Paper detail

The Difference between Radio-Loud and Radio-Quiet Active Galaxies

The recent development of unified theories of active galactic nuclei (AGN) has indicated that there are two physically distinct classes of these objects - radio-loud and radio-quiet. The primary observational distinctions between the two types are: (1) The radio-loud objects produce large scale radio jets and lobes, with the kinetic power of the jets being a significant fraction of the total bolometric luminosity. On the other hand, the weak radio ejecta of the radio-quiet objects are energetically insignificant. (2) The radio-loud objects are associated with elliptical galaxies which have undergone recent mergers, while the radio-quiets prefer spiral hosts. (3) The space density of the radio-louds at a given optical luminosity is $\approx$ 10 times lower than that of the radio-quiets. Despite these differences, the (probably) thermal emissions from the AGN (continua and lines from X-ray to infrared wavelengths) are quite similar in the two classes of object. We argue that this last result suggests that the black hole masses and mass accretion rates in the two classes are not greatly different, and that the difference between the classes is associated with the spin of the black hole. We assume that the normal process of accretion through a disk does not lead to rapidly spinning holes, and propose instead that galaxies (e.g. spirals) which have not suffered a recent major merger event contain non-rotating or only slowly rotating black holes. When two such galaxies merge, the two black holes are known to form a binary and we assume that they eventually coalesce. In the small fraction of mergers in which the two ``parent'' galaxies contain very massive holes of roughly equal mass, a rapidly spinning, very massive hole results. It is proposed that such mergers are the progenitors of powerful radio

preprint1994arXivOpen 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.