A simple model for superluminal motion and state transition of microquasars
Sponsored Links
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
1 / 28

A simple model for superluminal motion and state transition of microquasars PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 87 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

A simple model for superluminal motion and state transition of microquasars. Huazhong University of Science and technology. Gong Biping. Bulk motion. M. Rees 1966. Mirabel et al., 1994, Nature, 371, 46. XTE J1550-564 in 2000 and 2002. 2002, Science, 298, 196. GRS 1915+105

Download Presentation

A simple model for superluminal motion and state transition of microquasars

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


A simple model for superluminal motion and state transition of microquasars

Huazhong University of Science and technology

Gong Biping


Bulk motion

M. Rees 1966


Mirabel et al., 1994, Nature, 371, 46.


XTE J1550-564 in 2000 and 2002

2002, Science, 298, 196.


GRS 1915+105

in 1994 and 1997

2004, ARA&A, 42, 317.


Miller-Jones et al

2005


Position angle variation

1999, ApJ, 511, 398.


Difficult questions on SLM

(a) why the ratio of the displacement of the approaching blob to the receding blob is not a constant.

(b) why the receding jet appears later than the approaching jet in XTEJ1550-564 (for months) and GRS 1915+105 (for days).

(c) why deceleration appeared in XTE J1550-564 but not in GRS 1915+105.

(d) why the position angle changes 10 deg in 20-30 days in GRS 1915+105.

(e) why there is obvious oscillation in the receding blob.

(f) why 20% discrepancy in proper motion between the ejection of 1994 and 1997.

(g) why the size of condensations do not increase rapidly as expected from adiabatic expansion.


Other possibility?

Bulk motion

precession


The precession of GRS 1915+105 and SS433


Jet precession model


Primary precession


Perturbation to orbital elements


Nutation


SLM under precession scenario


(a) why the ratio of the displacement of the approaching blob to the receding blob is not a constant.

is not a constant under precession model

It is a constant under bulk motion


(b) why the receding jet appears later than the approaching jet in XTEJ1550-564 .


(c) why deceleration appeared in XTE J1550-564 but not in GRS 1915+105.


(d) why the decrease in flux density with angular separation from the core on GRS 1915+105 is remarkably similar with that of SS 433.

(e) why 20% discrepancy in proper motion between the ejection of 1994 and 1997.


(f) why the position angle changes 10 deg in 20-30 days in GRS 1915+105.

(g) why there is obvious oscillation in the receding blob.


Observations which are difficult to understand

under the bulk motion scenario can be interpreted

by the jet precession model naturally.


The state evolution of GRS 1915+105

Fender et al. 2004


Fender et al. 2004


Structured jet


Precession of the structured jet


Summary

Simple

Unified

Easy to test


Thanks for your attention


  • Login