1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %
3: % Draft Ver.02 edited by K.O. 2006/12/15
4: % Draft Ver.03 edited by K.O. 2007/01/11
5: % Draft Ver.04 edited by K.O. 2007/02/16
6: % Draft Ver.05 edited by K.O. 2007/02/25
7: % Draft Ver.06 edited by K.O. 2007/05/22
8: % Draft Ver.07 edited by K.O. 2007/06/18
9: % Draft Ver.08 edited by K.O. 2007/06/21
10: % Draft Ver.09 edited by K.O. 2007/06/27
11: % Draft Ver.10 edited by K.O. 2007/08/05
12: % Draft Ver.11 edited by K.O. 2007/08/10
13: % Draft Ver.12 edited by K.O. 2007/10/15
14: %
15: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
16: \documentclass{emulateapj}
17: %%\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
18: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
19:
20: %%\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
21:
22: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
23: %%\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
24:
25: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
26: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
27: %% use the longabstract style option.
28:
29: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
30:
31: \newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
32: \newcommand{\myemail}{skywalker@galaxy.far.far.away}
33:
34: \newcommand{\re}{\par\hangindent=0.5cm\hangafter=1\noindent}
35: \newcommand{\se}{\par\hangindent=12mm\hangafter=1\indent}
36: \newcommand{\noi}{\noindent}
37: \newcommand{\lsim}{\raisebox{0.3mm}{\em $\, <$} \hspace{-3.3mm}
38: \raisebox{-1.8mm}{\em $\sim \,$}}
39: \newcommand{\gsim}{\raisebox{0.3mm}{\em $\, >$} \hspace{-3.3mm}
40: \raisebox{-1.8mm}{\em $\sim \,$}}
41: \newcommand{\bm}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath $#1$}}
42:
43: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
44:
45: %\slugcomment{Not to appear in Nonlearned J., 45.}
46:
47: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
48: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
49: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
50: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
51: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
52: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
53:
54: \slugcomment{To Appear in the Astrophysical Journal}
55: \shorttitle{SUPERCRITICAL DISK ACCRETION}
56: \shortauthors{OHSUGA \& MINESHIGE}
57:
58: %% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
59: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.
60:
61: \begin{document}
62:
63: %% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than
64: %% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if
65: %% you desire.
66:
67: \title{Why Is Supercritical Disk Accretion Feasible?}
68:
69: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
70: %% author and affiliation information.
71: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
72: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
73: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
74: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.
75:
76:
77: %\author{Ken Ohsuga\altaffilmark{1,2}}
78: \author{Ken Ohsuga}
79: \affil{Department of Physics, Rikkyo University,
80: Toshimaku, Tokyo 171-8501, Japan; \\
81: and Institute of Physical and Chemical Research (RIKEN),
82: 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama, 351-0198, Japan}
83:
84: \and
85: %\author{Shin Mineshige\altaffilmark{2}}
86: \author{Shin Mineshige}
87: \affil{Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics,
88: Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan}
89:
90: %\author{Ken Ohsuga\altaffilmark{1,2}, Shin Mineshige\altaffilmark{3}}
91:
92: %\altaffiltext{1}{Institute of Physical and Chemical Research (RIKEN),
93: %2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama, 351-0198, Japan}
94: %\altaffiltext{2}{Department of Physics, Rikkyo University,
95: %Toshimaku, Tokyo 171-8501, Japan}
96: %\altaffiltext{3}{Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics,
97: %Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan}
98:
99: %\author{S. Djorgovski\altaffilmark{1,2,3} and Ivan R. King\altaffilmark{1}}
100: %\affil{Astronomy Department, University of California,
101: % Berkeley, CA 94720}
102:
103: %\author{C. D. Biemesderfer\altaffilmark{4,5}}
104: %\affil{National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ 85719}
105: %\email{aastex-help@aas.org}
106:
107: %\and
108:
109: %\author{R. J. Hanisch\altaffilmark{5}}
110: %\affil{Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore, MD 21218}
111:
112: %% Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
113: %% are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. Specify alternate
114: %% affiliation information with \altaffiltext, with one command per each
115: %% affiliation.
116:
117: %\altaffiltext{1}{Visiting Astronomer, Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory.
118: %CTIO is operated by AURA, Inc.\ under contract to the National Science
119: %Foundation.}
120: %\altaffiltext{2}{Society of Fellows, Harvard University.}
121: %\altaffiltext{3}{present address: Center for Astrophysics,
122: % 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138}
123: %\altaffiltext{4}{Visiting Programmer, Space Telescope Science Institute}
124: %\altaffiltext{5}{Patron, Alonso's Bar and Grill}
125:
126: %% Mark off your abstract in the ``abstract'' environment. In the manuscript
127: %% style, abstract will output a Received/Accepted line after the
128: %% title and affiliation information. No date will appear since the author
129: %% does not have this information. The dates will be filled in by the
130: %% editorial office after submission.
131:
132: \begin{abstract}
133: Although the occurrence of steady supercritical disk accretion
134: onto a black hole has been speculated about since the 1970s,
135: it has not been accurately verified so far.
136: For the first time, we previously demonstrated it
137: through two-dimensional, long-term
138: radiation-hydrodynamic simulations. To clarify why this accretion is
139: possible, we quantitatively investigate the dynamics
140: of a simulated supercritical accretion flow with
141: a mass accretion rate of $\sim 10^2 L_{\rm E}/c^2$
142: (with $L_{\rm E}$ and $c$ being, respectively, the Eddington
143: luminosity and the speed of light). We confirm two important
144: mechanisms underlying supercritical disk accretion flow,
145: as previously claimed,
146: one of which is the radiation anisotropy arising from
147: the anisotropic density distribution
148: of very optically thick material.
149: We qualitatively show that
150: despite a very
151: large radiation energy density,
152: %$E_0\gg L_{\rm E}/4\pi r^2 c$
153: $E_0\gsim 10^2L_{\rm E}/4\pi r^2 c$
154: (with $r$ being the distance from the black hole),
155: the radiative flux $F_0\sim cE_0/\tau$ could be small
156: due to a large optical depth, typically $\tau\sim 10^3$, in the disk.
157: Another mechanism is photon trapping, quantified by
158: ${\bm v}E_0$, where ${\bm v}$
159: is the flow velocity.
160: With a large $|{\bm v}|$ and $E_0$, this term
161: significantly reduces the radiative flux and even makes it
162: negative (inward) at $r < 70 r_S$, where $r_S$ is
163: the Schwarzschild radius.
164: Due to the combination of these effects,
165: the radiative force in the direction along the disk plane is largely
166: attenuated so that the gravitational force barely exceeds the sum
167: of the radiative force and the centrifugal force. As a result,
168: matter can slowly fall onto the central black hole mainly along the
169: disk plane with velocity much less than the free-fall velocity,
170: even though the disk luminosity exceeds the Eddington
171: luminosity. Along the disk rotation axis, in contrast,
172: the strong radiative force drives strong gas outflows.
173: \end{abstract}
174:
175: \keywords{accretion: accretion disks --- black hole physics ---
176: hydrodynamics --- radiative transfer}
177:
178:
179: \section{Introduction}
180:
181: Recently, very bright objects which may be undergoing
182: supercritical (or super-Eddington) accretion flows
183: have successively been found.
184: Good examples are ultraluminous X-ray sources
185: (ULXs; \citeauthor{WMM01} \citeyear{WMM01};
186: \citeauthor{Ebisawa03} \citeyear{Ebisawa03};
187: \citeauthor{Okajima06} \citeyear{Okajima06}).
188: %\citep[ULXs;][]{WMM01,Ebisawa03,Okajima06}.
189: These are
190: pointlike off-center X-ray sources whose X-ray luminosity significantly
191: exceeds the Eddington luminosity of a neutron star \citep{Fabbiano89}.
192: Because of substantial variations, it is reasonable to assume
193: that the ULXs are
194: single compact objects powered by accretion flows \citep{Makishima00}.
195: If so, there are two possibilities to account for
196: large luminosities exceeding
197: the Eddington luminosity for a mass of 100 $M_\odot$:
198: sub-critical accretion onto an intermediate-mass black hole (IMBH)
199: and supercritical accretion onto a stellar-mass black hole.
200: We support the latter possibility,
201: since through the fitting to several {\it XMM-Newton} EPIC data of ULXs,
202: which have been claimed as good IMBH candidates,
203: we have found evidence of supercritical flows
204: \citep{Vierdayanti06}.
205: Another interesting group is narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies
206: \citep[see][for a review]{Boller04}.
207: Because of their relatively small black hole masses,
208: they have in general large Eddington ratios
209: ($L/L_{\rm E}$ with $L$ and $L_{\rm E}$ being the
210: luminosity and the Eddington luminosity, respectively),
211: and some of them seem to fall in the slim-disk regimes
212: (\citeauthor{Mineshige00} \citeyear{Mineshige00};
213: \citeauthor{Kawaguchi03} \citeyear{Kawaguchi03};
214: see also \citeauthor{Wang99} \citeyear{Wang99})
215:
216: Despite growing evidence indicating the existence of supercritical
217: accretion flows in the universe,
218: theoretical understanding is far from being complete.
219: It is well known that any spherically accreting object,
220: irrespective of the nature of the central source,
221: cannot emit above the Eddington luminosity,
222: since otherwise significant radiative force
223: will prevent accretion of the gas.
224: If we examine detailed radiation-matter interactions in the interior,
225: however,
226: we notice that the situation is not so simple. Actually,
227: radiation produced at the very center cannot immediately reach
228: the surface (i.e., photosphere), since photons generated at
229: the center should suffer numerous scatterings with accreting material
230: and thus take a long time to reach the surface.
231: If the matter continuously falls, and if the mass accretion timescale
232: is shorter than the mean travel time for photons to reach the surface
233: (the diffusion timescale), photons at the core may not be able to go out.
234: This is the so-called photon-trapping effect
235: \citep[e.g.,][]{Begelman78,HC91}.
236: %%%%% OHSUGA %%%%%
237: Here we define the trapping radius,
238: inside which radiation-matter interaction is so frequent that
239: photons are trapped within the accretion flow.
240: Inside this trapping radius, therefore,
241: radiative flux can be negative (i.e., inward).
242: Thus, the apparent luminosity is reduced
243: as compared with the case without photon trapping.
244: %Here, we define the trapping radius, $r_{\rm trap}$,
245: %inside which radiation-matter interaction is so frequent that
246: %photons are trapped within the accretion flow.
247: %Inside this trapping radius, therefore,
248: %radiative flux can be negative (i.e., inward),
249: %so is the radiative force.
250: %That is, radiative force does not inhibit accreting motion of gas,
251: %as far as the interior zone is concerned.
252: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
253: Nevertheless, the concept of the Eddington luminosity is still valid,
254: since far outside the trapping radius
255: radiative flux should be outward
256: and its absolute value should be less than
257: %$F \approx L_{\rm E}/4\pi r^2$,
258: $L_{\rm E}/4\pi r^2$,
259: where $r$ is the distance from the central black hole,
260: in the quasi-steady state.
261: Radiation-hydrodynamic (RHD) simulations of spherically symmetric
262: supercritical accretion flows
263: have been performed by \citet{BK83}.
264:
265: The situation may differ in the case of disk accretion,
266: since the radiation
267: field is not isotropic due to inhomogeneous matter distribution.
268: That is, matter can fall predominantly along the disk plane,
269: whereas radiation can go out along its rotating axis, where
270: matter density is low.
271: In other words,
272: the main directions of the inward matter flow and
273: the outward radiative flux are not parallel to each other
274: in disk accretion, leading to a situation in which
275: the radiative force does not completely
276: counteract the gravitational force.
277: There is room for the possibility of a supercritical accretion flow
278: with super-Eddington luminosity.
279:
280: Based on such an argument,
281: many researchers have speculated about
282: the occurrence of supercritical flows in disk accretion systems.
283: %There is a long history in study of the supercritical disk accretion flows.
284: \citet{SS73} discussed the possibility of supercritical disk accretion
285: based on a one-dimensional steady model
286: \citep[see also][]{MRT76}. They mentioned that the mass accretion rate
287: would not be steady but oscillate if the mass accretion rate
288: exceeded the critical rate; otherwise, a part of the accreting matter
289: might be ejected from the disk as a disk wind.
290: Radiatively driven outflows from supercritical disks
291: were investigated by \citet{Meier79}, \citet{JR79}, and \citet{Icke80}.
292: %Radiation hydrodynamical simulations have also been
293: %performed \citep{BK83}.
294: %However, the precision and quantitative research
295: %treating both the supercritical disks and outflows,
296: %which also takes into consideration the multi-dimensional
297: %effects, is poorly attempted.
298:
299: Despite a long history in the study of
300: supercritical disk accretion flows, the occurrence
301: of steady supercritical disk accretion has not yet been
302: accurately verified.
303: Similar simulations have been performed since the 1980s, but all of them
304: calculated only the initial transient phase.
305: Their conclusions then were not general, since the back-reactions
306: (i.e., enhanced radiation pressure), which may inhibit steady
307: flow, were not accurately evaluated.
308: %Whereas
309: %there is a long history in study of the supercritical
310: %disk accretion flows,
311: %the occurrence of the supercritical disk accretion
312: %is not accurately verified yet.
313: %Yet, the occurrence of the supercritical flow in actual disk accretion systems
314: %is not obvious.
315: Although the radiative force predominantly has an effect in the vertical
316: direction, it should also have an effect on the material within the disk.
317: %%%%% OHSUGA %%%%%
318: Hence, in the direction parallel to the disk plane,
319: the situation may be similar to or
320: more severe than the case of spherical accretion.
321: This is because the radiative force,
322: together with the centrifugal force,
323: may possibly overcome the gravitational force.
324: %Fortunately, however, if photon trapping is very much effective,
325: %radiative force can be weakened or be even changed the direction
326: %to be inward.
327: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
328: To study the possibility of supercritical disk accretion flows,
329: precise and quantitative research
330: treating both supercritical disks and outflows,
331: and which also takes into consideration
332: multi-dimensional effects, is needed.
333:
334:
335: \citeauthor{O05} (\citeyear[][hereafter Paper I]{O05})
336: have confirmed the occurrence of
337: quasi-steady supercritical disk accretion onto a black hole
338: by two-dimensional RHD simulations.
339: The motivation of the present study is to
340: investigate the physical mechanisms
341: which make supercritical disk accretion possible.
342: For this purpose we examine quantitatively
343: the flow motion and force fields
344: via the radiative flux, rotation, and gravity
345: of a supercritical disk accretion flow
346: onto a central black hole,
347: based on the two-dimensional RHD simulation data from Paper I.
348: %We also study the flow motion induced by the force fields.
349: %The motivation of the present study is to
350: %examine quantitatively the structure of supercritical disk accretion flow
351: %into a central black hole based on the two-dimensional
352: %radiation-hydrodynamic (RHD) simulation data by
353: %\citeauthor{O05} (\citeyear[][hereafter Paper I]{O05}).
354: Through detailed inspection of the results,
355: it will be possible to
356: clarify the physics behind supercritical disk accretion flows.
357: In \S 2 we plot the spatial distributions of
358: several key quantities which control flow dynamics.
359: A discussion is given in \S 3.
360:
361: \section{Dynamics of a Supercritical Disk Accretion Flow}
362:
363: \subsection{Basic Considerations}
364:
365: Here we adopt the spherical coordinates $(r,\theta,\varphi)$,
366: with $\theta=\pi/2$ corresponding to the disk plane
367: and the origin being set at the central black hole.
368: The momentum equation for the radial component of the flow is
369: \begin{equation}
370: \frac{d v_r}{dt} =
371: f_{\rm grav} + f_{\rm rad}^r + f_{\rm pres}^r
372: + f_{\rm cent}^r.
373: \end{equation}
374: Here $v_r$ is the radial component of the flow velocity,
375: $d/dt \equiv \partial/\partial t + v_r \partial/\partial r$
376: is the Lagrangian derivative,
377: $f_{\rm grav}$ is the gravitational force by the central black hole,
378: $f_{\rm rad}^r = \chi F_0^r/c$
379: is the radiative force
380: with $\chi$ being absorption and scattering coefficients,
381: $c$ being the speed of light,
382: and $F_0^r$ representing the radial component of
383: the radiative flux in the comoving frame,
384: $f_{\rm pres}^r$ is
385: %the radial component of the gas pressure,
386: the radial component of the gas pressure force,
387: and $f_{\rm cent}^r = v_\varphi^2/r$ is
388: the radial component of the centrifugal force.
389: We adopt a pseudo-Newtonian potential, thus having
390: $f_{\rm grav}=-GM/(r-r_S)^2$
391: with $M$ being the mass of the black hole
392: and $r_S \equiv 2GM/c^2$
393: \citep{PW80}.
394: %\begin{equation}
395: % \frac{d \vec{v_r}}{dt} =
396: % \vec{f}_{\rm grav} + \vec{f}_{\rm rad} + \vec{f}_{\rm pres}
397: % + \vec{f}_{\rm cent}.
398: %\end{equation}
399: %Here, $\vec{v}_r$ is the radial component of the flow velocity,
400: %$d/dt \equiv \partial/\partial t + v_r d/dr$
401: %is the Lagrangian derivative,
402: %$\vec{f}_{\rm grav}$ is the gravitational force by the central black hole,
403: %$\vec{f}_{\rm rad} = (\chi/c) \vec{F}_0$
404: %is the radiative force
405: %with $\chi$ being absorption and scattering coefficients and
406: %$F_0$ representing radial radiative flux in the comoving frame
407: %(defined later),
408: %$\vec{f}_{\rm pres}$ is the gas pressure,
409: %and $\vec{f}_{\rm cent} = \vec{e}_r v_\varphi^2/r$ is the centrifugal force
410: %(with $\vec{e}_r$ being the unit vector in the radial direction),
411: %respectively.
412: %We adopt the pseudo-Newtonian potential, thus having
413: %$\vec{f}_{\rm grav}=- \vec{e}_r GM/(r-r_{\rm s})^2$
414: %with $M$ being the mass of the black hole
415: %and $r_{\rm s} \equiv 2GM/c^2$.
416:
417: To proceed, it is important to distinguish two different views:
418: the view from an observer comoving with the accreting gas
419: (i.e., the comoving frame)
420: and the view from an observer standing at infinity (the rest frame).
421: %Whereas the radiative flux should be negative (inward) in the rest
422: %frame, it could be positive (outward) in the comoving frame.
423: %This can be understood through the relation
424: %relating
425: %the radiative flux in the comoving frame ($\vec{F}_0$)
426: %to that in the rest frame ($\vec{F}$):
427: The $i$th component of radiative flux in the comoving frame, $F_0^i$,
428: is related to that in the rest frame, $F^i$,
429: on the order of $v/c$,
430: \begin{equation}
431: % \vec{F} = \vec{F}_0 + \vec{v} E_0 + \vec{v}:\vec{P}_0,
432: F^i = F_0^i + v_i E_0 + v_j P_0^{ij},
433: \label{flux}
434: \end{equation}
435: %where $E_0$ and $\vec{P}_0$ are the radiation energy density
436: where $E_0$ and $P_0^{ij}$ are the radiation energy density
437: and the radiation stress tensor in the comoving frame, respectively.
438: Here the final term in equation (\ref{flux})
439: is equal to $v_i E_0/3$ in the optically thick diffusion limit.
440:
441: In \S 2.3 we show that the gas accretes toward the black hole
442: in the disk region.
443: In this region,
444: even if the radiative flux in the comoving frame is positive, $F_0^r > 0$
445: (i.e., outward flux),
446: $F^r$ can be negative, $F^r < 0$ (inward flux),
447: because $v_r < 0$.
448: The term $v_r E_0$ thus represents photon trapping.
449: In \S 2.5 we explicitly show this effect in the simulation data.
450:
451: In contrast, the flow dynamics in the direction perpendicular to
452: the disk plane is distinct. In particular,
453: the centrifugal force has no effect in this direction.
454: In addition,
455: the matter density is significantly smaller along the rotation axis.
456: Hence, the radiative flux can be much more effective
457: in the vertical direction, thus driving strong outflows,
458: as we see in \S 2.3.
459:
460: \subsection{Overview of the Simulated Flow}
461:
462: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
463: %Fig. 1
464: \begin{figure*}
465: % \epsscale{1.085}
466: % \plotone{Fig01_000_R060.ps}
467: % \plotone{Fig01_CMYK.eps}
468: \epsscale{1.075}
469: \plotone{Fig01_astroph.eps}
470: \caption{Color contours of matter density ({\it left}) and
471: radiation energy density ({\it right}) distributions
472: as a function of $R$ and $z$. Note that
473: these values are time-averaged over $t=20-50$ s.
474: \label{rhoE}
475: }
476: \end{figure*}
477: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
478:
479: Our present analysis is
480: based on the two-dimensional RHD simulation data from Paper I.
481: These are the first simulations of supercritical accretion flow
482: in the quasi-steady state.
483: Although the research history of such simulations
484: stems back to the late 1980s,
485: when \citet{ECK87} performed numerical simulations for the first time,
486: their calculations were restricted to the first few seconds
487: (see also \citeauthor{Kley89} \citeyear{Kley89};
488: \citeauthor{OFS97} \citeyear{OFS97};
489: \citeauthor{KL99} \citeyear{KL99};
490: \citeauthor{Okuda02} \citeyear{Okuda02}).
491: %\citep[see also][]{Kley89,OFS97,KL99,Okuda02}.
492: Back-reactions were not fully taken into account in their simulations.
493: In our simulations presented in Paper I,
494: matter is added continuously from the outer
495: disk boundary at $r = 500~r_S$
496: to the initially (nearly) empty space
497: at the rate of $10^3 L_E/c^2$.
498: The injected mass has a small specific angular momentum so that
499: it first free falls but then forms a rotating disk at
500: $r \sim 100 r_S$.
501: Mirror symmetry is assumed with respect to the disk (equatorial) plane.
502: %The viscosity parameter is assumed to be $\alpha = 0.1$.
503: The $\alpha$-prescription of the viscosity is employed,
504: in which the viscosity is set to be proportional to the total pressure
505: in the optically thick limit and
506: the gas pressure only in the optically thin region.
507: Hence, the viscosity is more effective in the disk region than
508: in the outflow regions above and below the disk.
509: The viscosity parameter is assumed to be $\alpha = 0.1$.
510: Except for the radial-azimuthal component,
511: all components of the viscous stress tensor are set to be zero.
512:
513:
514: The radiative transfer was solved under the flux-limited diffusion
515: approximation \citep{LP81}.
516: The central object is taken to be a non rotating stellar-mass
517: black hole ($M=10 M_\odot$), generating a pseudo-Newtonian potential.
518: Only $10\%$ of the
519: inflowing material finally reaches the inner boundary ($3r_S$);
520: i.e., $90\%$ of the mass input gets stuck in the dense,
521: disk like structure around the equatorial plane,
522: or transforms into the known collimated high-velocity outflows
523: perpendicular to the equatorial plane
524: or into low-velocity outflows with wider opening angles.
525: The resulting luminosity is about
526: 3 times larger than the Eddington luminosity.
527:
528: Figure \ref{rhoE} indicates the time-averaged contours of the matter density
529: ({\it left panel}) and the radiation energy density ({\it right panel})
530: on the $R$-$z$ plane ($R=r \sin \theta$ and $z=r \cos \theta$),
531: where both axes are normalized
532: by the Schwarzschild radius ($r_S$).
533: Note that these panels are similar to Figures 3 and 5 of Paper I,
534: except that Figure \ref{rhoE} of the present paper has contours which
535: are time-averaged over $t=20-50$ s,
536: whereas those in Paper I are snapshots at $t=10$ s
537: (i.e., in a quasi-steady phase).
538: The high concentration of gas and radiation in the region near the
539: black hole on the equatorial plane is clear.
540:
541:
542: %Paper I already explicitly demonstrated that there is a region,
543: %where the radiative flux in the comoving frame ($F_0$) is inward.
544: %To quantify this fact, we plot the two-dimensional flux distributions,
545: %both of that in the comoving frame and that in the rest frame,
546: %in figure 2.
547: %We understand that the negative flux zone appears at $r \sim x r_{\rm s}$;
548: %i.e., in the vicinity of the black hole near the disk plane.
549: %Note that flux is always outward in the direction perpendicular to the disk plane.
550: %Then, we can expect the region of negative radiative force.
551:
552: \subsection{Dynamics of the Simulated Flow}
553: First we plot the time-averaged
554: radiation energy density normalized by
555: $L_{\rm E}/4\pi r^2 c$ in Figure \ref{E0}.
556: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
557: %Fig. 2
558: \begin{figure}[b]
559: % \epsscale{1.085}
560: % \plotone{Fig03_000_R060.ps}
561: % \plotone{Fig02_CMYK.eps}
562: \epsscale{1.075}
563: \plotone{Fig02_astroph.eps}
564: \caption{Same as Fig. 1, but with the radiation energy density
565: normalized by $L_{\rm E}/4\pi r^2 c$.
566: \label{E0}
567: }
568: \end{figure}
569: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
570: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
571: %Fig. 3
572: \begin{figure*}
573: % \epsscale{1.085}
574: % \plotone{Fig02_000_R060.ps}
575: % \plotone{Fig03_CMYK.eps}
576: % \plotone{Fig03_small.eps}
577: \epsscale{1.075}
578: \plotone{Fig03_astroph.eps}
579: \caption{Same as Fig. 1, but with the color contours
580: of the ratio of the radial component of the radiative force
581: to the gravitational force ({\it left})
582: and that of the sum of the radiative
583: force and the centrifugal force to the gravitational force ({\it right}).
584: \label{2DForce}
585: }
586: \end{figure*}
587: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
588: We find that this value is larger than unity in most regions.
589: In particular, we have
590: $E_0 \gsim 10^2L_{\rm E}/4\pi r^2 c$ in the disk region.
591: This means that there exists so large a number of photons
592: that if we simply assume $F_0\sim cE_0$
593: as in the optically thin region,
594: the radiative force should highly exceed the gravity,
595: which inevitably prevents the inflow motion.
596: The simulation data, however, do show inflow motion (discussed below).
597: %It means that the radiative force highly exceeds the gravity,
598: %preventing the inflow motion,
599: %if the radiative flux is given by $F_0\sim cE_0$
600: %as in the optically thin region.
601: %However, the simulated disk is actually very optically thick
602: %(see Figure \ref{rhoE} and discussed below).
603:
604:
605:
606: %On the basis of such density and radiation distributions,
607: %we calculate the force balance in each region.
608: Figure \ref{2DForce} illustrates the time-averaged
609: force balance in the radial ($r$)
610: directions with various $\theta$-values from the origin.
611: (It should be noted that since force is a vector, we need to specify
612: the direction to draw such contours. Here
613: we only plot the radial component of the forces.)
614: Figure \ref{2DForce} ({\it left})
615: represents the ratio of the radial component
616: of the radiative force
617: to the gravitational force.
618: Especially surprising is that
619: %We notice that
620: most regions are turquoise, indicating that
621: the radiative force is outward and less than the gravitational force.
622: Why is the radiative force so weak,
623: %though the total luminosity
624: %exceeds the Eddington luminosity, $L > L_{\rm E}$?
625: even though the radiation energy density is very large,
626: $E_0 \gsim 10^2L_{\rm E}/4\pi r^2c$
627: (see Fig. \ref{E0}),
628: and even though the total luminosity exceeds the Eddington luminosity,
629: $L > L_{\rm E}$?
630: %This is because the spatial distribution of the
631: %radiation energy density, $E_0$, is nearly flat along the equatorial plane
632: %near the black hole, while $E_0$ rapidly decreases upward.
633: %Since the radiative flux is the spatial derivative of $E_0$, we have
634: %relatively small radiative flux,
635: %though the absolute value of $E_0$ is large
636: This is because the disk is very optically thick.
637: Although the absolute value of the radiative flux is equal
638: to $cE_0$ in the optically thin limit,
639: %it roughly given by $cE_0$ over optical thickness
640: %in the optically thick region.
641: it is roughly given by $cE_0/\tau$, and hence, $F_0$ can be
642: very small, $F_0\ll cE_0$,
643: in the optically thick region ($\tau\gg 1$),
644: where $\tau$ is the optical thickness.
645: Approximately, we find
646: $\tau=\rho \chi r \sim 10^3
647: (\rho/10^{-4.5}{\rm g\,cm^{-3}})(r/30r_S)$,
648: where $\rho$ is the gas density.
649: Thus, flux is attenuated a great deal.
650: We thus have a relatively small radiative flux within the disk
651: in spite of a large $E_0$
652: (see \S 2.4 for more detail).
653: There are two exceptions:
654: the color of the region
655: in the vicinity of the black hole is blue, which means
656: that the radiative force is inward.
657: %This is because of the photon trapping,
658: %as we mentioned in Introduction.
659: In this region, a large number of photons
660: are swallowed by the black hole, $F_0^r<0$,
661: so that the gas is accelerated inward.
662: The region near the rotation axis, in contrast, has
663: a white color, which means
664: that the radiative force exceeds the gravitational force.
665:
666:
667:
668: To discuss how matter flows, we also need to consider the centrifugal
669: force. (Note that the gas pressure is negligible in the present case.)
670: Figure \ref{2DForce} ({\it right}) illustrates the ratio of the sum of
671: the radial components of the radiation and centrifugal forces
672: to the gravitational force.
673: Certainly, the repulsing force is enhanced
674: along the disk plane. However, this force ratio is still around unity
675: %We then understand that this ratio is around unity
676: in most regions
677: except in the very vicinity of the black hole.
678: That is, the gas is nearly in balance of forces in wide regions.
679: The regions near the rotation axis again have white colors, which means
680: that the radiative force dominates, as in Figure \ref{2DForce} ({\it left})
681: (Note that the centrifugal force is not effective near the rotation axis.)
682:
683: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
684: %Fig. 4
685: \begin{figure}
686: % \epsscale{1.085}
687: % \plotone{Fig03_000_R060.ps}
688: % \plotone{Fig04_CMYK.eps}
689: \epsscale{1.075}
690: \plotone{Fig04_astroph.eps}
691: \caption{Same as Fig. 1, but with the radial velocity
692: normalized by the free-fall velocity.
693: \label{vr}
694: }
695: \end{figure}
696: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
697:
698: Since there are regions with a negative effective force
699: in the radial direction,
700: we expect regions with negative velocity (i.e., inflow).
701: Figure \ref{vr} shows the spatial distribution of
702: the radial component of the matter velocity
703: in units of the free-fall velocity.
704: Interestingly, the flow is inward in the disk region,
705: but the infall velocity is much smaller than the
706: free-fall velocity.
707: Along the rotation axis, conversely,
708: the flow is outward, and its magnitude is
709: larger than the free-fall velocity.
710:
711:
712: Let us have a more quantitative discussion based on the
713: one-dimensional distributions of these quantities, since
714: it is difficult to obtain their precise values from the color contours.
715: We calculate several quantities along two radial lines:
716: one at 0.45$\pi$ (close to the equatorial plane)
717: and the other at $\theta = 2.3 \times 10^{-2} \pi$
718: (nearly along the rotation axis).
719: They are illustrated in the top and bottom panels of Figure
720: \ref{1DForce}, respectively.
721:
722:
723: We see in the top panel that the radiative force is not
724: negligible, although it is smaller than the centrifugal force.
725: The sum of the radiative and centrifugal forces
726: is nearly balanced with the gravitational force.
727: Radiation does work as a ``radiation cushion,'' which
728: decelerates the accretion of the gas
729: in cooperation with the rotation (centrifugal force).
730: Deceleration via radiative flux was
731: also reported by \citet{BK80, BK83}.
732: Figure \ref{1DForce} ({\it top}) also shows that
733: the radial velocity is much smaller than the free-fall velocity
734: and only barely below zero (inflow),
735: although there also exist regions with $v_r\sim 0$ (no inflow).
736: %The accretion velocity is much smaller than the free-fall velocity
737: %and roughly agrees with that predicted by the slim disk
738: %model (Abramowicz et al. 1988; Watarai et al. 2000).
739: %Roughly speaking, the radial velocity
740: %is estimated as $v_r \sim -\alpha (H/r) c_{\rm s}$
741: %(Kato et al. 1998),
742: %where $H$ is the scale-height, $H$, on the order of $r$,
743: %and $c_{\rm s}$ is the sound speed, on the order of, but
744: %less than the free-fall velocity.
745: %For $\alpha \sim 0.1$, therefore,
746: %the radial velocity is more than one order of magnitude
747: %less than the free-fall velocity.
748:
749: In contrast, Figure \ref{1DForce} ({\it bottom}) shows that the ratio of
750: the radiative force to the gravitational force grows as
751: the distance increases. The outward velocity thus grows rapidly upward.
752: We confirm again that
753: the strong outflow around the rotation axis
754: is produced by the strong radiative force.
755: However, the velocity is negative in the very vicinity of the hole.
756: This means that the radiation which produces the huge radiative
757: force in the vertical direction does not originate from the region
758: just outside the event horizon but from the region
759: with $E_0$ at maximum [at $(5-10)r_S$].
760: %originate from the vicinity
761: %of the hole but from the region outside the region with $E_0$ maximum.
762:
763: Here we note that the angular momentum is very small around
764: the rotation axis, leading to a negligible centrifugal force
765: ({\it dotted line}). This is because a
766: significant amount of material exists
767: even inside the radius of the marginally stable orbit, $R<3r_S$,
768: in the supercritical flow,
769: so the matter can lose angular momentum there
770: \citep{KFM98, WM03}.
771: This situation contrasts with that of the subcritical flow, in which
772: there is a sharp density drop at $R=3 r_S$.
773:
774: Our computational domain covers exactly down to the
775: rotation axis. Numerical simulations show that most of the outflow
776: matter is blown away into an oblique direction by the radiative
777: force in cooperation with the centrifugal force.
778:
779: %Here, we note that the angular momentum is very small around
780: %the rotation axis, leading to the negligible centrifugal force
781: %(see dotted line).
782: %This is because the matter loses the angular momentum
783: %%even when it inflows onto the inside of the marginally stable orbit,
784: %%$R<3r_S$.
785: %even inside the radius of the marginally stable orbit, $R<3r_S$.
786: %We should note that the notion of the marginally stable orbit
787: %does not apply here, since the gas is not in the force balance
788: %between the gravity and centrifugal forces \citep{WM03}.
789: %The matter velocity and density do not abruptly change
790: %across the radius, $R=3r_S$.
791: %Our computational domain exactly covers down to the rotation axis.
792: %%The centrifugal force goes up as $\theta$ increases.
793: %Numerical simulations show
794: %that most of the outflow matter is blown away into the oblique direction
795: %by the radiative force in cooperation with the centrifugal force.
796:
797: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
798: %Fig. 5
799: \begin{figure}
800: % \epsscale{1.2}
801: % \plotone{Fig05.eps}
802: \epsscale{1.15}
803: \plotone{Fig05_astroph.eps}
804: \caption{time-averaged one-dimensional profiles of
805: the radiative force ({\it solid lines}),
806: the centrifugal force ({\it dotted lines}),
807: their sum ({\it dashed lines}),
808: and the radial velocity ({\it long-dashed lines})
809: for the case with a large
810: polar angle, $i=0.45 \pi$ ({\it top}), and
811: with a small angle,
812: $i=2.3\times 10^{-2} \pi$ ({\it bottom}).
813: Note that all the forces
814: are normalized by the gravitational force,
815: while the radial velocity is normalized by the free-fall velocity.
816: In both panels the two thin horizontal lines indicate
817: the values of 0 and 1.
818: \label{1DForce}
819: }
820: \end{figure}
821: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
822:
823: \subsection{Geometric Effect}
824: Here we consider the reason why the radiative force
825: in the radial direction
826: does not dominate over the gravitational force inside the disk,
827: %although the disk luminosity exceeds the Eddington luminosity.
828: even though $E_{\rm 0}$ is larger than $10^2L_{\rm E}/4\pi r^2 c$
829: as shown in Figure \ref{E0}.
830: %The radial component of the radiative flux is evaluated
831: %as $F_0^r \sim \left(c/3\chi \right) \partial E_0/\partial r$
832: %in the disk region.
833: The radial component of the radiative flux is evaluated as
834: $F_0^r \sim \left(c/3\rho \chi \right)
835: \partial E_0/\partial r$
836: in the disk region.
837: %It is attenuated since the disk is very optically thick.
838: It is attenuated since the disk is dense and
839: very optically thick ($\tau\gg 1$).
840: That is, even though the radiation energy density itself
841: is large, the high matter density significantly suppresses
842: the radiative flux inside the disk.
843: %$|dE_0/\chi dr| \sim |dE_0/d\tau| \ll E_0$.
844: %Therefore, the radiative force becomes weaker than
845: %gravitational force, though the radiation energy density itself
846: %is considerably larger than $L_E/(4\pi r^2 c)$,
847: %which corresponds to the radiation energy density
848: %in the optically thin region around the light source with Eddington
849: %luminosity.
850: %This implies that there is a potentiality that
851: %radiative force dominates over the gravitational force
852: %if the radiation energy smoothly streams.
853: %
854: %
855: However, the high density (large optical thickness)
856: is not the only condition for the occurrence of supercritical accretion.
857: In the case of a spherical system,
858: the radiative flux should be $L/4\pi r^2$
859: even if the matter is very optically thick.
860: The radiative force dominates
861: over the gravitational force when $L>L_E$,
862: preventing the accretion of matter.
863: Hence, there should be another reason that
864: supercritical disk accretion is realized
865: in spite of $L>L_E$.
866:
867: %The situation differs in the case of the disk accretion flows.
868: Whereas the radiation field is isotropic in the spherical case by definition,
869: it can be anisotropic in the disk case.
870: Indeed, the simulated profile of the radiation energy density
871: is highly anisotropic (Fig. \ref{rhoE}, {\it right}).
872: Unlike in spherical geometry,
873: photons can escape from the less dense region
874: around the rotation axis
875: without thrusting through the dense disk region.
876: Thus, the effective radiative force is attenuated
877: in the disk region.
878: Here we note that,
879: even in the presence of an anisotropic matter distribution, $L$ cannot
880: exceed $L_{\rm E}$ if the medium is optically thin.
881: To sum up, supercritical disk accretion with super-Eddington luminosity
882: is realized due to a large optical thickness and anisotropy
883: of the radiation field.
884: %We also discuss the anisotropic radiative flux in the next subsection.
885: %Even in the presence of anisotropic matter distribution, $L$ cannot
886: %exceed $L_{\rm E}$ if the medium is optically thin.
887:
888: \subsection{Photon-trapping Effects}
889: Photon-trapping effects assist the occurrence of supercritical
890: accretion.
891: Figure \ref{flux2} ({\it top}) indicates the radiative fluxes in
892: the comoving and rest frames inside the disk.
893: As shown in this figure,
894: the radial component of
895: the radiative flux in the rest frame ({\it dotted line}) is negative
896: in the region of $r<70r_S$,
897: whereas that in the comoving frame ({\it solid line}) is positive
898: except in the vicinity of the black hole.
899: This means that the radiation energy is transported inward
900: via photon trapping, $v_r E_0<0$ (see equation [\ref{flux}]).
901: %The radiative flux in the rest frame, $F_0^r$, becomes negative
902: %in the case of $-v_r E_0 > F_0^r$ [see equation (\ref{flux})].
903: %It means that the radiation energy is transported inward
904: %in the region where the photon trapping is effective,
905: %even if the radial component of the radiative flux is positive
906: %(outward).
907: Some part of this radiation energy is swallowed by the black hole,
908: whereby the luminosity is reduced.
909: %The disk luminosity is reduced by the photon trapping,
910: %since the large number of photons is swallowed
911: %by the black hole.
912: This effect attenuates the radiative force,
913: supporting the accretion.
914: %Such photons can not effectively work as
915: %This effect supports
916: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
917: %Fig. 6
918: \begin{figure}[b]
919: \epsscale{1.2}
920: \plotone{Fig06.eps}
921: \caption{
922: {\it Top}: Radial components of the
923: time-averaged radiative fluxes in the comoving
924: frame ($F_0^r$; {\it solid line}) and the rest frame
925: ($F^r$; {\it dotted line})
926: near the equatorial plane as a function of the radius.
927: {\it Bottom}: Same as the top panel, but with the polar components
928: of the radiative fluxes in the comoving frame, $F_0^{\theta}$
929: ({\it solid line}),
930: and in the rest frame, $F^{\theta}$ ({\it dotted line}) along a line with
931: $\theta = 0.3 \pi$.
932: \label{flux2}
933: }
934: \end{figure}
935: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
936:
937: The anisotropy of the radiation field is enhanced
938: by photon trapping.
939: This is another important role of the photon trapping.
940: The radiation energy, which is advected inward with the matter
941: by the photon trapping
942: but not swallowed by the black hole,
943: is transported to the vertical
944: direction and finally released from the disk surface.
945: %It is shown in the bottom panel of Figure \ref{flux2},
946: %in which we also plot the $\theta$-components of the
947: %radiative fluxes in the comoving (solid)
948: %and the rest (dotted) frames near the disk surface.
949: It is shown in Figure 5 ({\it bottom}), which plots
950: the $\theta$-components of the radiative fluxes in the comoving
951: ({\it solid line}) and the rest ({\it dotted line}) frames
952: along a radial line at
953: $\theta=0.3\pi$, that the entire region is below the photosphere.
954: %It is shown in the bottom panel of Figure \ref{flux2},
955: %in which we also plot the $\theta$-components of the
956: %radiative fluxes in the comoving (solid)
957: %and the rest (dotted) frames along a radial line with
958: %$\theta=0.3\pi$, which is distant from the equatorial plane
959: %but deeper than the photosphere.
960: In this figure we can see that the radiation energy
961: is transported toward the disk surface, $F^{\theta}<0$,
962: in most of the region.
963: We also find $F^{\theta}<F_0^{\theta}$ in this figure.
964: %It implies that the gas motion
965: %contributes to the the radiation energy transport
966: %toward the disk surface, $v_\theta E_0<0$.
967: This implies that the gas motion
968: contributes to the transport of radiation energy
969: toward the disk surface, $v_\theta E_0<0$.
970: To conclude, the photon-trapping effect
971: enhances the anisotropy of the radiation field,
972: assisting the occurrence of supercritical accretion.
973: %Thus, the radiation field becomes more anisotropic.
974:
975: %However, it is noted that this effect is not the most essential effect.
976: %It is understood by the fact
977: %that the disk luminosity still exceeds the Eddington luminosity.
978: %The matter should be accelerated outward by the radiative force
979: %if the radiation field is isotropic and if the luminosity
980: %is larger than the Eddington luminosity despite of the photon trapping.
981: %Hence, whereas
982: %the reduction of the luminosity by the photon-trapping
983: %cooperates the occurrence of the supercritical disk accretion,
984: %%it is not the more essential than the geometrical effect
985: %it is the secondary effect, compared with the geometrical effect
986: %(anisotropic radiation field).
987:
988: %We can see this phenomenon in Figure \ref{flux2}.
989: %In this figure, the $r$ component of
990: %the radiative flux in the rest frame is negative (inward)
991: %whereas that of the
992: %radiative flux in the comoving frame is positive
993: %(outward) except in the vicinity of the black hole.
994: %It means that the radiation energy is transported inward
995: %via the photon trapping.
996: %As a result, the photon trapping effect enhances the anisotropy
997: %of the radiation field, assisting the occurrence of the
998: %supercritical disk accretion flows.
999:
1000: Here we note that the gas motion in the vertical direction
1001: seems to be driven by convection in cooperation with
1002: the radiative force.
1003: In fact, we find that the adiabatic conditions
1004: for radiation-pressure-dominated matter
1005: are roughly satisfied along the vertical line in the disk region,
1006: $\partial\ln P/\partial\ln \rho \sim 4/3$
1007: and $\partial\ln T/\partial\ln P \sim 1/4$,
1008: where $P$ is the total pressure and $T$ is the temperature.
1009:
1010:
1011: \section{Discussion}
1012: \subsection{Structure of the Supercritical Disk Accretion Flow}
1013: We summarize our simulation results in a schematic
1014: picture (see Fig. \ref{pic}).
1015: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1016: %Fig. 7
1017: \begin{figure*}
1018: % \epsscale{0.79}
1019: %\begin{figure}[b]
1020: % \epsscale{0.87}
1021: % \plotone{Fig07.eps}
1022: \epsscale{0.87}
1023: \plotone{Fig07_astroph.eps}
1024: \caption{Schematic picture of the supercritical disk
1025: accretion flow around a black hole.
1026: The gas motion is shown on the right: the high-velocity outflow
1027: ({\it solid arrows}) and the slow accretion flow
1028: ({\it dashed arrows}). The left side indicates
1029: the radiative fluxes in the comoving frame ({\it black arrows}) and
1030: the rest frame ({\it white arrows}).
1031: \label{pic}
1032: }
1033: \end{figure*}
1034: %\end{figure}
1035: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1036: In this figure
1037: the radiative flux in the comoving frame, $F_0^r$, is
1038: positive (outward) except in the vicinity of the black hole.
1039: However, the radiative flux in the rest frame,
1040: $F^r (\sim F_0^r+4v_r E_0/3)$,
1041: is negative (inward) via photon trapping, $v_r E_0<0$,
1042: in the trapping region.
1043: In the vicinity of the black hole,
1044: both $F_0^r$ and $F^r$ are negative.
1045: Matter slowly accretes inside the disk,
1046: since the sum of the radiative and
1047: centrifugal forces is nearly balanced with the
1048: gravitational force.
1049: Here we stress again that
1050: the radiative force counteracts the gravitational force
1051: in spite of the trapping region because $F_0^r>0$.
1052: Radiatively driven high-velocity outflows appear
1053: above and below the disk.
1054: In the very vicinity of the black hole,
1055: the gas is accelerated inward by the radiative force
1056: and the gravitational force.
1057:
1058: %As we have mentioned above, the radial velocity is
1059: %much smaller than the free-fall velocity.
1060: As far as the physical quantities around the equatorial plane
1061: are concerned, the simulated profiles of the density, temperature,
1062: and radial as well as rotational velocities
1063: roughly agree with the prediction of the slim-disk model
1064: \citep{Abramowicz88}.
1065: Such features have already been shown
1066: in Figure 11 in Paper I.
1067: However, only about $10\%$ of the injected mass can accrete
1068: onto the black hole, and an almost equal amount of matter is ejected
1069: as high-velocity outflows. The mass accretion rate
1070: is not constant in the radial direction and decreases near the
1071: black hole (see Fig. 6 in Paper I).
1072: Thus, we conclude that
1073: %the simulated flows is not consistent with the slim disk model
1074: the simulated flows do not perfectly agree with the slim-disk model
1075: with regard to the whole structure of the flow.
1076: %The accretion velocity is much smaller than the free-fall velocity
1077: %and roughly agrees with that predicted by the slim disk
1078: %model (Abramowicz et al. 1988; Watarai et al. 2000).
1079: %Roughly speaking, the radial velocity
1080: %is estimated as $v_r \sim -\alpha (H/r) c_{\rm s}$
1081: %(Kato et al. 1998),
1082: %where $H$ is the scale-height, $H$, on the order of $r$,
1083: %and $c_{\rm s}$ is the sound speed, on the order of, but
1084: %less than the free-fall velocity.
1085: %For $\alpha \sim 0.1$, therefore,
1086: %the radial velocity is more than one order of magnitude
1087: %less than the free-fall velocity.
1088: %
1089: %Note that the $80\%$ of the injected matter is
1090: %ejected from the computational domain as the low-velocity outflows,
1091: %whose velocity does not exceed the escape velocity at the outer
1092: %boundary.
1093: %Since such outflowing matter tends to be accelerated by the
1094: %radiative force even at the outside of the computational domain,
1095: %it would be blown away from the system.
1096: %However, a part of the outflowing matter might return
1097: %to the vicinity of the black hole through the disk region,
1098: %since the radiative force does not exceed the gravity
1099: %near the equatorial plane.
1100: %The numerical simulations with larger computational domain
1101: %would make this point clear.
1102:
1103:
1104: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1105: %Finally, we note that the supercritical accretion is possible even if
1106: %the central object is not a black hole.
1107: %As we have already mentioned,
1108: %the anisotropy of the radiation field
1109: %is induced by the anisotropic density distributions
1110: %and the photon trapping effect,
1111: %making the supercritical accretion possible
1112: %in the case of disk accretion.
1113: %Thus, the supercritical disk accretion is possible
1114: %even if the central object is a neutron star (Ohsuga 2006 in preparation).
1115: %In this case,
1116: %the radiation energy is not swallowed by the central object.
1117: %The radiative force accelerates the matter outward
1118: %in the whole region,
1119: %although it pushes the gas inward
1120: %around the inner boundary in the black hole case.
1121: %Such differences lead to the decrease of the mass accretion rate
1122: %onto the central object, the strengthening of the outflows,
1123: %and the increase of the luminosity.
1124: %When we set the mass input rate from the outer disk boundary
1125: %to be $10^3 L_E/c^2$,
1126: %the luminosity and the mass accretion rate
1127: %are about $5L_E$ and $30L_E/c^2$ in the case of
1128: %the disk accretion around the neutron star,
1129: %although they are $3L_E$ and $10^2L_E/c^2$ in the case of
1130: %the black hole accretion disks.
1131: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1132:
1133: \citet{HD07} have investigated local maximum values
1134: of the accretion rate in the supercritical disk accretion flows.
1135: In their paper
1136: they focused only on the force balance
1137: in the vertical and radial directions
1138: around the equatorial plane.
1139: Multi-dimensional effects were not
1140: taken into consideration.
1141: They revealed that
1142: the vertical radiative force limits the maximum
1143: accretion rate at the inner disk region,
1144: leading to a decrease of the accretion rate
1145: with a decrease of the radius.
1146: Their results imply that
1147: the disk loses mass
1148: via the radiatively driven outflows
1149: and the mass accretion rate decreases
1150: at the inner region.
1151: Such tendencies agree with our results.
1152: As shown in Figure \ref{vr}, our simulations show that
1153: radiatively driven outflows form above and below the disk.
1154: The mass accretion rate decreases with
1155: a decrease of the radius
1156: (see Fig. 6 in Paper I).
1157:
1158:
1159: \subsection{Dependency of the Mass Accretion Rate}
1160: In the present study, focusing on numerical simulations
1161: in which the mass input rate at the outer boundary
1162: is set to be $\dot{M}_{\rm input}=10^3L_{\rm E}/c^2$,
1163: we show that
1164: the radiative force is attenuated in the disk region
1165: via large optical thickness,
1166: which makes supercritical disk accretion possible.
1167: Such dilution of the radiative force would effectively operate
1168: even if the mass input rate (mass accretion rate) varied.
1169: %In fact,
1170: %we performed new simulations with the mass input rate
1171: %of $3\times 10^2L_{\rm E}/c^2$
1172: %and $3\times 10^3L_{\rm E}/c^2$,
1173: %finding that
1174: In fact,
1175: simulations with mass input rates
1176: of $3\times 10^2L_{\rm E}/c^2$
1177: and $3\times 10^3L_{\rm E}/c^2$
1178: show that
1179: %by the simulations with
1180: %the mass input rate of $3\times 10^2L_{\rm E}/c^2$
1181: %and $3\times 10^3L_{\rm E}/c^2$,
1182: %we find that
1183: $E_0/\rho$ is almost independent
1184: of the mass input rate,
1185: although the radiation energy density goes up
1186: as the mass input rate increases.
1187: That is, the dynamics is not sensitive to the precise value of
1188: $\dot{M}_{\rm input}$,
1189: as long as it largely exceeds the critical value.
1190:
1191: So far, we have studied steady accretion flows.
1192: Although a highly supercritical disk
1193: ($\dot{M}_{\rm input}>3\times 10^2L_{\rm E}/c^2$)
1194: is quasi-steady,
1195: it has been revealed that
1196: a moderately supercritical disk
1197: [$\dot{M}_{\rm input}=(10-10^2)L_{\rm E}/c^2$]
1198: is unstable
1199: and exhibits limit-cycle behavior
1200: (\citeauthor{O06} \citeyear{O06}, \citeyear{O07};
1201: see also \citeauthor{SH75} \citeyear{SH75};
1202: \citeauthor{SS76} \citeyear{SS76}).
1203: The luminosity goes up and down around the Eddington luminosity.
1204:
1205: \citet{O07} has reported that
1206: the time-averaged mass, momentum,
1207: and kinetic energy output rates
1208: via the outflow, the mass accretion rate, and the disk luminosity
1209: increase as the mass input rate increases,
1210: $\propto \dot{M}_{\rm input}^{0.7}
1211: -\dot{M}_{\rm input}^{1.0}$
1212: for $\alpha=0.5$ and
1213: $\propto \dot{M}_{\rm input}^{0.4}
1214: -\dot{M}_{\rm input}^{0.6}$
1215: for $\alpha=0.1$.
1216:
1217:
1218:
1219:
1220:
1221: \subsection{Future Work}
1222: As we have already mentioned in \S 3.1,
1223: the sum of the accreting matter and
1224: the matter ejected as high-velocity outflows
1225: is $20\%$ of the injected mass, and
1226: $80\%$ of the injected matter is
1227: ejected from the computational domain as low-velocity outflows,
1228: whose velocities do not exceed the escape velocity at the outer
1229: boundary.
1230: Since such outflowing matter tends to be accelerated by the
1231: radiative force even at the outside of the computational domain,
1232: it would be blown away from the system.
1233: However, a part of the outflowing matter might return
1234: to the vicinity of the black hole through the disk region,
1235: since the radiative force does not exceed the gravity
1236: near the equatorial plane.
1237: Numerical simulations with larger computational domains
1238: would make this point clear.
1239:
1240: Whereas the resulting mass accretion rate onto the black hole
1241: is around $10^2 L_{\rm E}/c^2$
1242: in the present simulations,
1243: \citet{HD07} have indicated that the mass accretion rate
1244: can increase up to $10^4 L_{\rm E}/c^2$.
1245: They have reported that
1246: the vertical force balance breaks down via a strong radiative force
1247: if the mass accretion rate exceeds this limit.
1248: However, even in such a case,
1249: the matter might accrete onto the black hole,
1250: although the strong radiative force would produce
1251: powerful outflows.
1252: To investigate the maximum value of the accretion rate
1253: is an outstanding issue.
1254: We should perform numerical simulations with larger computational
1255: domains, since the trapping region is expected to expand
1256: with the increase of the mass accretion rate.
1257:
1258: We reveal in the present paper that photons generated
1259: deep inside the disk are effectively trapped in the flow,
1260: leading to supercritical disk accretion.
1261: Although the magnetic fields are not solved in our simulations,
1262: magnetic buoyancy might play an important role in the
1263: transportation of matter, as well as photons, toward the
1264: disk surface
1265: (\citeauthor{Parker75} \citeyear{Parker75};
1266: \citeauthor{SR84} \citeyear{SR84};
1267: \citeauthor{SC89} \citeyear{SC89}).
1268: %\citep{Parker75,SR84,SC89}.
1269: Magnetic buoyancy might lead to photon generation
1270: near the disk surface if the magnetic fields rise quickly
1271: without dissipation deep inside the disk.
1272: Thus, magnetic buoyancy would dilute the photon-trapping effect.
1273: A photon bubble instability, which is induced in the magnetized,
1274: radiation-pressure-dominated region, might also suppress
1275: the photon trapping \citep{Begelman02,Turner05}.
1276: In these cases the enhanced radiative force would more effectively
1277: accelerate the matter around the disk surface,
1278: working to decrease the mass accretion rate.
1279: However, the magnetic fields might prevent such acceleration
1280: if they strongly tie the matter near the disk surface with the disk matter.
1281: In the disk region
1282: the matter might easily accrete toward the black hole,
1283: since the radiation energy density decreases.
1284: Global radiation-magnetohydrodynamic (RMHD) simulations
1285: would make these points clear.
1286: Local RMHD simulations of accretion flows have been
1287: performed by \citet{Turner03} and \citet{HKS06}.
1288: In addition, it is thought that disk viscosity has
1289: magnetic origins
1290: (\citeauthor{HBS01} \citeyear{HBS01};
1291: \citeauthor{MMM01} \citeyear{MMM01};
1292: for a review see \citeauthor{Balbus03} \citeyear{Balbus03}).
1293: %\citep[for a review]{HBS01,MMM01,Balbus03}.
1294: Hence, we should stress again that RMHD simulations are
1295: very important to more realistically investigate viscous
1296: accretion flows, although an $\alpha$-viscosity model is
1297: employed in the present study.
1298:
1299: \acknowledgments
1300: We would like to thank the anonymous reviewer for many helpful suggestions.
1301: The calculations were carried out
1302: by a parallel computer at Rikkyo University
1303: and the Institute of Natural Science, Senshu University.
1304: This work was supported in part
1305: by a special postdoctoral researchers program in RIKEN (K. O.),
1306: by a research grant from the Japan Society
1307: for the Promotion of Science (17740111; K. O.),
1308: by Grants-in-Aid from the Ministry
1309: of Education, Science, Culture, and Sports
1310: (14079205, 16340057; S. M.),
1311: and by the Grant-in-Aid for the 21st Century COE
1312: ``Center for Diversity and Universality in Physics''
1313: from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports,
1314: Science, and Technology of Japan.
1315:
1316: %REFERENCE LIST
1317: \begin{thebibliography}{}
1318: \bibitem[Abramowicz et al.(1988)]{Abramowicz88}
1319: Abramowicz, M. A., Czerny, B., Lasota, J. P., \& Szuszkiewicz, E. 1988,
1320: \apj, 332, 646
1321: \bibitem[Balbus(2003)]{Balbus03}
1322: Balbus, S.~A.\ 2003, \araa, 41, 555
1323: %\bibitem[Becker et al.(2001)]{Becker01}
1324: % Becker, R. H. et al. 2001, AJ, 122, 2850
1325: \bibitem[Begelman(1978)]{Begelman78}
1326: Begelman, M. C. 1978, \mnras, 184, 53
1327: \bibitem[Begelman(2002)]{Begelman02}
1328: Begelman, M.~C.\ 2002, \apjl, 568, L97
1329: %\bibitem[Bisnovatyi-Kogan \& Blinnikov(1977)]{BB77}
1330: % Bisnovatyi-Kogan, G. S. \& Blinnikov, S. I. 1977, \aap, 59, 111
1331: \bibitem[Boller(2004)]{Boller04}
1332: Boller, T. 2004, PThPS, 155, 217
1333: \bibitem[Burger \& Katz(1980)]{BK80}
1334: Burger, H. L. \& Katz, J. I. 1980, \apj, 236, 921
1335: \bibitem[Burger \& Katz(1983)]{BK83}
1336: Burger, H. L. \& Katz, J. I. 1983, \apj, 265, 393
1337: %\bibitem[Castor, Abbot, \& Klein(1975)]{CAK75}
1338: % Castor J. I., Abbott D. C., \& Klein R. I., 1975, \apj, 195, 157
1339: %\bibitem[Chelouche \& Netzer(2003)]{CN03}
1340: % Chelouche, D. \& Netzer, H. 2003, \mnras, 344, 223
1341: \bibitem[Ebisawa et al.(2003)]{Ebisawa03}
1342: Ebisawa, K., Zycki, P., Kubota, A., Mizuno, T., \& Watarai, K.
1343: 2003, \apj, 597, 780
1344: \bibitem[Eggum et al.(1987)]{ECK87}
1345: Eggum, G. E., Coroniti, F. V., \& Katz, J. I. 1987, \apj, 323, 634
1346: %\bibitem[Eggum, Coroniti, \& Katz(1988)]{ECK88}
1347: % Eggum, G. E., Coroniti, F. V., \& Katz, J. I. 1988, \apj, 330, 142
1348: \bibitem[Fabbiano(1989)]{Fabbiano89}
1349: Fabbiano, G. 1989, \araa, 27, 87
1350: %\bibitem[Fan et al.(2001)]{Fan01}
1351: % Fan, X. et al. 2001, \aj, 122, 2833
1352: %\bibitem[Ferrarese \& Merritt(2000)]{FM00}
1353: % Ferrarese, L. \& Merritt, D. 2000, \apj, 539, L9
1354: %\bibitem[Gebhardt et al.(2000)]{Gebhardt00}
1355: % Gebhardt, K. et al. 2000, \apj, 539, L13
1356: %\bibitem[Greene \& Ho(2006)]{GH06}
1357: % Greene, J. E. \& Ho, L. C. 2006, \apj, 641, L21
1358: \bibitem[Hawley et al.(2001)]{HBS01}
1359: Hawley, J. F., Balbus, S. A. \& Stone, J. M. 2001, \apj, 554, L49
1360: %\bibitem[Hawley \& Balbus(2002)]{HB02}
1361: % Hawley, J. F., \& Balbus, S. A. 2002, \apj, 573, 738
1362: %\bibitem[Hayashi, Hoshi, \& Sugimoto(1962)]{HHS62}
1363: % Hayashi, C., Hoshi, R., \& Sugimoto, D. 1962,
1364: % Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl., 22, 1
1365: \bibitem[Heinzeller \& Duschl(2007)]{HD07}
1366: Heinzeller, D., \& Duschl, W.~J.\ 2007, \mnras, 374, 1146
1367: %\bibitem[Hiaman, Rees, \& Loeb(1997)]{HRL97}
1368: % Haiman, Z., Rees, M. \& Loeb, A., 1997, \apj, 476, 458
1369: \bibitem[Hirose et al.(2006)]{HKS06}
1370: Hirose, S., Krolik, J.~H., \& Stone, J.~M.\ 2006, \apj, 640, 901
1371: \bibitem[Houck \& Chevalier(1991)]{HC91}
1372: Houck, J. C. \& Chevalier, R. A. 1991, \apj, 376, 234
1373: \bibitem[Icke(1980)]{Icke80}
1374: Icke, V. 1980, \aj, 85, 329
1375: \bibitem[Jones \& Raine(1979)]{JR79}
1376: Jones, B. C. \& Raine, D. J. 1979, \aap, 76, 179
1377: \bibitem[Kato et al.(1998)]{KFM98}
1378: Kato, S., Fukue, J., \& Mineshige, S. 1998,
1379: Black-Hole Accretion Disks (Kyoto: Kyoto Univ. Press)
1380: %\bibitem[Kato, Mineshige, \& Shibata(2004)]{KMS04}
1381: % Kato, Y., Mineshige, S., \& Shibata, K. 2004, \apj, 605, 307
1382: \bibitem[Kawaguchi(2003)]{Kawaguchi03}
1383: Kawaguchi, T. 2003, \apj, 593, 69
1384: %\bibitem[Kawakatu \& Umemura(2002)]{KU02}
1385: % Kawakatu, N. \& Umemura, M. 2002, \mnras, 329, 572
1386: %\bibitem[King(2003)]{King03}
1387: % King, A., 2003, \apj, 596, L27
1388: \bibitem[Kley(1989)]{Kley89}
1389: Kley, W. 1989, \aap, 222, 141
1390: \bibitem[Kley \& Lin(1999)]{KL99}
1391: Kley, W. \& Lin, D. N. C. 1999, \apj, 518, 833
1392: %\bibitem[Kudoh, Matsumoto, \& Shibata(2002)]{KMS02}
1393: % Kudoh, T., Matsumoto, R., \& Shibata, K. 2002, \pasj, 54, 267
1394: \bibitem[Levermore \& Pomraning(1981)]{LP81}
1395: Levermore, C. D. \& Pomraning, G. C. 1981, \apj, 248, L321
1396: %\bibitem[Lightman, \& Eardley(1974)]{LE74}
1397: % Lightman, A. P. \& Eardley, D. M. 1974, \apj, 187, L1
1398: \bibitem[Makishima et al.(2000)]{Makishima00}
1399: Makishima, K., et al. 2000, \apj, 535, 632
1400: %\bibitem[Machida, Hayashi, \& Matsumoto(2000)]{MHM00}
1401: % Machida, M., Hayashi, M. R., \& Matsumoto, R. 2000, \apj, 532, L67
1402: \bibitem[Machida et al.(2001)]{MMM01}
1403: Machida, M., Matsumoto, R., \& Mineshige, S. 2001, \pasj, 53, L1
1404: \bibitem[Maraschi et al.(1976)]{MRT76}
1405: Maraschi, L., Reina, C., \& Treves, A. 1976, \apj, 206, 295
1406: \bibitem[Meier(1979)]{Meier79}
1407: Meier, D. L. 1979, \apj, 233, 664
1408: \bibitem[Mineshige et al.(2000)]{Mineshige00}
1409: Mineshige, S., Kawaguchi, T., Takeuchi, M., \& Hayashida, K. 2000,
1410: \pasj, 52, 499
1411: %\bibitem[Ohsuga(2006)]{O06}
1412: % Ohsuga, K. 2006, \apj, 640, 923
1413: %\bibitem[Ohsuga et al.(2002)]{O02}
1414: % Ohsuga, K., Mineshige, S., Mori, M., \& Umemura, M. 2002, \apj, 574, 315
1415: %\bibitem[Ohsuga, Mineshige, \& Watarai(2003)]{OMW03}
1416: % Ohsuga, K., Mineshige, S., \& Watarai, K. 2003, \apj, 596, 429
1417: \bibitem[Ohsuga(2006)]{O06} Ohsuga, K. 2006, \apj, 640, 923
1418: \bibitem[Ohsuga(2007)]{O07} Ohsuga, K. 2007, \apj, 659, 205
1419: \bibitem[Ohsuga et al.(2005)]{O05}
1420: Ohsuga, K., Mori, M., Nakamoto, T., \& Mineshige, S. 2005, \apj, 628, 368
1421: (Paper I)
1422: %\bibitem[Ohsuga et al.(2005)]{O05}
1423: % Ohsuga, K., Mori, M., Nakamoto, T., \& Mineshige, S. 2005, \apj, 628, 368
1424: \bibitem[Okajima et al.(2006)]{Okajima06}
1425: Okajima, T., Ebisawa, K., \& Kawaguchi, T.\ 2006, \apjl, 652, L105
1426: \bibitem[Okuda(2002)]{Okuda02}
1427: Okuda, T. 2002, \pasj, 54, 253
1428: \bibitem[Okuda et al.(1997)]{OFS97}
1429: Okuda, T., Fujita, M., \& Sakashita, S. 1997, \pasj, 49, 679
1430: \bibitem[Paczy\'nsky \& Wiita(1980)]{PW80}
1431: Paczy\'nsky, B. \& Wiita, P. J. 1980, \aap, 88, 23
1432: \bibitem[Parker(1975)]{Parker75}
1433: Parker, E.~N.\ 1975, \apj, 198, 205
1434: %\bibitem[Pounds et al.(2003b)]{Pounds03b}
1435: % Pounds, K. A., King, A. R., Page, K. L., \& O'Brien, P. T. 2003b,
1436: % \mnras, 346, 1025
1437: %\bibitem[Pounds et al.(2003a)]{Pounds03a}
1438: % Pounds, K. A., Reeves, J. N., King, A. R., Page, K. L., O'Brien, P. T.,
1439: %\& Turner, M. J. L. 2003a, \mnras, 345, 705
1440: %\bibitem[Proga(1999)]{Proga99}
1441: % Proga, D. 1999, \mnras, 304, 938
1442: %\bibitem[Proga, Stone, \& Kallman(2000)]{PSK00}
1443: % Proga, D., Stone, J. M., \& Kallman, T. R. 2000, \apj, 543, 686
1444: %\bibitem[Proga \& Kallman(2004)]{PK04}
1445: % Proga, D. \& Kallman, T. R. 2004, \apj, 616, 688
1446: %\bibitem[Reeves, O'Brien, \& Ward(2003)]{ROW03}
1447: % Reeves, J. N., O'Brien, P. T., \& Ward, M. J. 2003, \apj, 593, 65
1448: %\bibitem[Rybicki \& Lightman(1979)]{RL79}
1449: % Rybicki, G. B. \& Lightman, A. P. 1979,
1450: % Radiative Processes in Astrophysics (New York: John Wiley \& Sons, Inc.)
1451: \bibitem[Sakimoto \& Coroniti(1989)]{SC89}
1452: Sakimoto, P.~J., \& Coroniti, F.~V.\ 1989, \apj, 342, 49
1453: \bibitem[Shakura \& Sunyaev(1973)]{SS73}
1454: Shakura, N. I. \& Sunyaev, R. A. 1973, \aap, 24, 337
1455: \bibitem[Shakura \& Sunyaev(1976)]{SS76}
1456: Shakura, N.~I., \& Sunyaev, R.~A.\ 1976, \mnras, 175, 613
1457: \bibitem[Shibazaki \& H\=oshi(1975)]{SH75}
1458: Shibazaki, N. \& H\=oshi, R. 1975, PThPh, 54, 706
1459: %\bibitem[Shimura \& Manmoto(2003)]{SM03}
1460: % Shimura, T. \& Manmoto, T. 2003, \mnras, 338, 1013
1461: %\bibitem[Shields et al.(2006)]{Shields06}
1462: % Shields, G. A., Menezes, K. L., Massart, C. A., \& Vanden Bout, P. 2006,
1463: % \apj, 641, 683
1464: %\bibitem[Silk \& Rees(1998)]{SR98}
1465: % Silk, J. \& Rees, M. J. 1998, \aap, 331, L1
1466: \bibitem[Stella \& Rosner(1984)]{SR84}
1467: Stella, L., \& Rosner, R.\ 1984, \apj, 277, 312
1468: %\bibitem[Stone, Pringle, \& Begelman(1999)]{SPB99}
1469: % Stone, J. M., Pringle, J. E., \& Begelman, M. C. 1999, \mnras, 310, 1002
1470: %\bibitem[Stone \& Pringle(2001)]{SP01}
1471: % Stone, J. M. \& Pringle, J. E. 2001, \mnras, 322, 461
1472: %\bibitem[Susa \& Umemura(2006)]{SU06}
1473: % Susa, H. \& Umemura, M. 2006, \apj, 645, 93L
1474: %\bibitem[Turner \& Stone(2001)]{TS01}
1475: % Turner, N. J. \& Stone, J. M. 2001, \apjs, 135, 95
1476: \bibitem[Turner et al.(2005)]{Turner05}
1477: Turner, N.~J., Blaes, O.~M., Socrates, A., Begelman, M.~C.,
1478: \& Davis, S.~W.\ 2005, \apj, 624, 267
1479: \bibitem[Turner et al.(2003)]{Turner03}
1480: Turner, N. J., Stone, J. M., Krolik, J. H., \& Sano, T. 2003, \apj, 593, 992
1481: %\bibitem[Umemura(2001)]{Umemura01}
1482: % Umemura, M. 2001, \apj, 560, L29
1483: \bibitem[Vierdayanti et al.(2006)]{Vierdayanti06}
1484: Vierdayanti, K., Mineshige, S., Ebisawa, K., \& Kawaguchi, T. 2006,
1485: \pasj, 58, 915
1486: \bibitem[Wang et al.(1999)]{Wang99}
1487: Wang, J.-M., Szuszkiewicz, E., Lu, F.-J., \& Zhou, Y.-Y.\ 1999, \apj, 522, 839
1488: %\bibitem[Watarai \& Fukue(1999)]{WF99}
1489: % Watarai, K., \& Fukue, J. 1999, \pasj, 51, 725
1490: \bibitem[Watarai \& Mineshige(2003)]{WM03}
1491: Watarai, K., \& Mineshige, S. 2003, \pasj, 55, 959
1492: \bibitem[Watarai et al.(2001)]{WMM01}
1493: Watarai, K., Mizuno, T., \& Mineshige, S. 2001, \apj, 549, L77
1494: %\bibitem[Weymann, Carswell, \& Smith(1981)]{WCS81}
1495: %Weymann, R. J., Carswell, R. F., \& Smith, M. G. 1981, \araa, 19, 41
1496: %\bibitem[Yu \& Tremaine(2002)]{YT02}
1497: % Yu, Q. \& Tremaine, S. 2002, \mnras, 335, 965
1498: \end{thebibliography}
1499:
1500: \end{document}
1501:
1502: \newpage
1503: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1504: %Fig. 1
1505: \begin{figure}
1506: \epsscale{1.0}
1507: % \plotone{Fig01_000_R060.ps}
1508: \plotone{Fig01_CMYK.eps}
1509: \caption{Color contours of matter density (left) and
1510: radiation energy density (right) distributions
1511: as a function of $R$ and $z$. Note that
1512: these values are time-averaged over $t=20$s $\sim 50$s.
1513: \label{rhoE}
1514: }
1515: \end{figure}
1516: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1517:
1518: \newpage
1519: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1520: %Fig. 2
1521: \begin{figure}
1522: \epsscale{0.8}
1523: % \plotone{Fig03_000_R060.ps}
1524: \plotone{Fig02_CMYK.eps}
1525: \caption{Same as figure 1, but for the radiation energy density
1526: normalized by $L_{\rm E}/4\pi r^2 c$.
1527: \label{E0}
1528: }
1529: \end{figure}
1530: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1531:
1532: \newpage
1533: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1534: %Fig. 3
1535: \begin{figure}
1536: \epsscale{1.0}
1537: % \plotone{Fig02_000_R060.ps}
1538: \plotone{Fig03_CMYK.eps}
1539: \caption{Same as Fig. 1, but for the color contours
1540: of the ratio of the radial component of the radiative force
1541: to the gravitational force (left)
1542: and that of the sum of the radiation
1543: force and the centrifugal force to the gravitational force (right).
1544: \label{2DForce}
1545: }
1546: \end{figure}
1547: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1548:
1549: \newpage
1550: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1551: %Fig. 4
1552: \begin{figure}
1553: \epsscale{0.8}
1554: % \plotone{Fig03_000_R060.ps}
1555: \plotone{Fig04_CMYK.eps}
1556: \caption{Same as figure 1, but for the radial velocity
1557: normalized by the free-fall velocity.
1558: \label{vr}
1559: }
1560: \end{figure}
1561: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1562:
1563: \newpage
1564: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1565: %Fig. 5
1566: \begin{figure}
1567: \epsscale{0.8}
1568: \plotone{Fig05.eps}
1569: \caption{time-averaged one dimensional profiles of
1570: the radiative force (solid),
1571: the centrifugal force (dotted),
1572: the sum of the them (dashed),
1573: and the radial velocity (long-dashed) for the case with a large
1574: polar angle, $i=0.45 \pi$ (upper) and those
1575: for the case with a small angle,
1576: $i=2.3\times 10^{-2} \pi$ (lower).
1577: Note that all the forces
1578: are normalized by the gravitational force,
1579: while the radial velocity is normalized by the free-fall velocity.
1580: In both panels, the two thin horizontal lines indicate
1581: the values of 0 and 1.
1582: \label{1DForce}
1583: }
1584: \end{figure}
1585: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1586:
1587: \newpage
1588: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1589: %Fig. 6
1590: \begin{figure}
1591: \epsscale{0.8}
1592: \plotone{Fig06.eps}
1593: \caption{
1594: Top panel; The radial components of the
1595: time-averaged radiative fluxes in the comoving
1596: frame ($F_0^r$, solid) and the rest frame ($F^r$, dotted)
1597: near the equatorial plane as a function of the radius.
1598: Bottom panel; Same as the top panel, but for the polar components
1599: of the radiative fluxes in the comoving frame, $F_0^{\theta}$ (solid)
1600: and in the rest frame, $F^{\theta}$ (dotted) along a line with
1601: $\theta = 0.3 \pi$.
1602: \label{flux2}
1603: }
1604: \end{figure}
1605: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1606:
1607: \newpage
1608: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1609: %Fig. 7
1610: \begin{figure}
1611: \epsscale{0.8}
1612: \plotone{pic4.eps}
1613: \caption{Schematic picture of the supercritical disk
1614: accretion flow around a black hole.
1615: The gas motion is shown in the right hand side; high-velocity outflow
1616: (solid) and slow accretion flow (dotted). The left hand side indicates
1617: the radiative fluxes in the comoving frame (black) and
1618: the rest frame (white).
1619: \label{pic}
1620: }
1621: \end{figure}
1622: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1623:
1624: \end{document}
1625:
1626: