Paper detail

General relativistic radiation hydrodynamics of accretion flows: II. Treating stiff source terms and exploring physical limitations

We present the implementation of an implicit-explicit (IMEX) Runge-Kutta numerical scheme for general relativistic hydrodynamics coupled to an optically thick radiation field in two existing GR-hydrodynamics codes. We argue that the necessity of such an improvement arises naturally in astrophysically relevant regimes where the optical thickness is high as the equations become stiff. By performing several 1D tests we verify the codes' new ability to deal with this stiffness and show consistency. Then, still in 1D, we compute a luminosity versus accretion rate diagram for the setup of spherical accretion onto a Schwarzschild black hole and find good agreement with previous work. Lastly, we revisit the supersonic Bondi Hoyle Lyttleton (BHL) accretion in 2D where we can now present simulations of realistic temperatures, down to T~10^6 K. Here we find that radiation pressure plays an important role, but also that these highly dynamical set-ups push our approximate treatment towards the limit of physical applicability. The main features of radiation hydrodynamics BHL flows manifest as (i) an effective adiabatic index approaching gamma_effective ~ 4/3; (ii) accretion rates two orders of magnitude lower than without radiation pressure; (iii) luminosity estimates around the Eddington limit, hence with an overall radiative efficiency as small as eta ~ 10^{-2}; (iv) strong departures from thermal equilibrium in shocked regions; (v) no appearance of the flip-flop instability. We conclude that the current optically thick approximation to the radiation transfer does give physically substantial improvements over the pure hydro also in set-ups departing from equilibrium, and, once accompanied by an optically thin treatment, is likely to provide a fundamental tool for investigating accretion flows in a large variety of astrophysical systems.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.