1: \documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}
2:
3: %%% PREAMBLE MATTER
4:
5: \usepackage{prcsa2008}
6: \usepackage{epsf}
7: \usepackage{lscape}
8: \usepackage{graphicx}
9:
10: \markboth{Zhang and Hao}{Jets and environment of microquasars} %%% FILL in authors' names and short running title
11:
12: \pagestyle{myheadings}
13: \setcounter{equation}{0}
14: \setcounter{figure}{0}
15: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
16: \setcounter{section}{0}
17: \setcounter{table}{0}
18:
19: %%% MAIN PART OF DOCUMENT
20:
21: \begin{document}
22: \title{Jets and environment of microquasars } %%% Fill in title
23: \author{S. N. Zhang\altaffilmark{1}; J. F. Hao\altaffilmark{1}} %%% Fill in author names
24: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Physics and Tsinghua Center for
25: Astrophysics, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China. zhangsn@tsinghua.edu.cn, jingfang.hao@hotmail.com} %%% Fill in author affiliations
26:
27: \begin{abstract} %%% Abstract to run on from here.
28: Two relativistic X-ray jets have been detected with the \textit{Chandra} X-ray
29: observatory from the black hole X-ray transient XTE J1550-564. We report a full
30: analysis of the evolution of the two jets with a gamma-ray burst external shock model.
31: A plausible scenario suggests a cavity outside the central source and the jets first
32: travelled with constant velocity and then are slowed down by the interactions between
33: the jets and the interstellar medium (ISM). The best fitted radius of the cavity is
34: $\sim$0.36 pc on the eastern side and $\sim$0.46 pc on the western side, and the
35: densities also show asymmetry, of $\sim$0.015 cm$^{-3}$ on the east to $\sim$0.21
36: cm$^{-3}$ on the west. A large scale low density region is also found in another
37: microquasar system, H 1743-322. These results are consistent with previous suggestions
38: that the environment of microquasars should be rather vacuous, compared to the normal
39: Galactic environment. A generic scenario for microquasar jets is proposed, classifying
40: the observed jets into three main categories, with different jet morphologies (and
41: sizes) corresponding to different scales of vacuous environments surrounding them.
42: \end{abstract}
43:
44: %%% MAIN BODY OF TEXT GOES HERE. CONSULT "INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS USING
45: %%% LATEX2E MARKUP", SECTIONS 2.3-2.6 FOR HELP WITH EQUATIONS, FIGURES,
46: %%% AND TABLES.
47:
48:
49:
50: \section{INTRODUCTION}
51: Microquasars are well known miniatures of quasars, with a central black hole (BH), an
52: accretion disk and two relativistic jets very similar to those found in the centers of
53: active galaxies, only on much smaller scales (Mirabel $\&$ Radr\'{\i}guez 1999). Since
54: discovered in 1992, radio jets have been observed in several BH binary systems and some
55: of them showed apparent superluminal features. In the two well known microqusars, GRS
56: 1915+105 (Mirabel $\&$ Radr\'{\i}guez 1999) and GRO J1655-40 (Tingay et al.1995;
57: Hjellming $\&$ Rupen 1995), relativistic jets with actual velocities greater than
58: 0.9$c$ were observed. In some other systems, small-size ``compact jets", e.g. Cyg X-1
59: (Stirling et al. 2001), and large scale diffuse emission, e.g. SS433 (Dubner et al.
60: 1998), were also detected.
61:
62: XTE J1550-564 was discovered with RXTE during its strong X-ray outburst on September 7,
63: 1998 (Smith 1998). It is believed to be an X-ray binary system at a distance of
64: $\sim$5.3 kpc, containing a black hole of 10.5$\pm$1.0 solar masses and a low mass
65: companion star (Orosz et al. 2002). Soon after the discovery of the source, a jet
66: ejection with an apparent velocity greater than 2$c$ was reported (Hannikainen et al.
67: 2001). In the period between 1998 and 2002, several other outbursts occurred but no
68: similar radio and X-ray flares were detected again in these outbursts (Tomsick et al.
69: 2003).
70:
71: With the help of the \textit{Chandra} satellite, Corbel et al (2002) found two large
72: scale X-ray jets lying to the east and the west of the central source, which were also
73: in good alignment with the central source. The eastern jet has been detected first in
74: 2000 at a projected distance of $\sim$21$\arcsec$ from the central black hole. Two
75: years later, the jet could only be seen marginally in the X-ray image, while a western
76: counterpart became visible at $\sim$22$\arcsec$ on the other side. The corresponding
77: radio maps are consistent with the X-ray observations (Corbel et al. 2002).
78:
79: There are altogether eight two-dimentional imaging observations of XTE J1550-564 in
80: \textit{Chandra} archive during June 2000 and October 2003 (henceforth observations
81: 1$\sim$8). Here we report a full analysis of these X-ray data, together with the
82: kinematic and spectral evolution fittings for all these observations.
83:
84:
85:
86: \section{OBSERVATIONS of XTE J1550-564}
87:
88: The basic information of observations 1$\sim$8 is listed in Table 1, including the
89: observation ID, date, and the angular separation between the eastern and western jets
90: and the central source. The positions are obtained by the \textit{Chandra} Interactive
91: Analysis of Observations (CIAO) routine $wavdetect$ (Freeman et al. 2002). In
92: observations 5 and 6, no X-ray source is detected by $wavdetect$ at the position of the
93: eastern jet. However, from the smoothed images (Fig.1), a weak source could be
94: recognized in observation 6. We thus select the center of the strongest emission region
95: as one data point. We calculate the source centroid for the central source and the
96: X-ray jet respectively and for all the five observations, the calculated position
97: changed by less than 0.5\arcsec. Therefore, an upper limit of 0.5$\arcsec$ is set for
98: the error of the jet distance.
99:
100:
101: \begin{figure}
102: \begin{minipage}[b]{.5\textwidth}
103: \centering
104: \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{fig1.eps}
105: \end{minipage}%
106: \begin{minipage}[b]{.5\textwidth}
107: \centering
108: \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{fig2.eps}
109: \end{minipage}
110: \caption{{\it Left}: The Chandra 0.3-8 keV raw image showing XTE J1550-564 and
111: the western jet. The images are in linear scale and no count
112: saturation has been set. \textit{Right}: The smoothed
113: \textit{Chandra} X-ray images of the eight observations of XTE
114: J1550-564 and the two jets together. The green elliptical regions
115: are source emission regions by $wavdect$. Observation 4 shows the
116: good alignment of the two jets and the central source.}
117: \end{figure}
118:
119:
120:
121: From Table 1 and Fig.1, we could see clearly that an X-ray emission source is detected
122: to the east of the central source in the first four observations and another source is
123: detected to the west in the last five observations. Calculations also show that these
124: two sources, when presented in a single combined image, are in good alignment with the
125: central compact object with an inclination angle of
126: 85.9\textordmasculine$\pm$0.3\textordmasculine. By calculating the average proper
127: motion, an approximate estimate of deceleration could be seen for both jets.
128:
129:
130:
131: \section{ENERGY SPECTRUM and FLUX}
132:
133: Since the emission from the eastern jet has been studied fully (Corbel et al. 2002;
134: Tomsick et al. 2003), we mainly focus our spectral analysis on the western jet. The
135: X-ray spectrum in 0.3-8 keV energy band is extracted for each observation of the
136: western jet. We use a circular source region with a radius of 4\arcsec, an annular
137: background region with an inner radius of 5$\arcsec$ and an outer radius of 15\arcsec,
138: for each observation. Instrument response matrices (rmf) and weighted auxiliary
139: response files (warf) are created using CIAO programs mkacisrmf and mkwarf, and then
140: added to the spectra. We re-bin the spectra with 10 counts per bin and fit them in
141: \textit{Xspec}.
142:
143: The results of spectra fitting with an absorbed power-law model are also shown in table
144: 1. We use the Cash statistic since it is a better method when counts are low. The
145: absorption column density is fixed to the Galactic value in the direction of XTE
146: J1550-564 obtained by the radio observations ($N_{H}=9\times10^{21}$cm$^{-2}$) (Dickey
147: \& Lockman 1990). Our results are quite consistent with previous work by Karret et
148: al.(2003). The calculated absorbed energy flux in 0.3-8 keV band is comparable to the
149: value of the eastern jet. The observed flux decayed rather quickly, from
150: $\sim1.9\times10^{-13}$erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ in March 2002 to only one sixth of this
151: value in October 2003 (see section 4.2).
152:
153: \begin{table}[!ht]
154: \caption{XTE J1550-564 \textit{Chandra} Observations}
155: \begin{center}
156: {\small
157: \begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
158: \tableline \noalign{\smallskip}
159: & & &
160: \multicolumn{2}{c}{Angular Separations (arcsec)} &
161: \multicolumn{2}{c}{Powerlaw Fitting for the western jet} \\
162: \cline{4-5} \cline{6-7}\\
163: Num & ID & Date & Eastern Jet & Western jet &
164: Photon Index & Flux (ergs cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) \\
165: \noalign{\smallskip} \tableline \noalign{\smallskip}
166: 1 &679 & 2000 Jun 9 &21.5$\pm$0.5 & \\
167: 2 &1845 & 2000 Aug 21 &22.8$\pm$0.5 & & & \\
168: 3 &1846 & 2000 Sep 11 &23.4$\pm$0.5 & & & \\
169: 4 &3448 & 2002 Mar 11 &28.6$\pm$0.5 &22.6$\pm$0.5 &1.75$\pm$0.11 &$(1.9\pm0.4)\times10^{-13}$\\
170: 5 &3672 & 2002 Jun 19 & &23.2$\pm$0.5 &1.71$\pm$0.15 &$(1.6\pm0.3)\times10^{-13}$ \\
171: 6 &3807 & 2002 Sep 24 &29.2$\pm$0.5 &23.4$\pm$0.5 &1.94$\pm$0.17 &$(8.6\pm1.5)\times10^{-14}$\\
172: 7 &4368 & 2003 Jan 28 & &23.7$\pm$0.5 &1.81$\pm$0.22 &$(5.5\pm1.0)\times10^{-14}$ \\
173: 8 &5190 & 2003 Oct 23 & &24.5$\pm$0.5 &1.97$\pm$0.20 &$(3.1\pm0.6)\times10^{-14}$\\
174: \noalign{\smallskip} \tableline
175:
176: \end{tabular}
177: }
178: \end{center}
179: \end{table}
180:
181:
182: \section{JET MODEL}
183:
184: \subsection{Kinematic Model}
185:
186: In the external shock model for afterglows of GRBs, the kinematic and radiation
187: evolution could be understood as the interaction between the outburst ejecta and the
188: surrounding ISM (Rees \& M\'{e}sz\'{a}ros 1992). Microquasar jet systems are also
189: expected to encounter such interactions. In this section, we describe our attempts
190: after Wang et al. (2003) in constructing the kinetic and radiation model based on these
191: models.
192:
193: We adopt the model of a collimated conical beam with a half opening
194: angle $\theta_{j}$ expanding into the ambient medium with the number
195: density $n$. The initial kinetic energy and Lorentz factor of the
196: outflow material are $E_{0}$ and $\Gamma_{0}$ , respectively. Shocks
197: should arise as the outflow moves on and heat the ISM, and its
198: kinetic energy will turn into the internal energy of the medium
199: gradually. Neglect the radiation loss, the energy conservation
200: function writes (Huang, Dai, \& Lu 1999):
201: \begin{equation}\label{a}
202: (\Gamma-1)M_{0}c^{2}+\sigma(\Gamma_{\textrm{\tiny sh}}^{2}-1)m_{\textrm{\tiny
203: SW}}c^{2}=E_{0},
204: \end{equation}
205: where the first term on the left of the equation represents the kinematic energy of the
206: ejecta, $\Gamma$ is the Lorentz factor and $M_{0}$ is the mass of the original ejecta.
207: The second term represent the internal energy of the swept-up ISM, where
208: $\Gamma_{\textrm{\tiny sh}}$ and $m_{\textrm{\tiny SW}}$ are the corresponding Lorentz
209: Factor and mass of the shocked ISM respectively, and $ m_{\textrm{\tiny
210: SW}}=(4/3){\pi}R^{3}m_{\textrm{\tiny p}}n(\theta_{j}^{2}/4)$.
211:
212: Coefficient $\sigma$ differs from 6/17 to 0.73 for ultra-relativistic and
213: nonrelativistic jets (Blandford \& McKee 1976). We adopt the approximation of
214: $\sigma\sim$0.7 after Wang et al.(2003). Equation (1) and the relativistic kinematic
215: equations
216: \begin{equation}
217: (\frac{dR}{dt})_{\textrm{a}}=\frac{\beta(\Gamma)c}{1-\beta(\Gamma)\cos\theta};
218: (\frac{dR}{dt})_{\textrm{r}}=\frac{\beta(\Gamma)c}{1+\beta(\Gamma)\cos\theta}
219: \end{equation}
220: can be solved and give the relation between the projected angular separation $\mu$ and
221: time $t$. In equations (2), the subscript `a' and `r' represent the approaching and
222: receding jets in a pair of relativistic jets respectively. $R$ is the distance between
223: the jet and the source, which can be transformed into the proper motion separation by
224: $\mu=R\sin\theta/5.3$ kpc, and $\theta$ is the jet inclination angle to the line of
225: sight. We can get the $\mu-t$ curve numerically with the above equations. To be
226: consistent with the work previously done to the eastern jet, we choose the same initial
227: conditions that $\Gamma_{0}=3$, $E_{0}=3.6\times10^{44}$ erg, and
228: $\theta_{j}=1.\textordmasculine5$. Then the parameters needed to be fit are $n$ and
229: $\theta$.
230:
231: In the case of the eastern jet, the number density of the ISM was assumed as a constant
232: in the whole region outside the central source (Wang et al. 2003). This assumption does
233: not work well in the case of its western counterpart. The western jet decelerated quite
234: fast, requiring a local dense environment; however if the ISM is dense everywhere, the
235: jet will be unable to travel that far from the central point source. As a result, we
236: consider a model that the ISM density varies as the distance changes. For simplicity,
237: we test the ideal case that the jet travelled first through a ``cavity" with a constant
238: velocity and then through a dense region where the jet was decelerated. A new parameter
239: $r$, the outer radius of the cavity, is introduced and the ISM number density is set to
240: be a constant $n$ outside this region and zero inside. The fittings improved a lot, but
241: not well constrained because of the limited number of the data points. A combination of
242: lightcurve fitting is required to further constrain the model parameters.
243:
244:
245: \subsection{Radiation Model}
246: In the standard GRB scenario, the afterglow emission is produced by
247: the synchrotron radiation or inverse Compton emission of the
248: accelerated electrons in the shock front of the jets (Wang et al.
249: 2003 and references there). Wang et al.(2003) found that the reverse
250: shock emission, originating from the electrons of the jet when a
251: shock moves back through the ejecta, decay rather fast and describe
252: the data of the eastern jet quite well. We thus take this model in
253: our work as well.
254:
255: Assuming the distribution of the electrons obeys a power-law form,
256: $n{\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny e}}}d\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny
257: e}}=K\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny e}}^{-p}d\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny e}}$, for
258: $\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny m}}<\gamma_{e}<\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny M}}$,
259: the volume emissivity at frequency $\nu'$ in the comoving frame is
260: given by (Rybicki \& Lightman 1979)
261: \begin{equation}
262: j_{\nu'}=\frac{\sqrt{3}q^{3}}{2m_{\textrm{\tiny
263: e}}c^{2}}(\frac{4{\pi}m_{\textrm{\tiny
264: e}}c\nu'}{3q})^{\frac{(1-p)}{2}}B_{\pm}^{\frac{(p+1)}{2}}KF_{1}(\nu,\nu'_{\textrm{\tiny
265: m}},\nu'_{\textrm{\tiny M}}),
266: \end{equation}
267: where $F_{1}(\nu,\nu'_{\textrm{\tiny m}},\nu'_{\textrm{\tiny
268: M}})=\int_{\nu'/\nu'_{\textrm{\tiny M}}}^{\nu'/\nu'_{\textrm{\tiny
269: m}}}F(x)x^{(p-3)/2}dx$, with $F(x)=x\int_{0}^{+\infty}K_{5/3}(t)$
270: and $K_{5/3}(t)$ is the Bessel function. The physical quantities in
271: these equations include $q$ and $m_{\textrm{\tiny e}}$, the charge
272: and mass of the electron, $B_{\perp}$, the magnetic field strength
273: perpendicular to the electron velocity, and $\nu'_{\textrm{\tiny
274: m}}$ and $\nu'_{\textrm{\tiny M}}$, the characteristic frequencies
275: for electrons with $\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny m}}$ and
276: $\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny M}}$.
277:
278: Assuming the reverse shock heats the ejecta at time $t_{0}$ at the radius $R_{0}$, the
279: physical quantities in the adiabatically expanding ejecta with radius $R$ will evolve
280: as $\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny m}}=\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny m}}(t_{0})R_{0}/R,
281: \gamma_{\textrm{\tiny m}}=\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny m}}(t_{0})R_{0}/R$ and
282: $K=K(t_{0})(R/R_{0})^{-(2+p)}, B_{\perp}=B_{\perp}(t_{0})(R/R_{0})^{-2}$, where the
283: initial values of these quantities are free parameters to be fitted in the calculation.
284: With these assumptions, we can then calculate the predicted flux evolution of the jets.
285: The comoving frequency $\nu'$ relates to our observer frequency $\nu$ by $\nu=D\nu'$,
286: where $D$ is the Doppler factor and we have $D_{\textrm{\tiny
287: a}}=1/\Gamma(1-\beta\cos\theta)$ and $D_{\textrm{\tiny r}}=1/\Gamma(1+\beta\cos\theta)$
288: for the approaching and receding jets respectively. Considering the geometry of the
289: emission region, the observed X-ray flux in 0.3-8 keV band could be estimated by
290: \begin{equation}
291: F(\textrm{0.3-8
292: keV})=\int_{\nu_{1}}^{\nu_{2}}[\frac{\theta_{j}^{2}}{4}(\frac{R}{d}){\Delta}RD^{3}j_{\nu'}]d\nu,
293: \end{equation}
294: where ${\Delta}R$ is the width of the shock region and is assumed to
295: be ${\Delta}R=R/10$ in the calculation.
296:
297: To reduce the number of free parameters, we set
298: $\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny m}}=100$ in our calculation because the
299: results are quite insensitive to this value. We choose the time that
300: the reverse shock takes place according to our kinematic model in
301: section 3.1. Then we fit the data to find out the initial values of
302: $K$ and $B_{\perp}$.
303:
304: Next step, we combine the kinematic and radiation fitting together.
305: We know that the energy and the number density of the gas in the
306: pre-shock and post-shock regions are connected by the jump
307: conditions $n'=\zeta(\Gamma)n$ and $e'=\eta(\Gamma)nm_{\textrm{\tiny
308: p}}c^{2}$, where $\zeta(\Gamma)$ and $\eta(\Gamma)$ are coefficients
309: related to the jet velocity. Therefore if we assume the shocked
310: electrons and the magnetic field acquire constant fractions
311: ($\epsilon_{\textrm{\tiny e}}$ and $\epsilon_{\textrm{\tiny B}}$) of
312: the total shock energy, we have $\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny
313: m}}=\epsilon_{\textrm{\tiny e}}(p-2){m_{\textrm{\tiny
314: p}}}(\Gamma-1)/(p-1){m_{\textrm{\tiny e}}}$,
315: $K=(p-1)n'\gamma_{\textrm{\tiny m}}^{p-1}$, and
316: $B_{\perp}=\sqrt{8\pi\epsilon_{\textrm{\tiny B}}e'}$.
317:
318: If we further assume that the $\epsilon_{\textrm{\tiny e}}$ of the
319: eastern and the western jets is the same, we may infer that
320: $K\propto{e'}\propto{n}$ for the two jets. As a result, we search
321: for the combination of parameters that could satisfy the kinematic
322: and radiation fitting, as well as the relationship $K_{\textrm{\tiny
323: e}}/K_{\textrm{\tiny w}}{\sim}n_{\textrm{\tiny e}}/n_{\textrm{\tiny
324: w}}$.
325:
326: A set of parameters has finally been found (Please refer to the \textit{Left} panel in
327: Fig.2). The boundary of the cavity lies at $r\sim$14$\arcsec$ to the east and
328: $\sim$18$\arcsec$ to the west of the central source. The corresponding number density
329: of the ISM outside this boundary is $\sim$0.00675 cm$^{-3}$ and $\sim$0.21 cm$^{-3}$,
330: respectively. Both values are lower than the canonical ISM value of $\sim$1 cm$^{-3}$,
331: although the value in the western region is much higher than that in the eastern
332: region. The electron energy fraction relationship is satisfied as $K_{\textrm{\tiny
333: e}}/K_{\textrm{\tiny w}}{\sim}n_{\textrm{\tiny e}}/n_{\textrm{\tiny w}}\sim0.03$. On
334: the other hand, the other relation concerning the magnetic field strength could not be
335: satisfied simultaneously by these parameters. Although the cavity radius and the number
336: density are allowed to vary significantly, the best fitted magnetic field strength
337: remains quite stable($\sim$0.4-0.6 mG). One possible interpretation for this is that
338: the equipartition parameter varies as the physical conditions of the jet varies; an
339: alternative explanation may involve the {\it in situ} generation (or amplification) of
340: the magnetic field.
341:
342: \begin{figure}
343: \begin{minipage}[b]{.5\textwidth}
344: \centering
345: \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig4c_bw.eps}
346: \end{minipage}
347: \begin{minipage}[b]{.5\textwidth}
348: \centering
349: \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig5_bw.eps}
350: \end{minipage}
351: \caption{{\it Left}: Proper motion fitting with asymmetric
352: cavity. Parameters: $\theta$=68\textordmasculine, $r_{\textrm{\tiny
353: e}}$=14 arcsec, $r_{\textrm{\tiny w}}$=18 arcsec, $n_{\textrm{\tiny
354: e}}$=0.00675 cm$^{-3}$, $n_{\textrm{\tiny w}}$=0.21 cm$^{-3}$. {\it
355: Right}: Reverse shock emission fitting to the X-ray light curve of
356: the jets. $K_{\textrm{\tiny e}}$=0.09 cm$^{-3}$, $K_{\textrm{\tiny
357: w}}$=0.3 cm$^{-3}$, $B_{\textrm{\tiny e}}$=0.5 mG, $B_{\textrm{\tiny
358: w}}$=0.4 mG.}
359: \end{figure}
360:
361:
362:
363: \section{Conclusion and Discussions}
364: A GRB external shock model shows that a large scale cavity exists outside XTE
365: J1550-564. This model has also been applied to another X-ray transient H 1743-322.
366: Chandra X-ray and ATCA radio observations of H 1743-322 from 2003 November to 2004 June
367: revealed the presence of large-scale ($\sim$0.3 pc) jets with velocity $v/c\sim0.8$
368: (Rupen et al. 2004; Corbel et al. 2005). Deceleration is also confirmed in this system.
369: The external shock model describes the data of this source well. A cavity of size
370: $\sim$0.12 pc most likely exists, but the conclusion is not firm in this case. Even if
371: there is no vacuum cavity, the ISM density is found to be very low($\sim3\times10^{-4}$
372: cm$^{-3}$), compared to the canonical Galactic value.
373:
374: These studies led us to the suggestion that in microquasars the interactions between
375: the ejecta and the environmental gas play major roles in the jet evolution and the low
376: density of the environment is a necessary requirement for the jet to develop to a long
377: distance. We find that microquasar jets can be classified into roughly three groups:
378: small scale moving jets, large scale moving jets and large scale jet relics. For the
379: first type, the ``small jets", only radio emissions are detected. The jets are always
380: relatively close to the central source and dissipate very quickly, including GRS
381: 1915+105 (Rodr\'{\i}guez \& Mirabel 1999; Miller-Jones et al. 2007), GRO J1655-40
382: (Hjellming \& Rupen 1995), and Cyg X-3 (Marti et al. 2001). The typical spatial scale
383: is 0$\sim$0.05 pc and the time scale is several tenths of days. No obvious deceleration
384: is observed before the jets become too faint. For the second type, the ``large jets",
385: both X-ray and radio detections are obtained, at a place far from the central source
386: several years after the outburst. Examples are XTE J1550-564, H1743-322, and GX 339-4
387: (Gallo et al.2004). The typical jet travelling distance for this type is 0.2$\sim$0.5
388: pc from the central engine and deceleration is clearly observed. The last type, the
389: ``large relics", is a kind of diffuse structures observed in radio, optical and X-ray
390: band, often ring or nebula shaped that are not moving at all. In this class, some well
391: studied sources, Cygnus X-1 (Gallo et al.2005), SS433 (Dubner el al.1998), Circinus X-1
392: (Stewart et al. 1993), 1E~1740.7-2942 (Mirabel et al. 1992) and GRS 1758-258
393: (Rodr\'{\i}guez et al. 1992) are included. The typical scale for this kind is 1$\sim$30
394: pc, an order of magnitude larger than the second type. The estimated lifetime often
395: exceeds one million years, indicating that they are related to previous outbursts.
396:
397: From these properties, it is reasonable to further suggest a consistent picture
398: involving all the sources together. We make a conjecture that large scale cavities
399: exist in all microquasar systems. The ``small jets" observed right after the ejection
400: are just travelling through these cavities. Since there are few or none interactions
401: between the jets and the surrounding gas in this region, the jets travel without
402: obvious deceleration. The emission mechanism is synchrotron radiation by particles
403: accelerated in the initial outburst. The emissions of jets decay very quickly and are
404: not detectable after several tenths of days. In some cases (e.g. XTE J1550-564), the
405: cavity has a dense (compared to the cavity interior) boundary at some radius and the
406: interactions between the jets and the boundary gas heat the particles again and thus
407: make the jets detectable again. Those are the ``large jets". The emission mechanism
408: then is synchrotron radiation by the re-heated particles in the external shocks. Then,
409: after these interactions, the jets lost most of their kinetic energy into the ISM
410: gradually, causing the latter to expand to large scale structures, the ``large relics",
411: in a comparatively long time (several millions of years).
412:
413: The creation of the cavities is not clear at this stage. Possible mechanism may involve
414: supernovae explosions, companion star winds or disk winds. Since some of the sources
415: most likely have never had supernovae before and the winds from the companion stars are
416: not strong enough, the accretion disk winds may be the most plausible possibility.
417: However, these assumptions all require further observations to justify.
418:
419: Microquasars are powerful probes of both the central engine and their surrounding
420: environment. More studies of their jet behaviors may give us information on the ISM gas
421: properties, as well as the ejecta components. It will provide insights of the jet
422: formation process and offer another approach into black hole physics and accretion flow
423: dynamics.
424:
425: %\subsection{} %%% Second level section head (remove "%" symbol)
426: %\subsubsection{} %%% Lowest level section head (remove "%" symbol)
427: %\section*{} %%% Unnumbered top level section head (remove "%" symbol)
428: %\subsection*{} %%% Unnumbered second level section head (remove "%" symbol)
429:
430:
431:
432: \acknowledgements We thank Dr. Yuan Liu, Shichao Tang and Weike Xiao
433: for useful discussions and Xiangyu Wang for providing the model
434: codes. SNZ thanks the SOC and LOC for great effort in organizing
435: this conference. This study is supported in part by the Ministry of
436: Education of China, Directional Research Project of the Chinese
437: Academy of Sciences under project No. KJCX2-YW-T03 and by the
438: National Natural Science Foundation of China under project No.
439: 10521001, 10733010 and 10725313.
440:
441:
442: %%% THE BIBLIOGRAPHY
443: %%%
444: %%% CONSULT SECTION 3 OF "INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS" FOR HOW TO USE NATBIB.
445: %%% AUTHORS ARE ENCOURAGED TO USE EITHER THE "THEBIBLIOGRAPY" ENVIRONMENT
446: %%% BY UNCOMMENTING (DELETING THE "%" SYMBOL) THE COMMANDS BELOW, OR BY
447: %%% USING THE BIBTEX ENVIRONMENT. TO FIND OUT WHICH IS APPLICABLE TO YOUR
448: %%% CONTRIBUTION, CONSULT THE VOLUME EDITORS FOR YOUR PROCEEDINGS.
449: %%%
450:
451: \begin{thebibliography}{}
452: \bibitem[Blandford \& McKee]{bla76} Blandford, R.D., \& McKee, C. F. 1976, Phys. Fluids, 19, 1130
453: \bibitem[Corbel et al.(2001)]{cor01} Corbel S., Kaaret P., Jain R.K.,et al. 2001, ApJ, 554, 43,
454: \bibitem[Corbel et al.(2002)]{cor02} Corbel, S., Fender, P. R., et al. 2002, Science, 298, 196
455: \bibitem[Corbel et al.(2005)]{cor05} Corbel, S., Kaaret, P., et al. 2005, \apj, 632, 504
456: \bibitem[Corbel et al.(2006)]{cor06} Corbel, S, Tomsick, J. A, \& Kaaret, P, 2006, ApJ, 636, 971
457: \bibitem[Dickey and Lockman(1990)]{dic90} Dickey, J. M., \& Lockman, F. J. 1990, ARA\&A, 28, 215
458: \bibitem[Dubner et al.(1998)]{dub98} Dubner, G. M., Holdaway, M., Goss, W. M., \& Mirabel, I. F., 1998, ApJ 116,1842
459: \bibitem[Freeman et al. (2002)]{fre02} Freeman, P. E., Kashyap, V., Rosner, R., \& Lamb, D. Q. 2002, ApJS, 138, 185
460: \bibitem[Gallo et al.(2004)]{gal04} Gallo, E., Corbel, S., Fender, R. P., et al., 2004, MNRAS, 347, L52
461: \bibitem[Gallo et al.(2005)]{gal05} Gallo, E., Fender, R. P., Kaiser, C., et al., 2005, arXiv:astro-ph/0508228v1
462: \bibitem[Hannikainen et al.(2001)]{han01} Hannikainen, D., Campbell-Wilson, D., Hunstead, R., et al. 2001, ApSS Supp., 276, 45
463: \bibitem[Heinz(2002)]{hei02} Heinz, S., 2002, AA, 388, L40
464: \bibitem[Hjellming(1995)]{hje95} Hjellming, R.M., \& Rupen, M. P., 1995, Nature, 375, 464
465: \bibitem[Huang et al.(1999)]{hua99} Huang, Y. F., Dai, Z.G., \& Lu, T. 1999, MNRAS, 309, 513
466: \bibitem[Karret et al.(2003)]{kar03} Karret, P, Corbel, S, \& Tomsick, J.A, 2003, ApJ, 582, 945
467: \bibitem[Marti et al.(2001)]{mar01} Marti, J., Paredes, J., M., \& Peracaula, M., 2001, A\&A 375, 476
468: \bibitem[Miller-Jones et al.(2007)]{mil07} Miller-Jones, J. C. A., Rupen, M. P., Fender, R. P., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 375, 1087
469: \bibitem[Mirabel et al.(1992)]{mir92}Mirabel, I. F., Rodr\'{\i}guez, L. F., Cordier, etal. 1992, Nature, 358, 215
470: \bibitem[Mirabel et al.(1993)]{mir93} Mirabel, I. F., Rodr\'{\i}guez, L. F., Cordier B., et al. 1993, \aap, suppl.Ser., 97, 193
471: \bibitem[Mirabel and Rodr\'{\i}guez(1994)]{mir94} Mirabel, I. F., \& Rodr\'{\i}guez, L. F. 1994, Nature, 371, 46
472: \bibitem[Mirabel and Radr\'{\i}guez(1999)]{mir99} Mirabel, I. F., \& Rodr\'{\i}guez, L. F. 1999, \araa, 37, 409
473: \bibitem[Mirabel and Radr\'{\i}guez(2003)]{mir03} Mirabel, I. F., \& Rodr\'{\i}guez, L. F. 2003, Science, Vol300, 1119
474: \bibitem[Orosz et al.(2002)]{oro02} Orosz, J. A., Groot, P. J., van der Klis, M., et al., 2002, ApJ, 568, 845
475: \bibitem[Rodr\'{\i}guez et al.(1992)]{rod92} Rodriguez, L. F., \& Mirabel, I. F., \& Marti, J. 1992, ApJ, 401, L15
476: \bibitem[Rees and M\'{e}sz\'{a}ros]{ree92} Rees, M. J., and M\'{e}sz\'{a}ros, P. 1992, MNRAS, 258, P41
477: \bibitem[Rupen et al.(2004)]{rup04} ------- 2004, BAAS, 204, 5.16
478: \bibitem[Rybicki \& Lightman 1979]{ryb79} Rybicki, G. B., \& Lightman, A. P. 1979, Radiative Process in Astrophysics (New York: Wiley)
479: \bibitem[Smith(1998)]{smi98} Smith, D. A., 1998, Int. Astron. Union Circ. No. 7008
480: \bibitem[Sobczak et al.(2000)]{sob00} Sobczak, G. J, McClintock, J. E, et al., 2000, ApJ, 544, 993
481: \bibitem[Stewart et al.(1993)]{ste93} Stewart, R. T., Caswell, J. L., Haynes, R. F., \& Nelson, G. J., 1993, MNRAS, 261, 593
482: \bibitem[Stirling et al.(2001)]{sti01} Stirling, A. M., Spencer, R. E., de la Force, C. J., et al. 2001, MNRAS, 327, 1273
483: \bibitem[Sturner and Shrader(2005)]{stu05} Sturner S. J., \& Shrader, C. R. 2005, ApJ, 625, 923
484: \bibitem[Tingay et al.(1995)]{tin95} Tingay, S. J., Jauncey, D. L., Prestonet, R. A., et al. 1995, Nature, 374, 141
485: \bibitem[Tomsick et al.(2003)]{tom03} Tomsick, J. A., Corbel, S., \& Fender, R. 2003, ApJ, 582, 933
486: \bibitem[Wang et al.(2003)]{wan03} Wang, X. Y., Dai, Z. G., \& Lu, T. 2003, ApJ, 592, 347
487: \end{thebibliography}
488:
489: %\begin{thebibliography}{}
490: %\bibitem[]{}
491: %\bibitem[]{}
492: %\bibitem[]{}
493: %\bibitem[]{}
494: %\bibitem[]{}
495: %\bibitem[]{}
496: %\bibitem[]{}
497: %\bibitem[]{}
498: %\bibitem[]{}
499: %\bibitem[]{}
500: %\bibitem[]{}
501: %\bibitem[]{}
502: %\end{thebibliography}
503:
504: \end{document}
505: