Paper detail

Was the soft X-ray flare in NGC 3599 due to an AGN disc instability or a delayed tidal disruption event?

We present unpublished data from a tidal disruption candidate in NGC 3599 which show that the galaxy was already X-ray bright 18 months before the measurement which led to its classification. This removes the possibility that the flare was caused by a classical, fast-rising, short-peaked, tidal disruption event. Recent relativistic simulations indicate that the majority of disruptions will actually take months or years to rise to a peak, which will then be maintained for longer than previously thought. NGC 3599 could be one of the first identified examples of such an event. The optical spectra of NGC 3599 indicate that it is a low-luminosity Seyfert/LINER with L_bol~10^40 ergs/s The flare may alternatively be explained by a thermal instability in the accretion disc, which propagates through the inner region at the sound speed, causing an increase of the disc scale height and local accretion rate. This can explain the <9 years rise time of the flare. If this mechanism is correct then the flare may repeat on a timescale of several decades as the inner disc is emptied and refilled.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.