Paper detail

Hydrodynamical Simulations to Determine the Feeding Rate of Black Holes by the Tidal Disruption of Stars: The Importance of the Impact Parameter and Stellar Structure

The disruption of stars by supermassive black holes has been linked to more than a dozen flares in the cores of galaxies out to redshift $z \sim 0.4$. Modeling these flares properly requires a prediction of the rate of mass return to the black hole after a disruption. Through hydrodynamical simulation, we show that aside from the full disruption of a solar mass star at the exact limit where the star is destroyed, the common assumptions used to estimate $\dot{M}(t)$, the rate of mass return to the black hole, are largely invalid. While the analytical approximation to tidal disruption predicts that the least-centrally concentrated stars and the deepest encounters should have more quickly-peaked flares, we find that the most-centrally concentrated stars have the quickest-peaking flares, and the trend between the time of peak and the impact parameter for deeply-penetrating encounters reverses beyond the critical distance at which the star is completely destroyed. We also show that the most-centrally concentrated stars produced a characteristic drop in $\dot{M}(t)$ shortly after peak when a star is only partially disrupted, with the power law index $n$ being as extreme as -4 in the months immediately following the peak of a flare. Additionally, we find that $n$ asymptotes to $\simeq -2.2$ for both low- and high-mass stars for approximately half of all stellar disruptions. Both of these results are significantly steeper than the typically assumed $n = -5/3$. As these precipitous decay rates are only seen for events in which a stellar core survives the disruption, they can be used to determine if an observed tidal disruption flare produced a surviving remnant. These results should be taken into consideration when flares arising from tidal disruptions are modeled. [abridged]

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.