1: \documentclass{pasj00}
2: \draft
3:
4: \begin{document}
5: \SetRunningHead{Kawanaka et al.}{X-ray emissions from MHD accretion flows}
6:
7: \title{X-ray Emissions from Three-dimensional Magnetohydrodynamic Coronal
8: Accretion Flows}
9: \author{Norita \textsc{Kawanaka},\altaffilmark{1}
10: Yoshiaki \textsc{Kato},\altaffilmark{2}
11: and Shin \textsc{Mineshige}\altaffilmark{1}}
12: \altaffiltext{1}{Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics, Kyoto University,
13: Kyoto 606-8502, Japan}
14: \altaffiltext{2}{Center for Computational Sciences,
15: University of Tsukuba 1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8511, Japan}
16: \email{norita@yukawa.kyoto-u.ac.jp}
17: \KeyWords{accretion, accretion disks --- black hole physics ---
18: radiative transfer -- X-rays: general}
19:
20: \maketitle
21: \begin{abstract}
22: We calculate the radiation spectrum and its time variability of the black
23: hole accretion disk-corona system
24: based on the three-dimensional magnetohydrodynamic simulation.
25: In explaining the spectral properties of active galactic nuclei (AGNs),
26: it is often assumed
27: that they consist of a geometrically thin, optically thick disk and hot,
28: optically thin corona surrounding the thin disk.
29: As for a model of the corona, we adopt the simulation data of
30: three-dimensional, non-radiative MHD accretion flows
31: calculated by Kato and coworkers, while for a thin disk we assume
32: a standard type disk. We perform
33: Monte Carlo radiative transfer simulations in the corona, taking into
34: account the Compton scattering of soft photons
35: from the thin disk by hot thermal electrons and coronal irradiation heating
36: of the thin disk, which emits blackbody radiation.
37: By adjusting the density parameter of the MHD coronal flow,
38: we can produce the emergent spectra which are consistent with those of
39: typical Seyfert galaxies. Moreover, we find
40: rapid time variability in X-ray emission spectra, originating from the
41: density fluctuation produced by the magnetorotational instability
42: in the MHD corona.
43: The features of reflection component including iron fluorescent line
44: emission are also briefly discussed.
45: \end{abstract}
46:
47: \section{Introduction}
48: Thanks to the rapid progress in the observational studies in recent years,
49: our understanding of the radiation properties of black hole accretion flows
50: have been
51: really deepened. Accreting black holes, such as active galactic nuclei
52: (AGNs) and black hole binaries (BHBs) during their very-high
53: spectral state [state with luminosities around a few
54: tenths of the Eddington limit ($L_{\rm Edd}$)], show the radiation spectra
55: dominated by two components; the thermal bump in UV/soft X-ray
56: band and the power-law emission with a spectral index of $\alpha\sim 1$
57: in the X-ray band (possibly with a high energy cutoff around MeV; for
58: the multiwavelength spectrum of a typical AGN, see Reynolds et al. 1997).
59: These components are often explained by the disk-corona model
60: (Liang \& Price 1975; Bisnovatyi-Kogan \& Blinnikov 1977;
61: Haardt \& Maraschi 1991, 1993). In this model, the accretion flow consists
62: of geometrically thin, optically thick accretion disk whose structure is
63: studied by Shakura \& Sunyaev (1973), and hot, optically thin corona
64: surrounding the disk. The thermal bump is believed as the thermal emission
65: from the optically thick disk (see Kishimoto et al. 2005 for its
66: observational implication), and the power-law component is interpreted
67: to be formed by photons which are emitted from
68: the disk and Compton up-scattered by hot electrons in the corona
69: (see Thorne \& Price 1975; Shapiro et al. 1976 but in the context of the
70: inner hot accretion flow model). Such a structure that the hot gas
71: (i.e. the corona) coexists with the cool gas
72: (i.e. the disk) is justified by the existence of the reflection component
73: observed in the X-ray spectra (Pounds et al. 1990; see also
74: Guilbert \& Rees 1988; Lightman and White 1988).
75: This reflection component is accompanied by the iron fluorescent line
76: emission broadened relativistically (for reviews, see Mushotzky et al. 1993;
77: Fabian et al. 2000; Reynolds \& Nowak 2003).
78:
79: On the other hand, our theoretical understanding of black hole accretion has
80: also made a rapid progress. Now the dynamics of accretion flows is
81: understood in terms of magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), since Balbus \& Hawley
82: (1991) rediscovered the magnetorotational instability (MRI) as the
83: fundamental mechanism of angular momentum transfer in accretion disks.
84: Detailed dynamical features of MHD accretion flows have been investigated
85: via global three-dimensional numerical simulations (Matsumoto 1999;
86: Stone \& Pringle 2001; Machida et al. 2001; Hawley \& Krolik 2001, 2002;
87: Machida \& Matsumoto 2003; Armitage \& Reynolds 2003;
88: De Villiers et al. 2003; Gammie et al. 2003; Igumenshchev et al. 2003).
89: Such magnetically dominated accretion flows as those simulated in these
90: calculations are radiatively inefficient accretion flows (RIAFs)
91: whose mass accretion rates are much smaller than the critical value of
92: $\sim L_{\rm Edd}$ (see, e.g., Mineshige et al. 1995).
93: In such flows, the dissipated energy would not be radiated away
94: efficiently, because of their low density, and be advected inward to the
95: central black hole (Ichimaru 1977; Narayan \& Yi 1994;
96: Abramowicz et al. 1995; Kato et al. 1998).
97:
98: Although the detailed structures and behavior of magnetohydrodynamical
99: accretion flows are shown by numerical methods, it is still unclear
100: that if these simulational results can be applied in realistic
101: situations in the universe. In recent years, the researches concerning
102: the observational properties like the spectra and their time
103: variabilities expected from numerically simulated accretion flows have
104: been extensively performed. Since the RIAF model is believed to fit the
105: emergent spectrum of Sagittarius ${\rm A}^*$, some authors have
106: calculated the time dependent radiation spectra predicted from simulated
107: MHD accretion flows with the aim to reproduce the observed behavior of
108: Sgr ${\rm A}^*$ (Hawley \& Balbus 2002; Goldstone et al. 2005;
109: Ohsuga et al. 2005; Moscibrodzka et al. 2007). However, as for the
110: accretion flows with moderately high mass accretion rate, which are
111: considered to be a good model for AGNs and BHBs showing the thermal bump
112: and the power-law emission in their spectra, no attempts have been made
113: so far to calculate the spectra predicted from MHD simulations taking
114: into account realistic radiation processes. As noted in the above, in
115: order to reproduce such spectra, the simulated accretion flows should
116: have two components: geometrically thin cool disk and optically thin
117: hot corona. However, no simulation data which incorporate such
118: two-component effects are available.
119:
120: In this study we calculate for the first time the emergent spectra of
121: two-component accretion flows based on the three-dimensional MHD
122: simulation by Kato et al. (2004, hereafter KMS04). Instead of fully
123: solving the dynamics of two-component accretion flows, we adopt the
124: simulation result of RIAF-like
125: MHD accretion flow for the optically thin corona, and assume that
126: the optically thick, geometrically thin disk is embedded in the corona
127: with mutual interaction through radiation. Other interactions,
128: such as mass evaporation/condensation or heat conduction, are
129: neglected, for simplicity (Meyer \& Meyer-Hofmeister 1994; Meyer
130: et al. 2000; Liu et al. 2002, 2007). The disk is emitting soft
131: photons with thermal spectrum, and those photons are up-scattered
132: by hot electrons in the corona. After being scattered in the corona,
133: a part of upscattered photons return to the disk and are
134: thermalized there, thereby heating the accretion disk. The disk
135: emission is, hence, enhanced by this returning process.
136: In this paper we perform three-dimensional Monte Carlo radiative
137: transfer simulations to properly calculate such radiation processes
138: and the emergent spectra.
139:
140: The plan of this paper is as follows. We show the detail of the model
141: and method used in our calculation in \S 2. The results are presented in
142: \S 3, and compare them with the spectra observed in typical AGNs
143: and discuss the similar points and discrepancies between them in \S 4.
144: In \S 5 we summarize our study.
145:
146: \section{MODEL AND CALCULATION METHODS}
147: \subsection{Overview of Adopted MHD Simulations}
148: KMS04 investigated the evolution of a torus threaded by weak localized
149: poloidal magnetic fields by performing the three-dimensional MHD
150: simulation. They solved the following basic equations of the resistive
151: MHD in the cylindrical coordinates, $(r,~\phi ,~z)$:
152: \begin{eqnarray}
153: \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t}+\mbox{\boldmath $\nabla$}\cdot
154: (\rho \mbox{\boldmath $v$})=0, \\
155: \frac{\partial}{\partial t}(\rho \mbox{\boldmath $v$})+
156: \mbox{\boldmath $\nabla$}\cdot \left(\rho \mbox{\boldmath $v$}\otimes
157: \mbox{\boldmath $v$}
158: -\frac{\mbox{\boldmath $B$}\otimes \mbox{\boldmath $B$}}{4\pi} \right)
159: = -\mbox{\boldmath $\nabla$}\left(p_{\rm gas}+\frac{B^2}{8\pi}\right)
160: -\rho\mbox{\boldmath $\nabla$}\psi ,\\
161: \frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left(\varepsilon +\frac{B^2}{8\pi}\right)
162: +\mbox{\boldmath $\nabla$}\cdot \left[\left(\varepsilon
163: +p_{\rm gas}\right)\mbox{\boldmath $v$}
164: +\frac{c(\mbox{\boldmath $E$}\times \mbox{\boldmath $B$})}{4\pi}\right]
165: =-\rho\mbox{\boldmath $v$}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath $\nabla$}\psi, \\
166: \frac{\partial B}{\partial t}=-c\mbox{\boldmath $\nabla$}\times
167: \mbox{\boldmath $E$},
168: \end{eqnarray}
169: where $\psi=-GM/(R-r_{\rm S})$ is the pseudo-Newtonian potential
170: (Paczy\'{n}ski \& Wiita 1980), $\varepsilon =\rho v^2/2+p_{\rm gas}/
171: (\gamma-1)$ is the energy of the gas (here $\gamma$ is fixed to be 5/3)
172: and $\mbox{\boldmath $E$}=
173: -(\mbox{\boldmath $v$}/c)\times \mbox{\boldmath $B$}+(4\pi\eta/c^2)
174: \mbox{\boldmath $J$}$ is Ohm's law. Here $R~[\equiv (r^2+z^2)^{1/2}$
175: is the distance
176: from the origin,$r_{\rm S}~(\equiv 2GM/c^2)$ is the Schwarzschild
177: radius (with $M$ and $c$ being the mass of a BH and the speed of
178: light, respectively),
179: and $\mbox{\boldmath $J$}=(c/4\pi)
180: \mbox{\boldmath $\nabla$}\times \mbox{\boldmath $B$}$ is the electric
181: current. As to $\eta$ we adopt the anomalous resistivity model which
182: is used in many
183: solar flare simulations (for the detail, see Yokoyama \& Shibata 1994).
184: The calculation is started with a rotating torus in hydrostatic balance
185: located around $r=r_0=40r_{\rm S}$. The initial magnetic fields are
186: confined within a torus and purely poloidal (see KMS04 for the detail).
187: In the simulation
188: they used $300\times 32\times 400$ nonuniform mesh points. The grid
189: spacing is uniform $(\Delta r=\Delta z=0.16r_{\rm S})$ within the inner
190: calculation box of
191: $0\leq z\leq 10r_{\rm S}$, and it increases by 1.5\% from one mesh to
192: the adjacent outer mesh outside this box up to $r\leq 20r_{\rm S}$ and
193: $z\leq 20r_{\rm S}$, and it
194: increases by 3\% beyond that. The entire computational box size is
195: $0\leq r\leq 200r_{\rm S}$, $0\leq \phi \leq 2\pi$,
196: and $-50r_{\rm S}\leq z\leq 50r_{\rm S}$, and they simulated a full
197: $360^\circ $ domain (see Kato 2004 for more detail).
198:
199: The simulated MHD flow is slightly oscillating because of the turbulence
200: driven by MRI, and geometrically thick density distribution is produced.
201: In this quasi-steady accretion flow,
202: the density profile is $\rho \propto r$ in the inner part
203: ($r<20r_{\rm S}$), while $\rho \propto r^{-1}$ in the outer
204: part ($r>20r_{\rm S}$) (see Fig. 4 in KMS04). We use this quasi-steady
205: density distribution as well as the ion temperature distribution in
206: modeling the corona in which hot thermal electrons up-scatter the soft
207: photons emerging from the cold disk virtually located in the equatorial
208: plane.
209:
210: \subsection{Physical Quantities of the Disk and Corona}
211: As mentioned in \S 1 briefly, we adopt the following assumptions in
212: constructing the disk-corona model.
213:
214: 1. In the equatorial plane, we assume a standard accretion disk
215: (Shakura \& Sunyaev 1973) with an infinitesimal height for a given
216: mass accretion rate $\dot{M}_{\rm disk}$.
217:
218: 2. The RIAF-like accretion flow, whose structure is provided by the
219: three-dimensional MHD simulation (KMS04), is surrounding the standard
220: thin disk
221: as the hot corona. That is, we assume that coronal flow is created at
222: large radius by evaporation of the disk material and moves freely
223: inward
224: \footnote{Note that evaporation dominates over condensation at large
225: radii, whereas the opposite is the case at small radii
226: (e.g. Liu et al. 2007)}.
227: Mass evaporation and condensation occurring between them and heat
228: conduction from the corona to the disk are neglected in the calculation.
229: Radiative
230: cooling of coronal plasma is also neglected.
231:
232: 3. The photons radiated from the thin disk are partly up-scattered by
233: hot electrons in the corona and the remaining portion penetrate
234: through the
235: corona, creating a power-law hard emission in the spectrum.
236:
237: 4. As the seed photon field from the underlying disk, we include the
238: reprocessed radiation, which comes from the coronal irradiation
239: on the disk, as
240: well as the intrinsic disk radiation.
241:
242: We take three-dimensional data of density and proton temperature
243: distributions in the accretion flows calculated in Kato
244: (2004). This has the same initial condition with Model B in KMS04. The data
245: of physical properties
246: are given at each point in the simulation box associated with Cartesian
247: coordinates $(x,~y,~z)$, in which the black hole is located at the
248: origin of the
249: coordinate axes, the $z$-axis is set to be the rotation axis of the
250: accretion flow, and the $x$-$y$ plane corresponds to the equatorial
251: plane. We employ
252: Cartesian grids with numbers $(N_x,~N_y,~N_z)=(101,~101,~101)$ of cells.
253: The size of the calculating box is $2X\times 2Y\times 2Z$, where we set
254: $(X,~Y,~Z)=(99.9r_{\rm S},~99.9r_{\rm S},~99.9r_{\rm S})$.
255:
256: In the MHD simulations with no radiative loss the density is given as
257: non-dimensional number ${\tilde \rho}$ with the normalization factor
258: $\rho_0$,
259: which is treated a free parameter in our calculation. Basically the
260: coronal density is determined by evaporation of the disk gas, but here we
261: determine $\rho_0$
262: so that the power-law indices of the evaluated spectra agree with
263: the observations. The proton temperature does not depend on the
264: density parameter and
265: is given by the MHD simulation as
266: $(\mu m_p c^2/k_B){\tilde c}_s^2$, where $\mu$ is the mean molecular
267: weight $(=0.5)$, $m_p$ is the proton mass, $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant,
268: and ${\tilde c}_s$ is the normalized sound velocity obtained by the
269: simulation.
270:
271: Here we should note that ions (protons) and electrons in the plasma
272: simulated in KMS04 have the same temperature, though electrons would be
273: radiatively
274: cooled and have lower temperature in the realistic situation. Assuming
275: that ion temperature coincides with the simulated one and that the
276: electrons
277: have a Maxwellian distribution, we evaluate the electron
278: temperature, $T_e$, through the energy balance of the electrons between
279: Coulomb collisions with ions and radiative cooling,
280: \begin{eqnarray}
281: \int_{-Z}^Z \int_{r_{\rm in}}^{r_{\rm out}} \lambda _{ie}2\pi r dr dz
282: =\int L_C(\nu;~r_{\rm in}\leq r\leq r_{\rm out})d\nu. \label{balance}
283: \end{eqnarray}
284: Here $\lambda_{ie}$ is the energy transfer rate from ions to electrons
285: (Stepney \& Guilbert 1983) and $L_C(\nu)$ is the coronal luminosity at
286: frequency $\nu$. In the present study, we divide the corona into three
287: regions (0<$r\leq 10r_{\rm S}$, $10r_{\rm S}<r\leq 30r_{\rm S}$,
288: and $30r_{\rm S}<r$; ($r_{\rm in}$, $r_{\rm out})=(0,10r_{\rm S}),
289: ~(10r_{\rm S},30r_{\rm S})$ and $(30r_{\rm S},\infty )$) for simplicity,
290: and suppose that the electrons in the accretion flow
291: in each region have the temperature which is independent of the radius
292: $r$ and the altitude $z$. The coronal luminosity, $L_C$, is obtained
293: by Monte Carlo simulations
294: (see next subsection) for a guess value of $T_e$. Since this $T_e$
295: does not always satisfy Eq. (\ref{balance}), we should do some
296: iterations to
297: calculate the appropriate electron temperature and the emergent
298: spectrum.
299:
300: \subsection{Radiative Transfer Simulations}
301: Our model consists of a cold disk which produces blackbody radiation
302: at each radius with temperature being determined from the standard
303: model (Shakura \& Sunyaev 1973):
304: \begin{eqnarray}
305: T^0_{\rm disk}=\left[\frac{3GM\dot{M}_{\rm disk}}{8\pi r^3\sigma}
306: \left(1-\sqrt{\frac{r}{r_{\rm in}}}\right)\right]^{1/4}, \label{seed}
307: \end{eqnarray}
308: (as long as the reprocessed radiation is unimportant) where $G$
309: is the gravitational constant, $\dot{M}_{\rm disk}$ is the mass
310: accretion rate in the disk,
311: and $\sigma$ is the Stephan-Boltzmann constant. Note that when
312: irradiation flux $F_{\rm irr}$ by the corona is available, the
313: disk emits blackbody
314: with an enhanced temperature
315: \begin{eqnarray}
316: T_{\rm disk}=\left[\left(T_{\rm disk}^0\right)^4+F_{\rm irr}/
317: \sigma\right]^{1/4}. \label{irr}
318: \end{eqnarray}
319: In the following calculation we set $r_{\rm in}=3r_{\rm S}$,
320: $\dot{M}_{\rm disk}=10^{-3}\dot{M}_{\rm Edd}$ (with
321: $\dot{M}_{\rm Edd}=10L_{\rm Edd}/c^2$)
322: and the mass of a central black hole to be $M=10^8 M_{\odot}$,
323: which is believed to be the typical value for AGNs. Thus, the
324: normalized time
325: corresponds to ${\tilde t}\cong r_{\rm S}/c=10^3{\rm sec}$.
326:
327: As the radiation process, we take into account both of the
328: intrinsic disk radiation [Eq.(\ref{seed})] and the thermal
329: reprocessing from irradiated
330: disk as the seed photon field [see Eq. (\ref{irr})], and the
331: Compton/inverse Compton scattering in the corona. We neglect
332: synchrotron emission/absorption and free-free emission/absorption.
333: Some studies about the
334: disk-corona model have shown that the power-law component of the
335: emergent spectra is explained as the Comptonized emission
336: (Haardt \& Maraschi 1991, 1993)
337: , so for our
338: present purpose this approximation is justified at least in the
339: X-ray energy bands.
340: According to the simulation by KMS04, the magnetic field in the
341: coronal flow with $\rho_0=1.6\times 10^{-14}~{\rm g}~{\rm cm}^{-3}$
342: is $B\sim 10^3{\rm G}$, for which
343: the Compton scattering is the most efficient cooling mechanism.
344: This fact justifies the method of deriving the coronal temperature
345: described
346: in the previous section.
347:
348: The method of the Monte Carlo simulation is based on Pozdnyakov et
349: al. (1977). In order to efficiently calculate the emergent spectra,
350: we introduce
351: a photon weight $w$. When emerged
352: from the disk we set that each photon has the weight of $w_0=1$,
353: and then we calculate
354: the escape probability, $P_0$. The escape probability of a photon
355: after
356: $i$-th scattering (for $i\geq 1$), $P_i$, is evaluated as
357: \begin{eqnarray}
358: P_i=\exp \left( -\int \left[ \frac{\rho(x_i,~y_i,~z_i)}{m_p}\right]
359: \sigma_{\rm KN}(x_i,~y_i,~z_i) dl\right),
360: \end{eqnarray}
361: where $(x,~y,~z)=(x_0,~y_0,~0)$ corresponds to the point on the
362: equatorial plane
363: (i.e. the disk plane), in which the thermal soft photons are
364: generated,
365: $(x_i~,y_i,~z_i)$ is the point where a photon is subject to the
366: $i$-th
367: scattering, $m_p$ is the proton mass, $\sigma_{\rm KN}$ is the
368: Klein-Nishina cross section (Rybicki \& Lightman 1979), and the
369: integral of $dl$ should be
370: done along the photon direction there from the point
371: $(x_i,~y_i,~z_i)$ to the boundary of the calculating
372: box. The quantity of $w_0P_0$ represents the transmitted portion
373: of photons
374: and is recorded to calculate the penetrated spectrum if the path
375: of the photon
376: does not cross with the equatorial plane, and will no longer
377: continue to be
378: counted and will be regarded to be absorbed by the disk. As for
379: the remaining
380: portion of a photon, its weight becomes $w_1=w_0(1-P_0)$.
381: The transmitted portion
382: of photons after $i$-th scattering, $w_i P_i$ is recorded to
383: calculate the emergent
384: spectrum, and the remaining portion, $w_i(1-P_i)$, undergoes the
385: $(i+1)$-th scattering.
386: This calculation is continued until the weight $w_i$ becomes
387: sufficiently small
388: ($w_i\ll 1$) or the path of the remaining photon crosses the
389: equatorial plane, regarding
390: to be absorbed by the disk. The whole process is simulated by the
391: Monte Carlo method.
392: Finally, we suppose that the inner boundary of the underlying
393: standard disk is $r=3r_{\rm S}$,
394: and general relativistic effects like the light bending and
395: energy shift are neglected in
396: our study.
397:
398: \section{Results}
399: \subsection{Spectral Features}
400: First, we show the emergent spectra from the accretion disk with
401: MHD coronal flow with various
402: density parameters for the corona in Fig. 1. In this calculation,
403: the mass accretion rate of the underlying disk is set to be
404: $\dot{M}_{\rm disk}=10^{-3}M_{\rm Edd}$. This value is relatively
405: lower than that assumed in the standard picture
406: ($\dot{M}_{\rm disk}\sim 0.1-0.01M_{\rm Edd}$). However,
407: according to the idea of Haardt \& Maraschi (1991), the liberated
408: gravitational energy accompanying the mass accretion $L_G$ should
409: be mostly dissipated in
410: the corona ($fL_G$, where $f\simeq 1$), while only a small fraction
411: of the energy ($(1-f)L_G$) is dissipated in the underlying disk.
412: Then the temperature of
413: the intrinsic disk radiation would be reduced by a factor of
414: $(1-f)^{1/4}$. In our calculation the mass accretion rate of the
415: disk only appears when
416: giving the intrinsic disk temperature Eq. (\ref{seed}), and so the
417: small mass accretion rate corresponds to the reduced disk temperature.
418: Due to
419: this fact, the relatively small mass accretion rate adopted in our
420: calculation is justified.
421:
422: \begin{figure*}[ht]
423: \begin{center}
424: \FigureFile(130mm,100mm){fig1.eps}
425: \end{center}
426: \caption{Broadband spectra from a disk at the accretion
427: rate of $10^{-3}{\dot M}_{\rm Edd}$ and a MHD coronal flow
428: around a black hole
429: of $10^8M_{\odot}$ with the density normalization parameters
430: $5.1\times 10^{-15}$,
431: $1.6\times 10^{-14}$ and
432: $5.1\times 10^{-14}~{\rm g}~{\rm cm}^{-3}$ {\it solid lines}. The spectra of
433: the seed photons (including those from the cold disk and the
434: reflection component; {\it dashed lines}) are also shown
435: for the comparison. The short solid lines near the spectra show the power-law fit of $\nu F_{\nu}$.}
436: \label{sedrho}
437: \end{figure*}
438:
439: The adopted density parameters $\rho_0$ for the corona
440: are $\rho_0=5.1\times 10^{-15},~1.6\times 10^{-14}$, and $5.1\times
441: 10^{-14}{\rm g}~{\rm cm}^{-3}$. These values correspond to
442: the number density of $\sim 10^9{\rm cm}^{-3}$.
443: Such density is consistent with some corona models (see Liu
444: et al. 2002, 2003). Due to the inverse Compton scattering
445: of
446: in which the soft thermal photons from the underlying disk in the
447: corona, the power-law component with the spectral index of
448: $\alpha \sim 1-2$ ($F_{\nu}\propto \nu^{-\alpha}$) appears in the
449: higher energy band. In the calculated spectra, we cannot find a
450: bump-like structure
451: clearly in the UV/soft X-ray band which is usually seen in typical
452: spectra of AGNs. As $\rho_0$ increases, the total luminosities
453: increases, while the
454: power-law index decreases. The corona with higher density (especially
455: with higher scattering optical depth) would irradiate the underlying
456: disk with
457: higher energy flux because larger number of photons originated from the
458: disk would gain the energy and be backscattered. The the disk is
459: heatened by
460: the corona and so the energy flux of the seed photon field would
461: increase. This is why the total luminosity rises with the coronal
462: density.
463:
464: \begin{table}
465: \caption{Coronal properties}
466: \begin{center}
467: \begin{tabular}{|cccccc|}
468: \hline
469: $\rho_0$ (${\rm g}~{\rm cm}^{-3}$)®ion&
470: $T_{\rm cor}~[{\rm K}]$&$\tau$&$y$&$\alpha$\\ \hline
471: $5.1\times 10^{-14}$&$0<r<10r_{\rm S}$&
472: $\sim 5.2\times 10^9$&$\sim 0.2$&$\sim 0.5$&$\sim 1.30$ \\
473: &$10r_{\rm S}<r<30r_{\rm S}$&$\sim 3.4\times 10^9$&
474: $\sim 0.9$&$\sim 3$& \\
475: &$30r_{\rm S}<r$&$\sim 7.6\times 10^8$&$\sim 0.7$&$\sim 0.5$&
476: \\ \hline
477: $1.6\times 10^{-14}$&$0<r<10r_{\rm S}$&
478: $\sim 5.2\times 10^9$&$\sim 0.05$&$\sim 0.2$&$\sim 1.60$ \\
479: &$10r_{\rm S}<r<30r_{\rm S}$&$\sim 3.4\times 10^9$&
480: $\sim 0.25$&$\sim 0.55$& \\
481: &$30r_{\rm S}<r$&$\sim 7.5\times 10^8$&$\sim 0.2$&
482: $\sim 0.1$& \\ \hline
483: $5.1\times 10^{-15}$&$0<r<10r_{\rm S}$&
484: $\sim 5.2\times 10^9$&$\sim 0.02$&$\sim 0.05$&$\sim 2.00$ \\
485: &$10r_{\rm S}<r<30r_{\rm S}$&$\sim 3.4\times 10^9$&
486: $\sim 0.09$&$\sim 0.15$& \\
487: &$30r_{\rm S}<r$&$\sim 7.6\times 10^8$&$\sim 0.07$&
488: $\sim 0.03$& \\
489: \hline
490: \end{tabular}
491: \end{center}
492: \end{table}
493:
494: In Table 1 we summarize the scattering optical depths $\tau$
495: (evaluated by integrating the scattering
496: opacity over the z-direction from the equatorial plane), and the
497: Compton $y$ parameters of the corona (averaged in each region), and the spectral indices of the
498: power law component estimated from the calculation results for 3
499: density parameters. The MHD simulation of coronal flow was
500: started from the initial condition of a magnetized torus located
501: around at
502: $r\sim 40r_S$. The radius of maximum gas density
503: (and of maximum $\tau$) decreases inward with time and stays around
504: $r\sim 20r_S$.
505: According to the theory of unsaturated inverse Compton scattering,
506: the power-law index of the Comptonized emission component depends on
507: the plasma
508: density and temperature through this equation:
509: \begin{eqnarray}
510: \alpha=-\frac{3}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{9}{4}+\frac{4}{y}}. \label{ypara}
511: \end{eqnarray}
512: Here $y\equiv (4k_B T/m_e c^2)\tau$ is the Compton $y$-parameter
513: (Rybicki \& Lightman 1973), where $T$ and $\tau$ are the temperature
514: and
515: Thompson optical depth of the corona, respectively. The spectral
516: indices derived from this equation using $y$-parameters in Table 1 do
517: not always agree with those estimated from the spectra. This is
518: because $\tau$ and $T_{\rm cor}$ have spatial distributions and we
519: cannot evaluate
520: $y$-parameter of the corona uniquely. Even with such a situation,
521: however, we can see the tendency that the spectra get flatter with
522: higher
523: coronal density (and then higher $y$-parameter), which is consistent
524: with the theory above.
525:
526: In our calculation, $\rho_0$ is determined so as to reproduce the
527: observation.
528: By tuning the coronal density parameter, we can reproduce the
529: luminosity
530: of the power-law component which is as intense as that of the thermal
531: component originated from the optically thick disk. Such
532: feature is typical in Seyfert galaxies.
533: However, the coronal temperature cannot be chosen freely but should
534: be determined by imposing the energy balance of the electrons
535: between Coulomb collisions and the cooling via inverse Compton
536: scattering, as we have done. Nevertheless the resulting coronal
537: temperature
538: is substantially reduced from the plasma temperature derived by the
539: simulation ($\sim 10^{13}~{\rm K}$) to $\sim 10^9{\rm K}$, which makes
540: the high energy cutoff of computed spectra consistent with
541: observations.
542:
543: \subsection{Time variation}
544: The spectral variation caused by the time variation of MHD coronal flow
545: structure is shown in Fig. 2. In the highest energy range
546: ($\gtrsim 10^{18}{\rm Hz}$) the spectra show fluctuations because of
547: poor photon statistics. As for the soft X-ray band
548: (with ${\rm log}\nu\simeq 17-18$)
549: where the spectra show a smooth power-law shape, the spectral index
550: slightly changes with time, and then the X-ray flux fluctuates a little
551: (see also Fig. 3). According to the MHD simulation on which
552: our radiative transfer calculations are based, the three-dimensional
553: structure of the coronal accretion flow is fluctuating everywhere in
554: each timestep.
555: On the other hand, the spectral index depends on the distribution of
556: $y$-parameter of the corona, as we note in the last subsection. So we
557: can conclude
558: that the fluctuations of the spectral indices of the computed spectra
559: in Fig. 2 reflect the fluctuation of $y$, which comes from the density
560: fluctuations (which is supposed to be due to MRI) in the coronal flow.
561:
562: \begin{figure*}[ht]
563: \begin{center}
564: \FigureFile(130mm,100mm){fig2.eps}
565: \end{center}
566: \caption{Spectral variation of the Comptonized emission
567: predicted from the standard disk with a MHD coronal flow
568: around a black hole of
569: $10^8M_{\odot}$. Here we set the density parameter as
570: $1.6\times 10^{-14}{\rm g}~{\rm cm}^{-3}$.}
571: \label{sedtime}
572: \end{figure*}
573:
574: Fig. 3. shows the X-ray lightcurve derived from our simulations.
575: From this plot we can see that the X-ray luminosity from our
576: disk-corona
577: system can change by factors of a few tens of percent on timescales of
578: the orbital period at the last stable orbit ($r=3r_{\rm S}$),
579: i.e. about $10^3(M/10^8) M_{\odot}$ sec. In the whole calculation
580: we do not vary the properties of the soft photon source (i.e. the
581: underlying cold disk). This variation which we obtained
582: is due to the density fluctuation (and accompanying temperature
583: fluctuation) of the coronal flow.
584:
585: \begin{figure*}[ht]
586: \begin{center}
587: \FigureFile(130mm,100mm){fig3.eps}
588: \end{center}
589: \caption{Time variation of the X-ray luminosity (1-6keV).
590: Here we set the density parameter as
591: $1.6\times 10^{-14}{\rm g}~{\rm cm}^{-3}$.}
592: \label{xlc14}
593: \end{figure*}
594:
595: \section{Discussion and Conclusion}
596: We have calculated the emergent spectra and their time variabilities
597: predicted based on the disk-corona model, in which
598: a cold standard disk at the equatorial plane is sandwiched by a hot
599: coronal flow. As for the structure and
600: dynamics of the corona we use the three-dimensional MHD simulation data
601: by Kato (2004). In this section we discuss our results
602: especially in the context of AGNs.
603:
604: We have shown that our black hole disk-corona system can reproduce the
605: power-law X-ray emission with the photon index $\alpha\sim 1-2$ by
606: adjusting the
607: density parameter properly. The power-law indices and the cutoff
608: energy scales of the spectra are roughly
609: in agreement with the observed spectra of Seyfert galaxies. Moreover,
610: we find significant variability of the power-law X-ray emission.
611: The power-law X-ray emission flux predicted from our model changes
612: by a few tens of percent on timescales of the orbital period
613: near the last stable orbit, which is about
614: $10^3(M/10^8M_{\odot})~{\rm sec}$,
615: while the power-law index nor the cutoff energy do not change
616: considerably. This variability comes purely from the fluctuation
617: of the coronal flow around $r\sim 20r_S$,
618: where the scattering optical depth of the coronal flow
619: attains its largest value in its structure. This fluctuation is
620: driven by the turbulence as a result of MRI, and its amplitude is large
621: enough to explain the observed X-ray variability in Seyfert galaxies
622: (e.g. Miniutti et al. 2007). In UV/soft X-ray band, however, we cannot
623: see the bump-like structure which is often found in the spectra of AGNs.
624: The same problem occurred in other disk-corona models
625: (Shimura et al. 1995; Liu et al. 2003).
626: This bump is supposed to be the thermal radiation coming directly from
627: the optically thick disk,
628: while in those disk-corona models the disk is wholly covered with corona.
629: In order to reproduce the
630: UV/soft X-ray bump with a model, the coronal structure may need to be
631: patchy or locally concentrated. In the present study we do
632: not consider the viewing angle dependence of the spectra. If we
633: observe this accretion flow system face-on, then the scattering
634: optical depth along the line of sight would be smaller than in the
635: case observed with non-zero viewing angle and the optically thick
636: component should be observed more clearly.
637:
638:
639: Iron K$\alpha$ fluorescent line emissions would occur when the disk is
640: irradiated by X-ray from the corona. The profile of this line emission
641: would
642: be broadened due to relativistic effects (see Reynolds \& Nowak 2003 for
643: a review). The detailed structure of this line profile is determined by
644: the line emissivity distribution on the disk, which depends on the
645: spectra of local X-ray irradiation from the corona.
646:
647: Recently {\it Suzaku}
648: has observed the broadened iron line profile from MCG-6-30-15 in detail
649: and they implied that the emissivity profile should be as steep as
650: $F_{\rm line}(r)\propto r^{-4.4}$ (Miniutti et al. 2007). This is not
651: easy to understand, since standard disks are known to produce
652: continuum flux $F_{\rm cont}(r)\propto r^{-3}$. Some authors proposed
653: that this is a manifestation of Kerr black hole effects
654: (e.g. Wilms et al. 2001).
655: Such a steep emissivity profile can
656: be reproduced by thermal Comptonization in the corona, if the
657: irradiating corona has the temperature and density profiles which are
658: arising inward, as was pointed out by Kawanaka et al. (2005). This is
659: because the fraction
660: of high energy photons increases inward so that the number of
661: irradiating photons which are capable of producing iron fluorescent
662: line emissions should increase inward more rapidly than $r^{-3}$.
663: As for the MHD corona model which we adopted in this study, however,
664: the temperature and density
665: have flatter profiles (see KMS04), so such a steep line emissivity
666: profile is not expected as long as we consider only Compton
667: upscattering to be the X-ray
668: emission process in this corona.
669:
670: One of the way of producing such a
671: steep emissivity profile so as to produces the iron line profile as
672: is observed is to introduce moderate radiative cooling in the
673: simulation (Mineshige et al. 2002).
674: Radiative cooling can be efficient in dense region which is
675: generally located in the inner part of the disk. Then the density
676: profile near the
677: event horizon of the coronal flow can be steeper and Compton
678: up-scattering would be more efficient. As a result, hard X-ray
679: photons irradiating the disk would increase and iron fluorescence
680: line photons would become
681: more efficient. Another possibility is that the transient X-ray
682: emission accompanying with magnetic reconnection flares in the
683: localized region of the corona would contribute to the iron line
684: emissions from the disk,
685: which is not taken into account in our present calculation. Such
686: small-scale X-ray sources are often assumed when explaining the
687: constant reflection component including iron line emissions
688: (Miniutti \& Fabian 2004; Malzac et al. 2006; Nayakshin 2007).
689: If we analyze the local
690: electron heating (or nonthermal acceleration) around magnetic
691: reconnection flares and hard X-ray emission processes in the MHD
692: coronal flow simulation,
693: then we can know the local X-ray irradiation onto the disk, which
694: may lead us to understanding the observed broad iron line profiles
695: and their time variabilities from the microphysics of X-ray
696: emission processes.
697:
698: We can check the consistency of the assumption that the MHD coronal
699: flow which we adopt in the calculation is cooled dominantly by
700: advection, by comparing the heating rate ($\sim GMm_p/(2r)\Omega$)
701: and the cooling rate ($\sim$Comptonization luminosity per electron).
702: According to the result of our calculation, the innermost region
703: ($0<r\lesssim 20r_{\rm S}$) is not cooled efficiently by inverse Compton
704: scattering. However, in the outer region ($r\gtrsim 20r_{\rm S}$)
705: local heating rate and cooling rate are comparable, which means that
706: the assumption of an advection-dominated flow is only marginally justified.
707: Generally when Compton cooling becomes efficient the coronal
708: temperature will become lower, and then Compton upscattering will be
709: inefficient. This means that the power-law X-ray emission would not
710: be generated so much from that region.
711: As far as we consider the spectrum and energy flux in X-ray and
712: higher energy band, to which the photons from the innermost region
713: mainly contribute, this inconsistency would hardly affect the results.
714:
715: Finally, we should mention the interaction between the corona and
716: the underlying disk. In the transition zone between the hot corona
717: and the
718: cold disk where density and temperature abruptly change, the heat
719: conduction and
720: the mass evaporation would be important as the mass and energy
721: exchanging processes (Meyer \& Meyer-Hofmeister 1994;
722: Liu et al. 2002). Evaporation of photospheric material was
723: actually shown to be essential in the context
724: of solar flares (see e.g. Yokoyama \& Shibata 1994). By including
725: these effects in the simulation we will be able to obtain
726: a more realistic model of the coronal structure and dynamics. To
727: what extent the disk-corona structure can extend
728: to the inner region is important when we consider the relativistic
729: skewing of the iron line emission profile because most of the
730: observations of iron line profiles imply that the iron fluorescence
731: line photons are
732: emitted from around/inside the last stable orbit. The detailed
733: analysis
734: of such disk-corona interactions and their observational
735: implications are left as a future work.
736:
737: \bigskip
738: We would like to thank Masayuki Umemura, Toshihiro Kawaguchi
739: and Ken Ohsuga for helpful comments and discussions. We are also
740: grateful to an anonymous referee for his/her valuable comments, which
741: helped us to improve the manuscript in a great deal.
742: The numerical calculations were carried out on Altix3700 BX2
743: at YITP in Kyoto University. This work is supported in part by
744: Research Fellowship of the Japan Society for the Promotion of
745: Science for Young Scientists (N. K.).
746:
747: \begin{thebibliography}{}
748: \bibitem[Abramowicz et al. (1995)]{}
749: Abramowicz, M. A., Chen, X., Kato, S., Lasota, J.-P \&
750: Regev, O. 1995, ApJ, 438, L37
751: \bibitem[Armitage \& Reynolds (2003)]{}
752: Armitage, P. J. \& Reynolds, C. S. 2003, MNRAS, 341, 1041
753: \bibitem[Balbus \& Hawley (1991)]{}
754: Balbus, S. A. \& Hawley, J. F. 1991, ApJ, 376, 214
755: \bibitem[Bisnovatyi-Kogan \& Blinnikov (1977)]{}
756: Bisnovatyi-Kogan, G. S. \& Blinnikov, S. I. 1977, A\&A, 59, 111
757: \bibitem[De Villers et al. (2003)]{}
758: De Villers, J. -P., Hawley, J. F. \& Krolik, J. H. 2003, ApJ,
759: 599, 1238
760: \bibitem[Fabian et al. (2000)]{}
761: Fabian, A. C., Iwasawa, K., Reynolds, C. S., Young, A. J., 2000,
762: PASP, 112, 1145
763: \bibitem[Gammie et al. (2003)]{}
764: Gammie, C. F., McKinney, J. C. \& Toth, G. 2003, ApJ, 589, 444
765: \bibitem[Goldston et al. (2005)]{}
766: Goldston, J. E., Quataert, E. \& Igumenshchev, I. V. 2005, ApJ,
767: 621, 785
768: \bibitem[Guilbert \& Rees (1988)]{}
769: Guilbert, P. W. \& Rees, M. J. 1988, MNRAS, 233, 475
770: \bibitem[Haardt \& Maraschi (1991)]{}
771: Haardt, F. \& Maraschi, L. 1991, ApJ, 380, L51
772: \bibitem[Haardt \& Maraschi (1993)]{}
773: Haardt, F. \& Maraschi, L. 1993, ApJ, 413, 507
774: \bibitem[Hawley \& Krolik (2001)]{}
775: Hawley, J. F. \& Krolik, J. H. 2001, ApJ, 548, 348
776: \bibitem[Hawley \& Krolik (2002)]{}
777: Hawley, J. F. \& Krolik, J. H. 2002, ApJ, 566, 164
778: \bibitem[Ichimaru (1977)]{}
779: Ichimaru, S. 1977, ApJ, 214, 840
780: \bibitem[Igumenshchev et al. (2003)]{}
781: Igumenshchev, I. V., Narayan, R. \& Abramowicz, M. A. 2003,
782: ApJ, 592, 1042
783: \bibitem[Kato et al. (1998)]{}
784: Kato, S., Fukue, J. \& Mineshige, S. 1998, Black-Hole
785: Accretion Disks (Kyoto: Kyoto Univ. Press)
786: \bibitem[Kato (2004)]{}
787: Kato, Y. 2004, PASJ, 56, 931
788: \bibitem[Kato et al. (2004)]{}
789: Kato, Y., Mineshige, S. \& Shibata, K. 2004, ApJ, 605, 307
790: (KMS04)
791: \bibitem[Kawanaka et al. (2005)]{}
792: Kawanaka, N., Mineshige, S. \& Iwasawa, K. 2005, ApJ, 635,
793: 167
794: \bibitem[Kishimoto et al. (2005)]{}
795: Kishimoto, M., Antonucci, R., \& Blaes, O. 2005, MNRAS,
796: 364, 640
797: \bibitem[Liang \& Price (1977)]{}
798: Liang, E. P. T \& Price, R. H. 1988, ApJ, 218, 247
799: \bibitem[Lightman \& White (1988)]{}
800: Lightman, A. P. \& White, T. R. 1988, ApJ, 335, 57
801: \bibitem[Liu et al. (2002)]{}
802: Liu, B. F., Mineshige, S., Meyer, F., Meyer-Hofmeister. E.
803: \& Kawaguchi, T. 2002, ApJ, 575, 117
804: \bibitem[Liu et al. (2007)]{}
805: Liu, B. F., Taam, R. E., Meyer-Hofmeister, E. \& Meyer, F.
806: 2007, arXiv:0709.0143, ApJ accepted
807: \bibitem[Machida \& Matsumoto (2003)]{}
808: Machida, M. \& Matsumoto, R. 2003, ApJ, 585, 429
809: \bibitem[Machida et al. (2001)]{}
810: Machida, M., Matsumoto, R. \& Mineshige, S. 2001, PASJ,
811: 53, L1
812: \bibitem[Malzac et al. (2006)]{}
813: Malzac, J., Merloni, A. \& Suebsuwong, T. 2006, Astron.
814: Nachr., 327, 985
815: \bibitem[Matsumoto (1999)]{}
816: Matsumoto, R. 1999, in Numerical Astrophysics, ed. S. M.
817: Miyama, K. Tomisaka \& T. Hanawa (Boston: Kluwer), 195
818: \bibitem[Meyer et al. (2000)]{}
819: Meyer, F., Liu, B. F. \& Meyer-Hofmeister, E. 2000, A\&A,
820: 361, 175
821: \bibitem[Meyer \& Meyer-Hofmeister (1994)]{}
822: Meyer, F. \& Meyer-Hofmeister, E. 1994, A\&A, 288, 175
823: \bibitem[Mineshige et al. (2002)]{}
824: Mineshige, S., Negoro, H., Matsumoto, R., Machida, M. \&
825: Manmoto, T. 2002, in Current High Energy Emission around
826: Black Holes, ed. C. -H. Lee \& H. -Y. Chang (Singapore:
827: World Scientific), 119
828: \bibitem[Miniutti \& Fabian (2004)]{}
829: Miniutti, G. \& Fabian, A. C. 2004, MNRAS, 349, 1435
830: \bibitem[Miniutti et al. (2007)]{}
831: Miniutti, G. et al. 2007, PASJ, 59, 315
832: \bibitem[Moscibrodzka et al. (2007)]{}
833: Moscibrodzka, M., Proga, D., Czerny, B. \&
834: Siemiginowska, A. 2007, arXiv:0707.1403
835: \bibitem[Mushotzky et al. (1993)]{}
836: Mushotzky, R. F., Done, C. \& Pounds, K. A. ARA\&A, 31,
837: 717
838: \bibitem[Narayan \& Yi (1994)]{}
839: Narayan, R. \& Yi, I. 1994, ApJ, 428, L13
840: \bibitem[Nayakshin (2007)]{}
841: Nayakshin, S. 2007, MNRAS, 376, L25
842: \bibitem[Ohsuga et al. (2005)]{}
843: Ohsuga, K., Kato, Y. \& Mineshige, S. 2005, ApJ, 627,
844: 782
845: \bibitem[Pounds et al. (1990)]{}
846: Pounds, K. A., Nandra, K., Stewart, G. C.,
847: George, I. M. \& Fabian, A. C. 1990, Nature, 344, 132
848: \bibitem[Pozdnyakov et al. (1977)]{}
849: Pozdnyakov, L. A., Sobol, I. M. \& Sunyaev, R.A. 1977,
850: Soviet Astron., 21, 708
851: \bibitem[Reynolds et al. (1997)]{}
852: Reynolds, C. S., Ward, M. J., Fabian, A. C. \& Celotti, A. 1997,
853: MNRAS, 291, 403
854: \bibitem[Reynolds \& Nowak (2003)]{}
855: Reynolds, C. S. \& Nowak, M. A. 2003, Phys. Rep., 377,
856: 389
857: \bibitem[Rybicki \& Lightman (1979)]{}
858: Rybicki, G. B., \& Lightman, A. P. 1979,
859: Radiative Processes in Astrophysics (New York: Wiley)
860: \bibitem[Shakura \& Sunyaev (1973)]{}
861: Shakura, N. I. \& Sunyaev, R. A. 1973, A\&A, 24, 337
862: \bibitem[Shapiro et al. (1976)]{}
863: Shapiro, S. L., Lightman, A. P. \& Eardley, D. M. 1976,
864: ApJ, 204, 187
865: \bibitem[Shimura et al. (1995)]{}
866: Shimura, T., Mineshige, S. \& Takahara, F. 1995, ApJ,
867: 439, 74
868: \bibitem[Stone \& Pringle (2001)]{}
869: Stone, J. M. \& Pringle, J. E. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 461
870: \bibitem[Thorne \& Price (1975)]{}
871: Thorne, K. S. \& Price, R. H. 1975, ApJ, 195, L101
872: \bibitem[Wilms et al. (2001)]{}
873: Wilms, J., Reynolds, C. S., Begelman, M. C., Reeves, J.,
874: Molendi, S., Staubert, R. \& Kendziorra, E. 2001,
875: MNRAS, 328, L27
876: \bibitem[Yokoyama \& Shibata (1994)]{}
877: Yokoyama T. \& Shibata, K. 1994, ApJ, 436, L197
878: \end{thebibliography}
879: \end{document}
880:
881: