0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The outflow at the poles of the black hole obviously are, though. There is no reason that an inflow should be a jet.
Please look again at the Wind structure outflow from the accretion disc at the page before the last one:http://phsites.technion.ac.il/talks/agn2017/Reeves-J.pdfSo, the matter is first ejected outwards from the accretion disc and at the plane of the accretion disc.In the following article it is stated that it is due to magnetic field: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/milky-way-black-hole-jet/"Jets arise because the black hole is spinning. As matter falls into the black hole, the matter’s magnetic field gets twisted and amplified by the black hole’s spin, and this pumped-up magnetic field launches material outward in the form of jets."Therefore, the outflow from the SMBH is always from the accretion disc due to magnetic field.However, due to the magnetic field lines, the matter is lifted upwards.Again - we can see it in the presentation which I have offered.So, let me ask you if you agree with the following:1.The magnetic field launches material outward from the accretion disc and set the first stage of outflow?2. The same magnetic field also Pushes this outflow in the direction of upwards/downwards with regards to the accretion disc plane?3. As it boosted outwards (at almost 0.8c) due to the magnetic field lines it set the molecular jet stream that we see above and below the galactic disc. (this jet stream move directly above the pole)?4. So, the jet stream outflow that we see above and below the accretion disc plane is a direct outcome from the impact of the magnetic field on the matter in the accretion disc?
Dear KryptidThere is no outflow from the pole of the black hole.This is a severe mistake.The outflow is from the accretion disc itself.Please look again at the Wind structure outflow from the accretion disc at the page before the last one:http://phsites.technion.ac.il/talks/agn2017/Reeves-J.pdf
In the following article it is stated that it is due to magnetic field: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/milky-way-black-hole-jet/"Jets arise because the black hole is spinning. As matter falls into the black hole, the matter’s magnetic field gets twisted and amplified by the black hole’s spin, and this pumped-up magnetic field launches material outward in the form of jets."Therefore, the outflow from the SMBH is always from the accretion disc due to magnetic field.However, due to the magnetic field lines, the matter is lifted upwards.Again - we can see it in the presentation which I have offered.
So, let me ask you if you agree with the following:1.The magnetic field launches material outward from the accretion disc and set the first stage of outflow?2. The same magnetic field also Pushes this outflow in the direction of upwards/downwards with regards to the accretion disc plane?
3. As it boosted outwards (at almost 0.8c) due to the magnetic field lines it set the molecular jet stream that we see above and below the galactic disc. (this jet stream move directly above the pole)?
4. So, the jet stream outflow that we see above and below the accretion disc plane is a direct outcome from the impact of the magnetic field on the matter in the accretion disc?
1. How any sort of matter can fall into the accretion disc? Why the same mighty magnetic field that sets the outflow jets can't push outwards any matter that just think to fall into the accretion disc?
2. Why the same magnetic field can't pull particles from the event horizon of the SMBH?
Once you agree with that we have solved the enigma of the whole Universe.
The jets are going to be aligned with the axis of rotation of the accretion disk, not the axis of the black hole itself.
The polar jets are a different phenomenon. These are the jets from the poles that I am talking about: http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/G/Galactic+Jets There is one on each side of the galaxy. The jets don’t literally come from the poles of the black hole, the accretion flow is just lifted along those particular axes.
So, why our scientists can justify those pair-production near the event of horizon that are squirted out by magnetic force, while it is forbidden for me to use the same identical idea?
Your idea wasn't identical. You were proposing that they come from within the event horizon.
Not sure how that sources material for the jets since the positrons typically find another electron somewhere in the accretion disk and annihilate it, for a net zero gain of charged particles
Well, I really don't care about the distance between those new created pair production to the event horizon.As long as they are squirted out at almost light speed by the action of the combined magnetic fields from the SMBH into the accretion disc - that is perfectly OK with me.
The pair production happens in the accretion disk near the event horizon, where the temperatures are very, very high
The modern consensus is that the main constituents are electrons and their anti-particle equivalent, positrons. These are thought to be produced by ‘pair-production’ close to the event horizon of the central black hole, and squirted out at almost light speed by the action of the combined magnetic fields."
Since the temperature of the material itself is what drives this, the energy and mass of the accretion disk is reduced by it when the pairs are blasted off into the jets
Therefore, it is clear that the ‘pair-production’ have been produced outside the accretion disc.
Here, we use a self-consistent dynamical and radiative model to investigate pair production by γγ collisions in weakly radiative accretion flows around a black hole of mass M and accretion rate M.
For first time we compute non-equilibrium electron-positron pair production rates by γγ from turbulent accretion disk around spinning black hole
The high pair creation rate during this state is indicated by the presence of a broad e−e+ annihilation line-like feature and needs the presence of a high temperature radiation field. We put forward a scenario in which the observed spectrum originates from the inner region of an accretion disk around a rapidly rotating black hole.
Hence the pair- production activity itself has no effect on the energy and mass in the accretion disk.
the mass of the accretion disc is increasing.
Don't you see that the game is over?
You have offered solid evidence to that theory.
Fron now on we must call it - Excretion disc.
Why don't we share our efforts in bringing the breakthrough information to the science community and mankind?We need to get a reward for our discovery!!!
QuoteTherefore, it is clear that the ‘pair-production’ have been produced outside the accretion disc.Not at all. Pair production is modeled as happening inside the accretion disk. There are other sources that state this:https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0004-637X/735/1/9/meta
http://cxc.harvard.edu/cdo/accr10/pres/moscibrodzka_monika.pdf:"For first time we compute non-equilibrium electron-positron pair production rates by γγ from turbulent accretion disk around spinning black hole"
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273117797000458:QuoteThe high pair creation rate during this state is indicated by the presence of a broad e−e+ annihilation line-like feature and needs the presence of a high temperature radiation field. We put forward a scenario in which the observed spectrum originates from the inner region of an accretion disk around a rapidly rotating black hole.
QuoteHence the pair- production activity itself has no effect on the energy and mass in the accretion disk.Yes it does, since the energy of the accretion disk is what allows them to be formed in the first place.
So, where do you see that Pair production is happening inside the accretion disk?
For first time we compute non-equilibrium electron-positron pair production rates by γγ from turbulent accretion disk around spinning black hole.
We put forward a scenario in which the observed spectrum originates from the inner region of an accretion disk around a rapidly rotating black hole.
I don't think that they aim for the accretion disc.
Therefore, the real meaning of "turbulent accretion disk around spinning black hole" is "magnetized disk around a spinning black hole."
Sorry, in most of the articles it is stated that the pair - production activity is NEAR the event horizon (and not in the accretion disc itself)
In this article it is stated clearly that pair production is concentrated close to the event horizon, but not in the accretion disc:"Electron-positron pairs may be produced near accreting black holes by a variety of physical processes"These indicate that γγ pair production is concentrated close to the event horizonSo, where do you see that Pair production is happening inside the accretion disk?
You realize that "near the event horizon" and "in the accretion disk" are not mutually-exclusive locations, don't you?
So every time an article says "near a black hole event horizon", they actually mean that it happens within, or on the edges of, the accretion disk.
The requested energy for that transformation is contributed by the gravity force + magnetic energy.
The only way to get energy out of a gravitational field is by converting gravitational potential energy into kinetic energy. This, in turn, can only be done by lowering a mass into the gravitational field. You, however, are taking a mass and pushing it out and far away from the black hole (in the form of jets). That doesn't give you energy, it requires it instead. So gravity is not a source of energy you can use for this.
Magnetism can indeed transfer energy (electric motors use this principle all the time), but that energy doesn't come from nowhere.
The source of that magnetic field must lose energy in the process.If the source of the field is the accretion disk, then the disk must lose energy.
Our pair production rate simulations are based on a GRMHD time-dependent model of a magnetized disk around a spinning black hole.
If the source of the field is the black hole (in your hypothetical case), then the black hole must lose energy (likely by slowing down its spin).
So you still have a system that loses energy and mass over time.
Those particles increase the total mass of the SMBH and therefore, there is increasing in the magnetic fields.Hence, this increasing in the magnetic field overcomes the energy lost due to the creation activity of new atoms and molecular in the accretion disc and due to the requested energy that drifts them all outwards into that jet outflow.
Both - the accretion disc and the SMBH get new particles.
Some of the new created particles must fall into the SMBH from the Event Horizon or close to it.
QuoteSome of the new created particles must fall into the SMBH from the Event Horizon or close to it.I thought you said that nothing can fall into the black hole because the magnetic field won't let it?
That violates the first law of thermodynamics. You can't get more energy out than you put in."New particles" does not equal "new mass/energy". The total mass/energy of the system cannot increase over time without violating the first law of thermodynamics.
No, there is no violation of the first law of thermodynamics.
Remember the famous formula by EinsteinE = M c^2In Atomic bomb the mass is converted into pure energy without any violation of the first law of thermodynamics.
Therefore, Energy can be transformed into mass as mass can be transformed into Energy.
Let's say that the magnetic field transfers 1.022 keV of mass-energy out of the black hole into order to form an electron-positron pair. The black hole must now weigh 1.022 keV less than it did before.