Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 4 cited by

Radiation and Magnetic Pressure Support in Accretion Disks around Supermassive Black Holes and The Physical Origin of the Extreme Ultraviolet to Soft X-ray Spectrum

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Simulations trace the quasar soft X-ray excess to bulk Comptonization in the accretion flow itself, not to a hot corona or reflection.

desk verdict First global 3D radiation-MHD demonstration of bulk Comptonization producing the AGN EUV/soft-X power law, but the production region sits at unresolved angular scales and the spectral slopes are provisional. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.09671 v1 pith:X54NXWVZ submitted 2025-05-14 astro-ph.HE

Yan-Fei Jiang , Omer Blaes , Ish Kaul , Lizhong Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords accretiondiskssupermassiveblackholessoftX-rayexcessbulkComptonizationradiationmagnetohydrodynamicsquasarspectraEddingtonEUVemission
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that the extreme-ultraviolet to soft X-ray power-law continuum observed in radio-quiet quasars is created inside the accretion flow itself, by bulk Comptonization in the optically thick, inflowing gas, rather than by a warm corona or by reflection of hard X-rays. The argument rests on four three-dimensional radiation magnetohydrodynamic simulations of disks around a $10^{8}$ solar-mass black hole with accretion rates from 0.03 to 4 times Eddington. At near- and super-Eddington rates, the computed spectra show a power-law component between about 10 eV and 1 keV with slopes $L_\nu\propto\nu^{-1}$ to $\nu^{-2}$, matching observed quasar continua; the 3 percent Eddington disk does not produce this component. The high-energy photons are traced to an optically thick region roughly 30 to 45 degrees from the disk midplane, where the inflow speed exceeds the electron thermal speed and photons are upscattered by the convergent motion of the gas. If correct, the spectral slope becomes a direct probe of inflow dynamics and removes the need for separate thermal-Comptonization layers.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is compressible bulk Comptonization in the converging accretion flow: photons repeatedly scatter off electrons in gas whose radial inflow speed exceeds the electron thermal speed, gaining energy from the bulk convergence of the flow rather than from thermal electron motions. The required physical condition is that the optical depth across the velocity gradient be comparable to $c/v$, so photons are carried along with the flow while slowly diffusing; the simulations find this condition met in an optically thick layer about 30 to 45 degrees from the midplane, where the inflow speed is $\gtrsim 0.1\%c$. The numerical machinery that exposes the mechanism is multi-group radiation transport with realistic opacities, which lets the emergent spectrum be computed self-consistently from the simulated gas structure, and a control experiment that turns off Doppler frequency shifts to isolate bulk Comptonization from thermal emission.

What would settle it

Take one of the near-Eddington simulations and re-run the multi-group spectrum calculation with the same level of angular refinement applied to the 30 to 45 degree off-midplane layer; if the emergent 10 eV to 1 keV power-law slope moves outside $L_\nu\propto\nu^{-1}$ to $\nu^{-2}$, or the component disappears, the claim that bulk Comptonization in this specific region produces the observed soft X-ray excess is not established.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery claim is that the power-law continuum from about 10 eV to 1 keV in near-Eddington accretion disks around supermassive black holes is produced by compressible bulk Comptonization within the converging accretion flow. The evidence is diagnostic rather than merely correlative: when the Doppler frequency shift is switched off in the multi-group radiation transport, the high-energy power law disappears while the thermal peak below 10 eV is unchanged, and setting all velocities to zero produces the same result. The photons emerge from a region 30 to 45 degrees from the midplane that is still optically thick (Rosseland optical depth above $10^3$), where the radial inflow speed exceeds the electron thermal speed; this is not a turbulent Comptonization process, which would require small-scale eddies, but a coherent convergent-flow process whose spectral shape resembles the analytic free-fall bulk-Comptonization solution. The same simulations show that the disks become either radiation-pressure or magnetic-pressure supported depending on whether the cooling time is shorter or longer than the inflow time, and that strongly magnetized disks with very low surface density would produce spectra very different from what is observed.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical grid refines only the region within about 3.5 degrees of the midplane, while the photons that form the power law are produced 30 to 45 degrees from the midplane at root-level angular resolution, and the paper presents no resolution-convergence check for that zone.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, the observed soft X-ray slope becomes a direct readout of the inflow velocity and optical depth structure of the disk.
  • No warm corona or blurred reflection is needed to explain the soft X-ray excess in near-Eddington quasars.
  • The power law merges smoothly with the ~10 eV thermal peak, matching the observed ~12 eV (1000 Å) far-UV break.
  • The absence of the power law in the 3 percent Eddington run is consistent with soft X-ray excesses appearing preferentially in high-accretion-rate sources.
  • Extrapolating to smaller black-hole masses, as in Narrow Line Seyfert 1 galaxies, the same mechanism is expected to shift the spectrum to higher frequencies while preserving the power-law slope (a prediction the paper states explicitly).

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same mechanism should be visible in any accretion flow that is optically thick and converges at speeds above the electron thermal speed; X-ray binaries, which lack the soft X-ray excess, may simply not satisfy that condition, a connection the paper notes observationally but does not develop into a model.
  • Because bulk Comptonization is a kinematic process, the soft X-ray excess should appear in other systems with suitable inflow conditions, such as tidal disruption events or ultraluminous X-ray sources, whenever the velocity and optical depth combination is met; this is a direct extrapolation of the paper's mechanism beyond AGN disks.
  • A decisive observational discriminator follows from the mechanism: the predicted EUV-to-soft-X-ray continuum is featureless and smoothly connects to the UV peak, so a high-resolution spectrum across the 0.01-1 keV range with no atomic features would favor this model over reflection or absorption interpretations; this test is implicit in the paper's comparison to observed slopes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents four 3D radiation MHD simulations of accretion disks around a 1e8 solar mass black hole, with accretion rates ranging from 0.03 to 4 times Eddington. The disks end up either magnetic-pressure dominated or radiation-pressure dominated depending on the relative cooling and inflow timescales. Using a restart of single snapshots with multi-group radiation transport (14 frequency groups, TOPS opacities), the authors compute emerging spectra and find a power-law component between ~10 eV and 1 keV in the three higher-accretion-rate runs, which they attribute to compressible bulk Comptonization in an optically thick converging flow located about 30-50 degrees from the midplane. The 3% Eddington run does not show this component from the disk body. The mechanism is probed by turning off the Doppler frequency shift, which removes the power law.

Significance. If the main result holds, the paper offers a concrete, physically motivated origin for the EUV/soft X-ray excess in radio-quiet quasars, distinct from warm-corona or reflection models, with the spectral slope set by the inflow dynamics. The work has genuine strengths: the Doppler-off experiment is a clean internal test of the mechanism; the multi-group transport uses realistic opacities; and the spectral calculation has no tunable parameters. The identification of the production region and the mechanism's dependence on inflow speed are falsifiable predictions. However, confidence is limited by the numerical resolution of the production region, the use of single non-time-averaged snapshots, and an inconsistency between the quoted slope conventions, as detailed below.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2 and Figures 15-16] The high-energy photon production region is under-resolved. The AMR refinement covers only |theta-90 deg| < 3.5 deg with Delta_theta=1.23%, while the root polar grid has 32 uniform cells over 180 degrees, giving Delta_theta about 5.6 degrees. Figure 15 places the production region at 30-50 degrees from the midplane, entirely at root resolution, with roughly 3-4 cells across the 20-degree-wide zone. Bulk Comptonization depends on the velocity gradient and optical depth along the photon path, and Figure 16 shows the inflow speed rising from below 1e-4 c at the midplane to above 1e-2 c at |theta-90 deg| > 30 deg, a gradient that 5.6-degree cells represent only coarsely. No resolution convergence test is presented for the velocity structure or the emergent spectrum in this region, so the reported power-law slopes (nu L_nu proportional to nu^-1 to nu^-1.5 in Figure 13) may be numerically dependent.
  2. [Abstract and Section 5 / Figure 13] The slope convention is inconsistent. The abstract and summary state L_nu proportional to nu^-1 to nu^-2, but Section 5 reports nu L_nu proportional to nu^-1 to nu^-1.5, which corresponds to L_nu proportional to nu^-2 to nu^-2.5. The observed slopes quoted (Laor et al. 1997) are L_nu proportional to nu^-1.77 and nu^-1.72. The comparison to observation is therefore not as claimed: the simulated L_nu slopes are steeper by one power of nu. This needs to be corrected and the observational comparison re-evaluated.
  3. [Section 5 and Figure 1] The spectra are computed from single snapshots with gas and magnetic fields frozen after restart, rather than from time-averaged or multiple snapshots. The luminosity histories in Figure 1 show large variability over the simulation, including a secular decline in AGNUV4, so the representativeness of the chosen snapshot is not established. Since the central claim is that the power-law component is a generic property of such disks, the absence of a time average or of several independent snapshots weakens the claim.
  4. [Table 1 and Section 3] The four runs differ simultaneously in initial torus density, pressure, radius, magnetic field amplitude, and field topology, as well as in the achieved accretion rate. The interpretation that the pressure-support regime is controlled by the ratio of cooling time to inflow time is thus not cleanly tested, because multiple initial conditions change together. A systematic study (varying one parameter at a time) would be needed to support the causal claims about magnetic versus radiation pressure support in Section 3.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Figure 14 caption] The caption refers to runs "AGNUV10" and "AGNUVB10", which appear to be typos for AGNUV4 and AGNUVB3.
  2. [Abstract and Section 5] The abstract says the 3% Eddington disk does not exhibit the power-law component, but Section 5 notes a weak power-law appears when photons from the whole box are included; please clarify whether the claim refers to the disk body only.
  3. [Abstract and Section 5] The production region is quoted as 30-45 degrees from the midplane in the abstract, while Section 5 gives 30-50 degrees (|theta-90 deg| between about 30 and 50); the numbers should be made consistent.
  4. [Section 5] The sentence "This is also not in the optically thin region" is awkward; consider "This region is not optically thin" for clarity.
  5. [Figure 1 caption] The caption mentions blue lines and red circles but does not describe how they appear in the panels; please add a legend or explicit description in the caption.
  6. [Section 5] The claim that the spectral shape is "pretty close" to the Payne & Blandford (1981) solution is qualitative; a quantitative comparison (e.g., fitting the simulated slope to the analytical prediction) would strengthen the connection.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the spectral power law is an emergent simulation output compared with external observations and a controlled Doppler-term toggle, not an input fitted into the model.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, that an EUV/soft-X-ray power law arises from bulk Comptonization in the optically thick converging flow, is derived from time-dependent radiation-MHD simulations rather than from a fit. The spectra in Figure 13 are computed by post-processing snapshots with a multi-group transport module using TOPS opacities, and the paper explicitly states that there are no free parameters that can adjust the spectra (Section 5). The attribution to bulk Comptonization is tested by turning off the Doppler frequency shift and showing that the power law disappears (Figure 14), which is a controlled numerical experiment rather than a definitional identity. Self-citations to Jiang et al. (2014a), Jiang (2021), and Jiang (2022) concern the radiation-transport algorithms used, and citations to Jiang et al. (2019a,b) and Secunda et al. (2024, 2025) are contextual or about the inner region excluded from the domain; none substitute for the present calculation of the outer-disk spectrum. The comparison to Payne & Blandford (1981) is an external analytic benchmark, not an imported uniqueness theorem. The skeptical concerns about root-level angular resolution in the 30-45 degree production region and the abstract/figure slope-convention mismatch (nu L_nu versus L_nu) are numerical-resolution and consistency issues, not circularity. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained: simulation dynamics plus multi-group radiation transport produce the spectrum, and the observed comparison is made after the fact.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The central claim rests on several hand-chosen initial conditions and practical numerical approximations (frozen gas during spectral post-processing, gray dynamics, restricted radial domain, solar metallicity). The spectral calculation itself has no fitted parameters, but the disk structures that determine the spectra are set by the free initial torus parameters.

free parameters (5)
  • Initial torus density scale rho_i = 0.2 rho0 (AGNUV0.03), 1 rho0 (AGNUV4), 1 rho0 (AGNUVB0.6), 10 rho0 (AGNUVB3)
    Chosen by hand to set the mass supply and the cooling-to-inflow timescale hierarchy; directly controls whether the disk becomes radiation or magnetic pressure supported.
  • Initial torus pressure scale P_i = 9.6e-4 P0 (AGNUV0.03), 1e8 P0 (AGNUV4), 108 P0 (AGNUVB0.6), 1080 P0 (AGNUVB3)
    Sets the initial thermal energy and optical depth of the torus; combined with rho_i it sets the gas temperature and cooling time.
  • Initial torus radius r_i = 300 r_g (AGNUV0.03), 400 r_g (AGNUV4, AGNUVB0.6, AGNUVB3)
    Sets the radial location of the mass reservoir and hence which region feeds the steady-state disk inside 200 r_g.
  • Magnetic field amplitude a0 = 3.25 (AGNUV0.03), 4e-4 (AGNUV4), 4e-4 (AGNUVB0.6), 2e-3 (AGNUVB3)
    Sets the initial magnetic pressure relative to thermal pressure; controls whether magnetic pressure support and winds develop.
  • Magnetic field loop topology = Single loop (AGNUV0.03, AGNUV4), double loop (AGNUVB0.6, AGNUVB3)
    Determines net poloidal flux through the disk and the presence of magnetocentrifugal winds; a design choice, not derived from first principles.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Ideal MHD with MRI as the angular momentum transport mechanism
    The simulations solve ideal MHD equations and rely on MRI turbulence; no anomalous viscosity is added. Invoked throughout Section 2 and 3.
  • domain assumption Gray radiation MHD during dynamical evolution is adequate for the disk structure
    The dynamical runs use frequency-integrated radiation transport; frequency-dependent effects are only applied in post-processing. Section 2 and Section 5.
  • ad hoc to paper The gas and magnetic fields can be frozen while the multi-group radiation field relaxes
    Section 5 states 'We do not evolve the gas quantities and magnetic fields after the restart'; this assumes the radiation field adjusts faster than the dynamical time and that radiative force feedback is negligible.
  • domain assumption The inner disk inside 50 r_g does not affect the UV and soft X-ray production outside it
    Section 2 excludes the inner region, and Section 6 argues hard X-rays from the inner region cannot penetrate the optically thick outer disk, citing Secunda et al. 2024, 2025.
  • ad hoc to paper Single snapshots are representative of the time-averaged disk emission
    Section 5 chooses single snapshots (red circles in Figure 1) despite significant time variability in luminosity and accretion rate shown in Figure 1; no time-averaged spectra are given.
  • domain assumption Solar metallicity opacity tables are appropriate for the disk atmosphere
    Section 5 uses TOPS opacities at solar metallicity; AGN abundances may differ and could affect the EUV opacity and spectral shape.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Radiation and Magnetic Pressure Support in Accretion Disks around Supermassive Black Holes and The Physical Origin of the Extreme Ultraviolet to Soft X-ray Spectrum." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/X54NXWVZ

@misc{pith2026250509671,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Radiation and Magnetic Pressure Support in Accretion Disks around Supermassive Black Holes and The Physical Origin of the Extreme Ultraviolet to Soft X-ray Spectrum},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/X54NXWVZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.09671}
}
abstract

We present the results of four three-dimensional radiation magnetohydrodynamic simulations of accretion disks around a $10^8$ solar mass black hole, which produce the far ultraviolet spectrum peak and demonstrate a robust physical mechanism to produce the extreme ultraviolet to soft X-ray power-law continuum component. The disks are fed from rotating tori and reach accretion rates ranging from $0.03$ to $4$ times the Eddington value. The disks become radiation pressure or magnetic pressure dominated depending on the relative timescales of radiative cooling and gas inflow. Magnetic pressure supported disks can form with or without net poloidal magnetic fields as long as the inflowing gas can cool quickly enough, which can typically happen when the accretion rate is low. We calculate the emerging spectra from these disks using multi-group radiation transport with realistic opacities and find that they typically peak around $10$ eV. At accretion rates close to or above the Eddington limit, a power-law component can appear for photon energies between $10$ eV and 1 keV with a spectral slope varying between $L_\nu\propto\nu^{-1}$ and $\nu^{-2}$, comparable to what is observed in radio quiet quasars. The disk with $3\%$ Eddington accretion rate does not exhibit this component. These high energy photons are produced in an optically thick region $\approx 30^{\circ}-45^{\circ}$ from the disk midplane by compressible bulk Comptonization within the converging accretion flow. Strongly magnetized disks that have a very small surface density will produce a spectrum that is very different from what is observed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.09671 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left: Histories of total luminosity emitted from the inner disks (r < 200rg) of the four runs AGNUV0.03, AGNUV4, AGNUVB0.6 and AGNUVB3. Blue lines indicate the temporal intervals we used to calculate the time averaged properties. The snapshots we used to calculate the spectra are indicated by the red circles. Right: Histories of mass accretion rate at radius r = 60rg (black lines) and r = 150rg (semi-transparent red… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Radial profiles of time-averaged net mass accre￾tion rates (solid black lines) for the four runs AGNUV0.03, AGNUV4, AGNUVB0.6 and AGNUVB3 (from top to bot￾tom panels). The dashed black lines in the second and fourth panels are the mass fluxes moving out, which are ba￾sically 0 for other two runs. The time averages are done for the time intervals [3.0, 4.3] × 106 rg/c, [1.6, 4.3] × 106 rg/c, [1.8, 4.2] × 106 rg/c, [1… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Three dimensional structures of density for a snapshot at time 2.58 × 106 rg/c of the run AGNUV4 (left) and a snapshot at time 2.71 × 106 rg/c of the run AGNUVB3 (right). Density is shown as iso-surfaces within 300rg [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Vertical slices of density for snapshots at time 4.26 × 106 rg/c, 2.58 × 106 rg/c, 3.87 × 106 rg/c and 2.71 × 106 rg/c respectively for the four runs. The over-plotted gray lines are the line integral convolution of the velocity, which is an efficient way to show the v…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Azimuthally averaged gas temperature for a snapshot at time 2.58 × 106 rg/c of the run AGNUV4 (left) and a snapshot at time 2.71 × 106 rg/c of the run AGNUVB3 (right). The streamlines show the azimuthally averaged flow velocities (the vr and vθ components) [PITH_FULL_…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Time averaged mass accretion rates integrated between θ = 180◦ and each polar position θ at radius r = 60rg (top row) and 100rg (bottom row) for the simulations AGNUV0.03 (left) and AGNUVB3 (right). Corresponding Rosseland mean optical depths are shown on the bottom ax…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Time and azimuthally averaged vertical density profiles at radii 60rg (top) and 100rg (bottom) for the four runs. Densities are scaled with the fiducial density unit ρ0 = 5 × 10−10 g/cm3 . there are clear changes of slopes between the radia￾tion pressure supported midp…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Azimuthally averaged vertical profiles of gas sound speed cg (black lines), radiation sound speed cr (red lines) and inflow speed −vr (green lines) as a func￾tion of Alfv´en speed (vk) at r = 100rg for the four runs AGNUV0.03, AGNUV4, AGNUVB0.6 and AGNUVB3 (from top to…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Dissipation, which is measured by the polar portion of the divergence of the azimuthally-averaged ra￾diation flux (1/r sin θ) ∂ h ⟨Fr,θ⟩ sin θ i /∂θ, per unit mass, as a function of the integrated Rosseland mean optical depth from the rotation axis at radius r = 60rg …
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Rosseland mean (top panel) and Planck mean (bottom panel) opacities as a function of temperature for se￾lected densities and frequency groups. The solid, dotted and dashed lines are for densities at 10−8 g/cm3 , 10−10 g/cm3 and 10−12 g/cm3 respectively. The black, blu…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Radiative spectra for snapshots at times 4.26 × 106 rg/c, 2.58 × 106 rg/c, 3.87 × 106 rg/c and 2.71 × 106 rg/c of the four runs AGNUV0.03, AGNUV4, AGNUVB0.6 and AGNUVB3, respectively. The solid black lines are the results when we include all photons emitted between 50…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Spectra when the frequency shift due to the Doppler effect is turned off for the snapshot at time 2.58 × 106 rg/c of AGNUV10 (left) and the snapshot at time 2.71 × 106 rg/c of AGNUVB10 (right). All the lines represent the spectra calculated in the same way as shown in…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Spatial distribution of the azimuthally averaged radiation energy density in the frequency group 0.40 < ν/keV < 1.12 for the run AGNUVB0.6 (left) and AGNUVB3 (right). The streamlines are the radiation flux in the same frequency group. The dashed white lines indicate l…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Top: Azimuthally averaged vertical profiles of different velocity components at radius 100rg for the run AGNUVB0.6 at time t = 3.87 × 106 rg/c. Bottom: Ra￾dial profiles of the azimuthally averaged radial velocity (solid black line for −vr and dashed black line for δvr…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Magnetosonic Waves as a Driver of Observed Temperature Fluctuation Patterns in AGN Accretion Disks

    astro-ph.HE 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Turbulent Maxwell stress in simulated AGN disks excites temperature waves that match observed slow inward and outward propagating fluctuations, implying magnetically dominated photospheres in observed AGN.

  2. Viscously Spreading Accretion Disks around Black Holes: Implications for TDEs, LFBOTs and other Transients

    astro-ph.HE 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Many late-time TDE plateaus can be reproduced by initially wide disks formed with redistributed angular momentum, while the same model with super-Eddington outflows explains AT2018cow's late emission with a 10-100 sol...

  3. Do Little Red Dots Vary?

    astro-ph.GA 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Super-Eddington accretion models can explain why little red dots show almost no variability, whereas standard sub-Eddington AGN variability models predict changes that should already have been seen.

  4. Idealized Global Models of Accretion Disks with Strong Toroidal Magnetic Fields

    astro-ph.HE 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A zero-net-vertical-flux accretion disk with a strong toroidal magnetic field settles into a state with midplane magnetic and gas pressures comparable, and accretion stress alpha about 0.1, when the gas scale height i...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    A., Branduardi-Raymont, G., Culhane, J

    Arnaud, K. A., Branduardi-Raymont, G., Culhane, J. L., et al. 1985, MNRAS, 217, 105, doi: 10.1093/mnras/217.1.105

    doi:10.1093/mnras/217.1.105 1985

  2. [2]

    Bai, X.-N., & Stone, J. M. 2013, ApJ, 767, 30, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/30 UV/Optical Regions of AGN Disks21

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/767/1/30 2013

  3. [3]

    A., & Hawley, J

    Balbus, S. A., & Hawley, J. F. 1991, ApJ, 376, 214, doi: 10.1086/170270 —. 1998, Reviews of Modern Physics, 70, 1, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.70.1

    doi:10.1086/170270 1991

  4. [4]

    R., & Xiang, X

    Ballantyne, D. R., & Xiang, X. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 4255, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1866

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1866 2020

  5. [5]

    R., Sudhakar, V., Fairfax, D., et al

    Ballantyne, D. R., Sudhakar, V., Fairfax, D., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 1603, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae944

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae944 2024

  6. [6]

    2024, ApJ, 977, 201, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9277

    Barnier, S., & Done, C. 2024, ApJ, 977, 201, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9277

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad9277 2024

  7. [7]

    F., & Krolik, J

    Beckwith, K., Hawley, J. F., & Krolik, J. H. 2008, ApJ, 678, 1180, doi: 10.1086/533492

    doi:10.1086/533492 2008

  8. [8]

    C., & Armitage, P

    Begelman, M. C., & Armitage, P. J. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 5952, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad914

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad914 2023

Show all 82 references
  1. [9]

    C., Armitage, P

    Begelman, M. C., Armitage, P. J., & Reynolds, C. S. 2015, ApJ, 809, 118, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/118

    2015 doi

  2. [11]

    C., Scepi, N., & Dexter, J

    Begelman, M. C., Scepi, N., & Dexter, J. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 2040, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3790

    2022 doi

  3. [12]

    2009, A&A, 495, 421, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810620

    Bianchi, S., Guainazzi, M., Matt, G., Fonseca Bonilla, N., & Ponti, G. 2009, A&A, 495, 421, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810620

    2009 doi

  4. [13]

    H., Hirose, S., & Shabaltas, N

    Blaes, O., Krolik, J. H., Hirose, S., & Shabaltas, N. 2011, ApJ, 733, 110, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/733/2/110

    2011 doi

  5. [14]

    D., & Payne, D

    Blandford, R. D., & Payne, D. G. 1981, MNRAS, 194, 1033, doi: 10.1093/mnras/194.4.1033

    1981 doi

  6. [15]

    F., & Torkelsson, U

    Brandenburg, A., Nordlund, A., Stein, R. F., & Torkelsson, U. 1995, ApJ, 446, 741, doi: 10.1086/175831

    1995 doi

  7. [16]

    M., Bentz, M

    Cackett, E. M., Bentz, M. C., & Kara, E. 2021, iScience, 24, 102557, doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2021.102557

    2021

  8. [17]

    P., Magee, N

    Colgan, J., Kilcrease, D. P., Magee, N. H., et al. 2016, ApJ, 817, 116, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/2/116

    2016 doi

  9. [18]

    C., Gallo, L., & Ross, R

    Crummy, J., Fabian, A. C., Gallo, L., & Ross, R. R. 2006, MNRAS, 365, 1067, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09844.x

    2006

  10. [19]

    1987, ApJ, 321, 305, doi: 10.1086/165630

    Czerny, B., & Elvis, M. 1987, ApJ, 321, 305, doi: 10.1086/165630

    1987 doi

  11. [20]

    2003, A&A, 412, 317, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031441

    Czerny, B., Niko lajuk, M., R´ o˙ za´ nska, A., et al. 2003, A&A, 412, 317, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031441

    2003 doi

  12. [21]

    C., & Lesur, G

    Das, U., Begelman, M. C., & Lesur, G. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 2791, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2518

    2018 doi

  13. [22]

    W., & Tchekhovskoy, A

    Davis, S. W., & Tchekhovskoy, A. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 407, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051905

    2020 doi

  14. [23]

    Dexter, J., & Begelman, M. C. 2019, MNRAS, 483, L17, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly213

    2019 doi

  15. [25]

    C., Anninos, P., Roth, N., & Mishra, B

    Fragile, P. C., Anninos, P., Roth, N., & Mishra, B. 2023, ApJ, 959, 59, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad096b

    2023 doi

  16. [26]

    C., & Sadowski, A

    Fragile, P. C., & Sadowski, A. 2017, MNRAS, 467, 1838, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx274

    2017 doi

  17. [27]

    2012, ApJ, 758, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/758/2/103 Gierli´ nski, M., & Done, C

    Gaburov, E., Johansen, A., & Levin, Y. 2012, ApJ, 758, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/758/2/103 Gierli´ nski, M., & Done, C. 2004, MNRAS, 349, L7, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07687.x

    2012

  18. [28]

    J., Nelson, R

    Gressel, O., Turner, N. J., Nelson, R. P., & McNally, C. P. 2015, ApJ, 801, 84, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/801/2/84

    2015 doi

  19. [29]

    M., Quataert, E., & Kim, C.-G

    Guo, M., Stone, J. M., Quataert, E., & Kim, C.-G. 2024, ApJ, 973, 141, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5fe7

    2024 doi

  20. [30]

    Hopkins, P. F. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.00160, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.00160

    2024 doi

  21. [31]

    F., Squire, J., Su, K.-Y., et al

    Hopkins, P. F., Squire, J., Su, K.-Y., et al. 2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 19, doi: 10.21105/astro.2310.04506

    2024

  22. [32]

    2023, ApJ, 945, 57, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb6fc

    Huang, J., Jiang, Y.-F., Feng, H., et al. 2023, ApJ, 945, 57, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb6fc

    2023 doi

  23. [33]

    2021, A&A, 647, A192, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039322

    Jacquemin-Ide, J., Lesur, G., & Ferreira, J. 2021, A&A, 647, A192, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039322

    2021 doi

  24. [34]

    2021, ApJS, 253, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abe303 —

    Jiang, Y.-F. 2021, ApJS, 253, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abe303 —. 2022, ApJS, 263, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac9231

    2021 doi

  25. [35]

    M., & Davis, S

    Jiang, Y.-F., Blaes, O., Stone, J. M., & Davis, S. W. 2019a, ApJ, 885, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4a00

    doi

  26. [36]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.16856, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.16856

    Jiang, Y.-F., & Dai, L. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.16856, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.16856

    2024 doi arXiv

  27. [37]

    W., & Stone, J

    Jiang, Y.-F., Davis, S. W., & Stone, J. M. 2016, ApJ, 827, 10, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/827/1/10

    2016 doi

  28. [38]

    M., & Davis, S

    Jiang, Y.-F., Stone, J. M., & Davis, S. W. 2013, ApJ, 778, 65, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/778/1/65 —. 2014a, ApJS, 213, 7, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/213/1/7 —. 2014b, ApJ, 784, 169, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/784/2/169 —. 2019b, ApJ, 880, 67, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab29ff

    2013 doi

  29. [39]

    2017, MNRAS, 471, 706, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1634

    Jin, C., Done, C., Ward, M., & Gardner, E. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 706, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1634

    2017 doi

  30. [40]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 356, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3193

    Jin, C., Lusso, E., Ward, M., Done, C., & Middei, R. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 356, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3193

    2024 doi

  31. [41]

    2012, MNRAS, 420, 1825, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19805.x

    Jin, C., Ward, M., Done, C., & Gelbord, J. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 1825, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19805.x

    2012

  32. [42]

    2008, A&A, 490, 501, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810385

    Johansen, A., & Levin, Y. 2008, A&A, 490, 501, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810385

    2008 doi

  33. [43]

    Kaufman, J., & Blaes, O. M. 2016, MNRAS, 459, 1790, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw761

    2016 doi

  34. [44]

    M., & Hirose, S

    Kaufman, J., Blaes, O. M., & Hirose, S. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 5548, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty540

    2018 doi

  35. [45]

    2008, Nature, 454, 492, doi: 10.1038/nature07114 22Jiang et al

    Kishimoto, M., Antonucci, R., Blaes, O., et al. 2008, Nature, 454, 492, doi: 10.1038/nature07114 22Jiang et al

    2008 doi

  36. [46]

    H., Hirose, S., & Blaes, O

    Krolik, J. H., Hirose, S., & Blaes, O. 2007, ApJ, 664, 1045, doi: 10.1086/519515

    2007 doi

  37. [47]

    Kynoch, D., Mitchell, J. A. J., Ward, M. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 2781, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad221 Lanˇ cov´ a, D., Abarca, D., Klu´ zniak, W., et al. 2019, ApJL, 884, L37, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab48f5

    2023 doi

  38. [48]

    Laor, A., & Davis, S. W. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 3024, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2408

    2014 doi

  39. [49]

    J., & McDowell, J

    Laor, A., Fiore, F., Elvis, M., Wilkes, B. J., & McDowell, J. C. 1997, ApJ, 477, 93, doi: 10.1086/303696

    1997 doi

  40. [50]

    1969, Nature, 223, 690, doi: 10.1038/223690a0

    Lynden-Bell, D. 1969, Nature, 223, 690, doi: 10.1038/223690a0

    1969 doi

  41. [51]

    2009, MNRAS, 394, 250, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14255.x

    Schurch, N. 2009, MNRAS, 394, 250, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14255.x

    2009

  42. [52]

    2000, PASJ, 52, 499, doi: 10.1093/pasj/52.3.499

    Mineshige, S., Kawaguchi, T., Takeuchi, M., & Hayashida, K. 2000, PASJ, 52, 499, doi: 10.1093/pasj/52.3.499

    2000 doi

  43. [53]

    C., Armitage, P

    Mishra, B., Begelman, M. C., Armitage, P. J., & Simon, J. B. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 1855, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3572

    2020 doi

  44. [54]

    Mitchell, J. A. J., Done, C., Ward, M. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 1796, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1830

    2023 doi

  45. [55]

    W., Kochanek, C

    Morgan, C. W., Kochanek, C. S., Morgan, N. D., & Falco, E. E. 2010, ApJ, 712, 1129, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/712/2/1129

    2010 doi

  46. [56]

    O., et al

    Palit, B., R´ o˙ za´ nska, A., Petrucci, P. O., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A308, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450111

    2024 doi

  47. [57]

    I., Blackman, E

    Pariev, V. I., Blackman, E. G., & Boldyrev, S. A. 2003, A&A, 407, 403, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030868

    2003 doi

  48. [58]

    G., & Blandford, R

    Payne, D. G., & Blandford, R. D. 1981, MNRAS, 196, 781, doi: 10.1093/mnras/196.4.781

    1981 doi

  49. [59]

    E., & Psaltis, D

    Pessah, M. E., & Psaltis, D. 2005, ApJ, 628, 879, doi: 10.1086/430940

    2005 doi

  50. [60]

    O., Ursini, F., De Rosa, A., et al

    Petrucci, P. O., Ursini, F., De Rosa, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 611, A59, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731580

    2018 doi

  51. [61]

    O., Gronkiewicz, D., Rozanska, A., et al

    Petrucci, P. O., Gronkiewicz, D., Rozanska, A., et al. 2020, A&A, 634, A85, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937011

    2020 doi

  52. [62]

    Psaltis, D., & Lamb, F. K. 1997, ApJ, 488, 881, doi: 10.1086/304711

    1997 doi

  53. [63]

    Rees, M. J. 1984, ARA&A, 22, 471, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.22.090184.002351

    1984

  54. [64]

    C., & Pickrel, D

    Roth, N., Anninos, P., Fragile, P. C., & Pickrel, D. 2025, ApJ, 981, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb1c1 R´ o˙ za´ nska, A., Malzac, J., Belmont, R., Czerny, B., &

    2025 doi

  55. [65]

    Petrucci, P. O. 2015, A&A, 580, A77, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526288

    2015 doi

  56. [66]

    2016, MNRAS, 459, 4397, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw913

    Sadowski, A. 2016, MNRAS, 459, 4397, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw913

    2016 doi

  57. [67]

    J., Simon, J

    Salvesen, G., Armitage, P. J., Simon, J. B., & Begelman, M. C. 2016a, MNRAS, 460, 3488, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1231

    doi

  58. [68]

    B., Armitage, P

    Salvesen, G., Simon, J. B., Armitage, P. J., & Begelman, M. C. 2016b, MNRAS, 457, 857, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw029

    doi

  59. [69]

    Secunda, A., Jiang, Y.-F., & Greene, J. E. 2024, ApJL, 965, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad34b0 —. 2025, arXiv, arXiv:2501.06304, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.06304

    2024 doi arXiv

  60. [70]

    I., & Sunyaev, R

    Shakura, N. I., & Sunyaev, R. A. 1973, A&A, 24, 337

    1973

  61. [71]

    A., & Done, C

    Sobolewska, M. A., & Done, C. 2007, MNRAS, 374, 150, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11117.x

    2007

  62. [72]

    W., & Blaes, O

    Socrates, A., Davis, S. W., & Blaes, O. 2004, ApJ, 601, 405, doi: 10.1086/380301

    2004 doi

  63. [73]

    Squire, J., Quataert, E., & Hopkins, P. F. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.05467, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.05467

    2024 doi arXiv

  64. [74]

    M., Tomida, K., White, C

    Stone, J. M., Tomida, K., White, C. J., & Felker, K. G. 2020, ApJS, 249, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab929b

    2020 doi

  65. [75]

    1994, MNRAS, 270, 480, doi: 10.1093/mnras/270.3.480

    Thompson, C. 1994, MNRAS, 270, 480, doi: 10.1093/mnras/270.3.480

    1994 doi

  66. [76]

    Titarchuk, L., Mastichiadis, A., & Kylafis, N. D. 1997, ApJ, 487, 834, doi: 10.1086/304617

    1997 doi

  67. [77]

    A., & Pringle, J

    Tout, C. A., & Pringle, J. E. 1992, MNRAS, 259, 604, doi: 10.1093/mnras/259.4.604

    1992 doi

  68. [78]

    J., & Pounds, K

    Turner, T. J., & Pounds, K. A. 1988, MNRAS, 232, 463, doi: 10.1093/mnras/232.2.463

    1988 doi

  69. [79]

    2002, ApJ, 576, 349, doi: 10.1086/341631

    Turolla, R., Zane, S., & Titarchuk, L. 2002, ApJ, 576, 349, doi: 10.1086/341631

    2002 doi

  70. [80]

    M., & Netzer, H

    Wang, J. M., & Netzer, H. 2003, A&A, 398, 927, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021511

    2003 doi

  71. [81]

    R., Bianchi, S., et al

    Xiang, X., Ballantyne, D. R., Bianchi, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 353, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1646

    2022 doi

  72. [82]

    Davidsen, A. F. 1997, ApJ, 475, 469, doi: 10.1086/303560

    1997 doi

  73. [83]

    Zhu, Z., Jiang, Y.-F., & Stone, J. M. 2019, arXiv:1912.01632, arXiv:1912.01632. https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.01632

    2019 arXiv

  74. [84]

    Zhu, Z., & Stone, J. M. 2018, ApJ, 857, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaafc9

    2018 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.