Paper detail

Explaining the Energetic AGN Outburst of MS0735+7421 with Massive Slow Jets

By conducting axisymmetrical hydrodynamical numerical simulations (2.5 dimensional code) we show that slow, massive, wide jets can reproduce the morphology of the huge X-ray deficient bubble pair in the cluster of galaxies MS0735+7421. The total energy of the jets, composed of the energy in the bubble pair and in the shock wave, is constraint by observations conducted by McNamara et al. (2009) to be ~10^{62}erg. We show that two opposite jets that are active for ~100Myr, each with a launching half opening angle of ~70 degrees, an initial velocity of ~0.1c, and a total mass loss rate of the two jets of ~100 Mo/year, can account for the observed morphology. Rapidly precessing narrow jets can be used instead of wide jets. In our model the cluster suffered from a cooling catastrophe ~100Myr ago. Most of the mass that cooled, ~10^{10} Mo, was expelled back to the intracluster medium (ICM) by the AGN activity and is inside the bubbles now, ~10% formed stars, and ~10% of the cold gas was accreted by the central black hole and was the source of the outburst energy. This type of activity is similar to that expected to occur in galaxy formation.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

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.