Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

The inner structure and thermodynamics of a thin accretion disc

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Thin accretion discs decouple into a two-temperature flow inside the plunging region, and at intermediate accretion rates the decoupling starts outside the ISCO, truncating the disc at an accretion-rate-dependent radius.

desk verdict First global GRMHD suite to let Coulomb coupling set thin disc truncation: the two-temperature plunging region is solid, but the quantitative transition radii are set by an imposed cooling law. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.21207 v2 pith:WGKQV4WI submitted 2025-04-29 astro-ph.HE

A. Hankla , J. Dexter , N. Scepi This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords accretiondiscsblackholephysicstwo-temperatureplasmaCoulombdecouplingplungingregionGRMHDsimulationsX-raybinariesdisctruncation
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

This paper argues that a geometrically thin accretion disc cannot remain a single-temperature, thermally radiating flow all the way down to the black hole. In three-dimensional general-relativistic magnetohydrodynamic simulations that evolve electrons and protons separately, with an electron-only cooling function, the protons stop equilibrating with the electrons once the infall time becomes shorter than the Coulomb coupling time, which happens inside the innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO) and, at intermediate accretion rates, already outside it. The authors find a two-temperature plunging region at all rates they model: near Eddington accretion the decoupling begins at $r\approx 2.04\,r_g$, close to the ISCO for spin $a=0.9375$, while at $\dot M \sim 10^{-2}\dot M_{\rm Edd}$ it begins near $3.6\,r_g$, rising to about $5\,r_g$ at lower rates. The standard thin-disc model assumes the disc stops radiating at the ISCO, so the result changes predictions for emission from the plunging region, the likely seat of the X-ray corona, X-ray binary state transitions, and black-hole spin measurements.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is an electron-only cooling function coupled to a separate electron fluid: energy is removed from electrons at the rate $Q_\mathrm{cool}=2u_e(T_e/T_{e,\mathrm{target}})^{0.5}/t_\mathrm{cool}$, with $t_\mathrm{cool}$ set to the local orbital time and the target temperature fixed at $10^{10}\,\mathrm{K}$, while protons lose energy only through Coulomb collisions with electrons. The competition that sets the structure is a comparison of timescales: where the infall time is longer than the Coulomb equilibration time and the viscous heating time, the disc collapses to the standard thin, single-temperature state; where the infall time becomes the shortest timescale, protons decouple and the disc transitions to a hot, thick flow. The paper locates this transition with the radius $r_\mathrm{tr}$ at which more than half of the gas has proton temperature above the target electron temperature, and shows it moves outward as accretion rate drops.

What would settle it

Run the same simulation suite with $T_{e,\mathrm{target}}=10^9\,\mathrm{K}$ and sufficient resolution to capture $H/r\sim 0.02$: if the disc remains single-temperature down to the ISCO, or if the truncation radius stops depending on accretion rate, the central claim fails. An observational check would compare the predicted inner edge, drifting from about $2\,r_g$ at near-Eddington rates to $4$-$5\,r_g$ near $10^{-2}$ Eddington, against continuum-fitting or reverberation measurements of the inner disc radius across X-ray binary states.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the plunging region of a thin accretion disc is necessarily two-temperature, and the decoupling can propagate outside the ISCO to form a truncated disc whose inner edge depends on accretion rate. In the simulations, a disc accreting near the Eddington rate stays single-temperature until $r_\mathrm{tr}\approx 2.04\,r_g$, then decouples; one accreting near $10^{-2}$ Eddington decouples at $r_\mathrm{tr}\approx 3.6\,r_g$, with the transition radius increasing monotonically to $\sim 5\,r_g$. The mechanism is the ordering of timescales: inside the region where protons decouple, the infall time is shorter than the proton viscous-heating and Coulomb-cooling times, so the protons heat above the electron target temperature, the disc thickens ($H/r$ rises toward $\sim 0.2$), and the inner flow becomes hot, thick, and radiatively inefficient. A further result is that cooling is not confined to the midplane: a sandwich-like layer above the disc radiates out to $\sim 10\,r_g$, and at intermediate accretion rates about 40% of the cooling occurs above the disc body. Relative to single-temperature models, thermal emission from inside the ISCO is suppressed, reaching roughly 75% of the single-temperature value at the highest rate and less than 50% at intermediate rates, with a large fraction emitted from optically thin, two-temperature regions.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative truncation radii rely on an imposed electron cooling law, a fixed target temperature of $10^{10}\,\mathrm{K}$ and a cooling time tied to the orbital time, that sets the disc's density and scale height; a more realistic target near $10^9\,\mathrm{K}$ or a shorter cooling time would change the simulated radii.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At near-Eddington accretion rates, even the canonical thin-disc case has a two-temperature plunging region beginning at $r \approx 2\,r_g$, so single-temperature treatments of the inner disc are incomplete.
  • The inner edge of the thin disc moves outward with decreasing accretion rate, from about $2\,r_g$ at Eddington to $3.6$-$5\,r_g$ at $10^{-2}$ Eddington, so disc truncation by Coulomb decoupling alone is accretion-rate dependent.
  • Thermal emission from inside the ISCO is weaker than single-temperature models predict, down to about 75% of the single-temperature value at high rates and below 50% at intermediate rates, with much of it optically thin.
  • A substantial part of the cooling occurs above the disc body, about 40% at intermediate rates, which bears directly on where an X-ray corona forms.
  • Spin measurements that map the disc's peak temperature to the ISCO radius can be biased: at intermediate accretion rates the disc appears truncated near $4\,r_g$ rather than the true $2\,r_g$, and the reduced plunging-region thermal emission shifts the inferred ISCO location.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the same timescale ordering holds with a realistic cooling law, the hot two-temperature inner region could itself provide the Comptonizing electrons for the soft-state hard X-ray tail, without requiring a separately heated corona; the present paper identifies the two-temperature region but does not construct the spectral model.
  • Because the decoupling criterion is a ratio of infall to Coulomb times, the truncation radius should scale with the ISCO radius as black-hole spin changes; a fixed-accretion-rate spin sequence would test whether Coulomb truncation tracks $r_\mathrm{ISCO}$ rather than magnetic flux.
  • The predicted $2$-$5\,r_g$ drift with accretion rate is narrow enough to search for with existing X-ray timing or continuum-fitting samples: soft-state binaries should show an inner edge that moves outward by roughly a factor of two as luminosity drops toward $10^{-2}$ Eddington.
  • A phenomenological two-zone disc model with the boundary $r_\mathrm{tr}(\dot M, a)$ taken from this mechanism would make the prediction directly usable in broad-band spectral fits of X-ray binaries; the paper stops at reporting the simulation result rather than providing such a fitting prescription.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports 3D GRMHD simulations of weakly magnetized thin accretion discs around a rapidly spinning black hole, with electrons and protons evolved as separate fluids and cooling applied to the electron fluid only. The central claim is that the plunging region of a thin disc is necessarily two-temperature because the infall time inside the ISCO becomes shorter than the Coulomb equilibration time, and that at intermediate accretion rates the two-temperature region extends outside the ISCO, producing an accretion-rate-dependent truncation radius that approaches the ISCO at high rates and moves outward to roughly 4-5 r_g near 10^-2 Eddington. The paper also reports extended surface cooling, a reduction of thermal emission from the plunging region relative to single-temperature models, and implications for X-ray binary state transitions, coronal origins, and spin measurements. The simulations use an electron cooling function with a fixed target temperature of 10^10 K and a cooling time set to the orbital time, with the main quantitative results concentrated in Sec. 3 and summarized in Fig. 11.

Significance. If the qualitative result holds, this is an important step beyond single-temperature thin-disc treatments: it provides a physical, Coulomb-coupling-based reason for a two-temperature plunging region and for an accretion-rate-dependent truncation that does not rely on magnetic arrest. The paper is honest about the limitations of its cooling prescription, and it includes useful implementation tests (Appendix A) and a clear timescale analysis (Secs. 3.1.1 and 3.2.3). The implicit Coulomb solver and the use of previously benchmarked heating prescriptions are strengths. However, the quantitative transition radii in Fig. 11 and the associated radiative efficiencies in Sec. 3.3 are tied to an imposed, non-physical electron cooling law, so the quantitative claims should be viewed as provisional until their sensitivity to that law is established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2.1, Eq. (2); Sec. 4.1; Fig. 11] The quantitative truncation radii in Fig. 11 are not independent of the imposed electron cooling law. With Q_cool = 2 u_e (T_e/T_e,target)^0.5 / t_cool, holding T_e,target = 10^10 K sets the electron temperature, hence the sound speed, H/r, and midplane density in the cooled equilibrium, and the Coulomb equilibration rate entering Eq. (11) depends steeply on density and electron temperature. The paper itself states that a realistic 10^9 K target would give H/r ~ 0.02, below the resolution of the simulations (Sec. 2.1), and Sec. 4.1 concedes that the exact accretion rates and radii may not remain the same with a lower target temperature. Therefore the specific claim that r_tr grows from about 2 r_g at mdot ~ 1 to about 4-5 r_g at mdot ~ 10^-2 is partly set by numerical convenience rather than by physical Compton cooling. To establish the quantitative claim, the authors should either repeat the M2 and M1 runs with a target temperature near 10^9 K (with correspondingly higher resolution), or provide an analytic scaling argument showing how r_tr depends on T_e,target and verify that the trend in Fig. 11 survives that scaling.
  2. [Sec. 2.1 and Sec. 4.5 (Eq. 2)] The choice t_cool = Omega^-1 has the same load-bearing role as T_e,target. Equation (2) uses t_cool directly in the cooling rate, and the manuscript acknowledges in Sec. 4.5 that the physical cooling time is likely much shorter. A shorter cooling time would keep electrons closer to the target temperature, changing the density and H/r and therefore the Coulomb coupling efficiency that controls the truncation in Sec. 3.2. Because r_tr is set by the balance between Coulomb cooling and viscous heating, and Q_coul depends on density, the sign and magnitude of the effect of a realistic cooling time on r_tr should be quantified, for example by varying t_cool in a subset of runs or by an analytic estimate of the resulting density change.
  3. [Sec. 2.1 and Sec. 3.3.2; Fig. 10 left] The cooling function assumes optically thin, local removal of energy (Eq. 1), yet Fig. 10 (left) shows that the M1 and M0 discs reach midplane Thomson optical depths of order 10 inside the ISCO and are optically thick in some of the same regions where the truncation forms. In an optically thick flow, cooling cannot be treated as local and immediate; photon trapping and reabsorption alter the temperature and density structure and therefore the Coulomb coupling that drives the transition. This limitation is acknowledged in Sec. 4.5, but it is connected to the quantitative transition radii because the density that sets Q_coul is established by exactly this cooling prescription. The authors should state explicitly which results (the qualitative two-temperature plunging region, the quantitative r_tr, or the radiative efficiencies in Table 2) are robust to this assumption, or test the sensitivity with a simplified radiation treatment.
  4. [Sec. 2.3 and Table 1] The reported simulations are not checked for numerical convergence. The MRI quality factors in Table 1 are Q_theta = 7-8 and Q_phi = 12-14 for the thin-disc runs M2, M1, and M0, which are at or below commonly adopted thresholds for resolving the MRI; the paper itself notes in Sec. 4.5 that the low resolution potentially suppressed some turbulence. Since the disc density and scale height in the cooled equilibrium, and hence t_Coul and r_tr, depend on the turbulent dissipation realized by the MRI, a resolution study, at least for M2, is needed before the specific values of r_tr in Fig. 11 can be taken as physical. The statement that accretion and dissipation rates were roughly constant over time does not substitute for a convergence test.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 2.3] The sentence describing the simulation domain says it extends 2π radians in π, which is presumably a typo for the azimuthal direction φ; please correct.
  2. [Sec. 3.2.3] The phrase 'leading the a more ADAF-like disc structure' in the M2 paragraph is grammatically garbled and should be rewritten.
  3. [Sec. 4.2] The sentence 'The optically-thin nature could have implications for produces the hard spectrum of XRBs' has a subject-verb error ('produces' should probably be 'producing'); please revise.
  4. [Fig. 11] Fig. 11 shows only four simulation points and a lower limit, with no time-averaging window or temporal scatter indicated; adding error bars or a statement of the time variability of r_tr would make the claimed monotonic trend easier to assess.
  5. [References] The in-text citation to Naethe Motta et al. (2025) appears as 'NaetheMottaP.' in the reference list, which is a formatting artifact that should be corrected for readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: r_tr is an emergent simulation output, and the cooling law is an openly acknowledged model choice rather than a fitted target.

full rationale

Walked the derivation chain from the cooling prescription of Eq. (2) through the diagnostics of Eqs. (10)-(16) to the central claims. The electron cooling function is an imposed subgrid model whose parameters are T_e,target = 10^10 K and t_cool = Omega^-1; it is not fitted to any data subset, and the transition radius r_tr of Eq. (16) is an emergent shell-average of the fraction of gas with T_p > T_e,target, not an input parameter. The Coulomb exchange rate uses Stepney & Guilbert (1983) and the heating partition uses Werner et al. (2018), both external benchmarks. The paper explicitly concedes in Secs. 4.1 and 5 that the exact quantitative radii would change with a realistic 10^9 K target, so the result is honestly presented as model-dependent rather than disguised as parameter-free. The qualitative claim that the plunging region is necessarily two-temperature rests on the timescale ordering t_infall < t_Coul (Eq. 15) appearing consistently in the simulation output and on the near-geodesic plunge, not on a self-reference. The self-citations (Hankla et al. 2022; Scepi et al. 2024a,b) provide analytic context and prior simulation comparison but are not the load-bearing proof of the simulation result. No equation reduces to its own input, and no fitted parameter is renamed a prediction; hence no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on the imposed cooling prescription and on external prescriptions for Coulomb coupling and heating partition; the transition radius itself is an emergent output, not a fitted parameter. The paper introduces no new physical entities.

free parameters (3)
  • Electron target temperature T_e,target = 10^10 K
    Imposed constant target for the electron cooling function (Sec. 2.1). It sets the disc scale height and density, and therefore the Coulomb coupling rate and the truncation radius; the physical Compton temperature is about 10^9 K.
  • Electron cooling time t_cool = Omega^-1
    Cooling time in Eq. (2) is set to the local orbital period rather than the physical cooling time; this controls how closely electrons track the target temperature, especially inside the ISCO (Sec. 2.1, Sec. 4.5).
  • Coulomb collision enhancement factor = 10 (2e4 to 3e4 t c/r_g)
    Coulomb rates were multiplied by 10 during an initial thermalization phase to speed equilibration; unenhanced rates are used afterward, but the early collapse from a hot torus to a thin disc depends on this numerical choice (Appendix B).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Radiative cooling is optically thin and local: the radiation force removes energy from the electron fluid with no photon transport or reabsorption.
    Eq. (1) and (2) implement G^mu = -Q_cool u^mu; Sec. 4.5 acknowledges this assumption breaks down at high accretion rates and in optically thick regions.
  • domain assumption Coulomb collisions are the only energy exchange mechanism between protons and electrons.
    Sec. 4.5 states other coupling mechanisms are in principle possible (Begelman & Chiueh 1988) but neglected.
  • domain assumption The dissipated energy partition between electrons and protons follows the Werner et al. (2018) 2D PIC reconnection prescription.
    Sec. 2 states delta_e between 1/4 and 1/2 depending on sigma_i; this external prescription sets electron heating and affects cooling.
  • ad hoc to paper The electron target temperature is held at 10^10 K, about ten times the expected non-relativistic Compton temperature.
    Sec. 2.1: chosen to keep H/r ~ 0.1 resolvable; a realistic 10^9 K target would give H/r ~ 0.02 and require higher resolution, so all quantitative transition radii depend on this choice.
  • ad hoc to paper The electron cooling time is set to the orbital time t_cool = Omega^-1 rather than the physical cooling time.
    Sec. 2.1: chosen as the shortest dynamical timescale; Sec. 4.5 notes the physical cooling time is likely much shorter, affecting electron temperatures inside the ISCO.
  • domain assumption The MRI is adequately resolved despite quality factors below or near the usual threshold.
    Table 1 lists Q_theta as low as 7 for the highest accretion rate run; Sec. 4.5 acknowledges resolution may suppress turbulence but argues the accretion rate stays constant.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The inner structure and thermodynamics of a thin accretion disc." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WGKQV4WI

@misc{pith2026250421207,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The inner structure and thermodynamics of a thin accretion disc},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WGKQV4WI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.21207}
}
abstract

Using three-dimensional general relativistic magnetohydrodynamic simulations with electron and proton thermodynamics and an electron cooling function, we probe the inner radial and vertical structure of weakly magnetized geometrically thin accretion discs around rapidly spinning black holes. We find that the thin, cold disc transitions to a thick, hot accretion flow at a radius dependent on the mass accretion rate due to proton-electron Coulomb decoupling. At high accretion rates, the disc truncates close to the innermost stable circular orbit $r\approx2r_g$, demonstrating that even in the canonical thin disc model, the plunging region should be treated with two-temperature physics. At intermediate accretion rates, the transition radius moves outward by a factor of two to $r\approx 5r_g$, forming a radiatively inefficient inner flow. The simulations also reveal extended cooling along the surface of the disc out to $\sim10r_g$, with 40\% of the total cooling at intermediate accretion rates occurring above the disc body. Two-temperature effects also impact the emission from within the plunging region of the black hole, leading to less thermal emission than predicted by single-temperature models. These results have implications for X-ray binary state transitions, the physical origin of the X-ray corona, and spin measurements that rely on determining the location of the innermost stable circular orbit.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.21207 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Azimuthally-averaged density structure of the low accretion rate simulation M6 (left) and highest accretion rate simulation M0 (right). The white dotted contour shows 𝜏es = 10, while the dark blue dash-dot and dashed lines show 𝑇𝑝/𝑇𝑒 = 2 and 10, respectively. The red dashed line shows the equatorial ISCO radius. Time-averaged over the last 2000𝑟𝑔/𝑐. 10−2 100 102 104 Proton t i/htinfalli m˙ ∼ 10−6 m˙ ∼ 100 ht i visci… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Demonstration of the proton and electron timescales relative to the infall time. The left column shows the low accretion rate simulation M6; the right column shows the canonical high accretion rate simulation M0. Rows show proton timescales (top) or electron timescales (bottom). In all panels, the dashed horizontal black line shows the infall time. Red indicates that the physical process heats the indicated species,… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of electron and proton thermodynamics for low (M6) vs. high (M0) accretion rate. Coulomb collisions are insufficient to cool protons in M6 (blue solid line). At high accretion rate M0, the disc reaches the single temperature regime for 𝑟 ≳ 4𝑟𝑔, but Coulomb collisions within this radius are insufficient to cool the protons down to the electron temperature. Time-averaged over the last 2000𝑟𝑔/𝑐. Vertical dot… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of flow velocity 𝑢 𝑟 absolute magnitude (top) and rest￾mass density 𝜌 (bottom) for low (M6; blue) vs. high (M0; gray) accretion rate. Time-averaged over the last 2000𝑟𝑔/𝑐. Vertical dotted line shows the location of the ISCO. Dot-dash black lines show predict…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Thermodynamic properties of accretion flows as a function of accretion rate, showing the impact of Coulomb collisions. Left panel: the proton temperature, which determines the disc structure, as a function of radius. Black horizontal and slanted dashed lines show the t…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Structural properties of accretion flows as a function of accretion rate, showing the impact of Coulomb collisions. Vertical black dotted lines show the location of the ISCO. Left panel: the mass density radial profile, with the black dashed line showing the thin disc …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Demonstration of the proton and electron timescales in the system’s relation to the infall time depending on accretion rate and radius. Columns show the accretion rates from lowest (left) to highest (right), simulations M2, M1, M0 in order. Rows show proton timescales …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison of L/Lvisc at each accretion rate over radius. The horizontal dashed black line shows the isothermal single-temperature limit of L/Lvisc → 1. Vertical black dotted line shows the location of the ISCO; vertical dashed lines show the transition radius for each…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Radiative properties of thin accretion flows as a function of accretion rate. Left panel: the optical depth at the midplane (Eq. 9), with black dashed line showing where the disc becomes optically thick at 𝜏 = 1. Center panel: fraction of shell-integrated luminosity e…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The transition radius (Eq. 16) as a function of accretion rate normalized to the Eddington accretion rate with nominal efficiency 𝜂 = 0.1. Black dotted line shows the location of the ISCO for the black hole spin 𝑎 = 0.9375. 4.1.2 Implications For Particle Acceleration…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Vertical slices of the azimuthally-averaged cooling rate −𝑢𝑡𝑄cool for different accretion rates, normalized to the midplane value at the ISCO. The white dotted contour shows 𝜏es = 10, while the dark blue dash-dot and dashed lines show 𝑇𝑝/𝑇𝑒 = 2 and 10, respectively. T…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. The plunging region of thin accretion discs across the black hole spin range

    astro-ph.HE 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    MHD stresses in the plunging region of thin accretion disks increase with prograde black hole spin, and a new flux-freezing model describes the magnetic fields there across the spin range.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    H., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308177 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...528..161A 528, 161

    Agol E., Krolik J. H., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308177 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...528..161A 528, 161

    doi:10.1086/308177 2000

  2. [2]

    J., McKinney J

    Avara M. J., McKinney J. C., Reynolds C. S., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1643 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.462..636A 462, 636

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1643 2016

  3. [3]

    J., Quataert E., Kunz M

    Bambic C. J., Quataert E., Kunz M. W., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3261 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.2895B 527, 2895

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3261 2024

  4. [4]

    C., Armitage P

    Begelman M. C., Armitage P. J., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/782/2/L18 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...782L..18B 782, L18

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/782/2/l18 2014

  5. [5]

    C., Chiueh T., 1988, @doi [ ] 10.1086/166698 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988ApJ...332..872B 332, 872

    Begelman M. C., Chiueh T., 1988, @doi [ ] 10.1086/166698 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988ApJ...332..872B 332, 872

    work page doi:10.1086/166698 1988

  6. [6]

    S., Dai X., Poindexter S., Garmire G., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/693/1/174 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...693..174C 693, 174

    Chartas G., Kochanek C. S., Dai X., Poindexter S., Garmire G., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/693/1/174 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...693..174C 693, 174

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/693/1/174 2009

  7. [7]

    C., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2608 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...919L..20D 919, L20

    Dexter J., Scepi N., Begelman M. C., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2608 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...919L..20D 919, L20

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac2608 2021

  8. [8]

    C., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ada76e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025ApJ...980..203D 980, 203

    Dhang P., Dexter J., Begelman M. C., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ada76e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025ApJ...980..203D 980, 203

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada76e 2025

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Done C., Gierli \'n ski M., Kubota A., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s00159-007-0006-1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A&ARv..15....1D 15, 1

    2007 doi

  2. [10]

    A., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/304129 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...482..400E 482, 400

    Esin A. A., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/304129 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...482..400E 482, 400

    1997 doi

  3. [11]

    A., McClintock J

    Esin A. A., McClintock J. E., Narayan R., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/304829 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...489..865E 489, 865

    1997 doi

  4. [12]

    C., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa564 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.493.5389F 493, 5389

    Fabian A. C., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa564 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.493.5389F 493, 5389

    2020 doi

  5. [13]

    G., Moncrief V., 1976, @doi [ ] 10.1086/154565 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1976ApJ...207..962F 207, 962

    Fishbone L. G., Moncrief V., 1976, @doi [ ] 10.1086/154565 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1976ApJ...207..962F 207, 962

    1976 doi

  6. [14]

    C., Etheridge S

    Fragile P. C., Etheridge S. M., Anninos P., Mishra B., Klu \'z niak W., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aab788 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...857....1F 857, 1

    2018 doi

  7. [15]

    F., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/312207 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...522L..57G 522, L57

    Gammie C. F., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/312207 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...522L..57G 522, L57

    1999 doi

  8. [16]

    F., McKinney J

    Gammie C. F., McKinney J. C., T \'o th G., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/374594 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...589..444G 589, 444

    2003 doi

  9. [17]

    M., Scepi N., Dexter J., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac1785 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.515..775H 515, 775

    Hankla A. M., Scepi N., Dexter J., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac1785 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.515..775H 515, 775

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    D., Reynolds C

    Hogg J. D., Reynolds C. S., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa774b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...843...80H 843, 80

    2017 doi

  11. [19]

    D., Reynolds C

    Hogg J. D., Reynolds C. S., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aac439 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...861...24H 861, 24

    2018 doi

  12. [20]

    E., Noble S

    Kinch B. E., Noble S. C., Schnittman J. D., Krolik J. H., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abc176 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...904..117K 904, 117

    2020 doi

  13. [21]

    Laha S., Ricci C., Mather J. C., Behar E., Gallo L., Marin F., Mbarek R., Hankla A., 2025, @doi [Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences] 10.3389/fspas.2024.1530392 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025FrASS..1130392L 11, 1530392

    2025

  14. [22]

    Liska M. T. P., Musoke G., Tchekhovskoy A., Porth O., Beloborodov A. M., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac84db , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...935L...1L 935, L1

    2022 doi

  15. [23]

    L., et al., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/340436 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...572..984M 572, 984

    McConnell M. L., et al., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/340436 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...572..984M 572, 984

    2002 doi

  16. [24]

    M., Ryan B

    Miller J. M., Ryan B. R., Dolence J. C., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ab09fc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJS..241...30M 241, 30

    2019 doi

  17. [25]

    C., Johnson L

    Mishra B., Fragile P. C., Johnson L. C., Klu \'z niak W., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2245 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.463.3437M 463, 3437

    2016 doi

  18. [26]

    C., Anderson J., Blankenship A., Li H., Nalewajko K., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac938b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...939...31M 939, 31

    Mishra B., Fragile P. C., Anderson J., Blankenship A., Li H., Nalewajko K., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac938b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...939...31M 939, 31

    2022 doi

  19. [27]

    J., McKinney J

    Morales Teixeira D., Avara M. J., McKinney J. C., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2044 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.480.3547M 480, 3547

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    F., Dolence J

    Mo \'s cibrodzka M., Gammie C. F., Dolence J. C., Shiokawa H., Leung P. K., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/706/1/497 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...706..497M 706, 497

    2009 doi

  21. [29]

    Mummery A., Ingram A., Davis S., Fabian A., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1160 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.531..366M 531, 366

    2024 doi

  22. [30]

    Naethe Motta P., Jacquemin-Ide J., Nemmen R., Liska M. T. P., Tchekhovskoy A., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2505.08855 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250508855N p. arXiv:2505.08855

    2025 doi arXiv

  23. [31]

    Narayan R., Yi I., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1086/187381 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJ...428L..13N 428, L13

    1994 doi

  24. [32]

    C., Gammie C

    Noble S. C., Gammie C. F., McKinney J. C., Del Zanna L., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/500349 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...641..626N 641, 626

    2006 doi

  25. [33]

    C., Krolik J

    Noble S. C., Krolik J. H., Hawley J. F., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/692/1/411 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...692..411N 692, 411

    2009 doi

  26. [34]

    D., Thorne K

    Novikov I. D., Thorne K. S., 1973, in Dewitt C., Dewitt B. S., eds, Black Holes (Les Astres Occlus). pp 343--450

    1973

  27. [35]

    N., Thorne K

    Page D. N., Thorne K. S., 1974, @doi [ ] 10.1086/152990 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1974ApJ...191..499P 191, 499

    1974 doi

  28. [36]

    F., McKinney J

    Penna R. F., McKinney J. C., Narayan R., Tchekhovskoy A., Shafee R., McClintock J. E., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17170.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.408..752P 408, 752

    2010

  29. [37]

    M., Tchekhovskoy A., Quataert E., Chandra M., Gammie C

    Ressler S. M., Tchekhovskoy A., Quataert E., Chandra M., Gammie C. F., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv2084 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.454.1848R 454, 1848

    2015 doi

  30. [38]

    M., Tchekhovskoy A., Quataert E., Gammie C

    Ressler S. M., Tchekhovskoy A., Quataert E., Gammie C. F., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx364 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.467.3604R 467, 3604

    2017 doi

  31. [39]

    S., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-112420-035022 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ARA&A..59..117R 59, 117

    Reynolds C. S., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-112420-035022 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ARA&A..59..117R 59, 117

    2021 doi

  32. [40]

    R., Dolence J

    Ryan B. R., Dolence J. C., Gammie C. F., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/31 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...807...31R 807, 31

    2015 doi

  33. [41]

    R., Ressler S

    Ryan B. R., Ressler S. M., Dolence J. C., Tchekhovskoy A., Gammie C., Quataert E., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8034 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...844L..24R 844, L24

    2017 doi

  34. [42]

    C., Dexter J., 2024a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3299 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.1424S 527, 1424

    Scepi N., Begelman M. C., Dexter J., 2024a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3299 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.1424S 527, 1424

    doi

  35. [43]

    C., Marcel G., Ferreira J., Petrucci P.-O., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202451568 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...692A.153S 692, A153

    Scepi N., Dexter J., Begelman M. C., Marcel G., Ferreira J., Petrucci P.-O., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202451568 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...692A.153S 692, A153

    doi

  36. [44]

    C., Narayan R., Tchekhovskoy A., Gammie C

    Shafee R., McKinney J. C., Narayan R., Tchekhovskoy A., Gammie C. F., McClintock J. E., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/593148 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...687L..25S 687, L25

    2008 doi

  37. [45]

    I., Sunyaev R

    Shakura N. I., Sunyaev R. A., 1973, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1973A&A....24..337S 24, 337

    1973

  38. [46]

    W., 1983, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/204.4.1269 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983MNRAS.204.1269S 204, 1269

    Stepney S., Guilbert P. W., 1983, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/204.4.1269 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983MNRAS.204.1269S 204, 1269

    1983 doi

  39. [47]

    M., Fabian A

    Uttley P., Cackett E. M., Fabian A. C., Kara E., Wilkins D. R., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s00159-014-0072-0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&ARv..22...72U 22, 72

    2014 doi

  40. [48]

    C., et al., 2016, in den Herder J.-W

    Weisskopf M. C., et al., 2016, in den Herder J.-W. A., Takahashi T., Bautz M., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 9905, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray. p. 990517, @doi 10.1117/12.2235240

    2016 doi

  41. [49]

    R., Uzdensky D

    Werner G. R., Uzdensky D. A., Begelman M. C., Cerutti B., Nalewajko K., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2530 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.473.4840W 473, 4840

    2018 doi

  42. [50]

    Yuan F., Narayan R., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-141003 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ARA&A..52..529Y 52, 529

    2014 doi

  43. [51]

    W., Narayan R., Kulkarni A

    Zhu Y., Davis S. W., Narayan R., Kulkarni A. K., Penna R. F., McClintock J. E., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21181.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.424.2504Z 424, 2504

    2012

  44. [52]

    C., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19655.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.418.2642Z 418, 2642

    Zoghbi A., Fabian A. C., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19655.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.418.2642Z 418, 2642

    2011

  45. [53]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.