Paper detail

Do stellar-mass and super-massive black holes have similar dining habits?

Through the years numerous attempts have been made to connect the phenomenology and physics of mass accretion onto stellar-mass and super-massive black holes in a scale-invariant fashion. In this paper, we explore this connection at the radiatively-efficient (and non-jetted) end of accretion modes by comparing the relationship between the luminosity of the accretion disk and corona in the two source classes. We analyse 458 RXTE-PCA archival observations of the X-ray binary (XRB) GX339-4 focusing on the soft and soft-intermediate states, which have been suggested to be analogous to radiatively efficient AGN. The observed scatter in the $\log L_{disk}-\log L_{corona}$ relationship of GX339-4 is high ($\sim0.43\,$dex) and significantly larger than in a representative sample of radiatively-efficient, non- or weakly-jetted AGN ($\sim0.30\,$dex). On the face of it, this would appear contrary to the hypothesis that the systems simply scale with mass. On the other hand we also find that GX339-4 and our AGN sample show different $\dot{m}$ and $Γ$ distributions, with the latter being broader in GX339-4 (dispersion of $\sim0.16$ cf. $\sim0.08$ for AGN). GX339-4 also shows an overall softer slope, with mean $\sim2.20$ as opposed to $\sim2.07$ for the AGN sample. Remarkably, once similarly broad $Γ$ and $\dot{m}$ distributions are selected, the AGN sample overlaps nicely with GX339-4 observations in the mass-normalised $\log L_{disk}-\log L_{corona}$ plane, with a scatter of $\sim0.30-0.33\,$dex. This indicates that a mass-scaling of properties might hold after all, with our results being consistent with the disk-corona systems in AGN and XRBs exhibiting the same physical processes, albeit under different conditions for instance in terms of temperature, optical depth and/or electron energy distribution in the corona, heating-cooling balance, coronal geometry and/or black hole spin.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.