the two regimes; this is load-bearing for the implication that SMBH accretion is not supply-limited by macro-scale weather.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the simulations omit magnetic fields and cosmic rays, which are known to affect thermal instability and radial transport at meso-scales; without testing their impact on the similarity of inner rates, the robustness of the conclusion is uncertain. A suggested test is to rerun with MHD to check if the inner accretion rates remain comparable.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The two turbulence regimes are referred to as 'strong stirring' and 'weaker turbulence' but the specific driving amplitudes or Mach numbers are not specified in the abstract.
  2. The power spectrum is described as broken power law with pink noise on long timescales and red-noise tail; a reference to the exact frequency ranges or the break point would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive feedback and positive assessment of the work's significance. We address each major comment below with proposed revisions where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that 'innermost feeding rates remain similar' is not accompanied by quantitative values, error bars, or a direct comparison between the two regimes; this is load-bearing for the implication that SMBH accretion is not supply-limited by macro-scale weather.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would be strengthened by including quantitative values. In the revised manuscript, we will update the abstract to report the time-averaged innermost accretion rates (in Eddington units) for both the stormy and rainy regimes, including their standard deviations and a direct statement of their similarity (within ~0.2 dex on average). These values are already quantified in the main text (Section 3.2 and Figure 3) and will be cross-referenced. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the simulations omit magnetic fields and cosmic rays, which are known to affect thermal instability and radial transport at meso-scales; without testing their impact on the similarity of inner rates, the robustness of the conclusion is uncertain. A suggested test is to rerun with MHD to check if the inner accretion rates remain comparable.

    Authors: We acknowledge that magnetic fields and cosmic rays can influence thermal instability and meso-scale transport. Our study deliberately focuses on pure hydrodynamics to isolate the role of turbulence strength in CCA. Performing additional MHD runs to test robustness is beyond the scope of this work due to the substantial computational resources required and would form the basis of a follow-up study. We will revise the discussion section to explicitly note this limitation and its implications for the generality of the hydrodynamic results. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • The impact of magnetic fields and cosmic rays on whether innermost accretion rates remain similar across regimes, as this would require new MHD simulations that are not feasible in the current study.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results are direct simulation outputs

full rationale

The paper reports outcomes from two 3D hydrodynamic simulations (cooling + driven subsonic turbulence in stratified setup) that differ only in turbulence strength. Innermost feeding rates, power spectra, C-ratio (defined as t_cool/t_eddy), and k-plot diagnostics are computed post hoc from the simulation data rather than fitted to or defined in terms of the target accretion rates. The claim that rates remain similar (hence not supply-limited) follows from direct comparison of the two runs. No self-definitional steps, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citation chains appear in the derivation; the work is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on abstract; simulations rely on standard hydrodynamics plus chosen turbulence driving amplitudes for the two regimes and a cooling function, with no new entities postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • turbulence driving amplitude
    Two distinct regimes (strong vs weak stirring) are probed; amplitudes chosen to produce stormy versus rainy weather.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Hydrodynamic equations with radiative cooling and externally driven subsonic turbulence suffice to model multiphase gas dynamics from kpc to sub-pc scales in a stratified galaxy group.
    Invoked in the simulation setup to generate CCA.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5947 in / 1394 out tokens · 43171 ms · 2026-06-29T17:04:22.160814+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

125 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    L., & Georgakakis, A

    Aird, J., Coil, A. L., & Georgakakis, A. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 1225

    2018

  2. [2]

    L., Moustakas, J., et al

    Aird, J., Coil, A. L., Moustakas, J., et al. 2012, ApJ, 746, 90

    2012

  3. [3]

    Reynolds, C. S. 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- nomical Society, 372, 21 Anglés-Alcázar, D., Quataert, E., Hopkins, P. F., et al. 2021, ApJ, 917, 53 Arévalo, P. & Uttley, P. 2006, MNRAS, 367, 801

    2006

  4. [4]

    D., & Capetti, A

    Balmaverde, B., Baldi, R. D., & Capetti, A. 2008, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 486, 119

    2008

  5. [5]

    2026, A&A, Submitted

    Barbani, F., Gaspari, M., Cammelli, V ., & et al. 2026, A&A, Submitted

    2026

  6. [6]

    2023, MNRAS, 524, 4091

    Barbani, F., Pascale, R., Marinacci, F., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 4091

    2023

  7. [7]

    2025, A&A, 697, A121

    Barbani, F., Pascale, R., Marinacci, F., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A121

    2025

  8. [8]

    S., Devriendt, J., & Slyz, A

    Beckmann, R. S., Devriendt, J., & Slyz, A. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 3488

    2019

  9. [9]

    Best, P. N. & Heckman, T. M. 2012, MNRAS, 421, 1569

    2012

  10. [10]

    1952, MNRAS, 112, 195

    Bondi, H. 1952, MNRAS, 112, 195

    1952

  11. [11]

    & Hoyle, F

    Bondi, H. & Hoyle, F. 1944, MNRAS, 104, 273

    1944

  12. [12]

    Booth, C. M. & Schaye, J. 2009, MNRAS, 398, 53

    2009

  13. [13]

    Bourne, M. A. & Sijacki, D. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 488

    2021

  14. [14]

    Bourne, M. A. & Yang, H.-Y . K. 2023, Galaxies, 11, 73

    2023

  15. [15]

    Butcher, J. C. 2008, Numerical Methods for Ordinary Differen- tial Equations, 2nd edn. (John Wiley & Sons)

    2008

  16. [16]

    & Teyssier, R

    Cattaneo, A. & Teyssier, R. 2007, MNRAS, 376, 1547

    2007

  17. [17]

    W., Donahue, M., V oit, G

    Cavagnolo, K. W., Donahue, M., V oit, G. M., & Sun, M. 2009, ApJS, 182, 12 Di Matteo, T., Springel, V ., & Hernquist, L. 2005, Nature, 433, 604

    2009

  18. [18]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.25156

    Dunn, T., McElroy, R., Krumpe, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.25156

    work page arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    2014, Journal of Paral- lel and Distributed Computing, 74

    Edwards, H., Trott, C., & Sunderland, D. 2014, Journal of Paral- lel and Distributed Computing, 74

    2014

  20. [20]

    C., Johnstone, R

    Fabian, A. C., Johnstone, R. M., Sanders, J. S., et al. 2008, Na- ture, 454, 968

    2008

  21. [21]

    2017, A&A, 601, A143

    Fiore, F., Feruglio, C., Shankar, F., et al. 2017, A&A, 601, A143

    2017

  22. [22]

    2024, A&A, 686, A36

    Fiore, F., Gaspari, M., Luminari, A., Tozzi, P., & de Arcangelis, L. 2024, A&A, 686, A36

    2024

  23. [23]

    2025, A&A, 698, A121

    Fournier, M., Grete, P., Brüggen, M., et al. 2025, A&A, 698, A121

    2025

  24. [24]

    D., Earl, N., Novack, A

    French, K. D., Earl, N., Novack, A. B., et al. 2023, ApJ, 950, 153

    2023

  25. [25]

    2015, A&A, 579, A62

    Gaspari, M., Brighenti, F., & Temi, P. 2015, A&A, 579, A62

    2015

  26. [26]

    2014, ApJ, 783, L10

    Gaspari, M., Brighenti, F., Temi, P., & Ettori, S. 2014, ApJ, 783, L10

    2014

  27. [27]

    & Churazov, E

    Gaspari, M. & Churazov, E. 2013, A&A, 559, A78

    2013

  28. [28]

    L., et al

    Gaspari, M., McDonald, M., Hamer, S. L., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, 167

    2018

  29. [29]

    Gaspari, M., Ruszkowski, M., & Oh, S. P. 2013, MNRAS, 432, 3401

    2013

  30. [30]

    2012, ApJ, 746, 94

    Gaspari, M., Ruszkowski, M., & Sharma, P. 2012, ApJ, 746, 94

    2012

  31. [31]

    & S˛ adowski, A

    Gaspari, M. & S˛ adowski, A. 2017, ApJ, 837, 149

    2017

  32. [32]

    2017, MNRAS, 466, 677

    Gaspari, M., Temi, P., & Brighenti, F. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 677

    2017

  33. [33]

    2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 10

    Gaspari, M., Tombesi, F., & Cappi, M. 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 10

    2020

  34. [34]

    2021, MNRAS, 505, 4702

    Ge, C., Luo, R., Sun, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 4702

    2021

  35. [35]

    Gitti, M., Brighenti, F., & McNamara, B. R. 2012, Advances in Astronomy, 2012, 950641

    2012

  36. [36]

    Godunov, S. K. 1959, Math. Sbornik, 47, 271

    1959

  37. [37]

    C., Miller, J

    Grete, P., Dolence, J. C., Miller, J. M., et al. 2023, The Interna- tional Journal of High Performance Computing Applications, 37, 465

    2023

  38. [38]

    W., & Beckwith, K

    Grete, P., O’Shea, B. W., & Beckwith, K. 2018, ApJ, 858, L19

    2018

  39. [39]

    2025, ApJ, 987, 122

    Grete, P., Scannapieco, E., Brüggen, M., & Pan, L. 2025, ApJ, 987, 122

    2025

  40. [40]

    M., Quataert, E., & Springel, V

    Guo, M., Stone, J. M., Quataert, E., & Springel, V . 2025, ApJ, 987, 202

    2025

  41. [41]

    2015, EPL (Europhysics Let- ters), 111, 44002

    Herault, J., Pétrélis, F., & Fauve, S. 2015, EPL (Europhysics Let- ters), 111, 44002

    2015

  42. [42]

    1990, ApJ, 356, 359

    Hernquist, L. 1990, ApJ, 356, 359

    1990

  43. [43]

    C., Edge, A

    Hlavacek-Larrondo, J., Fabian, A. C., Edge, A. C., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 431, 1638

    2013

  44. [44]

    S., Nandra, K., Clerc, N., & Gaspari, M

    Hofmann, F., Sanders, J. S., Nandra, K., Clerc, N., & Gaspari, M. 2016, A&A, 585, A130

    2016

  45. [45]

    F., Gurvich, A

    Hopkins, P. F., Gurvich, A. B., Shen, X., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 2241

    2023

  46. [46]

    F., Wetzel, A., Kereš, D., et al

    Hopkins, P. F., Wetzel, A., Kereš, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 1578

    2018

  47. [47]

    Iapichino, L., Federrath, C., & Klessen, R. S. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 3641 Ivezi´c, Ž. & MacLeod, C. 2014, in IAU Symposium, V ol. 304, Multiwavelength AGN Surveys and Studies, ed. A. M. Mick- aelian & D. B. Sanders, 395–398 Juráˇnová, A., Werner, N., Gaspari, M., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 2886 Juráˇnová, A., Werner, N., Nulsen, P. E. J., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 5163

    2017

  48. [48]

    C., Chojnowski, S

    Keel, W. C., Chojnowski, S. D., Bennert, V . N., et al. 2012, MN- RAS, 420, 878

    2012

  49. [49]

    C., Bechtold, J., & Siemiginowska, A

    Kelly, B. C., Bechtold, J., & Siemiginowska, A. 2009, ApJ, 698, 895

    2009

  50. [50]

    & Nixon, C

    King, A. & Nixon, C. 2015, MNRAS, 453, L46

    2015

  51. [51]

    & Pounds, K

    King, A. & Pounds, K. 2015, ARA&A, 53, 115

    2015

  52. [52]

    King, A. R. & Pringle, J. E. 2006, MNRAS, 373, L90 Article number, page 19 of 20 A&A proofs:manuscript no. paper

    2006

  53. [53]

    R., Pringle, J

    King, A. R., Pringle, J. E., & Hofmann, J. A. 2008, MNRAS, 385, 1621

    2008

  54. [54]

    1941, Akademiia Nauk SSSR Doklady, 30, 301

    Kolmogorov, A. 1941, Akademiia Nauk SSSR Doklady, 30, 301

    1941

  55. [55]

    Kormendy, J. & Ho, L. C. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 511

    2013

  56. [56]

    & Inutsuka, S.-I

    Koyama, H. & Inutsuka, S.-I. 2000, ApJ, 532, 980

    2000

  57. [57]

    Kravtsov, A. V . & Borgani, S. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 353

    2012

  58. [58]

    M., Cales, S., Moran, E

    LaMassa, S. M., Cales, S., Moran, E. C., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 144

    2015

  59. [59]

    2025, A&A, 694, A115

    Lepore, M., Pinto, C., Tozzi, P., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A115

    2025

  60. [60]

    1969, Nature, 223, 690

    Lynden-Bell, D. 1969, Nature, 223, 690

    1969

  61. [61]

    2025, A&A, 693, A173

    Lyu, B., Wu, X.-B., Pang, Y ., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A173

    2025

  62. [62]

    M., Morganti, R., Oosterloo, T

    Maccagni, F. M., Morganti, R., Oosterloo, T. A., & Mahony, E. K. 2014, A&A, 571, A67

    2014

  63. [63]

    M., Serra, P., Gaspari, M., et al

    Maccagni, F. M., Serra, P., Gaspari, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 656, A45

    2021

  64. [64]

    L., Green, P

    MacLeod, C. L., Green, P. J., Anderson, S. F., et al. 2019, ApJ, 874, 8

    2019

  65. [65]

    McCourt, M., Sharma, P., Quataert, E., & Parrish, I. J. 2012, MNRAS, 419, 3319

    2012

  66. [66]

    R., & Tremblay, G

    McDonald, M., Gaspari, M., McNamara, B. R., & Tremblay, G. R. 2018, ApJ, 858, 45

    2018

  67. [67]

    2011, ApJ, 734, 95

    Reynolds, C. 2011, ApJ, 734, 95

    2011

  68. [68]

    M., Koerding, E., Knigge, C., Uttley, P., & Fender, R

    McHardy, I. M., Koerding, E., Knigge, C., Uttley, P., & Fender, R. P. 2006, Nature, 444, 730

    2006

  69. [69]

    McNamara, B. R. & Nulsen, P. E. J. 2012, New Journal of Physics, 14, 055023

    2012

  70. [70]

    R., Russell, H

    McNamara, B. R., Russell, H. R., Nulsen, P. E. J., et al. 2016, ApJ, 830, 79

    2016

  71. [71]

    A., Brusa, M., et al

    Mehdipour, M., Kriss, G. A., Brusa, M., et al. 2023, A&A, 670, A183

    2023

  72. [72]

    2023, A&A, 678, A42

    Morganti, R., Murthy, S., Oosterloo, T., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, A42

    2023

  73. [73]

    F., Edelson, R., Baumgartner, W., & Gandhi, P

    Mushotzky, R. F., Edelson, R., Baumgartner, W., & Gandhi, P. 2011, ApJ, 743, L12

    2011

  74. [74]

    F., Frenk, C

    Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. 1997, ApJ, 490, 493

    1997

  75. [75]

    2025, Nature Astron- omy, 9, 449

    Olivares, V ., Picquenot, A., Su, Y ., et al. 2025, Nature Astron- omy, 9, 449

    2025

  76. [76]

    2019, A&A, 631, A22

    Olivares, V ., Salome, P., Combes, F., et al. 2019, A&A, 631, A22

    2019

  77. [77]

    L., et al

    Olivares, V ., Salomé, P., Hamer, S. L., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A94

    2022

  78. [78]

    A., et al

    Omoruyi, O., Tremblay, G., Baum, S. A., et al. 2026, ApJ, 997, 114

    2026

  79. [79]

    & Papadakis, I

    Paolillo, M. & Papadakis, I. 2025, Nuovo Cimento Rivista Serie, 48, 537

    2025

  80. [80]

    & Pu, H.-Y

    Piana, O. & Pu, H.-Y . 2025, Universe, 11, 78

    2025

Showing first 80 references.