Paper detail

Thanatology in Protoplanetary Discs: the combined influence of Ohmic, Hall, and ambipolar diffusion on dead zones

Protoplanetary discs are poorly ionised due to their low temperatures and high column densities, and are therefore subject to three "non-ideal" magnetohydrodynamic effects: Ohmic dissipation, ambipolar diffusion, and the Hall effect. The existence of magnetically driven turbulence in these discs has been a central question since the discovery of the magnetorotational instability. Early models considered Ohmic diffusion only and led to a scenario of layered accretion, in which a magnetically "dead" zone in the disc midplane is embedded within magnetically "active" surface layers at distances ~1-10 au from the central protostellar object. Recent work has suggested that a combination of Ohmic dissipation and ambipolar diffusion can render both the midplane and surface layers of the disc inactive and that torques due to magnetically driven outflows are required to explain the observed accretion rates. We reassess this picture by performing three-dimensional numerical simulations that include, for the first time, all three non-ideal MHD effects. We find that the Hall effect can generically "revive" dead zones by producing a dominant azimuthal magnetic field and a large-scale Maxwell stress throughout the midplane, provided the angular velocity and magnetic field satisfy Omega.B > 0. The attendant large magnetic pressure modifies the vertical density profile and substantially increases the disc scale height beyond its hydrostatic value. Outflows are produced, but are not necessary to explain accretion rates <10^{-7} Msun/yr. The flow in the disc midplane is essentially laminar, suggesting that dust sedimentation may be efficient. These results demonstrate that, if the MRI is relevant for driving mass accretion in protoplanetary discs, one must include the Hall effect to obtain even qualitatively correct results.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.