AG-2024.08-146·astro-ph.HE·cross-listed: gr-qc
The 230 GHz Variability of Numerical Models of Sagittarius A* II. The Physical Origins of the Variability
Authors
- Ho-Sang Chan
- Chi-kwan Chan
Abstract
We continue our previous work, Chan et al. 2024, to investigate how variations in the electron temperature prescription parameter, $R_{\rm Low}$, influence the $3$-hour variability at $230$\,GHz, $M_{ΔT}$, in magnetic-arrested disk (MAD) models of Sagittarius~A* (Sgr~A*), through analyzing a series of general-relativistic magnetohydrodynamics and raytracing simulations. For models with a black hole spin $a > 0$, we discovered that increasing $R_{\rm Low}$ renders the photon ring more optically thick, obscuring the varying accretion flows that contribute to the variability. However, as $R_{\rm Low}$ increases further, MAD flux eruptions become more pronounced, compensating for the decrease in $M_{ΔT}$. For models with a spin $a < 0$, although a higher $R_{\rm Low}$ also increases the optical thickness of the fluid, voids within the optically thick gas fail to cover the entire photon ring. Similarly, flux eruptions become more prominent as $R_{\rm Low}$ increases further, contributing to the observed rise in $M_{ΔT}$ relative to $R_{\rm Low}$. For black holes with a spin $a = 0$, although the effect of increasing optical depth is still present, their $230$\,GHz light curves, and hence $M_{ΔT}$, are insensitive to changes in $R_{\rm Low}$. Furthermore, we found that the variability of the $230$\,GHz light curves at $R_{\rm Low} = 1$ might correlate with fluctuations in the internal energy of the gas near the black hole, and we listed potential causes and solutions to the over-variability problem. Our findings highlight potential approaches for refining $M_{ΔT}$ to better align with observations when modeling Sgr~A*.
Submitted
7 August 20241 year ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2408.04132
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.