Paper detail

A comparison of black hole growth in galaxy mergers with Gasoline and Ramses

Supermassive black hole dynamics during galaxy mergers is crucial in determining the rate of black hole mergers and cosmic black hole growth. As simulations achieve higher resolution, it becomes important to assess whether the black hole dynamics is influenced by the treatment of the interstellar medium in different simulation codes. We here compare simulations of black hole growth in galaxy mergers with two codes: the Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics code Gasoline, and the Adaptive Mesh Refinement code Ramses. We seek to identify predictions of these models that are robust despite differences in hydrodynamic methods and implementations of sub-grid physics. We find that the general behavior is consistent between codes. Black hole accretion is minimal while the galaxies are well-separated (and even as they "fly-by" within 10 kpc at first pericenter). At late stages, when the galaxies pass within a few kpc, tidal torques drive nuclear gas inflow that triggers bursts of black hole accretion accompanied by star formation. We also note quantitative discrepancies that are model-dependent: our Ramses simulations show less star formation and black hole growth, and a smoother gas distribution with larger clumps and filaments, than our Gasoline simulations. We attribute these differences primarily to the sub-grid models for black hole fueling and feedback and gas thermodynamics. The main conclusion is that differences exist quantitatively between codes, and this should be kept in mind when making comparisons with observations. However, reassuringly, both codes capture the same dynamical behaviors in terms of triggering of black hole accretion, star formation, and black hole dynamics.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.