Paper detail

On the nature of the "radio quiet" black hole binaries

The accretion/ejection coupling in accreting black hole binaries has been described by empirical relations between the X-ray/radio and X-ray/optical-infrared luminosities. These correlations were initially thought to be universal. However, recently many sources have been found to produce jets that, given certain accretion-powered luminosities, are fainter than expected from the earlier correlations. This shows that black holes with similar accretion flows can produce a broad range of outflows in power, suggesting that some other parameters might be tuning the accretion/ejection coupling. Recent work has already shown that this jet power does not correlate with the reported black hole spin measurements. Here we discuss whether fixed parameters of the binary system, as well as the properties of the outburst, produce any effect on the energy output in the jet. No obvious dependence is found. We also show that there is no systematic variation of the slope of the radio:X-ray correlation with normalization. We define a jet-toy model in which the bulk Lorentz factor becomes larger than ~1 above ~0.1% of the Eddington luminosity. With this model, if we assume random inclination angles which result in highly variable boosting at large Eddington ratios, we are able to reproduce qualitatively the scatter of the X-ray/radio correlation and the radio quiet population. However the model seems to be at odds with some other observed properties of the systems. We also compare the radio quiet black holes with the neutron stars. We show that if a mass correction from the fundamental plane is applied, the possibility that they are statistically indistinguishable in the X-ray:radio plane can not be completely ruled out. This result suggests that some of the outliers could actually be neutron stars, or that the disc-jet coupling in the radio quiet black holes is more similar to the one in neutron stars.

preprint2011arXivOpen 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.