1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: %\usepackage{graphicx}
3:
4: %
5: % BEGIN PREAMBLE
6: %
7: \renewcommand{\b}[1]{\boldsymbol{#1}}
8: \newcommand{\pard}[2]{\frac{\partial #1}{\partial #2}}
9: \newcommand{\unit}[1]{\,{\rm #1}}
10: % Units
11: \newcommand{\cm}{\unit{cm}}
12: \newcommand{\G}{\unit{G}}
13: \newcommand{\kG}{\unit{kG}}
14: \newcommand{\rpm}{\unit{rpm}}
15: \newcommand{\s}{\unit{s}}
16: % Special symbols
17: \newcommand{\ab}{{\rm a}}
18: \newcommand{\bp}{{\rm b}}
19: \newcommand{\bB}{\b{B}}
20: \newcommand{\cs}{c_{\rm s}}
21: \newcommand{\half}{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}
22: \newcommand{\bO}{\b{\Omega}}
23: \newcommand{\Rm}{Re_{\rm m}}
24: % Environments and macros
25: \newcommand{\remark}[1]{{\bf #1}}
26: %
27: % END PREAMBLE
28: %
29:
30: \newcommand{\noun}[1]{\textsc{#1}}
31: %% Bold symbol macro for standard LaTeX users
32: \providecommand{\boldsymbol}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath $#1$}}
33:
34: %% Because html converters don't know tabularnewline
35: \providecommand{\tabularnewline}{\\}
36: %\usepackage{bm}% bold math
37:
38: %\usepackage{babel}
39: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% End of user commands
40: \shorttitle{3D Bubble simulations}
41: \shortauthors{W. Liu \emph{et al.}}
42:
43: \begin{document}
44:
45: \title{Long Term Evolution of Magnetized Bubbles in Galaxy Clusters}
46:
47: \author{Wei Liu\altaffilmark{1}, Hui Li\altaffilmark{1}, Shengtai Li\altaffilmark{1}, Scott C. Hsu\altaffilmark{2} }
48:
49: \altaffiltext{1}{Theoretical Division, Los Alamos National
50: Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA 87545;~wliu@lanl.gov, hli@lanl.gov, sli@lanl.gov.}\altaffiltext{2}{Physics Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA 87545;~scotthsu@lanl.gov.}
51:
52: \begin{abstract}
53: We have performed nonlinear ideal magnetohydrodynamic simulations of the long term
54: evolution of a magnetized low-density ``bubble" plasma formed by a radio galaxy in a
55: stratified cluster medium. It is found that about 3.5\% of the initial magnetic energy
56: remains in the bubble after $\sim 8 \times 10^{9}$~years, and the initial magnetic bubble
57: expansion is adiabatic. The bubble can survive for at least $8 \times 10^9$~years
58: due to the stabilizing effect of the bubble magnetic field on Rayleigh-Taylor
59: and Kelvin-Holmholtz instabilities, possibly accounting for ``ghost cavities" as observed
60: in Perseus-A\@. A filament structure spanning about 500~kpc is formed along the path of bubble motion.
61: The mean value of the magnetic field inside this structure is $\sim 0.88$~$\mu$G at $\sim8\times10^9$~years.
62: Finally, the initial bubble momentum and rotation have limited influence on the long term evolution of the bubble.
63: \end{abstract}
64:
65: \keywords{galaxies: jets ---magnetic fields ---MHD ---methods: numerical}
66:
67: %\maketitle
68:
69: \section{Introduction}
70:
71: An unsolved problem in active galactic nuclei (AGN) feedback on clusters is how to account for the the morphology and stability of buoyant bubbles and their interactions with the ambient intracluster medium (ICM) \citep{mn07}.
72: \citet{fstacji06} showed that in the Perseus cluster, such bubbles can stay intact far from cluster centers where they were inflated by AGN jets. However, studies of kinetic-energy dominated jets in the purely hydrodynamic limit did not explain the observed long term persistence of the buoyant bubbles, which are prone to Rayleigh-Taylor (RTI) and Kelvin-Holmhotz (KHI) instabilities and fragment entirely within $100\;\unit{Myr}$, contrary to observations [but see \citet{rmfs05,ps06,ga07}].
73:
74: Appreciable magnetic energy has been observed in both cluster and radio lobe plasmas \citep{oek00,kdl01,chh05}. The magnetic fields could play a vital role in the dynamics of the rising bubble, as shown by a series of 2D magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) studies for bubbles of several $10^8$~years
75: \citep{bk01,rdrr04,jd05}. \citet{sg08a} showed that uniform strong magnetic fields do not suppress RTI completely, but sheared fields at the bubble interface
76: quench the instability. This implies that not only the field strength but also the configuration matters for bubble stability.
77: \citet{rebhp07} did a comprehensive study of the influence of different magnetic field configurations upon the stability of a rising bubble. They found that the internal bubble helical magnetic field moderately stabilizes the bubble, however the bubble has an initial plasma parameter $\beta\equiv\left<2nT/B^2\right>\gg1$, still in thermal energy-dominated regime.
78: Recently, \citet{llf06} proposed a different bubble magnetic field configuration for jet/lobes. Here we adopt the field configuration of \citet{llf06} and focus on the late stage of the evolution of magnetically dominated bubbles in 3D\@. We show that this spheromak-like magnetic field configuration strongly stabilizes the instabilities and prevents
79: the bubble from breaking up, possibly forming the intact but detached ``ghost cavity" observed in systems such as Perseus-A\@. This {\it Letter} is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{setup}, we describe the problem setup. The simulation results and discussions are given in Sec.~\ref{results}.
80:
81: \section{Problem Set Up}\label{setup}
82:
83: The background ICM is assumed to be hydrostatic and
84: isothermal. The density and pressure profile is given as
85: $\rho=p=[1+(R/R_c)^2]^{-\kappa}$, where the parameters $\kappa$
86: and $R_c$ are taken to be $1.0$ and $4.0$ respectively. The fixed yet distributed gravitational field $-\nabla\psi(R)$ dominated by the dark matter is assumed \citep{nll06}. We simulate
87: only the phase after the AGN has inflated a
88: low-density bubble which is in pressure equilibrium
89: with the ICM\@ initially. The static magnetized bubble initially lies at
90: $(x_b,y_b,z_b)=(0,0,5)$ with density $\rho_b=0.1$, spherical radius
91: $r_d=2$ for the density profile and $r_b=1$ for the magnetic
92: configuration.
93: The specific heat $\gamma$ inside and outside the bubble is taken to be $5/3$. Physical
94: quantities are normalized by the characteristic system length scale
95: $R_0=25\;\unit{kpc}$, density
96: $\rho_0=1.67\times10^{-26}\;\unit{g\;cm^{-3}}$, and velocity
97: $V_{0}=6.2\times10^{7}\;\unit{cm\;s^{-1}}$. The initial sound speed,
98: $C_s|_{t=0}=\gamma^{1/2}\sim1.29$, is constant throughout the
99: computational domain. Other quantities are normalized as: time $t=1$ gives
100: $R_0/V_0=38.6\;\unit{Myr}$, magnetic field $B=1$ gives
101: $(2\rho_0V_{0}^2)^{1/2}=1.13\times10^{-5}\;\unit{G}$ and energy $E=1$
102: gives $\rho_0
103: V_{0}^2R_0^3=2.71\times10^{58}\;\unit{ergs}$. The magnetic field setup
104: of the bubble follows \citet{llf06} with the ratio of toroidal to
105: poloidal bubble field $\alpha$ taken to be $\sqrt{10}$, which
106: corresponds to a minimum initial Lorentz force. The latter is
107: reasonable since we want to mimic the situation that the magnetic
108: bubble has substantially relaxed and detached from the jet tip. The
109: initial total magnetic energy is around
110: $2.0\times10^{59}\;\unit{ergs}$. The computational domain is taken to
111: be $|x|\le16$, $|y|\le16$, and $0\le z\le32$ corresponding to a
112: $(800\;\unit{kpc})^3$ box in the actual length scales. The numerical
113: resolution used here is $400^3$, where the grid points are assigned
114: uniformly in every direction. A cell $\delta x$ corresponds to
115: $2.0\;\unit{kpc}$. We use ``outflow" boundary conditions at every
116: boundary except the boundary at $z=0$, where we use ``reflecting"
117: boundary conditions, which guarantee that the energy flux through this
118: boundary is zero.
119:
120:
121: \section{Results \& Discussion}\label{results}
122:
123: %In this section we present nonlinear ideal MHD simulation results on the
124: %long term evolution of a low density magnetic ``bubble" propagating
125: %and expanding into an initially stratified background plasma. The
126: %results are organized into three primary topics: (1)~energy and
127: %density evolution, (2)~influence of the initial magnetic field,
128: %(3)~influence of the initial momentum/rotation. Key findings include
129: %a long bubble lifetime due to the suppression of
130: %instabilities by the magnetic field, filament-like magnetic structure with
131: %morphology and field strength consistent with observations, and the
132: %insensitivity of the long-term bubble evolution to the initial
133: %momentum/rotation.
134:
135: Energy and density evolution reveal the different stages of the bubble. Figure~\ref{energy}(\emph{top})
136: presents the time evolution of various energies at the early stage,
137: in which the gravitational energy $E_g=\int \rho\psi dV$ and the
138: internal energy $E_T=\int p/(\gamma-1)dV$, where $dV$ is the
139: infinitesimal volume and the integral is over the entire computation
140: domain, have been reduced by their
141: initial values $E_{g,0}$ and $E_{T,0}$, respectively. The total energy
142: is defined as $E_{\rm total}=E_m+E_k+E_T+E_g$, where the kinetic
143: energy is defined as $E_k=\int 1/2\rho v^2 dV$ and the magnetic
144: energy is defined as $E_m=\int B^2/2 dV$.
145: At the early stage ($t\lesssim5$), the kinetic energy increases since
146: the bubble accelerates upward due to buoyancy, and the magnetic energy
147: decreases due to work done in expansion from the weak initial Lorentz force and conversion to shock and wave energy \citep{nll06}.
148: The gravitational energy increases because there is a net outward mass flow in the axial direction.
149: The passage of the shock wave heats and compresses the ICM and alters
150: its pressure gradient. The total energy $E_{\rm total}$ is almost
151: constant before $t\sim10$, at which time the shock and wavefront
152: reach the boundary. Conservation of
153: the total energy for $t\lesssim10$ is not strictly satisfied due to
154: numerical diffusion. The initial bubble expansion ($t\le20$) is approximately adiabatic, which gives $E=Vp\propto V^{1-\gamma}$, where $V$ is the bubble volume. Therefore
155: $E_2/E_1=(V_1/V_2)^{2/3}$, where the subscript $1$ and $2$ indicate
156: the initial and final state, respectively. At $t=20$, the radius of
157: the bubble has increased from $2$ to $\sim5$, which gives
158: $E_2/E_1\sim16\%$, roughly matching the amount of magnetic energy in
159: the bubble [$20\%$ from Fig.~\ref{energy}(\emph{top})]. For later times
160: [Fig.~\ref{energy}(\emph{bottom})], fitting with
161: $E_m(t)/E_{m,0}=\exp(-t/\tau_{\rm dis})$, we have: (1)~a fast
162: dissipation stage ($t\lesssim10$) when magnetic energy
163: dissipation time $\tau_{\rm dis}\sim11$; (2)~a slow dissipation stage
164: ($t\gtrsim10$) when $\tau_{\rm dis}\sim114$. Both times are much smaller
165: than the numerical dissipation time $\tau_{\rm res}$ at the
166: corresponding stages (see discussions at the end of this section). The kinetic energy is oscillating while it is
167: decaying slowly, which can be understood as follows.
168: Gravity pulls the bubble down to the denser ICM, compressing
169: the bubble and causing an increase in magnetic energy (since
170: the magnetic flux is nearly conserved). This results
171: in the magnetic energy oscillating in phase with
172: the kinetic energy with period $\sim90$
173: ($3.5\times10^9\;\unit{yr}$).
174: At $t=200$ after
175: several periods of decaying oscillations, about 3.5\% of the initial magnetic energy remains.
176:
177: The magnetic field suppresses instabilities and therefore the bubble
178: remains intact longer. Figure~\ref{overview} presents the typical
179: density distribution (logarithmic scale) in 2D $x$--$z$ slices at
180: $y=0$ at different times ($t=0,7.5,20,50,100,125$). The white solid
181: contour lines indicate contours of constant magnetic field strength
182: $|B|$. Consistent with
183: Fig.~\ref{energy}(\emph{bottom}), after $t\gtrsim50$, the bubble
184: undergoes a slowly decaying oscillation between $z\sim19$ and
185: $z\sim24$. We have also performed simulations of an unmagnetized
186: bubble and found that it disintegrates after $t=20$, whereas the
187: magnetic bubble still clearly differentiates itself from the ambient
188: medium at $t=200$ (Fig.~\ref{overview}). The formation of an ``umbrella" or a thin protective
189: magnetic layer on the bubble working surface suppresses
190: instabilities \citep{rebhp07}. The stronger magnetic field is also
191: found to move the bubble faster and push the bubble farther away from
192: its initial position. The position of the bubble top as a function of
193: time is shown in Fig.~\ref{pos}. This position is calculated by
194: plotting the axial profile of the density along the line of
195: $(x,y)=(0,0)$ and finding the location of the first density jump from
196: the top of the domain. Comparing the unmagnetized run (dash line) with
197: the magnetized run (both without initial momentum/rotation), we can
198: see that the rising speed increases from $~0.36$ to $0.6$. Note that
199: the rough estimate of the terminal speed $v_t$ based on the initial gravitational
200: acceleration $g$ and size $r_d$, both position-dependent, is $v_t\approx4/3\sqrt{2gr_d}\sim2$,
201: assuming force balance between buoyancy and viscous drag force at the
202: final stage \citep{mn07}.
203:
204: We investigate the effect of the magnetic field on bubble stability
205: in more detail. Following \citet{nll07}, we first study KHI of the
206: bubble. At both sides of the bubble, the magnetic field is almost uniform, not twisted like at the top of the bubble. From linear analysis, the instability criterion for nonaxisymmetric KHI surface
207: modes is \citep{hr02} : $\Delta V > V_{As}=[(\rho_b+\rho_e)/(4\pi
208: \rho_b\rho_e)(B_b^2+B_e^2)]^{1/2}$, where $\Delta V\equiv|V_b-V_e|$ is
209: the velocity shear and $V_{As}$ is the surface Alfv\'en
210: speed. The subscripts $b$ and $e$ indicate the bubble and external medium,
211: respectively. The nonaxisymmetric body modes would be important if
212: \citep{hr99}: (1) $V_b>V_f$, in which $V_f$ is the fast
213: magnetosonic speed; or (2) $C_sV_A/(C_s^2+V_A^2)^{1/2}<V_b<V_s$, in
214: which $V_A$ is the Alfv\'en speed and $V_s$ is the slow magnetosonic
215: speed. The definitions of $V_{f,s}$ are:
216: $V_{f,s}=\big\{1/2\{C_s^2+V_A^2\pm[(C_s^2+V_A^2)^2-4C_s^2V_A^2\cos^2\theta]^{1/2}\}\big\}^{1/2}$.
217: Since we focus on the $x$-direction only, $V_A^2\cos^2\theta$ are
218: taken to be $B_x^2/\rho$.
219: Figure~\ref{khi} (\emph{top}) displays the transverse distribution of
220: the bulk flow speed $V=(v_x^2+v_y^2+v_z^2)^{1/2}$, the density $\rho$,
221: and the magnetic field strength $B$ at $t=7.5$ at $z=8.0$.
222: A distinct velocity shear is identified at $x\sim3.5$. Across this
223: shear, $\Delta V\sim0.75$ and $V_{As}\sim0.85$. The inequality $\Delta
224: V<V_{As}$ holds. This means that the KHI surface modes are completely
225: suppressed. Figure~\ref{khi} (\emph{bottom}) displays the transverse
226: distribution of $V$, $V_f$, and $V_s$ at $t=7.5$ at $z=8.0$ . We see
227: that the bulk flow $V$ lies between $V_f$ and $V_s$. The inequality
228: $V_s<V<V_f$ is satisfied in the body of the buoyant bubble. This
229: rules out the KHI body modes as well.
230:
231: RTI could also be suppressed by the magnetic field. For the idealized
232: case of two conducting fluids separated by a contact discontinuity
233: with a uniform magnetic field parallel to the interface undergoing
234: constant acceleration $g$, \citet{chan61} demonstrated that RTI on a
235: scale $L$ parallel to the field requires
236: $B<B_c\equiv[Lg(\rho_h-\rho_l)]^{1/2}$, in which $\rho_h$ and $\rho_l$
237: are the densities in the heavy and light fluids respectively. Modes
238: perpendicular to the field are unaffected. At the top of the bubble
239: ($z\sim11.6$) (Fig.~\ref{rti}), $\rho_h$ and $\rho_l$ are found to be
240: $0.15$ and $0.06$, respectively, and the gravitational acceleration
241: $g$ is calculated to be $0.95$. If $L$ is chosen to be the computation
242: domain size, the maximum possible mode wavelength in the simulations,
243: then the critical magnetic field strength is $B_c\sim1.6$, which is
244: larger than the magnetic field ($\sim0.8$) at that location. This
245: means that only part of the parallel modes are suppressed regardless
246: of the perpendicular modes. This is not consistent with the simulation
247: results. However, as pointed out in \citet{sg08a}, the twisting nature
248: of the bubble field at the top of the bubble introduces a current
249: sheet at the surface, and the changes in the direction of the field at
250: the interface must be on very small scales to inhibit the interchange
251: modes. A more detailed study of this effect is beyond the scope of
252: this paper and will be the subject of future study.
253:
254: Our simulation also provides one possible explanation of the
255: morphology and origin of the large scale magnetic field and
256: the generation
257: of ``ghost cavities" observed in many clusters. Like \citet{rdrr04}, a
258: magnetized high-density tail remains as the bubble rises
259: (Fig.~\ref{overview}). The tails have an elongated morphology
260: (Fig.~\ref{overview}), resembling H$\alpha$ filaments, which is found
261: to indicate the history of the rising bubble. Interestingly, the
262: magnetic field also helps stabilize this ``filament" as it is still
263: visible at $t=200$. \citet{nb04} has argued that thermal conduction
264: has to be strongly suppressed in the ICM; otherwise, such cold filaments
265: would be rapidly evaporated. As in \citet{rebhp07}, our results
266: provide a possibility that thermal conduction may be locally weaker in
267: the bubble wake, thus preventing or slowing down filament
268: evaporation. The magnetic field is distributed between $z\sim2.5$ and
269: $z\sim25$ at $t=200$ with peak value around $0.156$ ($\sim1.8\;\unit{\mu
270: G}$) or mean value around $0.078$ ($\sim0.88\;\unit{\mu G}$), close to
271: the estimates of wider cluster fields \citep{ct02,tfa02}. This
272: large-scale ($\gtrsim500\;\unit{kpc}$) magnetic field structure also
273: mimics the morphology of the second class (``Phoenix") of ``radio
274: relics" elongated from the cluster center to the periphery observed in
275: A 115 \citep{gfg01}. The simulation results mean that the magnetic
276: bubble rising from $\sim125\;\unit{kpc}$ with an initial magnetic
277: energy of $2\times10^{59}\;\unit{ergs}$, will spread magnetic fields
278: between $62.5\;\unit{kpc}\lesssim z\lesssim600\;\unit{kpc}$ and keep a
279: magnetized bubble between $475\;\unit{kpc}$ and $600\;\unit{kpc}$ for
280: at least $\sim8\times10^{9}\;\unit{yr}$. Therefore one could reproduce
281: the intact but detached ``ghost cavity" observed in some systems such
282: as Perseus-A.
283:
284: Real radio lobes possess complex, jet-driven flows, different from the
285: static bubble that we use for our initial conditions. We study the
286: effects of additional variations in the initial bubble by having:
287: (1)~an initial uniform injection speed $v_{\rm inj}$ or (2)~an initial
288: uniform rotation $\omega$. \citet{ntll08} reported that the radio lobe
289: gains a momentum of $v_{\rm inj}\sim0.91C_{s0}=1.174$, and the
290: rotation speed $\omega$ at the edge of the bubble reaches
291: $\sim1.5C_{s0}/r_d=0.9675$ after jet-driven inflation and interaction
292: with the ambient ICM, although neither are not uniform inside the
293: bubble. Here we take these two values as our initial values for
294: $v_{\rm inj}$ and $\omega$ and idealize both to be uniform throughout
295: the bubble. Fig.~\ref{pos} presents the time evolution of the
296: position of the bubble top with initial uniform injection velocity
297: $v_{\rm inj}=1.174$ (long dash) and initial uniform rotation speed
298: $\omega=0.9675$ (dash dot). It is seen that these two variables only
299: have some influence on the evolution of the bubble during the early
300: stage. The bubble with an initial rotation has a reduced buoyancy resulting from rotation-driven instabilities that in turn lead to a reduced pressure differential between the bubble and the ICM.
301: The evolution,
302: and structure of the bubble in the later times are,
303: however, essentially the same.
304: %The initial momentum and rotation are
305: %found to have limited influence upon the long term dynamics of the
306: %bubble.
307:
308: The effects of numerical diffusion are estimated as follows. If we fit
309: the net toroidal magnetic flux $\psi_t=\int B_y dS$ (only positive $B_y$ is selected) as
310: $\psi_t(t)/\psi_t(t=0)\equiv\exp(-t/\tau_{\rm res})$, the ``resistive"
311: dissipation time due to numerical diffusion is $\tau_{\rm
312: res}\sim 38$ for $t\le10$, $\tau_{\rm res}=138$ for
313: $10\le t\le50$, and $\tau_{\rm res}=507$ for $50\le t \le
314: 100$. Therefore the numerical diffusion is not important on the
315: time scales of interest $(t\lesssim200)$. Increasing numerical resolution can further reduce the numerical diffusion.
316:
317: The oldest bubbles known so far are a few hundred $\unit{Myr}$ old \citep{mn07}, which are much younger than the long-sustained ($\sim$ a Hubble time) magnetized bubbles reported in this \emph{Letter}. The simulations show that at later times $t\gtrsim50$, the density and X-ray luminosity contrast between the bubble and ICM
318: plasma at the periphery of the cluster is small, which makes the direct X-ray observation of the bubble faraway from the parent galaxy very difficult. But the radio bubble at the borders of the clusters may still be detectable through: (1) Faraday rotation measurement of the outskirts of the cluster if an outside synchrotron source exists; (2) or radio observation from re-energization of fossil radio bubble plasma by shocks or mergers. It is highly possible for the bubbles to pile up in the outer atmospheres of the clusters in deep Chandra observation, if those observations are technically viable.
319:
320: It is conceivable that part of the initial magnetic energy of the bubble
321: accelerates cosmic rays.
322: Throughout the lifetime of a cluster, there could be multiple AGNs
323: injecting jets/lobes into the ICM\@. Both the cosmic rays
324: and the remaining magnetic fields (distributed over large scales)
325: could provide the energy sources for phenomena such as radio relics and
326: radio haloes that have been observed for a number of clusters \citep{fgsbr08}.
327:
328: %\bibliographystyle{apj}
329: %\bibliography{losalamos}
330:
331: \begin{thebibliography}{25}
332: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
333:
334: \bibitem[{Br{\"{u}}ggen \& Kaiser(2001)}]{bk01}
335: Br{\"{u}}ggen, M. \& Kaiser, C.~R. 2001, MNRAS, 325, 676
336:
337: \bibitem[{Carrili \& Taylor(2002)}]{ct02}
338: Carrili, C.~L. \& Taylor, G.~B. 2002, ARA\&A, 40, 319
339:
340: \bibitem[{Chandrasekhar(1961)}]{chan61}
341: Chandrasekhar, S. 1961, Hydrodynamic and Hydromagnetic Stability (Oxford
342: University Press)
343:
344: \bibitem[{Croston {et~al.}(2005)Croston, Hardcastle, Harris, Belsole,
345: Birkinshaw, \& Worrall}]{chh05}
346: Croston et al. 2005, Astrophys. J., 626, 733
347:
348: \bibitem[{Fabian {et~al.}(2006)Fabian, Sanders, Taylor, Allen, Crawford,
349: Johnstone, \& Iwasawa}]{fstacji06}
350: Fabian et al. 2006, MNRAS, 367, 433
351:
352: \bibitem[{Ferrari {et~al.}(2008)Ferrari, Govoni, Schindler, Bykov, \&
353: Rephaeli}]{fgsbr08}
354: Ferrari et al. 2008,
355: Space Sci. Rev., 134, 93
356:
357: \bibitem[{Gardini(2007)}]{ga07}
358: Gardini, A. 2007, A\&A, 464, 143
359:
360: \bibitem[{Govoni {et~al.}(2001)Govoni, Feretti, Giovannini, B{\"{o}}hringer,
361: Reiprich, \& Murgia}]{gfg01}
362: Govoni et al. 2001, A\&A, 376, 803
363:
364: \bibitem[{Hardee \& Rosen(1999)}]{hr99}
365: Hardee, P.~E. \& Rosen, A. 1999, ApJ, 524, 650
366:
367: \bibitem[{Hardee \& Rosen(2002)}]{hr02}
368: ---. 2002, ApJ, 576, 204
369:
370: \bibitem[{Jones \& De~Young(2005)}]{jd05}
371: Jones, T.~W. \& De~Young, D.~S. 2005, ApJ, 624, 586
372:
373: \bibitem[{Kronberg {et~al.}(2001)Kronberg, Dufton, Li, \& Colgate}]{kdl01}
374: Kronberg, P.~P., Dufton, Q.~W., Li, H., \& Colgate, S.~A. 2001, Astrophys, J.,
375: 560, 178
376:
377: \bibitem[{Li {et~al.}(2006)Li, Lapenta, Finn, Li, \& Colgate}]{llf06}
378: Li, H., Lapenta, G., Finn, J.~M., Li, S., \& Colgate, S.~A. 2006, Astrophys.
379: J., 643, 92
380:
381: \bibitem[{McNamara \& Nulsen(2007)}]{mn07}
382: McNamara, B.~R. \& Nulsen, P. E.~J. 2007, ARA\&A, 45, 117
383:
384: \bibitem[{Nakamura {et~al.}(2006)Nakamura, Li, \& Li}]{nll06}
385: Nakamura, M., Li, H., \& Li, S. 2006, Astrophys. J., 652, 1059
386:
387: \bibitem[{Nakamura {et~al.}(2007)Nakamura, Li, \& Li}]{nll07}
388: ---. 2007, Astrophys. J., 656, 721
389:
390: \bibitem[{Nakamura {et~al.}(2008)Nakamura, Tregillis, Li, \& Li}]{ntll08}
391: Nakamura, M., Tregillis, I.~L., Li, H., \& Li, S. 2008, ApJ, in press
392:
393: \bibitem[{Nipoti \& Binney(2004)}]{nb04}
394: Nipoti, C. \& Binney, J. 2004, MNRAS, 349, 1509
395:
396: \bibitem[{Owen {et~al.}(2000)Owen, Eilek, \& Kassim}]{oek00}
397: Owen, F.~N., Eilek, J.~A., \& Kassim, N.~E. 2000, Astrophys. J., 543, 611
398:
399: \bibitem[{Pizzolato \& Soker(2006)}]{ps06}
400: Pizzolato, F. \& Soker, N. 2006, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 371, 1835
401:
402: \bibitem[{Reynolds {et~al.}(2005)Reynolds, McKernan, Fabian, \& Stone}]{rmfs05}
403: Reynolds, C.~S., McKernan, B., Fabian, A.~C., \& Stone, J.~M. 2005, MNRAS, 357,
404: 242
405:
406: \bibitem[{Robinson {et~al.}(2004)Robinson, Dursi, Ricker, Rosner, Calder,
407: Zingale, Truran, Linde, Caceres, Fryxell, Olson, Riley, Siegel, \&
408: Vladimirova}]{rdrr04}
409: Robinson et al. 2004, ApJ, 601, 621
410:
411: \bibitem[{Ruszkowski {et~al.}(2007)Ruszkowski, En{\ss}lin, Br{\"{u}}ggen,
412: Heinz, \& Pfrommer}]{rebhp07}
413: Ruszkowski et al. 2007, MNRAS, 378, 662
414:
415: \bibitem[{Stone \& Gardiner(2008)}]{sg08a}
416: Stone, J.~M. \& Gardiner, T. 2008, ApJ, in press
417:
418: \bibitem[{Taylor {et~al.}(2002)Taylor, Fabian, \& Allen}]{tfa02}
419: Taylor, G.~B., Fabian, A.~C., \& Allen, S.~W. 2002, MNRAS, 334, 769
420:
421: \end{thebibliography}
422:
423: %\clearpage
424:
425: %
426: \begin{figure}[!htp]
427: \begin{center}
428: %\plottwo{f1a.eps}{f1b.eps}
429: \scalebox{0.2}{\includegraphics{f1.eps}}
430: \caption{\label{energy}~Time evolution of various energies. Top: short term various energies evolution $t\le20$, thin solid: magnetic Energy $E_m$, thin dash: kinetic energy $E_k$, thin dash dot: internal energy $E_T$, thick dash: gravitational energy $E_g$ and thick solid: total energy $E_{\rm tol}$. Bottom: long term time evolution of magnetic energy (in logarithmic scale) $E_m$ (solid) and kinetic energy $E_k$ (dash). $t=1$ represents $38.6\;\unit{Myr}$.}
431: \end{center}
432: \end{figure}
433:
434: %
435: \begin{figure}[!htp]
436: \begin{center}
437: \scalebox{0.8}{\includegraphics{f2.eps}}
438: \end{center}
439: \caption{~(color) Density (in logarithmic scale) in the $x$-$z$ plane as a function of time ($\alpha=\sqrt{10}$). The white solid contour lines indicate the magnetic field strength $|B|$. $t=0$, $|B|\in[0,1.976]$; $t=7.5$, $|B|\in[0,0.830]$; $t=20$, $|B|\in[0,0.400]$; $t=50$, $|B|\in[0,0.328]$; $t=100$, $|B|\in[0,0.159]$; $t=125$, $|B|\in[0,0.156]$. $|B|=1$ represents $11.3\;\unit{\mu G}$. The number of the contour levels are all $5$. \label{overview} }
440: \end{figure}
441:
442: %
443: \begin{figure}[!htp]
444: \begin{center}
445: \scalebox{0.4}{\includegraphics{f3.eps}}
446: \end{center}
447: \caption{~Position of the bubble top \emph{v.s.} time for four different runs. The solid, long dash and dash dot lines represent magnetized bubble runs without initial momentum rotation, with $v_{\rm inj}=1.174$ and with $\omega=0.9675$ respectively. The short dash line denotes the purely hydrodynamic run. \label{pos} }
448: \end{figure}
449:
450:
451: %
452: \begin{figure}[!htp]
453: \begin{center}
454: %\plottwo{f4a.eps}{f4b.eps}
455: \scalebox{0.2}{\includegraphics{f4.eps}}
456: \caption{\label{khi}~Transverse profiles in the $x$-direction of several quantities at $t=7.5$ on $z=8.0$. The bulk speed $V$, the density $\rho$, and the magnetic field strength $B$ are shown for inspecting the KHI surface modes (\emph{top}). The bulk speed $V$, the superfast magnetosonic speed $V_f$, and the slow magnetosonic speed $V_s$ are shown for inspecting the KHI body modes (\emph{bottom}).}
457: \end{center}
458: \end{figure}
459:
460: %
461: \begin{figure}[!htp]
462: \begin{center}
463: \scalebox{0.4}{\includegraphics{f5.eps}}
464: \caption{\label{rti}~Axial profiles in the $z$-direction of several quantities at $t=7.5$ with $(x,y)=(0,0)$. The density $\rho$ and the magnetic field strength $B$ are shown for inspecting the RTI modes.}
465: \end{center}
466: \end{figure}
467:
468: \end{document}