Paper detail

Accretion onto Seed Black Holes in the First Galaxies

The validity of the hypothesis that the massive black holes in high redshift quasars grew from stellar-sized "seeds" is contingent on a seed's ability to double its mass every few ten million years. This requires that the seed accrete at approximately the Eddington-limited rate. In the specific case of radiatively efficient quasiradial accretion in a metal-poor protogalactic medium, for which the Bondi accretion rate is often prescribed in cosmological simulations of massive black hole formation, we examine the effects of the radiation emitted near the black hole's event horizon on the structure of the surrounding gas flow. We find that the radiation pressure from photoionization significantly reduces the steady-state accretion rate and renders the quasiradial accretion flow unsteady and inefficient. The time-averaged accretion rates are a small fraction of the Eddington-limited accretion rate for Thomson scattering. The pressure of Ly-alpha photons trapped near the HII region surrounding the black hole may further attenuate the inflow. These results suggest that an alternative to quasiradial, radiatively efficient Bondi-like accretion should be sought to explain the rapid growth of quasar-progenitor seed black holes.

preprint2009arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.