Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-12T08:49:09.786Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does the Magnetodynamic Model for the Formation of AGN Jets Survive New Findings of High-energy Phenomena near the Central Objects?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 May 2016

Y. Uchida
Y. Uchida*
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Science University of Tokyo, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 162-8601, Japan

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Here, we argue that, despite all-new findings of phenomena with very large Lorentz factors, the importance of the magnetodynamic process accelerating and collimating AGN jets should not be affected because there exists evidence in the features of the jets and tails at large distances indicating that the wiggles of the jet structure are likely to be due to a magnetic, helical kink instability. These systematic features require too much energy and coherence of the driving process to be produced locally and axe most naturally produced by a magnetic effect coming from the powerful central engine. This indicates that the major effect producing the jets, and the lobes with hotspots at the tips of the jets, is likely to be the Poynting flux carried by torsional Alfvén wave trains plus the re-accelerated high-energy particles in them. The very large Lorentz-factor phenomena should not hinder the transfer of these magnetic effects and are likely to be byproducts of the basic magnetodynamic process, and not the reverse.

Type
Part III: Panel Discussion and Symposium Summary
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 195: Highly Energetic Physical Processes and Mechanisms , 2000 , pp. 473 - 481
Copyright
Copyright © Astronomical Society of the Pacific 2000 

References

Blandford, R. D., & Payne, D. G. 1982, MNRAS, 119, 883.Google Scholar
Eilek, J., & Owen, F. 2000, ApJ, submitted.Google Scholar
Feretti, L., Perley, R., Giovanni, G., & Andernach, H. 1999, A&A, 341, 29.Google Scholar
Koide, S., Shibata, K., & Kudoh, T. 1998, ApJ, 495, L63.Google Scholar
Kudoh, T., & Shibata, K. 1997, ApJ, 474, 362.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, R., Uchida, Y., Hirose, S., Shibata, K., Hayashi, M., Ferrari, A., Bodo, G., & Norman, C. 1997, ApJ, 461, 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, M., Uchida, Y., & Hirose, S., in preparation.Google Scholar
Owen, F., Hardee, P., & Cornwell, T. 1989, ApJ, 340, 698.Google Scholar
Perley, R., Bridle, A., & Willis, A. 1984, ApJS, 54, 291.Google Scholar
Perlman, E., Biretta, J., Zhou, F., Sparks, W., & Macchetto, F. 1999, AJ, 117, 2185.Google Scholar
Pudritz, R. E., & Norman, C. A. 1986, ApJ, 301, 571.Google Scholar
Shibata, K., Koide, S., & Kudoh, T. 2000, these Proceedings.Google Scholar
Shibata, K., & Uchida, Y. 1986, PASJ, 38, 631.Google Scholar
Uchida, Y., Nakamura, M., Hirose, S., & Uemura, S. 1999, A&AS, 264, 195.Google Scholar
Uchida, Y., Nakamura, M., Miyagoshi, T., Kobayashi, T., Mukawa, T., & Hirose, S. 2000, these Proceedings.Google Scholar
Uchida, Y., & Shibata, K. 1985, PASJ, 37, 515.Google Scholar
Uchida, Y., & Shibata, K. 1986, Can. J. Phys., 64, 507.Google Scholar
Walker, R., Benson, J., & Unwin, S. 1987, ApJ, 316, 546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar