How Much Mass Is Ejected in Polar Jets?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on quantifying the mass ejected in polar jets from astrophysical objects, particularly black holes and proto-stars. It explores the relationship between the mass of the jets, the mass of the black hole, and the conditions under which jets form, including the role of accretion and magnetic fields.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how much mass is ejected at the poles during jet formation and whether this mass is related to the mass of the black hole.
  • Another participant suggests that the mass ejection rate is not solely dependent on the black hole's mass but also on its accretion rate, indicating that quiescent black holes do not produce jets.
  • Magnetic fields around black holes are proposed to significantly influence the jet formation process, with a reference to the Blandford-Znajek mechanism as a foundational model.
  • A later reply raises the possibility that if the mass of quasar jets exceeds the mass of the galaxy, it could affect the galaxy's rotation, questioning if this scenario is common.
  • One participant indicates a potential shift of their discussion to another thread focused on the mass and energy of relativistic jets.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty regarding the quantitative understanding of mass ejection mechanisms and the factors influencing jet formation. Multiple competing views remain on the relationship between black hole mass, accretion rates, and jet mass.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the current understanding of the mass ejection mechanisms, including missing assumptions about the conditions under which jets form and the dependence on specific definitions related to black hole activity and magnetic field influence.

patellar-myotatic
Messages
12
Reaction score
2
I would like a discussion to quantify just how much mass is ejected at the poles (including the mass equivalence of the photons) when jets form. In quasars the black hole presumably reaches over a Billion solar masses, where the mass is proportionate to the mass of the galaxy and is also related to the angular velocity. Is the mass of the jets also related to the mass of the black hole? In more modest conditions, have the jets of forming proto-stars been quantified?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
While jets are common in astrophysical objects, I don't think we yet have a quantitative understanding of the mass ejection mechanism. The rate of mass ejection is not simply a function of the mass of the black hole, but depends on the rate at which the black hole is accreting mass. If the black hole is quiescent, meaning that it is not accreting mass, then there are no jets. It is clear that magnetic fields around the black hole also play a significant role. Try looking up the Blandford-Znajek mechanism, which is the starting point for most jet models.
 
Here is a link to a recent paper on understanding the mechanism for the jets.
 
phyzguy said:
While jets are common in astrophysical objects, I don't think we yet have a quantitative understanding of the mass ejection mechanism. The rate of mass ejection is not simply a function of the mass of the black hole, but depends on the rate at which the black hole is accreting mass. If the black hole is quiescent, meaning that it is not accreting mass, then there are no jets. It is clear that magnetic fields around the black hole also play a significant role. Try looking up the Blandford-Znajek mechanism, which is the starting point for most jet models.
Thank you. If the accumulated mass of the quasar jets exceeded the diminished mass of the galaxy, then the rotation of the galaxy would be profoundly affected. I was wondering if this scenario is possible or common.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K