1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}%

2: \usepackage{amsfonts}

3: \usepackage{amssymb}

4: \usepackage{graphicx}

5: %TCIDATA{OutputFilter=latex2.dll}

6: %TCIDATA{Version=5.00.0.2570}

7: %TCIDATA{CSTFile=aastex.cst}

8: %TCIDATA{LastRevised=Sunday, June 15, 2008 15:32:46}

9: %TCIDATA{<META NAME="GraphicsSave" CONTENT="32">}

10: %TCIDATA{<META NAME="SaveForMode" CONTENT="1">}

11: %TCIDATA{Language=American English}

12: \slugcomment{Preprint}

13: \shorttitle{Gravity-powered Jet Dynamo}

14: \shortauthors{Bellan}

15: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}

16: \newtheorem{acknowledgement}[theorem]{Acknowledgement}

17: \newtheorem{algorithm}[theorem]{Algorithm}

18: \newtheorem{axiom}[theorem]{Axiom}

19: \newtheorem{claim}[theorem]{Claim}

20: \newtheorem{conclusion}[theorem]{Conclusion}

21: \newtheorem{condition}[theorem]{Condition}

22: \newtheorem{conjecture}[theorem]{Conjecture}

23: \newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}

24: \newtheorem{criterion}[theorem]{Criterion}

25: \newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}

26: \newtheorem{example}[theorem]{Example}

27: \newtheorem{exercise}[theorem]{Exercise}

28: \newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}

29: \newtheorem{notation}[theorem]{Notation}

30: \newtheorem{problem}[theorem]{Problem}

31: \newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}

32: \newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}

33: \newtheorem{solution}[theorem]{Solution}

34: \newtheorem{summary}[theorem]{Summary}

35: \newenvironment{proof}[1][Proof]{\noindent\textbf{#1.} }{\ \rule{0.5em}{0.5em}}

36: \begin{document}

37: %

38: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{Defining underset}{\makeatletter\def\stackunder

39: %#1#2{\mathrel{\mathop{#2}\limits_{#1}}}

40: %\makeatother}}%

41: %BeginExpansion

42: \makeatletter\def\stackunder#1#2{\mathrel{\mathop{#2}\limits_{#1}}}

43: \makeatother

44: %EndExpansion

45: %

46: 

47: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{Title}{\title{Dust-driven Dynamos in Accretion Disks}}}%

48: %BeginExpansion

49: \title{Dust-driven Dynamos in Accretion Disks}%

50: %EndExpansion

51: %

52: 

53: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{Author}{\author{P. M. Bellan}}}%

54: %BeginExpansion

55: \author{P. M. Bellan}%

56: %EndExpansion

57: %

58: 

59: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{Affiliation}{\affil

60: %{Applied Physics, Caltech, Pasadena CA 91125, USA}}}%

61: %BeginExpansion

62: \affil{Applied Physics, Caltech, Pasadena CA 91125, USA}%

63: %EndExpansion

64: %

65: 

66: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{Email}{\email{pbellan@caltech.edu}}}%

67: %BeginExpansion

68: \email{pbellan@caltech.edu}%

69: %EndExpansion

70: %

71: 

72: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{Begin abstract}{\begin{abstract}}}%

73: %BeginExpansion

74: \begin{abstract}%

75: %EndExpansion

76: Magnetically driven astrophysical jets are related to accretion and involve

77: toroidal magnetic field pressure inflating poloidal magnetic field flux

78: surfaces. Examination of particle motion in combined gravitational and

79: magnetic fields shows that these astrophysical jet toroidal and poloidal

80: magnetic fields can be powered by the gravitational energy liberated by

81: accreting dust grains that have become positively charged \ by emitting

82: photo-electrons. Because a dust grain experiences magnetic forces after

83: becoming charged, but not before, charging can cause irreversible trapping of

84: the grain so dust accretion is a consequence of charging. Furthermore,

85: charging causes canonical angular momentum to replace mechanical angular

86: momentum as the relevant constant of the motion. The resulting effective

87: potential has three distinct classes of accreting particles distinguished by

88: canonical angular momentum, namely (i) \textquotedblleft

89: cyclotron-orbit\textquotedblright, (ii) \textquotedblleft

90: Speiser-orbit\textquotedblright, and (iii) \textquotedblleft zero canonical

91: angular momentum\textquotedblright\ particles. Electrons and ions are of class

92: (i) but depending on mass and initial orbit inclination, dust grains can be of

93: any class. Light-weight dust grains develop class (i) orbits such that the

94: grains are confined to nested poloidal flux surfaces, whereas grains with a

95: critical weight such that they experience comparable gravitational and

96: magnetic forces can develop class (ii) or class (iii)\ orbits, respectively

97: producing poloidal and toroidal field dynamos.

98: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{End abstract}{\end{abstract}} }%

99: %BeginExpansion

100: \end{abstract}

101: %EndExpansion

102: \ \ \ \ \ \ %

103: 

104: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{Keywords}{\keywords

105: %{Accretion, jet, MHD, canonical angular momentum, dynamo, kinetic theory, Störmer potential, collisions, Hamiltonian dynamics, orbit, Speiser orbit, dusty plasma, photo-emission }%

106: %} }%

107: %BeginExpansion

108: \keywords

109: {Accretion, jet, MHD, canonical angular momentum, dynamo, kinetic theory, Störmer potential, collisions, Hamiltonian dynamics, orbit, Speiser orbit, dusty plasma, photo-emission }

110: %EndExpansion

111: \ 

112: 

113: \pagebreak

114: 

115: \section{Introduction}

116: 

117: Magnetohydrodynamically driven plasma jets having topology and dynamics

118: analogous to astrophysical jets have been produced in laboratory experiments

119: by

120: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Hsu2002,Bellan2005}}{\citet{Hsu2002,Bellan2005}} }%

121: %BeginExpansion

122: \citet{Hsu2002,Bellan2005}

123: %EndExpansion

124: and by

125: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Lebedev2005}}{\citet{Lebedev2005}}}%

126: %BeginExpansion

127: \citet{Lebedev2005}%

128: %EndExpansion

129: ; see discussion by

130: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Blackman2007}}{\citet{Blackman2007}}}%

131: %BeginExpansion

132: \citet{Blackman2007}%

133: %EndExpansion

134: . The feature of azimuthal symmetry, common to both the lab experiments and to

135: real astrophysical jets, has important implications for the structure of the

136: magnetic field. This is because an azimuthally symmetric magnetic field can be

137: expressed using a cylindrical coordinate system $\{r,\phi,z\}$ as$\ $

138: \begin{equation}

139: \mathbf{B=}\frac{1}{2\pi}\left(  \nabla\psi\times\nabla\phi+\mu_{0}I\nabla

140: \phi\right)  \ \label{B general2}%

141: \end{equation}

142: where the poloidal flux $\psi(r,z,t)$ is defined by

143: \begin{equation}

144: \psi(r,z,t)=\int_{0}^{r}2\pi r^{\prime}dr^{\prime}B_{z}(r^{\prime},z,t)

145: \label{psi def2}%

146: \end{equation}

147: and the poloidal electric current $I(r,z)$ is defined by

148: \begin{equation}

149: I(r,z,t)=\int_{0}^{r}2\pi r^{\prime}dr^{\prime}J_{z}(r^{\prime},z,t).

150: \label{Idef2}%

151: \end{equation}

152: The definition of $I(r,z)$ is consistent with Ampere's law for the toroidal

153: field, since using $\nabla\phi=\hat{\phi}/r\ $in Eq.\ref{B general2} gives the

154: toroidal magnetic field to be

155: \begin{equation}

156: B_{\phi}=\frac{\mu_{0}I}{2\pi r}. \label{Bphi}%

157: \end{equation}

158: 

159: 

160: Equations \ref{B general2}-\ref{Idef2} describe the magnetic field and

161: electric current distribution of \textit{any} axisymmetric magnetic field.

162: Because astrophysical jets are azimuthally symmetric, their magnetic field

163: must be of the form prescribed by Eqs.\ref{B general2}- \ref{Idef2} and,

164: indeed, it is generally believed that astrophysical jets involve large-scale

165: poloidal magnetic fields threading an accretion disk (e.g., see

166: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Livio2002,Ferreira2004}}{\citet

167: %{Livio2002,Ferreira2004}}}%

168: %BeginExpansion

169: \citet{Livio2002,Ferreira2004}%

170: %EndExpansion

171: ) and in addition, toroidal magnetic fields. Application of Ampere's law to

172: Eq.\ref{B general2} shows that the poloidal and toroidal currents are

173: respectively given by

174: \begin{equation}

175: \mathbf{J}_{pol}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\nabla I\times\nabla\phi\label{Jpol2}%

176: \end{equation}

177: and

178: \begin{equation}

179: \mathbf{J}_{tor}=\ -\frac{r^{2}\nabla\cdot\left(  r^{-2}\nabla\psi\right)

180: }{2\pi\mu_{0}}\ \nabla\phi\label{Jtor}%

181: \end{equation}

182: showing that poloidal magnetic fields are produced by a toroidal electric

183: current and toroidal magnetic fields are produced by a poloidal current;

184: toroidal vectors are those vectors in the $\phi$ direction and poloidal

185: vectors are those in any combination of the $r$ and $z$ directions.

186: \ Knowledge of the two stream-function quantities $I(r,z,t)$ and $\psi(r,z,t)$

187: is thus necessary and sufficient to determine the complete vector magnetic

188: field and the complete vector current density.

189: 

190: The term `magnetic axis' has traditionally been assigned different meanings in

191: the respective contexts of astrophysics and laboratory toroidal magnetic

192: confinement devices (e.g., tokamaks, reversed field pinches, or spheromaks).

193: Specifically, a local maximum in $r$-$z$ space of $\psi(r,z)$ is called a

194: magnetic axis in the context of toroidal confinement devices whereas the $z$

195: symmetry axis of the magnetic field is called the magnetic axis in \ the

196: context of astrophysics. To avoid confusion, we will call the location of a

197: maximum of $\psi(r,z)$ the poloidal flux magnetic axis. Poloidal magnetic

198: field lines follow level contours of $\psi$ and so one can envision the

199: projection of the magnetic field in the $r$-$z$ plane as being like a set of

200: roads, each at a different altitude, encircling a mountain peak at a specific

201: $r$-$z$ location which is the poloidal flux magnetic axis (also called an

202: O-point). \ Since a toroidal current at infinity is not physical, and since

203: the net magnetic flux enclosed by a circle with infinite radius must vanish as

204: field lines cannot go to infinity, $\psi$ must vanish at infinity.

205: Furthermore, mathematical regularity of physical quantities requires $\psi$ to

206: vanish on the $z$ axis

207: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep{Lewis1990}}{\citep{Lewis1990}}}%

208: %BeginExpansion

209: \citep{Lewis1990}%

210: %EndExpansion

211: . Thus, a non-trivial $\psi$ can only be finite in the region $0<r<\infty$,

212: $-\infty<z<\infty.$ The simplest situation of physical interest is therefore

213: where $\psi$ has a single maximum in the $r$-$z$ plane. We will consider this

214: situation, namely a single poloidal field magnetic axis with $\psi(r,z)$

215: symmetric with respect to $z.$ This situation has been previously considered

216: by

217: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Lovelace2002}}{\citet{Lovelace2002}} }%

218: %BeginExpansion

219: \citet{Lovelace2002}

220: %EndExpansion

221: and implies via Eq.\ref{Jtor} that a toroidal current circulates in an

222: accretion disk to produce the poloidal magnetic field

223: \begin{equation}

224: \mathbf{B}_{pol}=\mathbf{\ }\frac{1}{2\pi}\nabla\psi\times\nabla\phi.

225: \label{Bpol def}%

226: \end{equation}

227: An inescapable feature of this topology is that because $\nabla\psi=0$ at the

228: maximum of $\psi$, i.e., at the poloidal field magnetic axis, the poloidal

229: magnetic field has a null on the poloidal field magnetic axis. In the $z=0$

230: plane, the poloidal flux $\psi$ thus starts from zero at $r=0,$ increases to a

231: maximum at the poloidal field magnetic axis, and then decays to zero as

232: $r\rightarrow\infty.$ \ 

233: 

234: We define $a\ $to be the radius of the poloidal field magnetic axis. In

235: addition, we define $\left\langle B_{z}\right\rangle $ to be the

236: \textit{spatially-averaged} axial magnetic field linked by the poloidal field

237: magnetic axis and $\psi_{0}$ to be the value of the poloidal magnetic flux at

238: the poloidal field magnetic axis, so

239: \begin{equation}

240: \left\langle B_{z}\right\rangle =\frac{\int_{0}^{a}dr2\pi rB_{z}(r,0)}%

241: {\int_{0}^{a}dr2\pi r}=\frac{\psi_{0}}{\pi a^{2}}. \label{Bbar}%

242: \end{equation}

243: \qquad\qquad

244: 

245: The axial field $B_{z}=(2\pi r)^{-1}\partial\psi/\partial r$ reverses sign at

246: $r=a$ and the radial field $B_{r}=-(2\pi r)^{-1}\partial\psi/\partial z$

247: reverses sign at $z=0.$ $\ $An analytic representation for a physically

248: realizable generic flux function satisfying all these properties is derived in

249: Appendix \ref{Generic Flux Function}. This generic flux function is

250: \begin{equation}

251: \psi(r,z)=\ \ \frac{27\left(  r/a\right)  ^{2}\psi_{0}}{8\left(  \left(

252: \frac{r}{a}+\frac{1}{2}\right)  ^{2}+\left(  \frac{z}{a}\right)  ^{2}\right)

253: ^{3/2}} \label{generic}%

254: \end{equation}

255: and has the properties that (i)\ $\psi(r,z)$ has a maximum value of $\psi_{0}$

256: at $r=a,$ $z=0,$ (ii) $\psi\sim r^{2}$ for $r\ll a$ and $z=0,$ (iii) $\psi\sim

257: r^{-1}$ for $r\gg a,z$ and (iv) for $r\ll a/2$ or $r\gg a\ $ and for $z\gg a$

258: the contours of $\psi$ are identical to the contours of the poloidal flux

259: produced by a current loop located at $r=a/2,$ $z=0.$ This flux function thus

260: encompasses simpler models which assume a uniform axial magnetic field $B_{z}%

261: $; these simpler models would correspond to the $r,z\ll a$ region here since

262: in this region $\psi\sim r^{2}$ which corresponds to having a uniform axial

263: magnetic field $B_{z}.$ This flux function could also\ be used to describe the

264: far-field of a dipole by assuming that $r,z\gg a.$ Since any real axial

265: magnetic field must always be generated by a toroidal current located at some

266: finite radius, any real situation will have a poloidal flux function

267: qualitatively similar to Eq.\ref{generic}. The flux function prescribed in

268: Eq.\ref{generic} is similar in essence to the flux function used in Fig.1 of

269: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Lovelace2002}}{\citet{Lovelace2002}}}%

270: %BeginExpansion

271: \citet{Lovelace2002}%

272: %EndExpansion

273: .

274: 

275: Figure \ref{GenericFluxFunction-new} plots $\psi(r,z)$ as prescribed by

276: Eq.\ref{generic} and shows that $\psi(r,z)$ has its maximum at the poloidal

277: field magnetic axis $r\ =a,$ $z=0$. This flux function corresponds to a

278: smoothly varying toroidal current density prescribed by Eq.\ref{Jtor}

279: concentrated in the vicinity of $r=a,$ $z=0.$ Since for $z=0$ and small $r$,

280: this function has the asymptotic dependence $\psi\simeq27\psi_{0}\left(

281: r/a\right)  ^{2}$, it corresponds to an approximately uniform axial magnetic

282: field $B_{z}\simeq27\psi_{0}/\pi a^{2}$ for $r,z\ll a.$ The $r\ll a$

283: inner-region $B_{z}$ is thus 27 times stronger than the average $B_{z}$ field

284: between $0$ and $a.$ The total toroidal current $\mathcal{I}_{\phi}$

285: associated with the generic flux function given by Eq.\ref{generic} is

286: calculated in Appendix \ref{current associated with flux function} using the

287: integral form of Ampere's law and found to be

288: \begin{equation}

289: \mathcal{I}_{\phi}=\frac{27\psi_{0}}{\ \pi a\mu_{0}}\ \ . \label{Iphi}%

290: \end{equation}

291: 

292: 

293: \begin{figure}[ptb]

294: \caption{Plot of the normalized generic flux function $\psi(r,z)/\psi_{0}\ $in

295: coordinates normalized to the radius of the poloidal field magnetic axis, that

296: is to the radial position of the maximum of $\psi(r,z)\,.$ Contours of

297: iso-surfaces shown on top; these correspond to projection of poloidal magnetic

298: field onto $r$-$z$ plane.}%

299: \plotone{f1.eps}\label{GenericFluxFunction-new}%

300: \end{figure}

301: 

302: The laboratory jets involve the mutual interaction between poloidal and

303: toroidal magnetic fields powered by laboratory capacitor banks. The jet

304: acceleration mechanism results from the pressure of the toroidal magnetic

305: field inflating flux surfaces associated with the poloidal magnetic field. The

306: question arises as to what powers the toroidal and poloidal magnetic fields in

307: an actual astrophysical situation. Existing models of astrophysical jets are

308: based on the magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) approximation of plasma behavior and

309: typically assume (i)\ the poloidal field is pre-existing and (ii)\ the

310: toroidal field results from a rotating accretion disk twisting up this assumed

311: primordial poloidal field. The purpose of this paper is to present an

312: alternate model wherein it is postulated that the toroidal and poloidal field

313: result instead from a non-MHD dusty plasma dynamo mechanism that converts the

314: gravitational energy of infalling dust grains into an electrical power source

315: that drives poloidal and toroidal electric currents creating the respective

316: toroidal and poloidal fields. A brief outline of how infalling charged dust

317: can drive poloidal currents has been presented in

318: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Bellan2007}}{\citet{Bellan2007}}}%

319: %BeginExpansion

320: \citet{Bellan2007}%

321: %EndExpansion

322: .

323: 

324: This model obviously requires existence of sufficient infalling dust to

325: provide the jet power. Since the dust-to-gas mass ratio in the Interstellar

326: Medium (ISM) is 1\%, one might be tempted to argue that any jet driven by the

327: proposed dust infall mechanism would be limited to having\ less than 1\% of

328: the power available from infalling gas, a constraint that would contradict

329: observations. However, in

330: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Bellan2008}}{\citet{Bellan2008}} }%

331: %BeginExpansion

332: \citet{Bellan2008}

333: %EndExpansion

334: (to be referred to as Paper I), we showed that the dust-to-gas mass ratio in a

335: molecular cloud can be substantially enriched compared to the ISM\ value

336: (e.g., the dust to gas mass ratio in a molecular cloud could be enriched

337: 20-fold compared to the 1\% ISM value). This enrichment occurs because

338: accreting dust slows down much more in proportion to its initial velocity than

339: does accreting gas so that the density amplification resulting from dust

340: slowing down is much greater than the corresponding density amplification of gas.

341: 

342: The condition for the toroidal magnetic field to inflate the poloidal magnetic

343: field and create a jet can be expressed as

344: \begin{equation}

345: \frac{\mu_{0}I}{\psi}>\lambda\label{lambda threshold}%

346: \end{equation}

347: where $\lambda$ is a parameter of the order of the inverse characteristic

348: linear dimension in the radial direction. The ratio $I/\psi$ can be thought of

349: as the ratio of the electric current flowing along a flux tube to the magnetic

350: flux content of the flux tube and is proportional to the twist of the magnetic

351: field. Equation \ref{lambda threshold}, well-established in spheromak

352: formation physics

353: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep

354: %{Barnes1990,Jarboe1994,Geddes1998,Bellan2000,Hsu2005}}{\citep

355: %{Barnes1990,Jarboe1994,Geddes1998,Bellan2000,Hsu2005}}}%

356: %BeginExpansion

357: \citep{Barnes1990,Jarboe1994,Geddes1998,Bellan2000,Hsu2005}%

358: %EndExpansion

359: , is essentially a statement that jet expansion (i.e., poloidal field

360: inflation)\ occurs when the toroidal magnetic field pressure force $\sim

361: B_{\phi}^{2}A_{1}$ acting on area $A_{1}$ exceeds the restraining force

362: $B_{z}^{2}A_{2}$ of the poloidal magnetic field `tension' acting on area

363: $A_{2}$. Here $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$ are not exactly the same because the

364: toroidal and poloidal fields do not act over the same areas. \ The equivalence

365: between Eq. \ref{lambda threshold} and the condition $B_{\phi}^{2}>B_{z}%

366: ^{2}A_{2}/A_{1}$ is seen by substituting $\mu_{0}I=2\pi aB_{\phi}$ from

367: Ampere's law and $\psi\sim B_{z}\pi a^{2}$ in Eq.\ref{lambda threshold}.

368: 

369: Paper I divided the regions of interest into successively smaller concentric

370: regions and considered dust and gas behavior in the outermost regions.

371: Simultaneous gas and dust accretion were considered and it was shown that the

372: dust could be considered as a perturbation on the gas, so that the gas

373: accretion problem could be solved first without considering dust and then the

374: solution of this gas accretion problem could be used as an input for the dust

375: accretion problem. Below is a listing showing which regions were considered in

376: Paper I, which are considered in this paper, and which will be considered in a

377: future paper; the nominal radii scales and star mass are from Table 3 in Paper I:

378: 

379: \begin{description}

380: \item \textit{ISM scale (considered in Paper I):} The outermost scale is that

381: of the Interstellar Medium (ISM). The ISM\ has a gas density $\sim$10$^{7}$

382: m$^{-3}$, a dust-to-gas mass ratio of 1 percent, a gas temperature

383: $T_{g}^{ISM}\sim100$ K$,$ and is optically thin. The ISM is assumed to be

384: spatially uniform and to bound a molecular cloud having radius $r_{edge}$

385: $\sim10^{5}$ a.u.

386: 

387: \item \textit{Molecular cloud scale (considered in Paper I):}\ The molecular

388: cloud scale has much higher density than the ISM and is characterized by force

389: balance between gas self-gravity\ and gas pressure. The molecular cloud scale

390: is sub-divided into a large, radially non-uniform low-density outer region and

391: a small, approximately uniform, high-density inner core region. Clouds have a

392: characteristic scale given by the Jeans length $r_{J}\sim1.4\times10^{4}$ a.u.

393: The radial dependence of gas density is provided by the Bonnor-Ebert sphere

394: solution which acts as the outer boundary of the Bondi accretion scale.

395: 

396: \item \textit{Bondi accretion scale (considered in Paper I):} The Bondi

397: accretion scale is $\sim r_{B}\sim4.3\times10^{3}$ a.u. which is sufficiently

398: small that gas self-gravity no longer matters so equilibrium is instead

399: obtained by force balance between gas pressure and the gravity of a central

400: object assumed to be a star having mass $M\sim0.4M_{\odot}$ The Bondi scale is

401: sub-divided into three concentric radial regions: an outermost region where

402: the gas flow is subsonic, a critical transition radius at exactly $r_{B}$

403: where the flow is sonic, and an innermost region where the gas flow is

404: free-falling and supersonic.

405: 

406: \item \textit{Collisionless dusty plasma scale (considered in this paper): }

407: Free-falling dust grains collide with each other in one of the above scales

408: and coagulate to form large-radius grains which are collisionless and

409: optically thin. The optically thin dust absorbs UV photons from the star,

410: photo-emits electrons and becomes electrically charged. The charged dust

411: grains are subject to electromagnetic forces in addition to gravity. Motions

412: of charged dust grains relative to electrons result in electric currents with

413: associated poloidal and toroidal magnetic fields [see preliminary discussion

414: in

415: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Bellan2007}}{\citet{Bellan2007}}}%

416: %BeginExpansion

417: \citet{Bellan2007}%

418: %EndExpansion

419: ]. \ This region is assumed to have a scale of $10-10^{3}$ a.u.\ \ and

420: corresponds to the scale of $a,$ the radius of the poloidal magnetic field

421: axis. It is assumed that a distributed toroidal current peaked at a nominal

422: radius $a$ is responsible for producing a poloidal field having the generic

423: profile given in Fig.\ref{GenericFluxFunction-new}.

424: 

425: \item \textit{Jet scale (to be considered in a future publication): }The

426: electric currents interact with the magnetic fields to produce

427: magnetohydrodynamic forces that drive astrophysical jets in a manner

428: consistent with Eq.\ref{lambda threshold} and analogous to that reported in \

429: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Hsu2002,Hsu2005}}{\citet{Hsu2002,Hsu2005}} }%

430: %BeginExpansion

431: \citet{Hsu2002,Hsu2005}

432: %EndExpansion

433: and

434: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Bellan2005}}{\citet{Bellan2005}}}%

435: %BeginExpansion

436: \citet{Bellan2005}%

437: %EndExpansion

438: . This region is assumed to have a scale $\ll10^{3}$ a.u., possibly as small

439: as a few a.u. and will involve a deformation of the generic poloidal field

440: profile given in Fig.\ref{GenericFluxFunction-new} because of the pressure of

441: toroidal magnetic field inflating the poloidal flux surfaces.

442: \end{description}

443: 

444: \section{Outline of model}

445: 

446: We will show how infalling collisionless dust grains can develop special three

447: dimensional orbits suitable for sustaining both toroidal and poloidal dynamos.

448: This result is obtained by considering Hamiltonian particle dynamics in the

449: combination of the gravitational field of a star with mass $M$ and a

450: three-dimensional axisymmetric magnetic field topology consistent with

451: previous models of magnetically driven astrophysical jets [e.g.,

452: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Lovelace1976}}{\citet{Lovelace1976}}}%

453: %BeginExpansion

454: \citet{Lovelace1976}%

455: %EndExpansion

456: ,

457: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Li2001}}{\citet{Li2001}}}%

458: %BeginExpansion

459: \citet{Li2001}%

460: %EndExpansion

461: ,

462: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Lovelace2002}}{\citet{Lovelace2002}}}%

463: %BeginExpansion

464: \citet{Lovelace2002}%

465: %EndExpansion

466: , and

467: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Lynden-Bell2003}}{\citet{Lynden-Bell2003}}}%

468: %BeginExpansion

469: \citet{Lynden-Bell2003}%

470: %EndExpansion

471: ]. The reason why dust grains develop these special orbits will be shown to be

472: due to charging of dust grains via photo-emission of electrons. The analysis

473: involves using Hamiltonian mechanics to generalize the centrifugal potential

474: so as to include magnetic force, i.e., the St\"{o}rmer effective potential is

475: used. St\"{o}rmer potentials have been previously used for investigating

476: auroral particles

477: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Stormer1955}}{\citep{Stormer1955}}}%

478: %BeginExpansion

479: \citep{Stormer1955}%

480: %EndExpansion

481: , electron and ion motion in the magnetosphere

482: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Shebalin2004,Lemaire2003}}{\citep

483: %{Shebalin2004,Lemaire2003}} }%

484: %BeginExpansion

485: \citep{Shebalin2004,Lemaire2003}

486: %EndExpansion

487: and most recently, charged dust grain motion in the magneto-gravitational

488: fields of Saturn and Jupiter

489: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Dullin2002,Mitchell2003}}{\citep

490: %{Dullin2002,Mitchell2003}}}%

491: %BeginExpansion

492: \citep{Dullin2002,Mitchell2003}%

493: %EndExpansion

494: . St\"{o}rmer potentials are also commonly used to characterize particle

495: orbits in tokamaks

496: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Rome1979}}{\citep{Rome1979}} }%

497: %BeginExpansion

498: \citep{Rome1979}

499: %EndExpansion

500: and St\"{o}rmer potentials were found to be important in the MHD-driven jet

501: experiment reported by

502: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Tripathi2007}}{\citet{Tripathi2007}}}%

503: %BeginExpansion

504: \citet{Tripathi2007}%

505: %EndExpansion

506: . We will restrict the analysis to showing how toroidal and poloidal field

507: dynamos can be sustained in steady state by these special Hamiltonian particle

508: orbits; the much more complicated problem of how a dynamo grows from a seed

509: magnetic field will not be addressed here. These special orbits are quite

510: different from conventional cyclotron orbits. As reviewed in Appendix

511: \ref{Orbit review} a dynamo cannot be sustained by particles executing

512: cyclotron orbits because cyclotron orbits and associated drifts are

513: diamagnetic, i.e., create magnetic fields that oppose the field in which the

514: particle is orbiting.

515: 

516: The importance of a Hamiltonian analysis can be appreciated by considering the

517: gedanken experiment where the charge to mass ratio of a particle in \ a

518: combined gravitational-magnetic field is assumed to be increased from zero

519: (neutral particle) to that of an electron or ion. The particle will thus make

520: a transition from Kepler to cyclotron orbital motion. The details of how this

521: transition occurs have been examined by

522: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Bellan2007}}{\citet{Bellan2007}} }%

523: %BeginExpansion

524: \citet{Bellan2007}

525: %EndExpansion

526: in the context of uniform-magnetic-field orbits restricted to a plane. The

527: present paper will address this issue in the more general context of three

528: dimensional particle orbits in a spatially non-uniform three dimensional

529: magnetic field having dipole-like topology appropriate for an accretion disk;

530: similar dipole topology has been previously invoked for accretion disks by

531: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Lovelace2002}}{\citet{Lovelace2002}}}%

532: %BeginExpansion

533: \citet{Lovelace2002}%

534: %EndExpansion

535: . Our analysis identifies five distinct classes of orbits and shows that the

536: class to which a given charged particle belongs depends both on its\ charge to

537: mass ratio and on the circumstances under which the charged particle was

538: created from an initially neutral particle. The interaction between the

539: distinct symmetries of the magnetic and gravitational fields removes the

540: isotropy of the incident neutral particles existent prior to charging so that

541: the newly formed charged particles separate into groups having qualitatively

542: different types of orbits. Some orbits correspond to a simple accretion, some

543: involve accretion and production of a dynamo driving toroidal current, and

544: some involve accretion and a dynamo driving poloidal current. The type of

545: orbit a charged particle develops depends on both the angular momentum and the

546: angle of incidence of the parent neutral particle.

547: 

548: The paper is organized with the goal of being concise while also realizing

549: that some readers may not be familiar with the concepts of adiabatic versus

550: non-adiabatic orbits, Speiser orbits, St\"{o}rmer effective potentials, and

551: how conservation of canonical angular momentum results in confinement of an

552: adiabatic particle to the vicinity of a poloidal flux surface. Rather than

553: reviewing these concepts in an introductory section , they are instead

554: discussed in appendices.

555: 

556: \section{Reduction of collisionality due to dust agglomeration}

557: 

558: Paper I showed that dust grains are collisionally decoupled from gas in the

559: ISM and then become collisionally coupled to gas in the Bonner-Ebert and Bondi

560: regions of a molecular cloud. Because of the spherical focusing of the dust

561: and gas inflows, the dust density increases to a level such that dust-dust

562: collisions become important. When dust grains collide with each other they may

563: agglomerate to form larger dust grains.

564: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Przygodda2003}}{\citet{Przygodda2003}} }%

565: %BeginExpansion

566: \citet{Przygodda2003}

567: %EndExpansion

568: and

569: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{vanBoekel2003}}{\citet{vanBoekel2003}} }%

570: %BeginExpansion

571: \citet{vanBoekel2003}

572: %EndExpansion

573: have reported direct observational evidence of grain growth in circumstellar

574: disks while, in addition,

575: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Jura1980}}{\citet{Jura1980}}}%

576: %BeginExpansion

577: \citet{Jura1980}%

578: %EndExpansion

579: ,

580: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Miyake1993}}{\citet{Miyake1993}}}%

581: %BeginExpansion

582: \citet{Miyake1993}%

583: %EndExpansion

584: ,

585: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Pollack1994}}{\citet{Pollack1994}}}%

586: %BeginExpansion

587: \citet{Pollack1994}%

588: %EndExpansion

589: ,

590: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{D'Alessio2001}}{\citet{D'Alessio2001}}}%

591: %BeginExpansion

592: \citet{D'Alessio2001}%

593: %EndExpansion

594: , and

595: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Dullemond2005}}{\citet{Dullemond2005}} }%

596: %BeginExpansion

597: \citet{Dullemond2005}

598: %EndExpansion

599: provided detailed calculations showing a strong tendency for dust grain growth

600: when dust grains collide with each other. This agglomeration will increase the

601: dust grain radius $r_{d}$ while keeping the dust mass density $\rho_{d}$

602: constant. We will consider first how this agglomeration affects dust-gas

603: collisions and then how it affects dust-dust collisions.

604: 

605: Since the mean free path is much larger than the grain radius, the drag force

606: on a dust grain due to collisions with gas molecules is of the Epstein-type

607: and given by

608: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep{Lamers1999}}{\citep{Lamers1999}} }%

609: %BeginExpansion

610: \citep{Lamers1999}

611: %EndExpansion

612: \begin{equation}

613: F_{drag}=-(u_{d}-u_{g})\rho_{g}\sigma_{d}\sqrt{c_{g}^{2}+(u_{d}-u_{g})^{2}}

614: \label{collision freq}%

615: \end{equation}

616: where $c_{g}$ is the gas thermal velocity, $u_{d}$ is the dust grain velocity,

617: $\sigma_{d}$ is the dust grain cross-sectional area, and $u_{g}$ is the mean

618: velocity of the gas (i.e., the fluid velocity). In the innermost Bondi region

619: where flow is supersonic, we may approximate $c_{g}\simeq0$ and work in a

620: frame moving with\ $u_{g}$ by defining $\Delta u_{d}=u_{d}-u_{g}.$ The dust

621: equation of motion in this frame is thus%

622: 

623: \begin{equation}

624: m_{d}\frac{d\Delta u_{d}}{dt}=-\left(  \Delta u_{d}\right)  ^{2}\rho_{g}%

625: \sigma_{d}.\ \label{collision}%

626: \end{equation}

627: Defining $\xi$ to be distance in the direction of dust motion so $\Delta

628: u_{d}=d\xi/dt,$ Eq.\ref{collision} can be recast as%

629: \begin{equation}

630: \frac{d\Delta u_{d}}{d\xi}\Delta u_{d}=-\left(  \Delta u_{d}\right)

631: ^{2}\ \sigma_{d}\frac{\rho_{g}}{m_{d}}\ .

632: \label{collision with integrating factor}%

633: \end{equation}

634: Integration gives%

635: \begin{equation}

636: \Delta u_{d}(\xi)=\Delta u_{d}(0)\exp\left(  -\xi/l_{dg}\right)

637: \label{slowing down}%

638: \end{equation}

639: where the dust-gas collision mean free path is

640: \begin{equation}

641: l_{dg}=\frac{m_{d}}{\rho_{g}\sigma_{d}}. \label{mean free path}%

642: \end{equation}

643: 

644: 

645: Since the dust cross-section and mass are given respectively by

646: \begin{equation}

647: \sigma_{d}=\pi r_{d}^{2} \label{sigma_d}%

648: \end{equation}

649: and%

650: \begin{equation}

651: m_{d}=\frac{4\pi r_{d}^{3}\rho_{d}^{int}}{3}\ \label{md}%

652: \end{equation}

653: where $\ $ $\rho_{d}^{int}$ is the intrinsic density of a dust grain, the

654: dust-gas collision mean free path can be expressed as%

655: \begin{equation}

656: l_{dg}=\frac{4\rho_{d}^{int}}{3\rho_{g}}r_{d}\ \label{ldg rd}%

657: \end{equation}

658: which shows that dust agglomeration increases the dust-gas mean free path and

659: so will tend to make dust collisionless with respect to gas.

660: 

661: Let us now consider how agglomeration affects dust-dust collisions. We first

662: note that the condition for dust-dust collisions to be significant is closely

663: related to the condition for the dust to be optically thick: if $l$ is the

664: characteristic length of a configuration, the condition for collisions to be

665: significant is $\rho_{d}\sigma_{d}l/m_{d}>1$ whereas the condition for the

666: dust to be optically thick is $Q_{eff}\rho_{d}\sigma_{d}l/m_{d}>1$ where $\ $

667: $Q_{eff}$ is an extinction efficiency parameter that depends on the ratio of

668: the dust radius to the light wavelength. The dust-dust collision mean free

669: path is thus%

670: \begin{equation}

671: l_{dd}=\frac{m_{d}}{\rho_{d}\sigma_{d}}=\frac{4\rho_{d}^{int}}{3\rho_{d}}%

672: r_{d}\ \label{ldd}%

673: \end{equation}

674: so if, as argued in Paper I, \ the dust mass density $\rho_{d}$ has been

675: enriched to be a significant fraction of the gas mass density $\rho_{g},$ the

676: dust-dust collision mean free path $l_{dd}$ will be the same order of

677: magnitude as the dust-gas mean free path $l_{dg}.$ Agglomeration will thus

678: tend to increase both the dust-dust and dust-gas collision mean free paths,

679: and furthermore will cause the dust to become optically thin. We will assume

680: that dust grains agglomerate when the dust number density $\ n_{d}=\rho

681: _{d}/m_{d}$ becomes sufficiently large for dust-dust collisions to occur and

682: that this agglomeration results in an increase in $r_{d}$ until the dust

683: grains become collisionless and optically thin again. We will not attempt to

684: follow the dynamics of the agglomeration process, relying instead on the

685: analysis in the papers cited above. Our starting point then will be assuming

686: the existence of collisionless dust grains exposed to star light, having

687: radius $r_{d}$ larger than in the ISM, and as discussed in Paper I, having a

688: dust to gas mass density ratio substantially enriched compared to the 1\%

689: value in the ISM.

690: 

691: \section{Review: Neutral particle motion in a gravitational

692: field\label{Kepler}}

693: 

694: For reference and in order to define terms to be used later in a more complex

695: context, we first review the elementary problem of the motion of a neutral

696: particle of mass $m$ in the gravitational field of a star of mass $M$. The

697: particle we have in mind could be a a dust grain with radius $r_{d}$

698: sufficiently large to be collisionless over the distance from its starting

699: point to the star.

700: 

701: The equations governing the motion of this neutral particle are spherically

702: symmetric whereas the motions of a charged particle in an azimuthally

703: symmetric electromagnetic field are cylindrically symmetric. An axisymmetric

704: magnetic field is assumed to exist in the lab frame and the $z$ axis is

705: defined by the direction of this magnetic field at the origin. Although the

706: neutral particle trajectory is unaffected by this magnetic field, we

707: nevertheless use the magnetic field coordinate system to define the lab frame.

708: Depending on what is being emphasized, the lab frame will be characterized by

709: either a cylindrical coordinate system $\{r,\phi,z\}\ $or by a Cartesian

710: coordinate system \thinspace$\{x,y,z\}$ so that $x=r\cos\phi,$ and

711: $y=r\sin\phi.$ Because the force is central, the neutral particle angular

712: momentum vector $\mathbf{L}=m\mathbf{r\times\dot{r}}$ is invariant and so the

713: neutral particle moves in an orbital plane normal to $\mathbf{L}$. The lab and

714: orbital planes are sketched in Fig.\ref{Orbital-Plane-coordinate-system}.\ The

715: $x$ axis of the lab frame is defined to be in the direction of the unit vector

716: $\hat{x}=$ $\hat{z}\times\mathbf{L}/L$ and the $y$ axis of the lab frame is

717: defined to be in the direction of the unit vector $\hat{y}=\hat{z}%

718: \times\left(  \hat{z}\times\mathbf{L}/L\right)  $. The orbital plane is tilted

719: with respect to the lab frame by an angle $\theta$ about the $x$ axis. The

720: $x^{\prime}$ axis of the orbital frame is defined to be coincident with the

721: $x$ axis of the lab frame and the $y^{\prime}$ axis of the orbital plane is an

722: uptilted version of the $y$ axis of the lab frame.

723: 

724: \begin{figure}[ptb]

725: \caption{Lab frame has Cartesian coordinates $x,y,z$ and the magnetic field is

726: axisymmetric with respect to the lab frame $z$ axis. The orbital plane of a

727: neutral particle is normal to the neutral particle angular momentum vector

728: $\mathbf{L}$ which is tilted by an angle $\theta$ with respect to the $z$

729: axis. The orbital plane Cartesian coordinates are $x^{\prime},y^{\prime}$

730: where the $x^{\prime}$ axis is coincident with the $x$ axis. \ The neutral

731: particle makes a circular Kepler, elliptical Kepler, or cometary orbit in its

732: orbital plane (cometary orbit shown).}%

733: \label{Orbital-Plane-coordinate-system}%

734: \plotone{f2.eps}\end{figure}

735: 

736: $\theta=0$ corresponds to prograde motion in the lab frame (i.e., the neutral

737: particle moves in the same sense as the toroidal current that produces the

738: magnetic field $B_{z}$ on the $z$ axis), $\theta=\pi$ corresponds to

739: retrograde motion in the lab frame, and $\theta=\pi/2$ corresponds to a polar

740: orbit. For purposes of following the trajectory in the orbital plane it is

741: convenient to use cylindrical coordinates $\rho,\eta$ defined in the

742: orbital\ plane such that $x^{\prime}=\rho\cos\eta$ and $y^{\prime}=\rho

743: \sin\eta.$ The Hamiltonian for a neutral particle moving in its orbital plane

744: can then be written as

745: \begin{equation}

746: H=\frac{1}{2}mv_{\rho}^{2}+\frac{L^{2}}{2m\rho^{2}}-\frac{mMG}{\rho}

747: \label{vt2}%

748: \end{equation}

749: where

750: \begin{equation}

751: L=m\rho v_{\eta}, \label{p}%

752: \end{equation}

753: the magnitude of the mechanical angular momentum vector, is an invariant

754: positive scalar. The Kepler angular frequency at a reference radius $a\ $\ is

755: defined as

756: \begin{equation}

757: \Omega_{0}=\sqrt{MG/a^{3}}. \label{Kepler0}%

758: \end{equation}

759: The value of $a$ is chosen to be the radius of the poloidal magnetic field

760: axis. Normalized quantities are defined as%

761: \begin{equation}%

762: \begin{array}

763: [c]{c}%

764: \bar{\rho}=\rho/a,\tau=\Omega_{0}t,\bar{v}_{\rho}=\frac{v_{\rho}}{\Omega_{0}%

765: a}\\

766: \bar{L}=\ \frac{L}{m\Omega_{0}a^{2}},\quad\bar{H}=\frac{H}{m\Omega_{0}%

767: ^{2}a^{2}}.

768: \end{array}

769: \label{norm}%

770: \end{equation}

771: Equation \ref{vt2} can then be expressed in dimensionless form as

772: \begin{equation}

773: \bar{H}=\frac{\bar{v}_{\rho}^{2}}{2}+\frac{\bar{L}^{2}}{2\bar{\rho}^{2}}%

774: -\frac{1\ }{\bar{\rho}}. \label{nondim}%

775: \end{equation}

776: 

777: 

778: The last two terms depend on $\bar{\rho}$ and so constitute an effective

779: potential

780: \begin{equation}

781: \bar{\chi}(\bar{\rho})=\frac{\bar{L}^{2}}{2\bar{\rho}^{2}}-\frac{1}{\bar{\rho

782: }}. \label{chi netural}%

783: \end{equation}

784: This effective potential depends parametrically on $\bar{L}$ which is a

785: property of the particle and not the environment. Two different particles at

786: the same position but having different values of $\bar{L}$ will have different

787: effective potentials and so march to a \textquotedblleft different

788: drummer\textquotedblright. This \textquotedblleft different

789: drummer\textquotedblright\ concept will re-appear later in a more elaborate

790: fashion when the motion of charged particles is considered.

791: 

792: $\bar{\chi}(\bar{r})$ attains its minimum value $\chi_{\min}=-1/2\bar{L}^{2}$

793: at the normalized radius $\bar{\rho}=\bar{L}^{2}$. \ A particle with energy

794: equal to this minimum has $\bar{v}_{\rho}=0$ and therefore has a circular

795: orbit with angular frequency $d\eta/d\tau=\ L/\Omega_{0}ma^{2}=\ \bar{L}%

796: /\bar{\rho}^{2}.$ Hence, if $\bar{L}=\ 1$ the minimum-energy particle traces

797: out a circular Kepler orbit with $d\eta/d\tau=1$ and has an energy $\bar

798: {H}=-1/2.$ A particle with energy $-1/2<\bar{H}<0$ cannot escape to infinity

799: and so has a bounded elliptical Kepler orbit. The effective potential

800: prescribed by Eq.\ref{chi netural} for a particle with $\bar{L}=\ 1$ is shown

801: in Fig.\ref{Effective-Potential-Neutral-Particle}(a).

802: 

803: \begin{figure}[ptb]

804: \caption{(a)\ Effective potential for a neutral particle having $\bar{L}=1$;

805: (b)\ effective potential for a charged particle with appropriate values of

806: canonical angular momentum and poloidal flux function.}%

807: \label{Effective-Potential-Neutral-Particle}%

808: \plotone{f3.eps}\end{figure}

809: 

810: Reflection (pericenter) of a particle \ occurs when $\bar{v}_{\rho}=0$ in

811: which case Eq.\ref{nondim} gives%

812: \begin{equation}

813: \bar{\rho}_{pericenter}=\frac{\bar{L}^{2}}{1+\sqrt{1+2\bar{L}^{2}\bar{H}}}.

814: \label{perigee}%

815: \end{equation}

816: Reflection at the pericenter \ can be considered to be the consequence of a

817: potential barrier preventing the particle from accessing the region $\bar

818: {\rho}<\bar{\rho}_{pericenter};$ the effective potential in the inaccessible

819: region exceeds the total available energy.$\ $Thus an unbounded particle with

820: $\bar{L}=1$ also has the effective potential shown Fig.

821: \ref{Effective-Potential-Neutral-Particle}(a), but unlike the bounded $\bar

822: {H}=-1/2$ Kepler particle, the unbounded particle reflects from the pericenter

823: potential barrier and so has a cometary orbit.

824: 

825: In order for an incoming unbound particle to access a given $\bar{\rho}$

826: without being reflected at some larger radius, the condition that $\bar

827: {v}_{\rho}^{2}~$cannot be negative gives the constraint on angular momentum

828: that

829: \begin{equation}

830: \bar{L}^{2}<2\bar{\rho}^{2}\bar{H}+2\bar{\rho}. \label{bound on p}%

831: \end{equation}

832: Since a particle with zero angular momentum will simply fall into the central

833: object, in order for a particle to be both unbounded and \ able to access the

834: radius $\bar{\rho}$ its angular momentum is constrained to lie in the range%

835: \begin{equation}

836: 0<\bar{L}^{2}<2\bar{\rho}^{2}\bar{H}+2\bar{\rho}. \label{p range}%

837: \end{equation}

838: 

839: 

840: Solution of the equation of motion

841: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep{Goldstein1950}}{\citep{Goldstein1950}} }%

842: %BeginExpansion

843: \citep{Goldstein1950}

844: %EndExpansion

845: shows that the orbit can be expressed as

846: \begin{equation}

847: \frac{1}{\ \bar{\rho}}=\frac{1-\sqrt{1+2\bar{L}^{2}\ \bar{H}}\cos\left(

848: \eta-\alpha\right)  }{\bar{L}^{2}}\ \ \label{solution}%

849: \end{equation}

850: where $\alpha,$ which we call the clock angle in the orbital plane, is the

851: angle between the symmetry line of the orbit (the line passing through the

852: central object and the pericenter position) and the lab frame $x$ axis (which

853: is also the $x^{\prime}$ axis of the orbital plane).

854: 

855: The Cartesian orbit coordinates $\bar{x}^{\prime}=\bar{\rho}\cos\eta\ $and

856: $\bar{y}^{\prime}=\bar{\rho}\sin\eta$ in the orbital plane (denoted by a prime

857: to distinguish this plane from the lab frame)\ are%

858: \begin{equation}%

859: \begin{array}

860: [c]{c}%

861: \bar{x}^{\prime}=\frac{\bar{L}^{2}\cos\eta}{1-\sqrt{1+2\bar{L}^{2}\ \bar{H}%

862: }\cos\left(  \eta-\alpha\right)  }\\

863: \bar{y}^{\prime}=\frac{\bar{L}^{2}\sin\eta}{1-\sqrt{1+2\bar{L}^{2}\ \bar{H}%

864: }\cos\left(  \eta-\alpha\right)  }%

865: \end{array}

866: \label{unbounded Cartesian}%

867: \end{equation}

868: If the effective potential had a different shape, say the shape shown in

869: Fig.\ref{Effective-Potential-Neutral-Particle}(b) with $\bar{\chi}%

870: \rightarrow0$ at large $\bar{\rho},$ then a particle with $\bar{H}\geq0$ could

871: be trapped in one of the two minima of this effective potential. However, a

872: particle coming from infinity would still be unbounded and would just reflect

873: from some potential barrier$.$ The inability of a static Hamiltonian system to

874: trap a particle coming from infinity is independent of the shape of the

875: Hamiltonian and results from the intrinsic time reversibility of Hamiltonian dynamics.

876: 

877: \section{Comparison of gravitational/magnetic forces to Poynting-Robertson

878: force and to radiation pressure}

879: 

880: \qquad The analysis in this paper is based on the assumption that the

881: trajectory of charged dust grains results primarily from a competition between

882: gravitational and magnetic forces with the possibility that in certain

883: situations electrostatic forces and collisional drag can\ also be important.

884: Two other types of forces, namely those due to the Poynting-Robertson effect

885: and due to radiation pressure, also exist and so it is important to check to

886: see if these additional forces need to be taken into account. This will be

887: done by making a comparison with the nominal magnetic force on a charged dust

888: grain. The magnetic force depends on the strength of the magnetic field, a

889: quantity which has been estimated in self-consistent fashion in Paper III to

890: be in the range $10^{-8}$ to $10^{-6}$ T (i.e., 0.1 to 10 mG) for a nominal

891: YSO jet-disk system where the dust grains have coagulated to a nominal radius

892: $r_{d}=$3 $\mu$m. This estimate of the magnetic field is in rough order of

893: magnitude agreement with measurements reported by

894: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Chrysostomou1994}}{\citet{Chrysostomou1994}}}%

895: %BeginExpansion

896: \citet{Chrysostomou1994}%

897: %EndExpansion

898: , by

899: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Roberts1997}}{\citet{Roberts1997}} }%

900: %BeginExpansion

901: \citet{Roberts1997}

902: %EndExpansion

903: and by

904: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Itoh1999}}{\citet{Itoh1999}}}%

905: %BeginExpansion

906: \citet{Itoh1999}%

907: %EndExpansion

908: , and also is in agreement with the expectation that the magnetic fields in a

909: disk jet system should be much stronger than the nominal $10^{-10}$ T (i.e., 1

910: $\mu$G) magnetic fields of the ISM.

911: 

912: The radiation pressure acting on a dust grain at a distance $r$ from a star

913: with luminosity $L$ is

914: \begin{equation}

915: P_{rad}=\frac{L}{4\pi r^{2}c}Q_{rad}(r_{d}) \label{Prad}%

916: \end{equation}

917: where $Q_{rad}(r_{d})$ is the efficiency with which the photons are

918: absorbed/reflected by the dust grain. This pressure results in a radial

919: outwards force $F_{rad}=P_{rad}\sigma_{d}$. If the dust grain radius is much

920: larger than $\lambda_{rad}$ the wavelength of the radiation, then

921: $Q_{rad}\simeq1$ whereas if the dust grain radius is much smaller than the

922: wavelength of the radiation then $Q_{rad}\sim(\lambda_{rad}/r_{d})^{4}\ll1.$

923: The nominal $r_{d}\sim3$ $\mu$m dust grains assumed here are much larger than

924: the nominal light wavelength and so $Q_{rad}\sim1.$

925: 

926: Since the gravitational force $F_{g}=mMG/r^{2}$ is also in the radial

927: direction, the force due to radiation pressure and gravity compete; the ratio

928: of radiation pressure force to gravitational force on a dust grain is

929: \begin{equation}

930: \alpha=\frac{LQ_{rad}\sigma_{d}}{4\pi cm_{d}MG}=\frac{3}{16\pi}\frac{L}%

931: {MG\rho^{int}c}\frac{Q_{rad}(r_{d})}{r_{d}} \label{radiation pressure ratio}%

932: \end{equation}

933: where Eqs.\ref{sigma_d} and \ref{md} have been used. Assuming $r_{d}=3$ $\mu

934: $m, nominal luminosity $L=L_{\odot}=$ $4\times10^{26}$ watts, $M=M_{\odot},$

935: intrinsic dust density $\rho^{int}=2\times10^{3}$ kg m$^{-3},$ and

936: $Q_{rad}(r_{d})=1$ gives $\alpha=10^{-1}$ so radiation pressure can be ignored

937: compared to gravitational force.

938: 

939: The force on a dust grain due to the Poynting-Robertson effect is smaller by a

940: factor $v/c$ compared to the radiation pressure force, is in the toroidal

941: direction, opposes the Keplerian orbital motion $v_{K}=\sqrt{MG/r}$, and so

942: constitutes a drag force

943: \begin{equation}

944: F_{PR}=\ F_{G}\alpha\frac{v_{K}}{c}=\frac{\ Q_{rad}r_{d}^{2}}{4c^{2}\ \ }%

945: \sqrt{\frac{MGL^{2}}{r^{5}\ }}. \label{Poyntin-Roberston force}%

946: \end{equation}

947: The toroidal component of the magnetic force acting on a charged particle has

948: magnitude%

949: \begin{equation}

950: F_{mag}=Zev_{r}B \label{magnetic force}%

951: \end{equation}

952: where $Z$ is the charge. The grains typically have non-circular trajectories

953: with $v_{r}$ being of the order of the Kepler velocity $v_{K}$ so $F_{mag}\sim

954: Zev_{K}B.$ The ratio of Poynting-Robertson force to magnetic force is thus%

955: \begin{equation}

956: \frac{F_{PR}}{F_{mag}}=\ \frac{F_{G}}{F_{mag}}\alpha\frac{v_{K}}{c}.

957: \label{FPR to FG ratio}%

958: \end{equation}

959: Since the dust grains are assumed to be in a regime where they are acted on by

960: magnetic forces which are at least comparable to gravitational forces, i.e.,

961: $\ F_{mag}\gtrsim F_{G}$ and since $\alpha\ll1$ and $v_{K}/c\ll1$ it is seen

962: that the\ force due to Poynting-Robertson effect is negligible compared to

963: magnetic forces and so the Poynting-Robertson effect, like radiation pressure,

964: may be neglected.

965: 

966: \section{Electromagnetic particle Hamiltonian with gravity}

967: 

968: Hamilton-Lagrange methods are mathematically equivalent to the particle

969: equation of motion and so describe all physically allowed orbits (e.g.,

970: cyclotron, drift, Speiser, etc.). Furthermore, because the Hamilton-Lagrange

971: approach clarifies effects of spatial symmetries, deeper insight into orbital

972: dynamics is obtained than provided by direct integration of the equation of

973: motion. Direct integration nevertheless provides insight as well by providing

974: an independent verification of the predictions of Hamilton-Lagrange methods.

975: This two-pronged approach (Hamilton-Lagrange and direct orbit

976: integration)\ provides a powerful method for examining particle motion in

977: non-adiabatic situations.

978: 

979: The Lagrangian of a particle with mass $m_{\sigma}$ and charge $q_{\sigma}$ in

980: the combination of an axisymmetric electromagnetic field and the spherically

981: symmetric gravitational potential of a\ mass $M$ central object is

982: \begin{equation}%

983: \begin{array}

984: [c]{ccl}%

985: \mathcal{L} & = & \frac{m_{\sigma}}{2}\left(  v_{r}^{2}+r^{2}\dot{\phi}%

986: ^{2}+v_{z}^{2}\right) \\

987: &  & +q_{\sigma}\left(  r\dot{\phi}A_{\phi}(r,z,t)+v_{z}A_{z}(r,z,t)\right) \\

988: &  & -q_{\sigma}V(r,z,t)+\frac{m_{\sigma}MG}{\left(  r^{2}+z^{2}\right)

989: ^{1/2}}%

990: \end{array}

991: \label{Lagrangian}%

992: \end{equation}

993: where $V(r,z,t)$ is the electrostatic potential and a gauge with $A_{r}=0$ is

994: assumed. The canonical angular momentum is \

995: \begin{equation}

996: P_{\phi}\equiv\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial\dot{\phi}}=m_{\sigma}%

997: r^{2}\dot{\phi}+q_{\sigma}rA_{\phi} \label{Pphi}%

998: \end{equation}

999: and, since $\ \mathbf{B}_{pol}=\nabla\times\left[  (2\pi r)^{-1}\psi\hat{\phi

1000: }\right]  =\nabla\times\left(  A_{\phi}\hat{\phi}\right)  $ implies $\psi=2\pi

1001: rA_{\phi}$, the canonical angular momentum can be expressed in terms of the

1002: poloidal magnetic flux as

1003: \begin{equation}

1004: P_{\phi}=m_{\sigma}r^{2}\dot{\phi}+\frac{q_{\sigma}}{2\pi}\psi(r,z,t).

1005: \label{Pphi flux}%

1006: \end{equation}

1007: Lagrange's equation $\dot{P}_{\phi}=\partial\mathcal{L}/\partial\phi

1008: \ $provides the important result that $\ $

1009: \begin{equation}

1010: P_{\phi}=const., \label{Pphi const}%

1011: \end{equation}

1012: i.e., $P_{\phi}$ is a constant of the motion because the system is

1013: axisymmetric. In the limit of a strong magnetic field, the second term in

1014: Eq.\ref{Pphi flux} dominates the first and leads to the constraint that a

1015: particle orbit must stay very nearly on a surface of constant $\psi;$ this is

1016: the basis for particle confinement in axisymmetric toroidal fusion devices

1017: (tokamaks, reversed field pinches, and spheromaks). Any deviation of a

1018: particle from a constant $\psi$ surface is a consequence of finite $m_{\sigma

1019: }$. When finite $m_{\sigma}$ is taken into account, it is seen that the

1020: particle must stay within a poloidal Larmor radius of a constant $\psi$

1021: surface, where poloidal Larmor radius means the cyclotron radius evaluated

1022: using the local poloidal field magnitude. Equation \ref{Pphi flux} may be

1023: solved for $\dot{\phi}$ to give

1024: \begin{equation}

1025: \dot{\phi}=\frac{P_{\phi}-\frac{q_{\sigma}}{2\pi}\psi(r,z,t)}{m_{\sigma}r^{2}%

1026: }. \label{solve phidot}%

1027: \end{equation}

1028: 

1029: 

1030: The corresponding Hamiltonian is

1031: \begin{equation}

1032: H=\frac{m_{\sigma}}{2}\left(  v_{r}^{2}+r^{2}\dot{\phi}^{2}+v_{z}^{2}\right)

1033: +q_{\sigma}V(r,z,t)-\frac{m_{\sigma}MG}{\left(  r^{2}+z^{2}\right)  ^{1/2}}.

1034: \label{Hamiltonian0}%

1035: \end{equation}

1036: By using Eq.\ref{solve phidot} to substitute for $\dot{\phi}\,\ $in

1037: Eq.\ref{Hamiltonian0}, the Hamiltonian can be expressed as%

1038: \begin{equation}%

1039: \begin{array}

1040: [c]{ccl}%

1041: H & = & \frac{m_{\sigma}}{2}\left(  v_{r}^{2}+v_{z}^{2}\right) \\

1042: &  & +\frac{\left(  P_{\phi}-\frac{q_{\sigma}}{2\pi}\psi(r,z,t)\right)  ^{2}%

1043: }{2m_{\sigma}r^{2}}\\

1044: &  & +q_{\sigma}V(r,z,t)-\frac{m_{\sigma}MG}{\left(  r^{2}+z^{2}\right)

1045: ^{1/2}}.

1046: \end{array}

1047: \label{Hamiltonian}%

1048: \end{equation}

1049: 

1050: 

1051: We now consider situations where $\psi$ is time-independent and $V=0\ $so the

1052: Hamiltonian reduces to

1053: \begin{equation}

1054: H=\frac{m_{\sigma}}{2}\left(  v_{r}^{2}+v_{z}^{2}\right)  +\frac{\left(

1055: P_{\phi}-\frac{q_{\sigma}}{2\pi}\psi(r,z)\right)  ^{2}}{2m_{\sigma}r^{2}%

1056: }-\frac{m_{\sigma}MG}{\sqrt{r^{2}+z^{2}}}. \label{H}%

1057: \end{equation}

1058: Since the Lagrangian does not explicitly depend on time, $H=const.$ and the

1059: particle energy is conserved. In the $q_{\sigma}\psi=0$ limit, $P_{\phi}$

1060: reduces to the mechanical angular momentum $p_{\phi}=mr^{2}\dot{\phi

1061: }=m\mathbf{r\times\dot{r}\cdot}\hat{z}=L\cos\theta$ in which case the dynamics

1062: reduces to the neutral particle orbital mechanics reviewed in Sec.\ref{Kepler}%

1063: . Thus, if $q_{\sigma}\psi=0$ bounded orbits correspond to $H<0$ and

1064: \ circular Kepler\ orbits correspond to $H$ having the minimum value of the

1065: effective potential well. Unbounded $q_{\sigma}\psi=0$ orbits correspond to

1066: $H\geq0$. Note that $p_{\phi}=L\cos\theta$ is a signed quantity, unlike $L.$

1067: 

1068: If $q_{\sigma}\psi$ is finite then $\left(  P_{\phi}-q_{\sigma}\psi

1069: (r,z)/2\pi\right)  ^{2}/2m_{\sigma}r^{2}$ is the appropriate term which

1070: contributes to the effective potential. This term, called the St\"{o}rmer

1071: potential, manifests \ a variety of qualitatively different spatial profiles

1072: depending on the relationship between $P_{\phi}$ and $q_{\sigma}\psi

1073: (r,z)/2\pi.$ These profiles are shown in

1074: Fig.\ref{effective-potential-scan.eps} for a sequence of decreasing values of

1075: $P_{\phi}.$ Very large positive $P_{\phi}$ gives prograde orbits similar to

1076: unmagnetized prograde cometary orbits and very large negative $P_{\phi}$ gives

1077: retrograde orbits similar to unmagnetized retrograde cometary orbits; in both

1078: these cases the strong centrifugal repulsion at small $r$ causes the particle

1079: to have an unbounded cometary orbit.

1080: 

1081: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

1082: 

1083: Caption for Fig. \ref{effective-potential-scan.eps}

1084: 

1085: Left: Plot of $\psi(r,z)/\psi_{0}$ v. $r/a\,\ $for $z=0$ with sequence of

1086: values of $2\pi P_{\phi}/q\psi_{0}$ shown as dotted line. Right: Corresponding

1087: dependence of effective potential term $\left(  P_{\phi}-q\psi(r,z)/2\pi

1088: \right)  ^{2}/r^{2}$ showing that potential wells develop at locations where

1089: $2\pi P_{\phi}/q\psi_{0}$ intersects $\psi(r,z)/\psi_{0}.$ These wells

1090: correspond to cyclotron motion if the intersection is away from the maximum of

1091: $\psi$ and to Speiser orbits if the intersection is at or near the maximum of

1092: $\psi.$ A potential well at $r=0$ develops if $P_{\phi}=0$ as seen in the

1093: sixth set of plots from top; this results in drain-hole orbits. Dotted line in

1094: right-hand second plot from top has the vertical scale multiplied by 100 to

1095: enable visualization of the outer minimum and the dotted line on the third

1096: plot from the top has the vertical scale multiplied by 2000 times. Note

1097: changes of scale in right-hand plots.

1098: 

1099: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

1100: 

1101: \begin{figure}[ptb]

1102: \caption{ caption on previous page}%

1103: \label{effective-potential-scan.eps}%

1104: \epsscale{0.48} \plotone{f4.eps}\end{figure}

1105: 

1106: \bigskip\pagebreak

1107: 

1108: On the other hand, if $P_{\phi}$ and $q_{\sigma}\psi(r,z)/2\pi$ have

1109: comparable magnitude, complex effective potential structures can result. For

1110: example if at some location $P_{\phi}$ $\ $equals $q_{\sigma}\psi(r,z)/2\pi$

1111: then $\left(  P_{\phi}-q_{\sigma}\psi(r,z)/2\pi\right)  ^{2}/2m_{\sigma}r^{2}$

1112: \ vanishes at this location, giving a \textit{localized minimum} in the

1113: overall effective potential.

1114: 

1115: If two separated positions exist where $P_{\phi}$ equals $q_{\sigma}%

1116: \psi(r,0)/2\pi$ then two distinct minima exist, but if only one position

1117: exists where $P_{\phi}$ equals $q_{\sigma}\psi(r,0)/2\pi$ then only one

1118: minimum exists. The former situation occurs when $P_{\phi}$ lies somewhere

1119: between $0$ and the maximum of $\psi$ and leads to cyclotron orbits with

1120: associated grad-$B$ $\ $and curvature drifts; in this case

1121: Eq.\ref{solve phidot} shows that the sign of $\dot{\phi}$ oscillates as the

1122: particle oscillates back and forth across the minimum of the effective

1123: potential, and the orbit is a cyclotron orbit. \ The situation of only one

1124: minimum occurs when the value of $P_{\phi}$ is approximately the maximum of

1125: $q_{\sigma}\psi/2\pi$ and gives Speiser orbits ($\dot{\phi}$ has fixed sign

1126: and the orbit is paramagnetic). For a review of the distinction between the

1127: diamagnetism of cyclotron orbits (and associated grad-$B$ $\ $and curvature

1128: drifts) and the paramagnetism of Speiser orbits see Appendix

1129: \ref{Orbit review}.

1130: 

1131: Yet another situation is where $P_{\phi}=0$. \ Because $\psi\sim r^{2}$ at

1132: small $r$, this special case removes the singularity of $\left(  P_{\phi

1133: }-q_{\sigma}\psi(r,0)/2\pi\right)  ^{2}/2m_{\sigma}r^{2}$ at $r=0$ and so

1134: eliminates centrifugal force repulsion altogether. The $P_{\phi}=0$ case gives

1135: trajectories which spiral down towards the central object\ while crossing

1136: magnetic field lines; part of the magnetic force cancels the centrifugal force

1137: so all that is left is gravity and a residual inward magnetic force. This

1138: situation is completely different from either cyclotron orbits or Speiser

1139: orbits and has only been previously discussed in the more limited context of

1140: two dimensional situations

1141: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep{Bellan2007}}{\citep{Bellan2007}}}%

1142: %BeginExpansion

1143: \citep{Bellan2007}%

1144: %EndExpansion

1145: . Finally, there is also the special situation discussed by

1146: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Schmidt1979}}{\citet{Schmidt1979}} }%

1147: %BeginExpansion

1148: \citet{Schmidt1979}

1149: %EndExpansion

1150: where $P_{\phi}=-r^{2}q_{\sigma}(2\pi)^{-1}\partial\left(  \psi/r\right)

1151: /\partial r$ in which case the charged particle executes an axis-encircling

1152: cyclotron orbit. While possible in principle, axis-encircling cyclotron orbits

1153: will be not be considered here because they would correspond to particles

1154: having extreme energies (e.g., a cyclotron radius of many a.u.).

1155: 

1156: Thus, there are five qualitatively distinct types of feasible trajectories

1157: depending on the relationship between $P_{\phi}$ and $q_{\sigma}\psi/2\pi.$ As

1158: labeled in Fig.\ref{effective-potential-scan.eps} and in order of descending

1159: signed value of the invariant $P_{\phi}\ $as shown by dashed horizontal line

1160: in left column of this figure, these are:

1161: 

1162: \begin{enumerate}

1163: \item prograde centrifugally dominated orbits [$P_{\phi}$ much larger than the

1164: peak of $q_{\sigma}\psi(r,z)/2\pi)$]

1165: 

1166: \item Speiser orbits [$P_{\phi}$ just grazes the peak of $q_{\sigma}%

1167: \psi(r,z)/2\pi$]

1168: 

1169: \item cyclotron orbits [$P_{\phi}$ well below the peak of $q_{\sigma}%

1170: \psi(r,z)/2\pi$ but much greater than zero]

1171: 

1172: \item $P_{\phi}=0$ orbits [which we will call \textquotedblleft drain-hole"

1173: orbits for reasons to be discussed later], and

1174: 

1175: \item retrograde centrifugally dominated orbits [$P_{\phi}$ negative and much

1176: less than zero)].

1177: \end{enumerate}

1178: 

1179: In the above list, we have removed the constraint that $z=0$ so, for example,

1180: in case \#3 (cyclotron orbits), the locations in the $r$-$z$ plane where

1181: $P_{\phi}$ and $q_{\sigma}\psi(r,z)/2\pi$ are equal corresponds to a specific

1182: closed curve in the $r$-$z$ plane; i.e., a specific $\psi$ iso-surface as

1183: shown in the projection of $\psi(r,z)$ at the top of Fig.

1184: \ref{GenericFluxFunction-new}.

1185: 

1186: The various possible values of $P_{\phi}$ can be considered as the different

1187: \textquotedblleft drummers\textquotedblright\ that dictate the effective

1188: potentials governing the motion of different particles located at the same

1189: position. A related example of this different \textquotedblleft

1190: drummers\textquotedblright\ situation \ has been reported by

1191: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Tripathi2007}}{\citet{Tripathi2007}} }%

1192: %BeginExpansion

1193: \citet{Tripathi2007}

1194: %EndExpansion

1195: and involves two particles at the same location having velocities with equal

1196: magnitudes but opposite directions; the two particles have such extremely

1197: different effective potentials that one particle is expelled from a magnetic

1198: flux tube (hill-shaped effective potential) whereas the other remains in the

1199: flux tube (valley-shaped effective potential).

1200: 

1201: \subsection{Mechanism for accretion of collisionless particles}

1202: 

1203: Accretion is the process of converting unbounded orbits (i.e., cometary

1204: orbits)\ into bounded orbits. Accretion of a collisionless neutral particle is

1205: clearly impossible if such a particle is governed by dynamics of a

1206: time-independent Lagrangian because converting an unbounded orbit into a

1207: bounded orbit would require changing the particle energy $H$ and such a change

1208: is forbidden for a particle having a Lagrangian that does not explicitly

1209: depend on time.

1210: 

1211: We now postulate an accretion mechanism as follows:\ \textit{photo-emission

1212: acts as an effective switch which alters the form of the Hamiltonian equation

1213: governing particle dynamics}. The particle energy $H$ and mechanical angular

1214: momentum $mr^{2}\dot{\phi}$ \textit{do not change} during the switching, but

1215: after photo-emission has occurred, $H$ and $mr^{2}\dot{\phi}$ become

1216: parameters in a \textit{different Hamiltonian system} which has a different

1217: topography of potential barriers. For example, photo-emission can transform

1218: the neutral particle effective potential shown in

1219: Fig.\ref{Effective-Potential-Neutral-Particle}(a) into the\ charged particle

1220: effective potential shown in Fig.\ref{Effective-Potential-Neutral-Particle}(b).

1221: 

1222: The switching is postulated to occur when an incident neutral dust grain

1223: absorbs sufficient energetic photons from the star. The photon absorption

1224: causes the dust grain to photo-emit electrons and therefore become positively

1225: charged

1226: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Lee1996,Sickafoose2000}}{\citep

1227: %{Lee1996,Sickafoose2000}}}%

1228: %BeginExpansion

1229: \citep{Lee1996,Sickafoose2000}%

1230: %EndExpansion

1231: . The photo-emitted electrons become free electrons equal in number to the

1232: dust grain charge $Z$. The photo-emission process has effectively caused the

1233: initial neutral dust grain to disintegrate into a single heavy positively

1234: charged fragment (the charged dust grain) and $Z$ light negatively charged

1235: fragments (the photoelectrons). The motion of each fragment is governed by the

1236: Hamiltonian for a charged particle and this Hamiltonian is considerably

1237: different in form from the Hamiltonian that governed the neutral particle

1238: motion. \ 

1239: 

1240: The charge $q_{d}$ of a dust grain charged by photo-emission is given by

1241: \begin{equation}

1242: \frac{q_{d}}{4\pi\varepsilon_{0}r_{d}}\approx\ W_{photon}-W_{wf} \label{Z}%

1243: \end{equation}

1244: where $W_{photon}$ is the energy in eV of an incident photon that causes

1245: photo-emission of a primary photo-electron and $W_{wf}$ is the work-function

1246: in eV of the material

1247: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep{Shukla2002}}{\citep{Shukla2002}}}%

1248: %BeginExpansion

1249: \citep{Shukla2002}%

1250: %EndExpansion

1251: .

1252: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Lee1996}}{\citet{Lee1996}} }%

1253: %BeginExpansion

1254: \citet{Lee1996}

1255: %EndExpansion

1256: has shown that the effective photon energy is $W_{photon}\simeq8$ eV for

1257: nominal solar parameters and the effective work function of typical dust is

1258: $W_{wf}\simeq6$ eV so that the energy of emitted photo-electrons is $\sim2$ eV.

1259: 

1260: Combination of Eqs. \ref{md} and \ref{Z} show that the dust charge to mass

1261: ratio will be

1262: \begin{equation}

1263: \frac{q_{d}}{m_{d}}=\frac{\ 3\varepsilon_{0}\left(  W_{photon}-W_{wf}\right)

1264: }{\ \rho_{d}^{int}r_{d}^{2}}\ \label{charge to mass ratio}%

1265: \end{equation}

1266: which will be many of orders of magnitude smaller than the charge to mass

1267: ratios of electrons or ions. The number $Z$ of charges on a dust grain will

1268: be

1269: \begin{equation}

1270: Z=\frac{4\pi\varepsilon_{0}r_{d}\left(  W_{photon}-W_{wf}\right)  }{e}.

1271: \label{Znumber}%

1272: \end{equation}

1273: 

1274: 

1275: Charging a dust grain to $q_{d}$ takes a finite time interval, but for

1276: simplicity we will assume that this charging occurs at a single time defined

1277: as $t=0.$ Charging will not change either the instantaneous position or

1278: velocity of a particle.

1279: 

1280: Photo-emission at $t=0$ therefore decomposes an incident neutral dust grain

1281: into positive and negative product particles each inheriting the same position

1282: and velocity at $t=0_{+}$ that the neutral dust grain had at $t=0_{-}.$

1283: Position and velocity can consequently be considered to be continuous

1284: functions at $t=0$ so the canonical angular momentum with which a newly formed

1285: charged particle is endowed is%

1286: \begin{equation}%

1287: \begin{array}

1288: [c]{ccc}%

1289: P_{\phi} & = & m_{\sigma}r_{\ast}^{2}\dot{\phi}_{\ast}+q_{\sigma}\psi(r_{\ast

1290: },z_{\ast})/2\pi\\

1291: & = & L_{\sigma}\cos\theta\ +q_{\sigma}\psi(r_{\ast},z_{\ast})/2\pi

1292: \end{array}

1293: \label{Pphiborne}%

1294: \end{equation}

1295: where the subscript $\ast$ denotes the value of a coordinate at the instant of

1296: charging, i.e., at $t=0$. For simplicity we assume that photo-emission occurs

1297: when the distance between the incident neutral and the central object is at

1298: some critical spherical radius $R_{\ast}$ so that charging and the setting of

1299: $t=0$ occurs when the particle crosses the surface of the fictitious $R_{\ast

1300: }$ sphere, i.e., when $r=r_{\ast}$ and $z=z_{\ast}$ are such that

1301: \begin{equation}

1302: r_{\ast}^{2}+z_{\ast}^{2}=R_{\ast}^{2}. \label{ionization sphere}%

1303: \end{equation}

1304: 

1305: 

1306: Depending on the value of $L_{\sigma},$ the angle of inclination $\theta$, the

1307: magnitude of $q_{\sigma},$ and the value of $\psi(r_{\ast},z_{\ast}),$ all

1308: possible finite values of $P_{\phi}$ can occur, including positive, negative,

1309: and zero. The $r$-$z$ plane topography of the effective potential can change

1310: completely from what it was at $t=0_{-}$ because the centrifugal force

1311: potential $p_{\phi}^{2}/2mr^{2}$ responsible for the neutral particle

1312: potential barrier at small $r$ is replaced by the St\"{o}rmer term $(P_{\phi

1313: }-q_{\sigma}\psi(r,z))^{2}/2\pi mr^{2}$. $\ $Figure

1314: \ref{effective-potential-scan.eps}\ demonstrates that variation of particle

1315: mass and variation of the incoming orbit plane inclination angle $\theta$ $\ $

1316: results in a range of $p_{\phi}$, $q_{d}$ values and hence a range of

1317: $P_{\phi}$ values corresponding to cyclotron, \textquotedblleft

1318: drain-hole\textquotedblright, Speiser, or cometary orbits. If the new orbit is

1319: cyclotron, drain-hole, or Speiser, then photo-emission has prevented the

1320: particle from returning to infinity, i.e., the particle has accreted.

1321: Photo-emission changes the \textquotedblleft rules of the

1322: game\textquotedblright\ \ by effectively erecting a new potential

1323: barrier\ which traps a previously unbound particle. The \textquotedblleft old

1324: game\textquotedblright\ (i.e., neutral particle Keplerian motion as reviewed

1325: in Sec.\ref{Kepler}) did not depend on particle mass or $\theta,$ but the

1326: \textquotedblleft new game\textquotedblright\ does and leads to a mass- and

1327: $\theta$-dependent sorting of incoming charged grains and their associated

1328: photo-emitted electrons into qualitatively different classes of orbits.

1329: 

1330: This process whereby neutral particles enter a magnetic field from outside,

1331: become charged, and then become subject to magnetic forces is called `neutral

1332: beam injection' in the context of tokamak physics and `pickup' in the context

1333: of solar physics. Neutral beam injection is used routinely for tokamak heating

1334: and current drive

1335: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Simonen1988,Akers2002}}{\citep

1336: %{Simonen1988,Akers2002}}}%

1337: %BeginExpansion

1338: \citep{Simonen1988,Akers2002}%

1339: %EndExpansion

1340: . Pickup is important in the solar wind

1341: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Gloeckler2001}}{\citep{Gloeckler2001}}}%

1342: %BeginExpansion

1343: \citep{Gloeckler2001}%

1344: %EndExpansion

1345: , in planetary atmospheres

1346: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Hartle2006}}{\citep{Hartle2006}}}%

1347: %BeginExpansion

1348: \citep{Hartle2006}%

1349: %EndExpansion

1350: , and in producing source particles for comic rays

1351: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Ellison1998}}{\citep{Ellison1998}}}%

1352: %BeginExpansion

1353: \citep{Ellison1998}%

1354: %EndExpansion

1355: . However, to the best of the author's knowledge, charging of incoming neutral

1356: particles has not been previously proposed as a means for accreting matter

1357: around a star and instead accretion of matter around a star has always been

1358: argued to be the result of the \ viscosity of neutral particles, i.e.,

1359: collisions of neutral particles with each other, as discussed for example in

1360: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Lynden-Bell1974}}{\citet{Lynden-Bell1974}}}%

1361: %BeginExpansion

1362: \citet{Lynden-Bell1974}%

1363: %EndExpansion

1364: ,

1365: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Shakura1976}}{\citet{Shakura1976}}}%

1366: %BeginExpansion

1367: \citet{Shakura1976}%

1368: %EndExpansion

1369: , and

1370: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Pringle1981}}{\citet{Pringle1981}}}%

1371: %BeginExpansion

1372: \citet{Pringle1981}%

1373: %EndExpansion

1374: . The viscosity-based neutral particle accretion models suffer from not

1375: knowing what to do with the angular momentum of incident particles; this issue

1376: has motivated substantial work on developing the rather complicated non-linear

1377: turbulence-based magneto-rotational instability model as a means for

1378: transporting excess angular momentum outwards. In contrast, the model proposed

1379: here inherently accounts for angular momentum and\ so does not need any

1380: \textquotedblleft add-on turbulence\textquotedblright\ to transport angular

1381: momentum outwards.

1382: 

1383: Trapping via photo-emission has the remarkable feature that the special class

1384: of charged particles created with zero canonical angular momentum will spiral

1385: all the way down to the central object. \ These $P_{\phi}=0$ (drain-hole)

1386: particles falling towards $r=0$ are in what is effectively a loss cone in

1387: canonical angular momentum space. The drain-hole particle motion constitutes a

1388: gravity-driven dynamo

1389: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep{Bellan2007}}{\citep{Bellan2007}} }%

1390: %BeginExpansion

1391: \citep{Bellan2007}

1392: %EndExpansion

1393: because the accumulation of these particles near $r=0$ produces a radially

1394: outward electric field while their flow produces a radially inward electric

1395: current (a dynamo is characterized by having opposed internal electric field

1396: and electric current). Since $J_{r}=-\left(  2\pi r\right)  ^{-1}\partial

1397: I/\partial z$ (see Eq.\ref{Jpol2}), creation of this radially inward current

1398: which is symmetric with respect to $z$ implies creation of an anti-symmetric

1399: function $I(r,z)$ which in turn implies creation of an anti-symmetric toroidal

1400: field $B_{\phi}\ $(see Eq.\ref{Bphi}). Equally remarkable, particles for which

1401: $P_{\phi}$ is near the maximum of $q_{\sigma}\psi/2\pi$ develop Speiser-type

1402: \textit{paramagnetic} orbits in the vicinity of $r=a$, $z=0$ and so can

1403: constitute the toroidal current that produces the poloidal flux (see

1404: discussion of Speiser orbit paramagnetism in Appendix \ref{Orbit review}). The

1405: creation of Speiser-orbit particles is \ conceptually similar to toroidal

1406: current drive in a tokamak via tangential neutral beam injection

1407: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep{Simonen1988}}{\citep{Simonen1988}}}%

1408: %BeginExpansion

1409: \citep{Simonen1988}%

1410: %EndExpansion

1411: . Because the drain-hole and Speiser dynamos are both axisymmetric, both

1412: violate the essential claim of Cowling's anti-dynamo theorem

1413: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep{Cowling1934}}{\citep{Cowling1934}} }%

1414: %BeginExpansion

1415: \citep{Cowling1934}

1416: %EndExpansion

1417: that axisymmetric dynamos cannot exist. This violation is not a problem

1418: because Cowling's theorem is based on MHD\ and so does not take into account

1419: drain-hole or Speiser orbits.

1420: 

1421: The Hamiltonian for an incoming neutral dust grain of mass $m_{n}$ can be

1422: written as

1423: \begin{equation}

1424: H\ =\frac{m_{n}v_{r}^{2}}{2}\ +\frac{m_{n}v_{\phi}^{2}}{2}+\frac{m_{n}%

1425: v_{z}^{2}}{2}-\frac{m_{n}MG}{\sqrt{r^{2}+z^{2}}}. \label{neutral}%

1426: \end{equation}

1427: This neutral dust grain absorbs energetic photons at $t=0,$ photo-emits $Z$

1428: free electrons, and consequently becomes positively charged with a charge of

1429: $Z.$ The mass of the neutral is related to the mass $m_{+}$ of the positively

1430: charged dust grain by $m_{n}=m_{+}+Zm_{e}$ where $m_{e}$ is the electron mass.

1431: Prior to this charging process, Eq.\ref{neutral} can be written as

1432: \begin{equation}%

1433: \begin{array}

1434: [c]{ccc}%

1435: H & = & \frac{\left(  m_{+}+Zm_{e}\right)  v_{r}^{2}}{2}\ +\frac{\left(

1436: m_{+}+Zm_{e}\right)  v_{\phi}^{2}}{2}\\

1437: &  & +\frac{\left(  m_{+}+Zm_{e}\right)  v_{z}^{2}}{2}-\frac{\left(

1438: m_{+}+Zm_{e}\right)  MG}{\sqrt{r^{2}+z^{2}}}%

1439: \end{array}

1440: \label{H before ionization}%

1441: \end{equation}

1442: so the positively charged dust grain with mass $m_{+}$ and the \thinspace$Z$

1443: electrons can each be thought of as executing identical neutral-type orbits

1444: before photo-emission occurs.

1445: 

1446: \bigskip\bigskip

1447: 

1448: At the instant before charging, the neutral particle mechanical angular

1449: momentum is

1450: \begin{equation}

1451: \ p_{\phi}=m_{n}r_{\ast}^{2}\dot{\phi}_{\ast}. \label{pmech}%

1452: \end{equation}

1453: At the instant after charging the newly created positively charged dust grain

1454: and its associated photo-emitted electrons all have the same values of

1455: $r_{\ast}$ and $\dot{\phi}_{\ast}.$ The canonical angular momentum of the

1456: positively charged dust grain will therefore be%

1457: \begin{equation}

1458: P_{\phi}^{+}=m_{+}r_{\ast}^{2}\dot{\phi}_{\ast}+Ze\psi(r_{\ast},z_{\ast}%

1459: )/2\pi\label{Pphi positive}%

1460: \end{equation}

1461: and the canonical momentum of each associated electron will be%

1462: \begin{equation}

1463: P_{\phi}^{e}=m_{e}r_{\ast}^{2}\dot{\phi}_{\ast}-e\psi(r_{\ast},z_{\ast})/2\pi.

1464: \label{Phi electron}%

1465: \end{equation}

1466: The initial neutral dust grain will be called the \textquotedblleft

1467: parent\textquotedblright\ particle while the positively charged dust grain

1468: resulting from photo-emission and its associated $Z~$photo-emitted electrons

1469: will be called \textquotedblleft child particles\textquotedblright\ that are

1470: \textquotedblleft siblings\textquotedblright\ of each other. The set of child

1471: particles resulting from the charging of a specific neutral dust grain will be

1472: called a \textquotedblleft family\textquotedblright. \ The canonical momenta

1473: $P_{\phi}^{+}$ and $P_{\phi}^{e}$ are now the appropriate orbit invariants for

1474: $t>0$ whereas \ the mechanical angular momenta $m_{\sigma}r^{2}\dot{\phi}$ of

1475: the individual siblings will \textit{not} be invariant for $t>0.$ Although the

1476: mechanical angular momentum of an individual sibling is not conserved, the

1477: total mechanical angular momentum of the family is conserved since summing

1478: Eq.\ref{Pphi positive} and $Z$ times Eq.\ref{Phi electron} gives $\left[

1479: p_{\phi}\right]  _{family}=P_{\phi}^{+}+ZP_{\phi}^{e}\ $where $\left[

1480: p_{\phi}\right]  _{family}$ $=m_{n}r_{\ast}^{2}\dot{\phi}$ is the sum of the

1481: mechanical angular momentum of the charged dust grain and all its sibling

1482: electrons. Because the siblings can physically separate from each other, the

1483: mechanical angular momentum $\left[  p_{\phi}\right]  _{family}$ is not a

1484: locally defined quantity and so is not a constant of the motion of either a

1485: single particle or, as in ideal hydrodynamics, of a fluid element. However,

1486: \textit{the mechanical angular momentum of the entire system is conserved}

1487: because the angular momentum of each family is globally conserved.

1488: 

1489: The kinetic energy of each sibling at the instant before photo-emission \ is

1490: the same as the value at the instant after photo-emission. If $H$ is

1491: decomposed into the contributions from the various \ siblings, it is seen that

1492: each sibling's $H_{\sigma}$ is the same before and after photo-emission.

1493: Assuming zero electrostatic potential $\ $for now, but allowing the child

1494: particle to be at arbitrary $z$, the Hamiltonian of each sibling is

1495: \begin{equation}%

1496: \begin{array}

1497: [c]{ccl}%

1498: H_{\sigma}\  & = & \frac{m_{\sigma}v_{r}^{2}}{2}\ +\frac{m_{\sigma}v_{z}^{2}%

1499: }{2}\\

1500: &  & +\frac{\left(  m_{\sigma}r_{\ast}^{2}\dot{\phi}_{\ast}+\frac{q_{\sigma}%

1501: }{2\pi}\left[  \psi(r_{\ast},z_{\ast})-\psi(r,z)\right]  \right)  ^{2}%

1502: }{2m_{\sigma}r^{2}}\\

1503: &  & -\frac{m_{\sigma}MG}{\sqrt{r^{2}+z^{2}}}.

1504: \end{array}

1505: \label{H-positive particle}%

1506: \end{equation}

1507: 

1508: 

1509: Using Eq.\ref{Bbar} we now define

1510: \begin{equation}

1511: \left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle =\frac{q_{\sigma}\left\langle

1512: B_{z}\right\rangle }{m_{\sigma}} \label{avg omegac}%

1513: \end{equation}

1514: as the spatially-averaged cyclotron frequency over the area bounded by the

1515: poloidal field magnetic axis. We now normalize all quantities to appropriate

1516: combinations of $a$ and $\Omega_{0},$ the Kepler angular frequency at $a$

1517: prescribed by Eq.\ref{Kepler0}. The normalized time, cylindrical coordinates,

1518: velocities, and magnetic flux are thus

1519: \begin{equation}%

1520: \begin{array}

1521: [c]{ccl}%

1522: \tau & = & \Omega_{0}t\\

1523: \bar{r} & = & r/a\\

1524: \bar{z} & = & z/a\\

1525: \bar{v}_{r} & = & v_{r}/a\Omega_{0}\\

1526: \bar{v}_{z} & = & v_{z}/a\Omega_{0}\\

1527: \bar{L} & = & L_{\sigma}/m_{\sigma}a^{2}\Omega_{0}\\

1528: \bar{p}_{\phi} & = & \bar{r}^{2}d\phi/d\tau=\bar{L}\cos\theta\\

1529: \bar{\psi}(r,z) & = & \frac{\psi(r,z)}{\psi(a,0)}\ =\frac{\psi(r,z)}%

1530: {\left\langle B_{z}\right\rangle \pi a^{2}}\\

1531: \bar{H} & = & \frac{H}{m\Omega_{0}^{2}a^{2}}%

1532: \end{array}

1533: \label{norm quantities}%

1534: \end{equation}

1535: in which case Eq.\ref{H-positive particle} becomes%

1536: \begin{equation}%

1537: \begin{array}

1538: [c]{ccl}%

1539: \bar{H} & = & \frac{\ \bar{v}_{r}^{2}}{\ 2}+\frac{\ \bar{v}_{z}^{2}}{\ 2}\\

1540: &  & +\frac{\left(  \bar{L}\cos\theta\ \ +\frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma

1541: }\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}}\ \left[  \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}%

1542: _{\ast})-\bar{\psi}(\bar{r},\bar{z})\right]  \right)  ^{2}}{2\ \bar{r}^{2}}\\

1543: &  & -\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{\bar{r}^{2}+\bar{z}^{2}}}.

1544: \end{array}

1545: \label{norm H}%

1546: \end{equation}

1547: The effective potential is now

1548: \begin{equation}%

1549: \begin{array}

1550: [c]{cl}%

1551: \chi(\bar{r},\bar{z})= & \frac{\left(  \stackrel{\textnormal{mechanical}}%

1552: {\overbrace{\bar{L}\cos\theta}}\ \ +\stackrel{\textnormal{magnetic}}{\overbrace

1553: {\frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}}\ \left[

1554: \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast})-\bar{\psi}(\bar{r},\bar{z})\right]

1555: }}\right)  ^{2}}{2\ \bar{r}^{2}}\\

1556: & -\stackunder{\textnormal{gravitational}}{\underbrace{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\bar{r}%

1557: ^{2}+\bar{z}^{2}}}}}%

1558: \end{array}

1559: \label{effective potential magnetized}%

1560: \end{equation}

1561: where the mechanical, magnetic, and gravitational contributions have been

1562: labeled. Before photo-emission, the mechanical angular momentum is invariant

1563: so $\bar{p}_{\phi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast})=\bar{L}\cos\theta$ is just

1564: the normalized mechanical angular momentum that the parent had when it was at

1565: infinity. Invoking Eq.\ref{p range}, it is seen that

1566: \begin{equation}

1567: 0\leq\bar{L}<\sqrt{2\bar{R}_{\ast}^{2}\bar{H}+2\bar{R}_{\ast}}%

1568: \ \label{pstar range}%

1569: \end{equation}

1570: is required since incident neutral dust grains with mechanical angular

1571: momentum outside this range would have reflected at larger radii than $\bar

1572: {R}_{\ast}$ and so would not have been able to access the radius $\bar

1573: {R}_{\ast}.$

1574: 

1575: The normalized canonical angular momentum with which a typical sibling charged

1576: particle is endowed is

1577: \begin{equation}

1578: \bar{P}_{\phi}=\bar{L}\cos\theta+\frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma

1579: }\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}}\ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast}).

1580: \label{norm can momentum}%

1581: \end{equation}

1582: The parameters underlying Fig.\ref{Effective-Potential-Neutral-Particle}(b)

1583: can now be understood. This figure is a plot of $\chi(\bar{r},\bar{z})$ v.

1584: $\bar{r}$ for $\bar{z}=0\ $where $\bar{P}_{\phi}$ is calculated for the

1585: situation where $\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle /\Omega_{0}=40,$

1586: $\bar{r}_{\ast}=0.5,$ $\bar{z}_{\ast}=0$, $\theta=0$, and $\bar{L}=1.$

1587: Charging of an $\ $ $\bar{L}=1$ dust grain via photo-emission causes the

1588: effective potential governing the dust grain to change from the form given in

1589: Fig.\ref{Effective-Potential-Neutral-Particle}(a) \ to the form given in

1590: Fig.\ref{Effective-Potential-Neutral-Particle}(b).

1591: 

1592: When the magnetic term in Eq.\ref{effective potential magnetized} becomes

1593: comparable to the mechanical term or much larger, orbital dynamics for the

1594: siblings become very different from the orbital dynamics of the neutral parent

1595: that existed before photo-emission. Various orbits can occur for the siblings.

1596: Because of the complexity of these three dimensional orbits, we will first

1597: consider orbits confined to the $\bar{z}=0$ plane and then generalize to fully

1598: three dimensional orbits ranging over finite $\bar{z}.$

1599: 

1600: \subsection{Distribution of Cometary, Speiser, Cyclotron, and Drain-Hole

1601: Orbits}

1602: 

1603: As reviewed in Sec.\ref{Kepler}, neutral particles orbits are degenerate with

1604: respect to their orbital plane inclination angle $\theta$ (see

1605: Fig.\ref{Orbital-Plane-coordinate-system}). However, once particles become

1606: charged, they are no longer restricted to an orbital plane, and furthermore,

1607: as seen from Eq.\ref{effective potential magnetized}, the effective potential

1608: of a charged particle has a strong dependence on the value of $\theta$ that

1609: its parent particle had. This dependence was manifested in the discussion of

1610: Fig. \ref{effective-potential-scan.eps} where it was noted that particles with

1611: $\left\vert 2\pi P_{\phi}/q_{\sigma}\psi_{0}\right\vert \gg1$ are essentially

1612: unmagnetized and have Keplerian cometary orbits, particles with $2\pi P_{\phi

1613: }\theta/q_{\sigma}\psi_{0}\simeq1$ have Speiser orbits, particles with

1614: $0\ll2\pi P_{\phi}/q_{\sigma}\psi_{0}\ll1$ have cyclotron orbits, and

1615: particles with $2\pi P_{\phi}/q_{\sigma}\psi_{0}\simeq0$ have drain-hole

1616: orbits. This discussion can be made more quantitative by defining

1617: $\Lambda\equiv2\pi P_{\phi}/q_{\sigma}\psi_{0};$ note that $\Lambda$

1618: corresponds to the horizontal dashed lines in the left hand column of

1619: Fig.\ref{effective-potential-scan.eps}. Equation \ref{norm can momentum} can

1620: then be recast as

1621: \begin{equation}

1622: \Lambda=\frac{2\Omega_{0}}{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }\bar

1623: {L}\cos\theta\ +\ \ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast}). \label{lambda}%

1624: \end{equation}

1625: Thus particles with $\left\vert \Lambda\right\vert \gg1$ have Keplerian

1626: cometary orbits, particles with $\Lambda\simeq1$ have Speiser orbits,

1627: particles with $0\ll\Lambda\ll1$ have cyclotron orbits, and particles with

1628: $\Lambda\simeq0$ have drain-hole orbits.

1629: 

1630: Assuming $\bar{H}\ll1$ and $\bar{R}_{\ast}\sim1,$ Eq.\ref{pstar range} implies

1631: that only particles with $0<\bar{L}<\sqrt{2}$ can access a given location.

1632: Because there will be a distribution of all possible $\bar{L}$'s within this

1633: allowed range, we consider a particle with the mean of these allowed values as

1634: being representative and so assume that $\bar{L}=\sqrt{2}/2$ is the normalized

1635: angular momentum of this representative nominal particle.

1636: 

1637: Since $\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle =q_{\sigma}\left\langle

1638: B_{z}\right\rangle /m_{\sigma}$, $\left\langle B_{z}\right\rangle =\psi

1639: _{0}/\pi a^{2}$, and $\Omega_{0}=\sqrt{MG/a^{3}}$ this nominal particle will

1640: have

1641: \begin{equation}

1642: \Lambda=K\cos\theta\ +\ \ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast})

1643: \label{def lambda}%

1644: \end{equation}

1645: where

1646: \begin{equation}

1647: K=\frac{m_{\sigma}}{q_{\sigma}}\frac{\ \pi\ \sqrt{2aMG\ }}{\psi_{0}%

1648: }\ \label{lambda rd}%

1649: \end{equation}

1650: parameterizes the competition between gravitational and magnetic forces. Using

1651: Eq. \ref{charge to mass ratio} to give the charge to mass ratio it is seen

1652: that

1653: \begin{equation}

1654: K=\ \frac{\ \pi\rho_{d}^{int}\sqrt{2aMG\ }}{3\varepsilon_{0}\left(

1655: W_{photon}-W_{wf}\right)  \psi_{0}}r_{d}^{2}; \label{K rd}%

1656: \end{equation}

1657: thus $K$ increases when $r_{d}$ increases as a result of dust grain coagulation.

1658: 

1659: Speiser and drain hole particles occur when gravitational and magnetic forces

1660: are comparable in magnitude, i.e., when $K$ is of order unity. For a given

1661: star mass $M,$ poloidal flux magnetic axis radius $a,$ and magnetic flux

1662: $\psi_{0},$ this means that Speiser and drain hole particles will occur when

1663: coagulation has caused the dust grains to have a certain critical radius which

1664: is of order%

1665: \begin{equation}

1666: r_{d}^{crit}\sim\frac{1}{\left(  2aMG\right)  ^{1/4}}\sqrt{\frac

1667: {3\varepsilon_{0}\left(  W_{photon}-W_{wf}\right)  \psi_{0}}{\pi\rho_{d}%

1668: ^{int}\ }}. \label{rdnom}%

1669: \end{equation}

1670: $\ $If $r_{d}\gg r_{d}^{crit}$ then gravity will dominate and the dust grains

1671: will behave like neutral particles whereas if $r_{d}\ll r_{d}^{crit}$ then

1672: magnetic forces will dominate and charged dust grains will mainly have

1673: cyclotron orbits. Since coagulation causes $r_{d}$ to increase monotonically,

1674: there should always be some time when $r_{d}$ $\sim r_{d}^{crit}$\ and $K$ is

1675: of order unity. This argument indicates that the dust-driven dynamo mechanism

1676: should take place as a well-defined temporal stage in the accretion process;

1677: before this stage $r_{d}$ is too small and after this stage $r_{d}$ is too large.

1678: 

1679: Since $\bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast})$ ranges between $0$ and $1$,

1680: let us consider the nominal situation where $\bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar

1681: {z}_{\ast})=1/2$ in which case%

1682: \begin{equation}

1683: \Lambda_{nom}=K\cos\theta\ +\frac{1}{2}. \label{lambda nom}%

1684: \end{equation}

1685: If $K\simeq1/2,$ Speiser particles result for $\cos\theta=1$ (i.e., neutral

1686: parent was prograde) and drain-hole particles result for $\cos\theta

1687: =-1\ $(i.e., neutral parent was retrograde ). If $K\ll1/2,$ the orbits will be

1688: cyclotron. Finally if $K\gg1/2,$ the orbits will be cometary if $\cos\theta$

1689: is not close to zero. The categorization implied by Eq.\ref{lambda nom} is

1690: shown schematically in Fig. \ref{orbit-distributionAI-PS-DCS2.0-Ascii5-25.eps}.

1691: 

1692: \begin{figure}[ptb]

1693: \caption{Distribution of orbits as function of $K,\theta.$ Radius $K$ is

1694: proportional to $r_{d}^{2}.$ Prograde orbits have $\theta=0$, retrograde

1695: orbits have $\theta=\pi$, and polar orbits have $\left\vert \theta\right\vert

1696: =\pi/2$.}%

1697: \label{orbit-distributionAI-PS-DCS2.0-Ascii5-25.eps}%

1698: \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f5.eps}\end{figure}

1699: 

1700: \subsection{Light-weight particles ($K\ll1$) \label{light-weight trapping}}

1701: 

1702: \subsubsection{Generic accretion mechanism}

1703: 

1704: \begin{figure}[ptb]

1705: \caption{An incident neutral particle ($\bar{H}=0,$ $\bar{\rho}_{pericenter}%

1706: =0.1,$ $\theta=30,\alpha=0^{0}$) becomes charged due to photoemission of

1707: electrons at $R_{\ast}=2.$ The child particle mass is such that $\left\langle

1708: \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle /\Omega_{0}=200$ and the child particle becomes

1709: magnetically trapped, staying within a poloidal Larmor orbit of a constant

1710: $\psi$ surface. In this example, the child particle is mirror trapped and so

1711: cannot enter the strong magnetic field region at small $\bar{r}.$ (a) $\bar

1712: {x}-\bar{y}$ plane, charging occurs where orbit abruptly changes, poloidal

1713: field magnetic axis shown as dashed circle (b)\ $\bar{r}-\bar{z}$ plane

1714: showing magnetic mirroring of child particle at large magnetic field (poloidal

1715: flux contours $\bar{\psi}(\bar{r},\bar{z})$ shown as dashed lines). The orbit

1716: the parent neutral particle would have continued to have if it had not become

1717: charged is shown by dotted line (both projections).}%

1718: \label{mirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=2_omegaratio=200.eps}%

1719: \epsscale{0.5} \plotone{f6.eps}\end{figure}

1720: 

1721: Potential barriers occur at locations where $\chi(\bar{r},\bar{z})>$ $\bar

1722: {H}.$ We first consider motion of a sibling particle constrained to stay in

1723: the $\bar{z}=0$ plane (i.e., the particle starts with $\bar{v}_{z}=0$ and no

1724: forces exist that push it off the $\bar{z}=0$ plane). In this case the

1725: effective potential is a function of $\bar{r}$ only and is%

1726: \begin{equation}

1727: \chi(\bar{r},0)=\frac{\left(  \stackrel{\textnormal{mechanical}}{\overbrace{\bar

1728: {L}\cos\theta}}\ \ +\stackrel{\textnormal{magnetic}}{\overbrace{\frac{\left\langle

1729: \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}}\ \left[  \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}%

1730: _{\ast},0)-\bar{\psi}(\bar{r},0)\right]  }}\right)  ^{2}}{2\ \bar{r}^{2}%

1731: }-\stackrel{\textnormal{gravitational}}{\overbrace{\frac{1}{\bar{r}}}}.

1732: \label{chi z plane}%

1733: \end{equation}

1734: If $\chi(\bar{r},0)$ exceeds $\bar{H}$ at some radius $\bar{r}>$ $\bar

1735: {r}_{\ast}$, the particle becomes trapped within a finite extent region as

1736: indicated in Fig.\ref{Effective-Potential-Neutral-Particle}(b) or equivalently

1737: by the third and fourth rows, right hand column of Fig.

1738: \ref{effective-potential-scan.eps}. \ If $\bar{r}_{\ast}$ is small or large

1739: compared to unity so $r_{\ast}$ is not near the peak of $\bar{\psi},$ then

1740: $\bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},0)\ll1.$ Because the particle is assumed to be

1741: light-weight (i.e., \thinspace$r_{d}\ll r_{d}^{crit}$), its average-field

1742: cyclotron frequency $\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle $ will be much

1743: larger than the Kepler frequency $\Omega_{0}.$ Since $\bar{L}$ is of order

1744: unity, the light-weight particle will have $\left\vert \left\langle

1745: \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle /2\Omega_{0}\right\vert \gg\bar{L}$ in which

1746: case%

1747: \[

1748: \max\left\{  \frac{\ \left(  \bar{L}\cos\theta+\frac{\left\langle

1749: \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle \ }{2\Omega_{0}}\left[  \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}%

1750: _{\ast},0)-\bar{\psi}(\bar{r},0)\right]  \right)  ^{2}}{2\bar{r}^{2}%

1751: \ }\right\}  \simeq\max\left\{  \frac{1}{2\bar{r}^{2}\ }\left(  \frac

1752: {\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle \ }{2\Omega_{0}}\bar{\psi}(\bar

1753: {r},0)\right)  ^{2}\right\}

1754: \]

1755: so the peak of $\chi(\bar{r},0)$ will occur where $\bar{\psi}(\bar{r},0)$

1756: takes on its maximum value, namely unity. The maximum of $\chi(\bar{r},0)$ for

1757: a light-weight particle is thus

1758: \begin{equation}

1759: \chi(1,0)\simeq\frac{1}{2}\left(  \frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma

1760: }\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}}\right)  ^{2}-1 \label{generic barrier}%

1761: \end{equation}

1762: where \ the $-1$ term comes from the gravitational potential at $\bar

1763: {r}=1,z=0.$ This gives the necessary condition for trapping light-weight

1764: charged dust grains to be

1765: \begin{equation}

1766: \frac{\left\vert \left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle \right\vert

1767: }{\ \Omega_{0}}>2\sqrt{2}. \label{trapping}%

1768: \end{equation}

1769: Because a typical light-weight grain has $\left\vert \left\langle

1770: \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle \right\vert \gg2\sqrt{2}\Omega_{0},$ a

1771: light-weight grain confined to the $z=0$ plane will become trapped in a

1772: finite-sized region upon being charged, i.e., it will have accreted. The same

1773: will be true for the associated sibling photo-electrons since they also have

1774: $\left\vert \left\langle \omega_{ce}\right\rangle \right\vert \gg2\sqrt

1775: {2}\Omega_{0}.$ Figure

1776: \ref{mirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=2_omegaratio=200.eps}%

1777: \ shows a direct numerical integration of the equation of motion demonstrating

1778: this basic accretion mechanism in three dimensions: a light-weight neutral

1779: dust grain disintegrates at a certain location into an $\left\vert

1780: \left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle \right\vert \gg2\sqrt{2}\Omega_{0}$

1781: positively charged dust grain \ (there would also be $Z$ associated

1782: photo-electrons which for clarity are not shown in the figure but would also

1783: have cyclotron-type orbits). An actual dust grain would start with an

1784: infinitesimal energy $0<\bar{H}\ll1;$ the calculation here uses $\bar

1785: {H}=0\,\ $as representative of this infinitesimal $\bar{H}$ since the

1786: difference between an orbit with $\bar{H}=0$ and an orbit with infinitesimal

1787: $\bar{H}$ is insignificant at any finite distance. The newly created charged

1788: particles are trapped to the vicinity of a $\bar{\psi}(\bar{r},\bar

1789: {z})=const.$ poloidal flux surface (poloidal flux surfaces are shown by dashed

1790: lines in

1791: Fig.\ref{mirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=2_omegaratio=200.eps}%

1792: (b)). Because of $\mu$ conservation, the charged particles can also be

1793: mirror-trapped, so while on the the constant $\bar{\psi}$ surface, they

1794: reflect from regions of this surface where the magnetic field is strong.

1795: Figure

1796: \ref{mirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=2_omegaratio=200momenta.eps}%

1797: (a) plots the time dependence of $\bar{p}_{\phi}$ for the particle shown in

1798: Fig.\ref{mirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=2_omegaratio=200.eps}%

1799: .

1800: 

1801: Figure

1802: \ref{mirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=2_omegaratio=200momenta.eps}%

1803: (b) plots the canonical angular momentum $\bar{P}_{\phi}$ (solid line) and the

1804: kinetic/potential energies (dashed lines labeled `KE' and `PE' in figure). It

1805: is seen that $\bar{p}_{\phi}$ is conserved before charging whereas $\bar

1806: {P}_{\phi}$ is the conserved quantity after charging. Also, the total energy

1807: (kinetic + potential, dashed line labeled `Tot' in figure) remains zero.

1808: Strictly speaking, this plot should be considered as referring to the neutral

1809: dust grain until charging, and then to the charged dust grain after charging

1810: so the jump in $\bar{P}_{\phi}$ at the charging time seen in the figure does

1811: not violate the requirement that $\bar{P}_{\phi}$ is a constant of the motion

1812: for\ a specific particle.

1813: 

1814: Figure

1815: \ref{notmirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=0.8_omegaratio=200.eps}

1816: shows the three dimensional orbit of a light-weight charged dust grain with

1817: slightly different parameters so that it is not mirror trapped. The derivation

1818: of the non-dimensional equation of motion used here is given in Appendix

1819: \ref{Equation of motion}. \begin{figure}[ptb]

1820: \caption{(a)\ Mechanical angular momentum $\bar{p}_{\phi}$ v. time $\tau$ and

1821: (b)\ kinetic energy (KE), potential energy (PE) and canonical angular momentum

1822: $\bar{P}_{\phi}$ v. time for the calculation shown in Fig.

1823: \ref{mirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=2_omegaratio=200.eps}%

1824: . Mechanical angular momentum $\bar{p}_{\phi}\ \ $ is conserved before

1825: charging, but oscillates after charging; canonical angular momentum $\bar

1826: {P}_{\phi}$ is much larger than mechanical angular momentum because of strong

1827: magnetic field and is conserved after charging. }%

1828: \label{mirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=2_omegaratio=200momenta.eps}%

1829: \epsscale{0.5} \plotone{f7.eps}\end{figure}\begin{figure}[ptbptb]

1830: \caption{Same parameters as Fig.

1831: \ref{mirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=2_omegaratio=200.eps}%

1832: , except $R_{\ast}=0.8.$ Charged particle is now not mirror-trapped.}%

1833: \label{notmirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=0.8_omegaratio=200.eps}%

1834: \epsscale{0.5} \plotone{f8.eps}\end{figure}

1835: 

1836: \subsubsection{Width of light-weight particle trapping well and relation to

1837: cyclotron orbits \label{trapping well width}}

1838: 

1839: If $\left\vert \left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle \right\vert

1840: /2\Omega_{0}\gg\ \left\vert \bar{p}_{\phi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast

1841: })\right\vert $, the magnetic term in Eq.\ref{effective potential magnetized}

1842: dominates the mechanical term as soon as $\bar{r}$ deviates slightly from

1843: $r_{\ast}.$ This implies existence of a narrow trench-like potential

1844: well\ with minimum very close to $r_{\ast}.$ The effective potential shown

1845: Fig.\ref{Effective-Potential-Neutral-Particle}(b) has such a trench; this

1846: situation involves a particle confined to the $\bar{z}=0$ plane and the trench

1847: is at $\bar{r}=\bar{\rho}=0.55.$ This situation is also evident in the third

1848: and fourth rows, right hand column of Fig. \ref{effective-potential-scan.eps}.

1849: If $\left\vert \left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle \right\vert

1850: \gg\Omega_{0}$ the gravitational term is completely overwhelmed by the

1851: magnetic term so the trench bottom in the $z=0$ plane is where

1852: \begin{equation}

1853: \ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r})=\frac{\Omega_{0}}{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma

1854: }\right\rangle }\bar{p}_{\phi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast})\ +\bar{\psi

1855: }(r_{\ast}).\ \label{well bottom}%

1856: \end{equation}

1857: Taylor expansion of $\ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r})$ near $r_{\ast}$ gives

1858: \begin{equation}%

1859: \begin{array}

1860: [c]{cc}%

1861: \ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r})= & \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast})+\ \left(  \bar{r}-\bar

1862: {r}_{\ast}\right)  \left(  \frac{\partial\bar{\psi}}{\partial\bar{r}}\right)

1863: _{\bar{r}=\bar{r}_{\ast}}\\

1864: & +\frac{1}{2}\left(  \bar{r}-\bar{r}_{\ast}\right)  ^{2}\left(

1865: \frac{\partial^{2}\bar{\psi}}{\partial\bar{r}^{2}}\right)  _{\bar{r}=\bar

1866: {r}_{\ast}}+...

1867: \end{array}

1868: \label{Taylor}%

1869: \end{equation}

1870: If $\bar{r}_{\ast}$ is not close to unity, then $\bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast})$

1871: is not close to its maximum value so the leading term in the Taylor expansion

1872: is the one involving $\partial\bar{\psi}/\partial\bar{r}.$ Using

1873: Eq.\ref{Taylor} to substitute for $\ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r})$ in

1874: Eq.\ref{well bottom} gives the trench bottom to be at%

1875: \begin{equation}

1876: \ \ \bar{r}\ \ =\bar{r}_{\ast}+\frac{2}{\left(  \partial\bar{\psi}%

1877: /\partial\bar{r}\right)  _{\bar{r}=\bar{r}_{\ast}}}\frac{\Omega_{0}%

1878: }{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }\bar{p}_{\phi}(\bar{r}_{\ast

1879: },\bar{z}_{\ast})\ \label{more well bottom}%

1880: \end{equation}

1881: so the trench bottom is close to $\bar{r}_{\ast}$ because $\left\vert

1882: \left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle \right\vert \gg\Omega_{0}$ is being

1883: assumed. If $\bar{r}_{\ast}<1$ then $\left(  \partial\bar{\psi}/\partial

1884: \bar{r}\right)  _{\bar{r}=\bar{r}_{\ast}}$ is positive and vice versa since

1885: $\bar{\psi}$ has its maximum value at $\bar{r}=1.$ The trench bottom will thus

1886: be outside of $\bar{r}_{\ast}$ if $\bar{r}_{\ast}<1$ so $\left\langle

1887: \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle \left(  \partial\bar{\psi}/\partial\bar

1888: {r}\right)  _{\bar{r}=\bar{r}_{\ast}}$is positive and vice versa if $\bar

1889: {r}_{\ast}>1$. The sign of $\ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r})-\bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast})$

1890: oscillates as the particle bounces back and forth in the trench. Using

1891: Eq.\ref{solve phidot} expressed in normalized variables, \ and noting

1892: that\ $\bar{P}_{\phi}=\bar{p}_{\phi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast})+\bar{\psi

1893: }(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast})\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle

1894: /2\Omega_{0}\ \ $it is seen that the azimuthal velocity

1895: \begin{equation}%

1896: \begin{array}

1897: [c]{ccl}%

1898: \frac{d\phi}{d\tau} & = & \frac{\bar{P}_{\phi}\ -\frac{\left\langle

1899: \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}}\bar{\psi}(\bar{r})}{\bar{r}^{2}%

1900: }\\

1901: & = & \frac{\bar{p}_{\phi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast})\ -\frac{\left\langle

1902: \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}}\left[  \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}%

1903: )-\bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast})\right]  }{\bar{r}^{2}}%

1904: \end{array}

1905: \label{phidot}%

1906: \end{equation}

1907: has an oscillating polarity. The combined oscillation of $\bar{r}$ and

1908: \ $d\phi/d\tau$ corresponds to the particle tracing out Larmor orbits with

1909: gyro-center at the trench bottom

1910: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Schmidt1979}}{\citep{Schmidt1979}}}%

1911: %BeginExpansion

1912: \citep{Schmidt1979}%

1913: %EndExpansion

1914: .

1915: 

1916: To summarize: In the $\left\vert \left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle

1917: \right\vert /\Omega_{0}\gg1$ situation (i.e., light-weight particles) Eq.

1918: \ref{effective potential magnetized} provides an effective potential whereby

1919: the magnetized charged particle is confined to the vicinity of a constant

1920: $\psi$ surface, just like a charged particle in a tokamak

1921: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Rome1979}}{\citep{Rome1979}}}%

1922: %BeginExpansion

1923: \citep{Rome1979}%

1924: %EndExpansion

1925: . The particle motion over the constant $\psi$ surface can be understood as a

1926: sum of parallel to $\mathbf{B}$ motion, cyclotron motion, and particle drifts

1927: (curvature, grad $B,$ etc.) as given by Eq.\ref{particle drifts}. Furthermore,

1928: regions where $\mu B$ \ is large can constitute an additional potential

1929: barrier (i.e., magnetic mirror) that prevents those subsets of particles

1930: having inadequate velocity parallel to $\mathbf{B}$\textbf{ }from accessing

1931: the entire constant $\psi$ surface. Because of magnetic mirroring by

1932: $\mu\nabla B$ forces, particles in these subsets are confined to the weaker

1933: magnetic field regions of a constant $\psi$ surface as seen in

1934: Fig.\ref{mirror..pericenter=0.1_theta=30_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=2_omegaratio=200.eps}%

1935: (b).

1936: 

1937: \subsection{Speiser orbit particles ($K\cos\theta\simeq1/2$)}

1938: 

1939: When $\bar{r}_{\ast}\simeq1$ and $\bar{z}_{\ast}\simeq0$, photoemission occurs

1940: near the peak of $\psi(\bar{r},\bar{z})$, i.e., where $\nabla\psi$ $\simeq0$;

1941: see Fig. \ref{effective-potential-scan.eps} second row from top where

1942: $P_{\phi}$ is just grazing the peak of $\psi.$ The linear term in the Taylor

1943: expansion in Eq.\ref{Taylor} is therefore negligible. Since $\partial^{2}%

1944: \bar{\psi}/\partial\bar{r}^{2}$ is negative near the maximum of $\bar{\psi},$

1945: Eq.\ref{Taylor} becomes

1946: \begin{equation}

1947: \bar{\psi}(\bar{r})\simeq\bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast})-\ \frac{1}{2}\left(

1948: \bar{r}-\bar{r}_{\ast}\right)  ^{2}\left\vert \left(  \frac{\partial^{2}%

1949: \bar{\psi}}{\partial\bar{r}^{2}}\right)  _{\bar{r}=\bar{r}_{\ast}}\right\vert

1950: . \label{chi Speiser}%

1951: \end{equation}

1952: Equation \ref{phidot} then reduces to%

1953: \begin{equation}

1954: \frac{d\phi}{d\tau}\ =\frac{\bar{p}_{\phi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},0)\ +\frac

1955: {\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }{4\Omega_{0}}\ \left(  \bar

1956: {r}-\bar{r}_{\ast}\right)  ^{2}\left\vert \left(  \frac{\partial^{2}\bar{\psi

1957: }}{\partial\bar{r}^{2}}\right)  _{\bar{r}=\bar{r}_{\ast}}\right\vert }{\bar

1958: {r}^{2}} \label{preSpeiser}%

1959: \end{equation}

1960: and for $\bar{p}_{\phi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},0)\ $being positive (i.e., parent

1961: particle was prograde), $d\phi/d\tau$ is always positive. This corresponds to

1962: Speiser-type orbits because when the particles bounce back and forth across

1963: the peak of $\psi$, they are bouncing back and forth between regions where the

1964: poloidal magnetic field $\sim\partial\psi/\partial r$ changes sign. As

1965: discussed in Section \ref{Speiser} of Appendix \ref{Orbit review}, this

1966: results in paramagnetism, i.e., positively charged particles moving in the

1967: positive $\phi$ direction and so \textit{producing} rather than opposing a

1968: $B_{z}$ field. Creation of Speiser-orbiting particles sustains the poloidal

1969: magnetic field against losses and will amplify an initial seed poloidal field;

1970: creation of Speiser particles therefore constitutes a dynamo for driving

1971: toroidal current.

1972: 

1973: Figure

1974: \ref{speiser_pericenter=0.95_theta=18_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=1.2_omegaratio=10.eps}

1975: shows the creation of a Speiser orbit by photo-emission charging of a neutral

1976: particle near the poloidal field magnetic axis. Figure

1977: \ref{speiser_pericenter=0.95_theta=18_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=1.2_omegaratio=10.eps}%

1978: (a) shows that the orbit is paramagnetic (i.e., particle moves in positive

1979: $\phi$ direction) while Fig.

1980: \ref{speiser_pericenter=0.95_theta=18_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=1.2_omegaratio=10.eps}%

1981: (b) shows that the orbit involves repeated reflection from the interior of a

1982: poloidal flux surface in the manner discussed in Section \ref{Speiser} of

1983: Appendix \ref{Orbit review}.\begin{figure}[ptb]

1984: \caption{Speiser orbit resulting from parent with $\bar{H}=0$, $\bar{\rho

1985: }_{pericenter}=0.95,$ $\theta=18^{0},$ $\alpha=0^{0}.$ Charging occurs at

1986: $\bar{R}_{\ast}=1.2$ and the child particle is a positive particle with

1987: $\omega_{c\sigma}/\Omega_{0}=10;\ $ (a) the $\bar{x}$-$\bar{y}$ plane orbit is

1988: counter-clockwise corresponding to paramagnetic motion; (b) the $\bar{r}%

1989: $-$\bar{z}$ plane orbit involves the particle continuously reflecting from the

1990: interior of a toroidal flux tube.}%

1991: \label{speiser_pericenter=0.95_theta=18_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=1.2_omegaratio=10.eps}%

1992: \epsscale{0.5} \plotone{f9.eps}\end{figure}

1993: 

1994: \subsection{Drain-hole particles ($K\cos\theta\simeq-1/2$)}

1995: 

1996: Charged particles born with $\bar{P}_{\phi}=0\ $are called `drain-hole'

1997: particles because they behave as if they are going down a drain. The

1998: properties of drain-hole particles restricted to the $z=0$ plane were briefly

1999: examined in

2000: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Bellan2007}}{\citet{Bellan2007}}}%

2001: %BeginExpansion

2002: \citet{Bellan2007}%

2003: %EndExpansion

2004: ; here the more general 3D situation will be considered. Using

2005: Eq.\ref{norm can momentum} and $\bar{p}_{\phi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast

2006: })=\bar{L}\cos\theta$ the $\bar{P}_{\phi}=0$ condition corresponds to

2007: \begin{equation}

2008: \bar{L}\cos\theta=-\frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }%

2009: {2\Omega_{0}}\ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast}%

2010: )\ \label{drain-perigee}%

2011: \end{equation}

2012: implying that $\cos\theta$ is negative in which case the parent particle must

2013: have been retrograde. The effective potential (see

2014: Eq.\ref{effective potential magnetized}) for the $\bar{P}_{\phi}=0$ class of

2015: particles reduces to

2016: \begin{equation}

2017: \chi(\bar{r},\bar{z})\simeq\frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle

2018: ^{2}}{8\Omega_{0}^{2}}\frac{\left(  \bar{\psi}(\bar{r},\bar{z})\right)  ^{2}%

2019: }{\ \bar{r}^{2}}\ -\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{\bar{r}^{2}+\bar{z}^{2}}}

2020: \label{chi free fall}%

2021: \end{equation}

2022: which has a funnel (i.e., drain-like) profile near $\bar{r}=0,$ $\bar{z}=0$

2023: due to the second (gravitational) term and a hill on the funnel side wall with

2024: peak near $\bar{r}=\bar{a},$ $\bar{z}=0$ due to the first (St\"{o}rmer) term.

2025: A particle initially on the hill (i.e., near the poloidal field magnetic axis)

2026: will fall down the hill into the drain-like funnel; see right hand column,

2027: second row from bottom in Fig. \ref{effective-potential-scan.eps} for plot of

2028: first term in Eq.\ref{chi free fall}. Thus, no matter where a $\bar{P}_{\phi

2029: }=0$ particle starts in $\bar{r},\bar{z}$ space, it eventually follows a

2030: spiral path down to\ $\bar{r}=0,\bar{z}=0;$ no centrifugal force will ever

2031: push it back outwards because the first term in Eq.\ref{chi free fall} has no

2032: singularity at $\bar{r}=0$ (recall that $\bar{\psi}\sim\bar{r}^{2}$ for small

2033: $\bar{r},\bar{z}$). The sense of this downward spiraling trajectory will be in

2034: the $-\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle $ direction as shown by

2035: Eq.\ref{phidot}. Since $\bar{\psi}\sim\bar{r}^{2}$ for small $\bar{r},\bar{z}$

2036: it is seen from Eq.\ref{phidot} that drain-hole particles have a limiting

2037: angular velocity

2038: \begin{equation}

2039: \lim_{\bar{r},\bar{z}\rightarrow0}\frac{\ d\phi}{d\tau}\ =-\ \frac

2040: {\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}\ }\lim_{\bar{r}%

2041: ,\bar{z}\rightarrow0}\left(  \frac{\bar{\psi}(\bar{r},\bar{z})}{\bar{r}^{2}%

2042: }\right)  =const. \label{drain-hole ang vel}%

2043: \end{equation}

2044: 

2045: 

2046: Combination of Eqs. \ref{p range} and \ref{drain-perigee} show that drain-hole

2047: particles can only be created if the accessibility condition%

2048: \begin{equation}

2049: \frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle ^{2}}{4\Omega_{0}^{2}%

2050: }\ \left(  \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast})\right)  ^{2}<\left(

2051: 2\bar{\rho}^{2}\bar{H}+2\bar{\rho}\right)  \cos^{2}\theta

2052: \ \label{accessibility}%

2053: \end{equation}

2054: is satisfied, a condition that $\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle

2055: /\Omega_{0}$ not be too large. Since $\bar{H}\simeq0$ is assumed, $\cos

2056: \theta\simeq-1$ for drain-hole particles, and since $\bar{\rho}=\sqrt{\bar

2057: {r}^{2}+\ \bar{z}^{2}}$ is required to be larger than the pericenter, this

2058: condition becomes

2059: \begin{equation}

2060: \left\vert \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast})\right\vert <\ \left\vert

2061: \frac{2\Omega_{0}}{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }\sqrt

2062: {2\bar{\rho}_{pericenter}}\right\vert . \label{drain hole creation criterion}%

2063: \end{equation}

2064: Because Eq.\ref{drain hole creation criterion} requires $\left\langle

2065: \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle /\Omega_{0}$ to be small, drain-hole particles,

2066: like Speiser particles, result from dust grains with grain radii consistent in

2067: order of magnitude with Eq.\ref{rdnom}.

2068: 

2069: Particles with $\bar{P}_{\phi}$ exactly zero (\textquotedblleft

2070: perfect\textquotedblright\ drain-hole particles) fall down the gravitational

2071: potential all the way to the central object at the origin $\bar{r}=0,$

2072: $\bar{z}=0.$ Particles that are not quite perfect drain-hole particles will

2073: have small, but finite $\bar{P}_{\phi}$ and so will reflect when close to the

2074: central object.

2075: 

2076: \begin{figure}[ptb]

2077: \caption{Drain-hole particle ($\bar{H}=0,$ $\bar{\rho}_{pericenter}=0.2,$

2078: $\theta=170^{0},\alpha=0,$ $\bar{R}_{\ast}=0.8$) falls across magnetic field

2079: all the way to the central object. This is a heavy particle (dust grain)\ and

2080: has $\omega_{c\sigma}/\Omega_{0}=1.6;$ (a)\ shows orbit projection in $\bar

2081: {x}$-$\bar{y}$ plane, (b) shows projection in $\bar{r}$-$\bar{z}$ plane.

2082: Dotted line shows trajectory parent would have continued to have if it had not

2083: become charged.}%

2084: \label{drain-hole_pericenter=0.3_theta=170_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=0.8_omegaratio=1.6.eps}%

2085: \epsscale{0.5} \plotone{f10.eps}\end{figure}

2086: 

2087: \begin{figure}[ptb]

2088: \caption{(a)\ Mechanical angular momentum $p_{\phi}$ for drain-hole particle

2089: is not conserved when particle becomes charged, (b)\ canonical angular

2090: momentum $P_{\phi},$ kinetic energy (KE) and potential energy (PE). The

2091: magnitudes of the kinetic and potential energy increase without bound as the

2092: particle falls towards the central object. The canonical angular momentum is

2093: conserved and is near zero upon charging.}%

2094: \label{drain-hole_pericenter=0.3_theta=170_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=0.8_omegaratio=1.6momenta-adobe.eps}%

2095: \epsscale{0.5} \plotone{f11.eps}\end{figure}

2096: 

2097: Figure

2098: \ref{drain-hole_pericenter=0.3_theta=170_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=0.8_omegaratio=1.6.eps}

2099: shows a numerical calculation of a drain-hole particle orbit with $\bar{H}=0.$

2100: The solid line in Fig.

2101: \ref{drain-hole_pericenter=0.3_theta=170_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=0.8_omegaratio=1.6.eps}%

2102: (a) shows the projection of the drain-hole orbit in the $\bar{x}$-$\bar{y}$

2103: plane. The orbit the neutral particle would have had if it had not encountered

2104: any photons and so remained neutral is shown as a dotted line. Figure

2105: \ref{drain-hole_pericenter=0.3_theta=170_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=0.8_omegaratio=1.6.eps}%

2106: (b)\ shows the projection in the $\bar{r}$-$\bar{z}$ plane with surfaces of

2107: constant $\psi$ indicated (the dotted line again shows the orbit the neutral

2108: particle would have had if it had not encountered any photons). The drain-hole

2109: particle has a retrograde orbit (clockwise sense resulting from its angle of

2110: inclination $\theta>90^{0}$). Figure

2111: \ref{drain-hole_pericenter=0.3_theta=170_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=0.8_omegaratio=1.6momenta-adobe.eps}%

2112: (a) shows that the mechanical angular momentum is not constant after charging

2113: while Fig.

2114: \ref{drain-hole_pericenter=0.3_theta=170_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=0.8_omegaratio=1.6momenta-adobe.eps}%

2115: (b) shows that the canonical angular momentum remains constant at zero after

2116: charging. Figure

2117: \ref{drain-hole_pericenter=0.3_theta=170_alpha=0_rho0=4_rstar=0.8_omegaratio=1.6momenta-adobe.eps}%

2118: (b) also shows how the magnitudes of the potential and kinetic energies

2119: increase without bound as the particle descends towards the central object

2120: while the total energy stays zero (kinetic, potential and total energies shown

2121: as dashed lines).

2122: 

2123: When drain-hole particles approach the central object, the gravitational term

2124: in Eq.\ref{chi free fall} dominates (recall that $\bar{\psi}\sim\bar{r}^{2}$

2125: at small $\bar{r}$ and near $\bar{z}=0$). It therefore makes sense to use

2126: spherical coordinates in this region in which case the Hamiltonian is

2127: approximately

2128: \begin{equation}

2129: 0\simeq\frac{1}{2}\left(  \frac{d\bar{R}}{d\tau}\right)  ^{2}-\frac{1}{\bar

2130: {R}} \label{free-fall}%

2131: \end{equation}

2132: where $\bar{R}$ is the spherical radius and $\bar{H}\simeq0$ has been assumed.

2133: Equation \ref{free-fall} shows that the free-fall velocity scales as

2134: \begin{equation}

2135: \ \left\vert \frac{d\bar{R}}{d\tau}\right\vert \ =\sqrt{\frac{2}{\bar{R}\ }}

2136: \label{free-fall velocity}%

2137: \end{equation}

2138: and particle flux conservation over a spherical surface $4\pi\bar{R}^{2}$

2139: shows that $4\pi\bar{R}^{2}n_{dh}(\bar{R})d\bar{R}/d\tau=const.$ where

2140: $n_{dh}(\bar{R})$ is the density of drain-hole particles. Thus, if the

2141: incoming drain-hole particles do not accumulate, spherical focusing combined

2142: with the accelerating free-fall velocity shows that the density of drain-hole

2143: particles scales as%

2144: \begin{equation}

2145: n_{dh}(\bar{R})\sim\frac{1}{\bar{R}^{2}d\bar{R}/d\tau}\sim\frac{1}{\bar

2146: {R}^{3/2}}. \label{drain-hole density}%

2147: \end{equation}

2148: 

2149: 

2150: Accumulation of the drain-hole particles in the vicinity of the central object

2151: will also increase the density of drain-hole particles with time. There is

2152: thus both a temporal increase and a geometrically-induced increase of the

2153: drain-hole particle density as $\bar{R}$ decreases. Since the sibling

2154: \ electrons were left stranded at large $\bar{r},$ what results is the

2155: establishment of a large positive charge density near the central object and

2156: an equal-magnitude negative charge density at large $\bar{r}$. The flow

2157: pattern of the drain hole particles and the location of the stranded electrons

2158: is sketched in Fig.\ref{f12.eps}. Eventually the positive space charge near

2159: the central object becomes so large that it produces a repulsive electrostatic

2160: electric field that balances the gravitational force acting on any additional

2161: drain hole particles. The large positive potential near $\bar{r}=0$ will tend

2162: to drive\ axial electric currents flowing away from the $\bar{z}=0$ plane

2163: resulting in the loss or neutralization of some of the drain-hole particles.

2164: The axial electric current could result from attraction of electrons near

2165: $\bar{r}=0$ towards the $\bar{z}=0$ plane or from expulsion of positive

2166: particles away from the $\bar{z}=0$ plane. Either electron attraction or

2167: positive particle repulsion will deplete the positive space charge density

2168: near $\bar{r}=0.$ There will then have to be a replenishing flow of additional

2169: drain hole particles into the $\bar{r}=0$ region to compensate for this

2170: depletion of positive space charge.\ Being very low mass, the stranded

2171: electrons have very small Larmor orbit radius and so are constrained to stay

2172: essentially right on the poloidal flux surface on which they were

2173: photo-emitted (see Secs.\ref{light-weight trapping} and

2174: \ref{trapping well width}). The electron flow is thus at a much larger

2175: $|\bar{z}|$ than the drain-hole particle radially inward flow which is

2176: concentrated near the $\bar{z}=0$ plane. The vertical separation between the

2177: respective radially inward flows of positive and negative particles means that

2178: bipolar toroidal magnetic fields will be generated in the interstitial regions

2179: between the electron flow and the drain-hole flow (see positive and negative

2180: $B_{\phi}$ regions in Fig.\ref{f12.eps}).

2181: 

2182: \begin{figure}[ptb]

2183: \caption{Drain hole dust grains fall across poloidal field lines towards

2184: central object leaving behind stranded electrons which are confined to

2185: poloidal flux surface on which they are born. Drain hole particles accumulate

2186: near central object creating large positive charge there. This repels positive

2187: particles (drain hole particles, ions) to flow axially away from $z=0$ plane

2188: and also attracts stranded electrons which can flow on poloidal flux surface.

2189: The result is a clockwise poloidal current flow pattern in upper-half $r$-$z$

2190: plane, giving a positive $B_{\phi}$ in region linked by poloidal current and a

2191: negative $B_{\phi}$ in lower-half $r$-$z$ plane where poloidal current flow is

2192: counter-clockwise.}%

2193: \label{f12.eps}%

2194: \plotone{f12.eps}\end{figure}

2195: 

2196: \begin{figure}[ptb]

2197: \caption{Flow of conventional electric current for drain hole particles and

2198: their associated stranded electrons. The electric field on the $z=0$ plane is

2199: radially outwards while the current flow is radially inwards so

2200: $\mathbf{J\cdot E}$ is negative, indicating that the infall of the drain-hole

2201: particles constitutes a dynamo. The $\mathbf{J\times B}$ force (which is

2202: essentially due to the gradient of $B_{\phi}^{2}$ and which is strongest at

2203: small $r$) drives a bipolar axial jet.}%

2204: \label{f13.eps}%

2205: \plotone{f13.eps}\end{figure}

2206: 

2207: If no electric current is allowed to flow, the situation is like a

2208: free-standing battery not connected to any load, i.e., a situation where there

2209: is a voltage differential across the battery terminals, but no current flows.

2210: However, if bipolar axial currents are allowed to flow, then the situation is

2211: like a battery connected to a load and the resulting radially inward

2212: drain-hole particle current in the $\bar{z}=0$ plane is like the internal

2213: current in a battery. The overall current flow pattern sketched in

2214: Fig.\ref{f12.eps} results from a combination of drain hole particle and

2215: electron motion. This pattern is sketched in Fig.\ref{f13.eps} as a

2216: conventional electric current. The geometry of the current flow pattern and

2217: electromotive force driving this current is identical to the geometry and flow

2218: patterns in the laboratory configuration simulating astrophysical jets

2219: described in

2220: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Hsu2002,Hsu2005}}{\citet{Hsu2002,Hsu2005}} }%

2221: %BeginExpansion

2222: \citet{Hsu2002,Hsu2005}

2223: %EndExpansion

2224: and

2225: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Bellan-a2005}}{\citet{Bellan2005}}}%

2226: %BeginExpansion

2227: \citet{Bellan2005}%

2228: %EndExpansion

2229: . The electric field due to the drain hole particles corresponds to the

2230: electric field produced by the capacitor bank used in the laboratory

2231: experiment. This geometry\ and symmetry is also identical to that proposed by

2232: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Lovelace1976}}{\citet{Lovelace1976}}}%

2233: %BeginExpansion

2234: \citet{Lovelace1976}%

2235: %EndExpansion

2236: , the only difference being the means by which the radial electric field is

2237: produced. The magnetic fields in the lab and astrophysical plasmas have the

2238: same toroidal/poloidal topology.

2239: 

2240: The drain-hole current is\ thus powered by gravity and has $J_{r}$ radially

2241: inward with $E_{r}$ radially outward so that $\mathbf{J\cdot E}$ is negative,

2242: consistent with the condition for a dynamo. The drain-hole particles have

2243: retrograde motion so their mechanical angular momentum is negative. This

2244: negative mechanical angular momentum is removed by the braking torque

2245: $\mathbf{r\times F=}$ $\left(  r\hat{r}\right)  \times\left(  J_{r}\hat

2246: {r}\times B_{z}\hat{z}\right)  =-rJ_{r}B_{z}\hat{z}$ which is positive since

2247: $J_{r}$ is negative and $B_{z}$ is positive.

2248: 

2249: The radially inward current is symmetric with respect to $z.$ This property

2250: provides enough information to determine the symmetry properties of $I(r,z).$

2251: The radially inward drain-hole current means that $J_{r}<0$ and $J_{z}=0$ in

2252: the $z=0$ plane. Since Eq.\ref{Jpol2} shows that $J_{r}=-(2\pi r)^{-1}\partial

2253: I/\partial z$ and $J_{z}=$ $(2\pi r)^{-1}\partial I/\partial r$ the condition

2254: $J_{z}=0$ means $I(r,z)$ must vanish in the $z=0$ plane$.$ Furthermore $I$

2255: must be an odd function of $z$ in order for $J_{r}=-(2\pi r)^{-1}\partial

2256: I/\partial z$ to be finite in the $z=0$ plane. Finally $\partial I/\partial z$

2257: should be positive in order to have $J_{r}<0.$ Thus, $I(r,z)$ should be

2258: positive for $z>0$ and negative for $z<0$ so that, as sketched in

2259: Fig.\ref{f13.eps}, there will be a bipolar axial current flowing along the $z$

2260: axis outwards from the $z=0$ plane. The accumulation of drain-hole particles

2261: constitutes the engine that drives the poloidal electric current that drives

2262: the astrophysical jet. The $z$-symmetry of $\psi(r,z)$ and $z$-antisymmetry of

2263: $I(r,z)$ has been noted previously by

2264: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Ferreira1995}}{\citet{Ferreira1995}}}%

2265: %BeginExpansion

2266: \citet{Ferreira1995}%

2267: %EndExpansion

2268: .

2269: 

2270: Electromagnetic power flow from this dynamo can also be interpreted in terms

2271: of the Poynting flux $\mathbf{S=E\times B}/\mu_{0}.$ Azimuthal symmetry

2272: applied to Faraday's law shows that $E_{\phi}$ is zero for a steady-state

2273: situation in which case the $z$-component of the Poynting flux reduces to

2274: $S_{z}=E_{r}B_{\phi}/\mu_{0}.$ Because $E_{r}$ and $B_{\phi}$ are both

2275: positive for $z>0$ whereas $E_{r}$ is positive while $B_{\phi}$ is negative

2276: for $z<0$, it is seen that $S_{z}$ is positive for $z>0$ and negative for

2277: $z<0.$ Thus, the Poynting flux associated with this dust-driven dynamo injects

2278: energy into bipolar astrophysical jets flowing normally outward from the $z=0$ plane.

2279: 

2280: One can ask just how close to exactly zero $\bar{P}_{\phi}$ has to be in order

2281: for a particle to behave as a drain-hole particle. Exact $\bar{P}_{\phi}=0$

2282: would enable a particle to spiral down all the way to the center of the

2283: central object, an obviously unrealistic situation because the particle would

2284: vaporize as it approached the stellar surface. A more realistic question then

2285: is how small does $\bar{P}_{\phi}$ have to be in order for a drain-hole

2286: particle to fall to some specified normalized radius $\bar{R}_{small}\ \ $that

2287: is much less than unity. $\bar{R}_{small}$ would presumably be of the order of

2288: the radius at which the astrophysical jet starts and so would be of the order

2289: of the thickness of the accretion disk or somewhat smaller. Since the

2290: dimensionless form of Eq.\ref{H} is

2291: \begin{equation}

2292: \bar{H}=\ \frac{1}{2}(\bar{v}_{r}^{2}+\bar{v}_{z}^{2})\ +\chi(\bar{r},\bar{z})

2293: \label{H TP}%

2294: \end{equation}

2295: where the effective potential is

2296: \begin{equation}

2297: \chi(\bar{r},\bar{z})=\frac{1}{2\bar{r}^{2}}\left(  \bar{P}_{\phi}%

2298: \ \ -\ \frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}}%

2299: \bar{\psi}(\bar{r},\bar{z})\right)  ^{2}-\frac{1}{\sqrt{\bar{r}^{2}+\bar

2300: {z}^{2}}} \label{chi TP}%

2301: \end{equation}

2302: and since $\bar{H}\simeq0$, the turning point for a drain-hole particle is

2303: where $\chi(\bar{r},\bar{z})\simeq0.$ Because $\bar{\psi}(\bar{r},\bar

2304: {z})\rightarrow0$ at small $\bar{r},$ the inner turning point will therefore

2305: be where $\bar{P}_{\phi}^{2}=2\bar{r}^{2}/\sqrt{\bar{r}^{2}+\bar{z}^{2}}.$

2306: Assuming that\ the inner turning point is at $\bar{r}\ \sim\bar{R}_{small}$

2307: and $\tilde{z}\simeq0,$ the inner turning point is where $\bar{P}_{\phi}%

2308: ^{2}=2\bar{R}_{small}.$ A sufficient condition for assuming $\bar{P}_{\phi

2309: }\simeq0$ is thus $\bar{P}_{\phi}^{2}<2\bar{R}_{small}$, i.e.,

2310: \begin{equation}

2311: -\sqrt{2\bar{R}_{small}}<\bar{L}\cos\theta+\frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma

2312: }\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}}\ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast}%

2313: )<\sqrt{2\bar{R}_{small}} \label{Pphi crit}%

2314: \end{equation}

2315: and particles satisfying this condition will fall to a normalized radius

2316: $\bar{R}<$ $\bar{R}_{small}.$ For given $\bar{L},$ $\left\langle

2317: \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle /2\Omega_{0},$ and $\ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast

2318: },\bar{z}_{\ast})$ this corresponds to a narrow range in $\theta$ centered

2319: about the angle at which $\bar{P}_{\phi}$ equals zero $\ $exactly. Equation

2320: \ref{Pphi crit} can be expressed as $\ \cos\left(  \theta+\Delta

2321: \theta/2\right)  <\cos\theta<\cos\left(  \theta-\Delta\theta/2\right)  $ where%

2322: \begin{equation}%

2323: \begin{array}

2324: [c]{ccc}%

2325: \bar{L}\cos\left(  \theta+\Delta\theta/2\right)  & = & -\sqrt{2\bar{R}%

2326: _{small}}-\frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}%

2327: }\ \bar{\psi}(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast})\\

2328: \bar{L}\cos\left(  \theta-\Delta\theta/2\right)  & = & \sqrt{2\bar{R}_{small}%

2329: }-\frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}}\ \bar{\psi

2330: }(\bar{r}_{\ast},\bar{z}_{\ast}).

2331: \end{array}

2332: \label{def theta minmax}%

2333: \end{equation}

2334: Subtracting these two equations from each other shows that the range

2335: $\Delta\theta$ for drain-hole particles to reach $\bar{R}_{small}$ is

2336: \begin{equation}

2337: \Delta\theta\simeq\frac{2\sqrt{2\bar{R}_{small}}}{\bar{L}\sin\theta}.

2338: \label{delta theta}%

2339: \end{equation}

2340: The solid angle of incident particles lying between $\theta$ and

2341: $\theta+\Delta\theta$ is $2\pi\sin\theta\Delta\theta$ and so the fraction

2342: $f_{dh}$ of all incident particles with angular momentum $\bar{L}$ that become

2343: drain-hole particles and fall to $\bar{R}<$ $\bar{R}_{small}$ is $\ $ $\ $

2344: \begin{equation}

2345: f_{dh}=\ \frac{2\pi\sin\theta\Delta\theta}{4\pi}\ =\frac{\ \sqrt{2\bar

2346: {R}_{small}}}{\bar{L}\ }. \label{drain hole fraction}%

2347: \end{equation}

2348: 

2349: 

2350: \subsection{Drain hole dynamo power}

2351: 

2352: The strength of the equilibrium radial electric field produced by drain-hole

2353: particles can be estimated as follows: Before any drain-hole particles

2354: accumulate at small $\bar{r},$ there is no radial electric field, but as the

2355: drain-hole particles accumulate, the radial outward electric field will

2356: develop. The force due to the radial outward electric field will oppose the

2357: gravitational and magnetic forces causing the inward motion of the drain-hole

2358: particles. The balance between these opposing forces is quantified by the

2359: radial equation of motion. In cylindrical un-normalized coordinates the radial

2360: equation of motion governing drain-hole particles with $v_{z}=0$ in the $z=0$

2361: plane (where $B_{\phi}=0$ due to $z$-antisymmetry of $I(r,z)$) is

2362: \begin{equation}

2363: m_{d}\left(  \ddot{r}-r\dot{\phi}^{2}\right)  =q_{d}\left(  E_{r}+r\dot{\phi

2364: }B_{z}\right)  -\frac{m_{d}MG}{r^{2}}.\label{drain-hole motion}%

2365: \end{equation}

2366: $B_{z}$ is approximately uniform at small $r$ so $\psi\simeq\pi r^{2}B_{z}%

2367: \ $at small $r$ in which case the drain-hole particle condition $P_{\phi

2368: }=m_{d}r^{2}\dot{\phi}+q_{d}\psi/2\pi=0$ implies $\ \dot{\phi}=-q_{d}%

2369: B_{z}/2m_{d}.\ $On eliminating $\dot{\phi}\ $in Eq.\ref{drain-hole motion},

2370: the radial equation of motion governing drain-hole particles is%

2371: \begin{equation}%

2372: \begin{array}

2373: [c]{ccl}%

2374: \ \ddot{r} & = & \frac{q_{d}}{m_{d}}E_{r}-r\frac{\ q_{d}^{2}B_{z}^{2}}%

2375: {4m_{d}^{2}\ }\ -\frac{MG}{r^{2}}\\

2376: & \simeq & \frac{q_{d}}{m_{d}}E_{r}\ \ -\frac{MG}{r^{2}}%

2377: \end{array}

2378: \label{drain-hole motion2}%

2379: \end{equation}

2380: where the second line is for small $r.$ When $E_{r}=0$, the drain-hole

2381: particles fall inwards with gravitational acceleration, but as $E_{r}$ builds

2382: up because of accumulation at small $r$ of fallen-in positively charged

2383: drain-hole particles, Eq.\ref{drain-hole motion2} shows that this electric

2384: field will oppose the gravitational force and retard the infall. The

2385: drain-hole particles will continue to fall in and accumulate, thereby

2386: increasing $E_{r}$ until the radially outward repulsive electrostatic force

2387: due to $E_{r}$ becomes so strong as to balance gravity and cause $\ddot{r}$ to

2388: vanish. Thus, gravitational force is balanced by the radially outward force

2389: from the space charge electric field of the accumulated positively charged

2390: drain-hole particles. The saturation electric field is

2391: \begin{equation}

2392: \ E_{r}\ \ =\frac{m_{d}MG}{q_{d}r^{2}}.\label{drain hole Er}%

2393: \end{equation}

2394: 

2395: 

2396: Using $E_{r}=-\partial V/\partial r,$ integration of Eq.\ref{drain hole Er}

2397: from large $r$ to the jet radius $r_{jet}$ gives the voltage at the jet to be%

2398: \begin{equation}

2399: V_{jet}=\frac{m_{d}MG}{q_{d}r_{jet}}. \label{Vjet}%

2400: \end{equation}

2401: 

2402: 

2403: The jet electric current corresponds to the charge per second carried inward

2404: by the drain-hole particles. The number of drain-hole particles accreting per

2405: second is $\dot{M}_{dh}/m_{d}$ where $\dot{M}_{dh}$ is the mass accretion rate

2406: per second of drain-hole particles and $m_{d}$ is the mass of an individual

2407: drain-hole particle. Thus, the poloidal electric current is

2408: \begin{equation}

2409: I_{jet}=q_{d}\dot{M}_{dh}/m_{d}. \label{Ijet}%

2410: \end{equation}

2411: The jet electric power is

2412: \begin{equation}

2413: P_{jet}=I_{jet}V_{jet}=\frac{\ \dot{M}_{dh}MG}{\ r_{jet}}\ \ \ \label{Pjet}%

2414: \end{equation}

2415: which is just the rate at which gravitational potential energy is released by

2416: drain-hole particles falling from large $r$ to the jet radius. The drain-hole

2417: dynamo converts the gravitational energy released from accretion into

2418: electrical power suitable for driving bipolar jets that are moving away from

2419: the $z=0$ plane. The jet power is proportional to both the central object mass

2420: $M$ and the drain-hole mass accretion rate $\dot{M}_{dh}$. Paper I showed that

2421: the dust mass accretion rate can be a substantial fraction of the total mass

2422: accretion so $P_{jet}$ can be a substantial fraction of the power of all

2423: accreting material. The jet power accelerates the jet material to escape

2424: velocity and so is equal to the power available from accreting drain-hole dust

2425: grains. Thus, assuming that the axial starting point for jet particles is of

2426: the order of $r_{jet},$ the power required to drive the jet particles to

2427: escape velocity is $P_{jet}=\dot{M}_{jet}MG/r_{jet}$ and so the jet mass

2428: outflow would be approximately equivalent to the drain hole particle accretion

2429: rate, i.e., $\dot{M}_{jet}\simeq\dot{M}_{dh}.$ The particles in the jet would

2430: not, in general, be the drain hole particles, but instead would be plasma

2431: magnetohydrodynamically accelerated using the drain-hole accretion as the

2432: power source. Assuming $\bar{L}\simeq1\ $ and $\bar{R}_{small}=r_{jet}%

2433: /a\sim0.1$ in Eq.\ref{drain hole fraction}, the fraction of retrograde

2434: particles that are drain hole and able to reach $r_{jet}$ would be

2435: $f_{dh}=\ \allowbreak0.4;$ the fraction of combined retrograde and prograde

2436: dust grains would thus be 0.2. The example in paper I\ showed that because of

2437: differences in proportional slowing down, the dust accretion rate would be

2438: enriched to be 20\% of the gas accretion rate. This gives $\dot{M}_{dh}%

2439: /\dot{M}_{g}\sim0.2\times0.2=0.04$ and so predicts a jet power that would be

2440: about 1/25 of the power associated with all accreting dust and gas. This ratio

2441: of outflow power to accretion power is consistent with the estimate given by

2442: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Bacciotti2004}}{\citet{Bacciotti2004}} }%

2443: %BeginExpansion

2444: \citet{Bacciotti2004}

2445: %EndExpansion

2446: using HST observations of T Tauri jets.

2447: 

2448: \section{Torque and angular momentum}

2449: 

2450: An important question repeatedly asked about accretion disks and jets is the

2451: role played by jets in satisfying conservation of \ mechanical angular

2452: momentum of the accreting material. It will now be shown that mechanical

2453: angular momentum is exactly conserved in our model.

2454: 

2455: Because of axisymmetry, the canonical angular momentum of the $j^{th}$

2456: $\ $charged dust grain

2457: \begin{equation}

2458: P_{\phi d,j}^{+}=m_{+}rv_{\phi}^{j}+Ze\psi(r,z)/2\pi\ \label{canmomentum}%

2459: \end{equation}

2460: and the canonical angular momentum of the $k^{th}$ electron

2461: \begin{equation}

2462: P_{\phi,k}^{e}=m_{e}rv_{\phi}^{k}-e\psi(r,z)/2\pi\label{e can momentum}%

2463: \end{equation}

2464: at any position $r,z$ are both invariants, i.e., $P_{\phi d}^{+}=const.$ and

2465: $P_{\phi}^{e}=const.$ In general, the dust grains and the electrons at any

2466: position $r$,$z$ will have quite different values of $v_{\phi}\ $but, in order

2467: for the plasma to be macroscopically quasi-neutral, there must be

2468: approximately $Z$ electrons adjacent to each dust grain$.$ Because electron

2469: and dust grain trajectories differ, these neighboring electrons will typically

2470: not be the original sibling electrons photo-emitted when the dust grain became charged.

2471: 

2472: The radial and axial velocities of a specific dust grain or electron can be

2473: written as $v_{r}^{\sigma,j}\ =dr^{\sigma,j}/dt$ and $\ v_{z}^{\sigma

2474: ,j}\ =dz^{\sigma,j}/dt$ where $r^{\sigma,j}(t)\ $ and $z^{\sigma,j}(t)$ are

2475: the position of the $j^{th}$ particle of species $\sigma$. Since $P_{\phi}$ is

2476: conserved for each individual particle, the time derivatives of the $P_{\phi}%

2477: $'s of a dust grain at a location $r,z$ and its neighboring neutralizing $Z$

2478: electrons respectively give $dP_{\phi d,j}^{+}/dt=0$ and $dP_{\phi,k}%

2479: ^{e}/dt=0.$ Using $d\psi/dt=v_{r}\partial\psi/\partial r+v_{z}\partial

2480: \psi/\partial z$ for the time derivative of $\psi$ measured in the particle

2481: frame, respective time derivatives of Eqs.\ref{canmomentum} and

2482: \ref{e can momentum} give

2483: \begin{equation}

2484: \frac{d}{dt}\left(  m_{+}rv_{\phi}^{+,j}\right)  =\ -\frac{Ze}{2\pi}\left(

2485: \frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r}v_{r}^{+,j}+\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial

2486: z}v_{z}^{,j}\right)  \label{ang momentum dust deriv}%

2487: \end{equation}

2488: and

2489: \begin{equation}

2490: \frac{d}{dt}\left(  Zm_{e}rv_{\phi}^{e,k}\right)  \ =\frac{Ze}{2\pi}\left(

2491: \frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r}v_{r}^{e,k}+\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial

2492: z}v_{z}^{e,k}\right)  . \label{ang momentum electron deriv}%

2493: \end{equation}

2494: 

2495: 

2496: Using $B_{r}=-(2\pi r)^{-1}\partial\psi/\partial z$ and $B_{z}=(2\pi

2497: r)^{-1}\partial\psi/\partial r$ from Eq.\ref{Bpol def} and summing

2498: Eqs.\ref{ang momentum dust deriv} and \ref{ang momentum electron deriv} over

2499: the dust grains and their associated $Z$ neutralizing electrons at location

2500: $r,z$ gives

2501: \begin{equation}

2502: \frac{dL_{\phi}}{dt}=r\left(  J_{z}B_{r}-J_{r}B_{z}\right)  =\ \ r\hat{\phi

2503: }\cdot\mathbf{J}_{pol}\mathbf{\times B}_{pol} \label{MHD ang momentum}%

2504: \end{equation}

2505: where $J_{r}$, $J_{z}$ are the respective radial and axial current densities

2506: and $L_{\phi}$ is the total mechanical angular momentum density taking into

2507: account both dust grains and electrons. Thus, from the macroscopic point of

2508: view there is a torque about the $z$ axis, namely $\hat{z}\cdot\mathbf{r\times

2509: F}=\hat{z}\times\left(  r\hat{r}+z\hat{z}\right)  \mathbf{\cdot}\left(

2510: \mathbf{J}_{pol}\times\mathbf{B}_{pol}\right)  =r\hat{\phi}\cdot

2511: \mathbf{J}_{pol}\mathbf{\times B}_{pol}$ acting to change the local mechanical

2512: angular momentum density.

2513: 

2514: On the other hand, using Eqs.\ref{Bpol def} and \ref{Jpol2} it is seen that

2515: when this torque is integrated over the entire volume to infinity,

2516: \begin{equation}%

2517: \begin{array}

2518: [c]{ccl}%

2519: \int d^{3}r\,r\hat{\phi}\cdot\mathbf{J}_{pol}\times\mathbf{B}_{pol}\  & = &

2520: \int\ d^{3}r\,r^{2}\nabla\phi\cdot\left(  \frac{1}{2\pi}\nabla I\times

2521: \nabla\phi\right)  \times\left(  \frac{1}{2\pi}\nabla\psi\times\nabla

2522: \phi\right) \\

2523: & = & \frac{1}{4\pi^{2}}\int\ d^{3}r\,r^{2}\nabla\phi\times\left(  \ \nabla

2524: I\times\nabla\phi\right)  \cdot\left(  \ \nabla\psi\times\nabla\phi\right) \\

2525: & = & \frac{1}{4\pi^{2}}\int\ d^{3}r\,\nabla I\cdot\left(  \nabla\psi

2526: \times\nabla\phi\right) \\

2527: & = & \frac{1}{4\pi^{2}}\int\ d^{3}r\,\nabla\cdot\left(  I\left(  \nabla

2528: \psi\times\nabla\phi\right)  \right) \\

2529: & = & 0

2530: \end{array}

2531: \label{integrate torque}%

2532: \end{equation}

2533: since both $I$ and $\nabla\psi$ vanish at $\infty.$ Thus, the total mechanical

2534: angular momentum of the system is exactly \ conserved because there is no net

2535: torque applied to the whole system.

2536: 

2537: $I$ is an odd function of $z$ and $\psi$ is an even function of $z,$ and in

2538: the jet $\mathbf{J}_{pol}$ is nearly parallel to $\mathbf{B}_{pol}.$ This

2539: suggests the following generic form for the current

2540: \begin{equation}

2541: \mu_{0}I(r,z)\simeq\lambda\psi(r,z)\tanh\left(  \frac{z}{h(r)}\right)

2542: \label{generic current}%

2543: \end{equation}

2544: where $h(r)$ represents the height of the accretion disk at radius $r\ $and

2545: $\lambda,$ the current per flux, has units of inverse length. Thus far from

2546: the $z=0$ plane, Eq.\ref{generic current} has the form $\mu_{0}I/\psi=\lambda

2547: $sign$(z)$ so that the jet above the $z=0$ plane has the opposite handedness

2548: of the jet below the $z=0$ plane. The parameter $\lambda$ is closely related

2549: to the current per flux in a force-free system (i.e., a system satisfying

2550: $\ \nabla\times\mathbf{B=}\lambda\mathbf{B}$), but differs slightly because

2551: here $\lambda$ refers to just the ratio of the poloidal current to the

2552: poloidal flux. Using Eq.\ref{MHD ang momentum} it is seen that the density of

2553: MHD\ torque about the $z$ axis is of the generic form%

2554: \begin{equation}%

2555: \begin{array}

2556: [c]{ccl}%

2557: \frac{dL_{\phi}}{dt} & = & \frac{1}{4\pi^{2}r\ }\left(  -\frac{\partial

2558: I}{\partial r}\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial z}+\frac{\partial I}{\partial

2559: z}\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r}\right) \\

2560: & = & \frac{\lambda}{4\mu_{0}\pi^{2}r}\left\{  -\frac{\partial\ }{\partial

2561: r}\left[  \psi(r,z)\tanh\left(  \frac{z}{h(r)}\right)  \right]  \frac

2562: {\partial\psi}{\partial z}+\frac{\partial\ }{\partial z}\left[  \psi

2563: (r,z)\tanh\left(  \frac{z}{h(r)}\right)  \right]  \frac{\partial\psi}{\partial

2564: r}\right\}  .

2565: \end{array}

2566: \label{dLphitdt}%

2567: \end{equation}

2568: We assume that $\partial h/\partial r\ll1$ so the radial scale length at which

2569: $h$ changes is much larger than $h.$ Also, from symmetry $\partial

2570: \psi/\partial z=0$ on the $z=0$ midplane. Together, these conditions imply

2571: that near the midplane the last term in Eq.\ref{dLphitdt} dominates so near

2572: the midplane

2573: \begin{equation}

2574: \frac{dL_{\phi}}{dt}\simeq\frac{\lambda}{4\mu_{0}\pi^{2}hr}\frac{\psi

2575: (r,z)}{\cosh^{2}(z/h)}\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r}=\frac{\lambda\psi

2576: (r,z)}{2\pi\mu_{0}h}\frac{B_{z}(r,z)}{\cosh^{2}(z/h)}. \label{approx dLphidt}%

2577: \end{equation}

2578: As seen from Eq.\ref{integrate torque} the torque density is proportional to

2579: $\ -\nabla I\times\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\psi\sim-r\mathbf{J}_{pol}\cdot

2580: \nabla\psi$ and so is positive for poloidal current flow away from the

2581: poloidal field magnetic axis and negative for poloidal current flow towards

2582: the poloidal field magnetic axis$.$The \ torque density vanishes as

2583: $r\rightarrow0$ and as $r\rightarrow\infty$ and at the poloidal field magnetic

2584: axis because $r\mathbf{\ }\nabla\psi\rightarrow0$ at $r=0,$ $\mathbf{J}%

2585: _{pol}\rightarrow0$ at $r=\infty$, and $\nabla\psi=0$ at the poloidal field

2586: magnetic axis. The direction of poloidal current flow is shown in

2587: Fig.\ref{f13.eps}. This \ torque acts on the drain hole particles and their

2588: associated electrons since these particles are the carriers of the poloidal

2589: current as sketched in Fig.\ref{f12.eps} and Fig.\ref{f13.eps}. Unlike the

2590: drain-hole particles, no \ torque $r\hat{\phi}\cdot\mathbf{J\times B}$ about

2591: the $z$ axis acts on the Speiser particles because the current associated with

2592: the Speiser particles is in the $\phi$ direction.

2593: 

2594: \section{Conclusions}

2595: 

2596: We have shown that charging of collisionless dust grains incident upon a star

2597: causes the dust grain orbital dynamics to change from a relatively simple

2598: Kepler form to more complicated motion involving competition between magnetic

2599: and gravitational forces. This competition gives rise to five qualitatively

2600: different types of orbits. Two of these, the retrograde and prograde cometary

2601: orbits are just perturbations of Kepler cometary orbits. The orbit of a

2602: particle where magnetic forces overwhelm gravitational forces is just a Larmor

2603: (cyclotron) orbit and in this case the particle is constrained to remain

2604: within a poloidal Larmor radius of a poloidal flux surface in a manner similar

2605: to tokamak confinement. Particles where magnetic and gravitational forces are

2606: comparable can have two very different types of orbit depending on whether the

2607: incident particle is prograde or retrograde. Prograde particles of this latter

2608: type develop Speiser orbits; these orbits are paramagnetic with respect to the

2609: poloidal magnetic field and so can be the source of the poloidal magnetic

2610: field. Retrograde particles having comparable magnetic and gravitational

2611: forces can have a peculiar behavior whereby centrifugal force is eliminated

2612: with the result that the charged particle falls in towards the star along a

2613: spiral orbit. The accumulation of these \textquotedblleft

2614: drain-hole\textquotedblright\ particles near the star provides a radial

2615: electric field oriented so as to drive the poloidal currents and toroidal

2616: magnetic fields of an astrophysical jet.

2617: 

2618: This paper showed the existence of these different types of orbits, how their

2619: orientation is suitable for generating the poloidal and toroidal magnetic

2620: fields associated with an accretion disk and astrophysical jet, and how

2621: questions of angular momentum conservation are inherently resolved. A future

2622: paper will investigate the quantitative values of dust grain parameters

2623: required to produce toroidal and poloidal fields in the accretion disk of a

2624: young stellar object.

2625: 

2626: Finally, we offer some remarks regarding the effect of deviations from axisymmetry. The model presented here assumed perfect magnetic field axisymmetry 

2627: field whereas actual accretion disks are observed to have varying amounts of non-axisymmetry. This situation is  analogous

2628: to toroidal magnetic fusion devices such as tokamaks, reversed field pinches, and spheromaks all of which are modeled to first

2629: approximation as being axisymmetric, but in reality have  deviations from axisymmetry due to waves, turbulence, instability, and errors in machine construction.

2630: It is known from these devices that a modest breaking of symmetry  does not invalidate the results of the axisymmetric model, but rather weakens the

2631: conclusions, e.g., instead of cyclotron-orbiting particles being perfectly confined to the vicinity of a poloidal flux surface, when there is deviation from

2632: axisymmetry  cyclotron-orbiting particles can slowly wander away from  the  poloidal flux surface they started on.

2633: One would expect that deviations from axisymmetry in accretion disks  would cause a similar transport of cyclotron particles across poloidal flux surfaces.

2634: Because symmetry breaking  causes the canonical angular momentum of particles to change, it could be 

2635: considered as being somewhat like a collision that changes the canonical angular momentum of each of two  particles involved in a collision

2636: while conserving the total canonical angular momenta. Hence,  deviations from axisymmetry

2637: would  cause a   jiggling   of the canonical angular momenta of individual particles so that particles  on

2638: the borderline between being drain-hole and cyclotron or on the borderline between being Speiser and cyclotron might spend part of the  time (i.e., between jiggles) 

2639: being one type and part of the time  being the neighboring type. Similarly cyclotron particles that are on the borderline between being

2640: mirror-trapped and not mirror-trapped would, as they get kicked into and out of the mirror loss-cone,  spend part of the  time being mirror-trapped and 

2641: part of the  time not being mirror-trapped. However, at any given time there would

2642: be a certain fraction of particles of each type, i.e., a certain fraction would be cyclotron, a certain fraction would be drain-hole,   

2643: a certain fraction would be

2644: Speiser, and a certain fraction would be  cometary.

2645:   

2646: \pagebreak

2647: 

2648: \appendix

2649: 

2650: 

2651: \begin{center}

2652: \textbf{APPENDICES}

2653: \end{center}

2654: 

2655: \section{Derivation of generic poloidal flux

2656: function\label{Generic Flux Function}}

2657: 

2658: If all the toroidal current $\mathcal{I}_{\phi}$ is concentrated at the

2659: poloidal location $r=R_{0}$ and $z=0$, then the toroidal current density is

2660: $\mathbf{J}_{tor}=\ \hat{\phi}\mathcal{I}_{\phi}\delta(z)\delta(r-R_{0}).$ On defining%

2661: 

2662: \begin{equation}

2663: k^{2}=\frac{4R_{0}r}{\left(  R_{0}+r\right)  ^{2}+z^{2}} \label{k2 def}%

2664: \end{equation}

2665: analytic solution of Eq.\ref{Jtor} using $\mathbf{J}_{tor}=\ \hat{\phi

2666: }\mathcal{I}_{\phi}\delta(z)\delta(r-R_{0})$ gives

2667: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep{Jackson1999}}{\citep{Jackson1999}} }%

2668: %BeginExpansion

2669: \citep{Jackson1999}

2670: %EndExpansion

2671: \begin{equation}

2672: \psi(r,z)=\ \ \frac{\mu_{0}\mathcal{I}_{\phi}}{k\ }\sqrt{R_{0}r}\left[

2673: \left(  2-k^{2}\ \right)  K(k)-2E(k)\right]  \ \label{elliptic}%

2674: \end{equation}

2675: where $E$ and $K$ are complete elliptic integrals. Equation \ref{elliptic}

2676: describes the situation where all the current density is concentrated at

2677: $r=R_{0},$ $z=0$, i.e., the current flows in a wire of zero cross-section

2678: located at $r=R_{0},$ $z=0.$ This equation can also be used to (i)\ describe

2679: the field observed at locations far from the poloidal field magnetic axis of a

2680: distributed current localized in the vicinity of the poloidal field magnetic

2681: axis and (ii)\ as the Green's function for a distributed toroidal current.

2682: This is because for an observer who is far from $r=R_{0},$ $z=0,$ the field of

2683: a distributed toroidal current localized near $r=R_{0},$ $z=0$ is

2684: indistinguishable from the field of a zero cross-section wire carrying the

2685: same total current. Equation \ref{elliptic} has a logarithmic singularity at

2686: the wire location because the wire has infinitesimal diameter.

2687: 

2688: Two analytic limits are of interest for Eq.\ref{elliptic}. The first is where

2689: $r\ll R_{0}$ so

2690: \begin{equation}

2691: k^{2}\simeq\frac{4R_{0}r}{R_{0}^{2}+z^{2}} \label{k2 approx 1}%

2692: \end{equation}

2693: and the second is where $r\gg R_{0}$ so

2694: \begin{equation}

2695: k^{2}\simeq\frac{4R_{0}r}{r^{2}+z^{2}}. \label{k2 approx 2}%

2696: \end{equation}

2697: The former gives the field near the loop axis and the latter gives the field

2698: at locations far from the current loop. In both cases $k^{2}$ is small

2699: compared to unity and so the small argument asymptotic expansions of the

2700: complete elliptic integrals can be used, namely,%

2701: \begin{equation}

2702: E(k)=\frac{\pi}{2}\left(  1-\frac{k^{2}}{4}\ -\frac{3}{64}k^{4}-...\right)

2703: ,\qquad K(k)=\frac{\pi}{2}\left(  1+\frac{k^{2}}{4}+\frac{9}{64}%

2704: k^{4}+...\right)  . \label{elliptic asymptotic}%

2705: \end{equation}

2706: Thus for small $k,$ it is seen that $\left(  2-k^{2}\right)  K(k)-2E(k)\simeq

2707: \pi k^{4}/16$ in which case$\ $%

2708: \begin{equation}

2709: \psi(r,z)=\ \frac{\pi\mu_{0}\mathcal{I}_{\phi}}{2\ \ }\frac{R_{0}^{2}r^{2}%

2710: }{\left(  \left(  R_{0}+r\right)  ^{2}+z^{2}\right)  ^{3/2}}%

2711: \ \label{psi approx}%

2712: \end{equation}

2713: so for $r\ll R_{0}$

2714: \begin{equation}

2715: \lim_{r\ll a}\psi(r,z)\simeq\frac{\pi\mu_{0}\mathcal{I}_{\phi}}{2\ \ }%

2716: \frac{R_{0}^{2}r^{2}}{\left(  R_{0}^{2}+z^{2}\right)  ^{3/2}}

2717: \label{small r psi}%

2718: \end{equation}

2719: and for $r\gg R_{0}$%

2720: \begin{equation}

2721: \lim_{r\gg a}\psi(r,z)\simeq\frac{\pi\mu_{0}\mathcal{I}_{\phi}}{2\ \ }%

2722: \frac{R_{0}^{2}r^{2}}{\left(  r^{2}+z^{2}\right)  ^{3/2}}. \label{large r psi}%

2723: \end{equation}

2724: For purposes of discussion and also numerical computation, it is convenient to

2725: choose Eq.\ref{psi approx} to represent the poloidal flux of a generic

2726: toroidal current \textit{everywhere}. Making this choice for the poloidal flux

2727: function (instead of the prescription given by Eq.\ref{elliptic}) means that

2728: $\psi(r,z)$ has a smooth hill-top at $r=2R_{0}$ rather than a logarithmic

2729: singularity at $r=R_{0}$ and has the same behavior far from $r=R_{0},$ $z=0$

2730: as does Eq.\ref{elliptic}.

2731: 

2732: Thus, a useful analytic representation for a nonsingular, physically

2733: realizable flux function is obtained by recasting Eq.\ref{psi approx} \ in the

2734: form

2735: \begin{equation}

2736: \psi(r,z)=\ \ \frac{27\left(  r/a\right)  ^{2}}{8\left(  \left(  \frac{r}%

2737: {a}+\frac{1}{2}\right)  ^{2}+\left(  \frac{z}{a}\right)  ^{2}\right)  ^{3/2}%

2738: }\psi_{0}. \label{realistic psi}%

2739: \end{equation}

2740: This has a maximum of $\psi_{0}$ at $r=a,$ scales as $r^{2}$ for small $r,$

2741: and scales as $r^{-1}$ for large $r.$ Equation \ref{Jtor} can be used to

2742: calculate the associated toroidal current density which will be sharply peaked

2743: near $r=a$ and $z=0.$ The $\psi(r,z)$ prescribed by Eq.\ref{realistic psi} has

2744: the features that it provides a dipole-like field far from the $z$ axis and a

2745: nearly uniform axial field near the $z$ axis, corresponds to a realistic

2746: distributed toroidal current, has a well-defined poloidal field magnetic axis,

2747: is analytically tractable, and is convenient for numerical computation of

2748: representative particle orbits in a physically relevant magneto-gravitational field.

2749: 

2750: \section{Current associated with flux function

2751: \label{current associated with flux function}}

2752: 

2753: Using Ampere's law to relate the toroidal current and the poloidal magnetic

2754: field it is seen that

2755: \begin{equation}

2756: \mathcal{I}_{\phi}=\frac{1}{\mu_{0}}\oint_{C}\mathbf{B}_{pol}\mathbf{\cdot

2757: }d\mathbf{l} \label{Amperes law}%

2758: \end{equation}

2759: where the contour $C$ links the total toroidal current $\mathcal{I}_{\phi}$.

2760: By letting the line integral go to infinity in the radial and $z$ directions

2761: it is seen that only the portion of the line integral along the $z$ axis makes

2762: a finite contribution so%

2763: \begin{equation}%

2764: \begin{array}

2765: [c]{ccl}%

2766: \mathcal{I}_{\phi} & = & \ \frac{1}{\mu_{0}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}%

2767: B_{z}(0,z)dz\\

2768: & = & \frac{27\psi_{0}}{16\pi\mu_{0}}\lim_{r\rightarrow0}\frac{1}{r}%

2769: \frac{\partial\ }{\partial r}\left(  \frac{r^{2}}{a^{2}}\int_{-\infty}%

2770: ^{\infty}\ \frac{dz\ }{\ \left(  \left(  \frac{r}{a}+\frac{1}{2}\right)

2771: ^{2}+\left(  \frac{z}{a}\right)  ^{2}\right)  ^{3/2}}\right)  \ .

2772: \end{array}

2773: \label{Iphi 1}%

2774: \end{equation}

2775: 

2776: 

2777: Defining $b=r/a+1/2$ and $z/a=b\sinh\vartheta$ the $z$ integral can be

2778: expressed as%

2779: \begin{equation}%

2780: \begin{array}

2781: [c]{ccl}%

2782: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\ \frac{dz\ }{\ \left(  \left(  \frac{r}{a}+\frac{1}%

2783: {2}\right)  ^{2}+\left(  \frac{z}{a}\right)  ^{2}\right)  ^{3/2}} & = &

2784: a\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\ \frac{b\cosh\vartheta\,d\vartheta}{\ \left(

2785: b^{2}+b^{2}\sinh^{2}\vartheta\right)  ^{3/2}}\\

2786: & = & \frac{a}{b^{2}}\left[  \tanh\vartheta\right]  _{-\infty}^{\infty}\\

2787: & = & \frac{2a}{\left(  r/a+1/2\right)  ^{2}}.

2788: \end{array}

2789: \label{integral details}%

2790: \end{equation}

2791: Since

2792: \begin{equation}

2793: \lim_{r\rightarrow0}\frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial\ }{\partial r}\left[

2794: \frac{r^{2}}{a^{2}}\frac{2a}{\left(  r/a+1/2\right)  ^{2}}\right]  =\frac

2795: {16}{a} \label{lim integral}%

2796: \end{equation}

2797: the total toroidal current is

2798: \begin{equation}

2799: \mathcal{I}_{\phi}=\frac{27\psi_{0}}{\ \pi a\mu_{0}}.

2800: \label{solve Iphi integral}%

2801: \end{equation}

2802: 

2803: 

2804: \section{Review:\ Distinction between diamagnetic (adiabatic) orbits and

2805: paramagnetic (Speiser) orbits\label{Orbit review}}

2806: 

2807: \subsection{Diamagnetism of cyclotron (Larmor) orbits}

2808: 

2809: We first review charged particle motion in a uniform magnetic field

2810: $\mathbf{B}=B_{z}\hat{z}$ (so $\psi=B_{z}\pi r^{2}$) and no electric field;

2811: orbital motion in more complex fields will be discussed later. The particle

2812: motion is prescribed by the Lorentz equation

2813: \begin{equation}

2814: m_{\sigma}\frac{d\mathbf{v}}{dt}=q_{\sigma}\mathbf{v}\times B_{z}\hat{z}\ .

2815: \label{Lorentz}%

2816: \end{equation}

2817: If the particle is restricted to the $z=0$ plane, the respective radial and

2818: azimuthal components of Eq.\ref{Lorentz} are%

2819: \begin{equation}

2820: m_{\sigma}\left(  \ddot{r}-r\dot{\phi}^{2}\right)  =q_{\sigma}r\dot{\phi}B_{z}

2821: \label{Lorentz r}%

2822: \end{equation}%

2823: \begin{equation}

2824: \frac{m_{\sigma}}{r}\frac{d}{dt}\left(  r^{2}\dot{\phi}\right)  =-q_{\sigma

2825: }\dot{r}B_{z}. \label{Lorentz phi}%

2826: \end{equation}

2827: We consider circular motion (i.e., cyclotron or Larmor orbits) so $\ r=const.$

2828: in which case Eq.\ref{Lorentz phi} gives $\dot{\phi}=const.$ and

2829: Eq.\ref{Lorentz r} then becomes%

2830: \begin{equation}

2831: \dot{\phi}=-\omega_{c\sigma} \label{phidot diamag}%

2832: \end{equation}

2833: where $\omega_{c\sigma}=q_{\sigma}B_{z}/m_{\sigma}$ is the signed cyclotron

2834: frequency. The minus sign in Eq.\ref{phidot diamag} indicates that cyclotron

2835: motion is \textit{diamagnetic}. Thus if a gyrating charged particle is

2836: considered as a $\phi$-directed current, the polarity of this current is such

2837: as to create a magnetic field which opposes the initial field $B_{z}$, i.e.,

2838: cyclotron orbits tend to depress the value of $\psi.$ The diamagnetism of

2839: cyclotron orbits means that cyclotron orbits cannot be the source for the

2840: assumed poloidal magnetic field $\psi(r,z)$ nor the means by which this field

2841: is sustained against dissipation.

2842: 

2843: \subsection{Adiabatic orbits}

2844: 

2845: When the magnetic field is non-uniform or there are electric fields, and if

2846: these additional features are sufficiently weak that to lowest order the

2847: Larmor orbit (cyclotron orbit) description is approximately correct, then

2848: additional charged particle motions occur which are superimposed on the Larmor

2849: orbits $\mathbf{v}_{L}(t);$ these additional motions are adiabatic in the

2850: sense of classical mechanics. Defining\ $v_{\parallel}$ as the velocity

2851: component parallel to the magnetic field and $\mathbf{v}_{\perp}$ as the

2852: component perpendicular to the magnetic field these motions are the standard

2853: drifts

2854: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citep{Longmire1967,Chen1984}}{\citep

2855: %{Longmire1967,Chen1984}}}%

2856: %BeginExpansion

2857: \citep{Longmire1967,Chen1984}%

2858: %EndExpansion

2859: , namely the $E\times B$ drift $\mathbf{v}_{E}=\mathbf{E\times B}/B^{2},$ the

2860: polarization drift $\mathbf{v}_{p}=m_{\sigma}q_{\sigma}^{-1}B^{-2}%

2861: d\mathbf{E}_{\perp}/dt$, the curvature drift $\mathbf{v}_{c}=-m_{\sigma

2862: }v_{\parallel}^{2}\hat{B}\cdot\nabla\hat{B}\times\mathbf{B/}q_{\sigma}B^{2}$,

2863: and the grad $B$ drift $\mathbf{v}_{\nabla B}=-\mu\nabla B\times

2864: \mathbf{B/}q_{\sigma}B^{2}$ where $\mu=m_{\sigma}v_{\perp}^{2}/2B$ is the

2865: magnetic moment, an adiabatic invariant. There is also a `force' drift

2866: $\mathbf{v}_{F}$ $=\mathbf{F\times B}/q_{\sigma}B^{2}$ where $\mathbf{F}$ is a

2867: generic non-electromagnetic force, which here is gravity, so $\mathbf{F}%

2868: =mMG\nabla\left(  r^{2}+z^{2}\right)  ^{-1/2}.$ Taking into account all these

2869: drifts, the velocity of an adiabatic-orbit charged particle becomes%

2870: \begin{equation}%

2871: \begin{array}

2872: [c]{cc}%

2873: \mathbf{v}= & v_{\parallel}\hat{B}+\mathbf{v}_{L\sigma}(t)\ +\frac

2874: {\mathbf{E\times B}}{B^{2}}+\frac{m_{\sigma}}{q_{\sigma}B^{2}}\frac

2875: {d\mathbf{E}_{\perp}}{dt}\ -\frac{m_{\sigma}v_{\parallel}^{2}\hat{B}%

2876: \cdot\nabla\hat{B}\times\mathbf{B}}{q_{\sigma}B^{2}}\\

2877: & -\frac{\mu\nabla B\times\mathbf{B}}{q_{\sigma}B^{2}}+\mathbf{\ }%

2878: \ \frac{m_{\sigma}MG}{q_{\sigma}B^{2}}\nabla\left(  \frac{1}{\sqrt{r^{2}%

2879: +z^{2}}}\right)  \times\mathbf{B.}%

2880: \end{array}

2881: \label{particle drifts}%

2882: \end{equation}

2883: The last four drifts in Eq.\ref{particle drifts} explicitly involve

2884: $q_{\sigma}$ and thus produce macroscopic currents. When these currents are

2885: summed and, in addition, diamagnetic current is taken into account, \ the

2886: result is equivalent to the MHD\ equation of motion where the polarization

2887: drift plays the role of the inertial term

2888: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep{Goldston1995,Bellan2006}}{\citep

2889: %{Goldston1995,Bellan2006}}}%

2890: %BeginExpansion

2891: \citep{Goldston1995,Bellan2006}%

2892: %EndExpansion

2893: . The ideal MHD\ concept of frozen-in flux is directly equivalent to $\mu$

2894: conservation because $\mu$ conservation corresponds to conservation of the

2895: magnetic flux linked by a cyclotron orbit. Thus, the ideal MHD\ concept of

2896: frozen-in flux is based on the adiabatic invariance of cyclotron orbits.

2897: 

2898: The poloidal flux function specified by Eq.\ref{generic} corresponds to a

2899: magnetic field generated by a toroidal current flowing in the positive $\phi$

2900: direction (counterclockwise direction); the $B_{z}$ component of this field is

2901: positive for $r<a$ and negative for $r>a$ where $a$ is the location of the

2902: poloidal field magnetic axis. The poloidal magnetic field has both curvature

2903: and gradients so that away from field nulls, particles should have parallel

2904: motion and cyclotron orbits together with superimposed curvature and grad $B$

2905: drifts. Figure \ref{Orbit-Inside-Poloidal-Field-Magnetic-Axis} shows the

2906: numerically calculated orbit of a particle located in the $z=0$ plane in a

2907: magnetic field prescribed by Eq.\ref{generic} and located inside the poloidal

2908: field magnetic axis (indicated by dashed circle). It is seen that the particle

2909: makes cyclotron orbits with a superimposed drift due to curvature and $\nabla

2910: B$. The cyclotron orbit is clockwise consistent with the assertion that

2911: cyclotron motion is diamagnetic. Figure

2912: \ref{Orbit-Outside-Poloidal-Field-Magnetic-Axis} shows the situation for a

2913: particle located at a radius outside the poloidal field magnetic axis. The

2914: sense of the cyclotron orbit is now reversed as is the polarity of $B_{z}$ so

2915: the cyclotron orbit is again diamagnetic. For both inside and outside

2916: particles the drift motion is clockwise and so opposes the original toroidal

2917: current creating the poloidal flux and so the curvature and $\nabla B$ drift

2918: motion can also be considered diamagnetic.

2919: 

2920: \begin{figure}[ptb]

2921: \caption{Orbit of a positive particle in the $z=0$ plane located inside the

2922: poloidal field magnetic axis (indicated by dashed circle), coordinates are

2923: normalized to the poloidal field magnetic axis radius. $B_{z}$ is positive

2924: inside the circle and negative outside.}%

2925: \label{Orbit-Inside-Poloidal-Field-Magnetic-Axis}%

2926: \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f14.eps}\end{figure}

2927: 

2928: \begin{figure}[ptb]

2929: \caption{Orbit for a positively charged particle located in the $z$ plane

2930: outside the poloidal field magnetic axis (dashed circle).}%

2931: \label{Orbit-Outside-Poloidal-Field-Magnetic-Axis}%

2932: \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f15.eps}\end{figure}

2933: 

2934: The current associated with the gravitational force drift is%

2935: \begin{equation}

2936: \mathbf{J}_{g}=\sum_{\sigma}n_{\sigma}q_{\sigma}\mathbf{v}_{F}=\ \frac{\varrho

2937: MG}{\ B^{2}}\nabla\left(  \frac{1}{\sqrt{r^{2}+z^{2}}}\right)  \times

2938: \mathbf{B} \label{Jg}%

2939: \end{equation}

2940: where $\varrho=\sum m_{\sigma}n_{\sigma}$ is the mass density.

2941: 

2942: From a macroscopic (i.e., MHD) point of view, the force associated with the

2943: gravitational drift current exactly balances the gravitational force component

2944: perpendicular to the magnetic field since%

2945: 

2946: \begin{equation}%

2947: \begin{array}

2948: [c]{ccl}%

2949: \mathbf{J}_{g}\times\mathbf{B} & = & \ \frac{\varrho MG}{\ B^{2}}\left(

2950: \nabla\left(  \frac{1}{\sqrt{r^{2}+z^{2}}}\right)  \times\mathbf{B}\right)

2951: \times\mathbf{B}\\

2952: & = & -\varrho MG\nabla_{\perp}\left(  \frac{1}{\sqrt{r^{2}+z^{2}}}\right)

2953: \end{array}

2954: \label{grav force}%

2955: \end{equation}

2956: If $I=0$ on the $z=0$ plane (as is consistent with astrophysical jet symmetry

2957: used by

2958: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{citet{Lovelace1976}}{\citet{Lovelace1976}}}%

2959: %BeginExpansion

2960: \citet{Lovelace1976}%

2961: %EndExpansion

2962: ), the gravitational drift is not defined on the poloidal field magnetic axis

2963: because $\mathbf{B}$ vanishes on the poloidal field magnetic axis and the

2964: theory of particle drifts fails. In other words, going from the first to the

2965: second line in Eq.\ref{grav force} at the poloidal field magnetic axis would

2966: involve dividing zero by zero (since $B=0$ on the poloidal field magnetic axis).

2967: 

2968: When summed over species, the curvature and grad $B$ drifts correspond to

2969: currents which balance macroscopic pressure gradients (when diamagnetic

2970: current is included) and the polarization current corresponds to the inertial

2971: term in the MHD\ equation of motion. This analysis shows, as discussed in

2972: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Bellan2007}}{\citet{Bellan2007}}}%

2973: %BeginExpansion

2974: \citet{Bellan2007}%

2975: %EndExpansion

2976: , that plasma particles undergoing cyclotron motion and drifts do not have

2977: Keplerian orbits. It also shows that the poloidal field magnetic axis is a

2978: special place where conventional particle drift theory fails.

2979: 

2980: \subsection{Non-adiabatic motion: the Speiser orbit\label{Speiser}}

2981: 

2982: An extreme form of magnetic non-uniformity occurs where the magnetic field

2983: reverses direction. In this case an orbit quite distinct from the cyclotron

2984: orbit and its associated adiabatic drifts occurs. This non-adiabatic orbit,

2985: called a meandering or Speiser orbit

2986: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citep{Speiser1965}}{\citep{Speiser1965}}}%

2987: %BeginExpansion

2988: \citep{Speiser1965}%

2989: %EndExpansion

2990: , consists of semi-circles of counterclockwise motion interspersed with

2991: semi-circles of clockwise motion.

2992: 

2993: A numerically calculated Speiser orbit for a positively charged particle in

2994: the $z=0$ plane is shown in Fig.\ref{SpeiserOrbit}. The particle oscillates

2995: across the poloidal field magnetic axis between the inside region where

2996: $B_{z}>0$ and the outside region where $B_{z}<0.$ The result is a net

2997: counterclockwise motion so, in contrast to cyclotron orbits, Speiser orbits

2998: are \textit{paramagnetic.} The paramagnetism of Speiser orbits has been

2999: considered an important aspect of current sheets in Earth's magnetotail,

3000: [e.g., see

3001: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{\citet{Zelenyi2000}}{\citet{Zelenyi2000}}}%

3002: %BeginExpansion

3003: \citet{Zelenyi2000}%

3004: %EndExpansion

3005: ], but to the author's knowledge this paramagnetism has not been previously

3006: considered in the axisymmetric three-dimensional geometry discussed here which

3007: is relevant to accretion disks and astrophysical jets. In particular, we will

3008: show that the poloidal flux function can be considered as a consequence of

3009: Speiser orbits such as shown in Fig.\ref{SpeiserOrbit}. \ Speiser orbits are

3010: not consistent with the drift approximation (i.e., $E\times B$ drift, grad $B$

3011: drift, curvature drift, etc.) \ because the drift approximation is based on

3012: the assumption that, to lowest order, the particle is undergoing cyclotron

3013: motion. The inconsistency between Speiser orbits and the drift approximation

3014: is obvious when one considers that the drift approximation fails where $B$

3015: reverses polarity whereas Speiser orbits depend on this reversal.

3016: 

3017: If motion in the $z$ direction is also allowed, then because $B_{r}$ also

3018: reverses at the poloidal field magnetic axis, the particle can also oscillate

3019: vertically across the poloidal field magnetic axis to make vertical Speiser

3020: orbits. The combined $r$ and $z$ Speiser motion means that particles moving at

3021: an arbitrary angle across the poloidal field magnetic axis will reflect from

3022: interior surfaces of the nested poloidal flux surfaces concentric with the

3023: poloidal field magnetic axis. These nested poloidal flux surfaces can thus be

3024: imagined as the walls of a toroidal tunnel and the Speiser orbit particles can

3025: be considered as reflecting from the interior walls of this toroidal tunnel

3026: while moving in the counterclockwise direction to trace out paramagnetic

3027: orbits and create poloidal flux.

3028: 

3029: \begin{figure}[ptb]

3030: \caption{Speiser orbit. The charged particle bounces back and forth across the

3031: field null at the poloidal field magnetic axis resulting in a counterclockwise

3032: (i.e., paramagnetic) orbit.}%

3033: \label{SpeiserOrbit}%

3034: \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f16.eps}\end{figure}

3035: 

3036: \section{Equation of motion and its solutions\label{Equation of motion}}

3037: 

3038: The Hamiltonian orbit analysis presented here shows that photo-emission

3039: creates new effective potential barriers. The topography of these barriers

3040: depends on a combination of environmental factors, particle properties, and

3041: the location of the charging. Representative orbits obtained by numerically

3042: integrating the equation of motion$\ $have been presented and are consistent

3043: with the predictions of the Hamiltonian theory. We outline here the derivation

3044: of the dimensionless equation of motion; this derivation gives insights into

3045: several fundamental issues regarding the dynamics, especially the influence of

3046: initial conditions.

3047: 

3048: The equation of motion for a charged particle in a combined electromagnetic

3049: and gravitational field is

3050: \begin{equation}

3051: m_{\sigma}\frac{d^{2}\mathbf{x}}{dt^{2}}=q_{\sigma}\left(  \mathbf{E+v\times

3052: B}\right)  +m_{\sigma}MG\nabla\frac{1}{\sqrt{r^{2}+z^{2}}}.

3053: \label{motion em gravity}%

3054: \end{equation}

3055: 

3056: 

3057: Using Eq.\ref{B general2} for the magnetic field, the equation of motion can

3058: thus be written as%

3059: \begin{equation}%

3060: \begin{array}

3061: [c]{cl}%

3062: m_{\sigma}\frac{d^{2}\mathbf{x}}{dt^{2}}= & q_{\sigma}\mathbf{E}\\

3063: & \mathbf{+}\frac{q_{\sigma}}{2\pi}\frac{d\mathbf{x}}{dt}\times\left(

3064: \frac{\partial\psi}{\partial\mathbf{x}}\times\frac{\partial\phi}%

3065: {\partial\mathbf{x}}+\mu_{0}I\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial\mathbf{x}}\right) \\

3066: & +m_{\sigma}MG\nabla\left(  \frac{1}{\sqrt{r^{2}+z^{2}}}\right)  .

3067: \end{array}

3068: \label{eq motion}%

3069: \end{equation}

3070: Then, using the definitions given in Eq.\ref{norm quantities}, the equation of

3071: motion can be expressed in dimensionless form as%

3072: \begin{equation}

3073: \frac{d^{2}\mathbf{\bar{x}}}{d\tau^{2}}=\ \mathbf{\bar{E}}+\frac{\left\langle

3074: \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }{2\Omega_{0}}\frac{d\mathbf{\bar{x}}}{d\tau

3075: }\times\left(  \ \frac{\partial\bar{\psi}}{\ \partial\mathbf{\bar{x}}}%

3076: \times\frac{\partial\phi}{\ \partial\mathbf{\bar{x}}}+\frac{\mu_{0}I}%

3077: {a\pi\left\langle B_{z}\right\rangle }\frac{\partial\phi}{\ \partial

3078: \mathbf{\bar{x}}}\right)  -\frac{\mathbf{\bar{x}}}{\left\vert \mathbf{\bar{x}%

3079: }\right\vert ^{3}} \label{norm eq motion}%

3080: \end{equation}

3081: where

3082: \begin{equation}

3083: \mathbf{\bar{E}}=\frac{q_{\sigma}}{am_{\sigma}\Omega_{0}^{2}}\mathbf{E}%

3084: =-\frac{q_{\sigma}}{a^{2}m_{\sigma}\Omega_{0}^{2}}\frac{\partial V}%

3085: {\partial\mathbf{\bar{x}}}=-\frac{\partial\bar{V}}{\partial\mathbf{\bar{x}}}

3086: \label{Enorm}%

3087: \end{equation}

3088: is the dimensionless electric field and

3089: \begin{equation}

3090: \bar{V}=\frac{aq_{\sigma}V\ }{\ m_{\sigma}MG}\ \label{Vnorm}%

3091: \end{equation}

3092: is the dimensionless electrostatic potential.

3093: 

3094: Equation \ref{norm eq motion} clearly shows that the dynamics change from

3095: being gravitationally dominated to being magnetically dominated according to

3096: the ratio $\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle /\Omega_{0}$. The

3097: possibility of complex interactions between gravitational and magnetic forces

3098: when $\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle /\Omega_{0}$ is of order

3099: unity is also evident. The coefficient $\mu_{0}I/a\pi\left\langle

3100: B_{z}\right\rangle $ is related to the pitch of a twisted field. The

3101: Hamilton-Lagrange formalism shows that $I$ plays a subservient role for

3102: particle orbits compared to $\psi$ because canonical angular momentum depends

3103: on $\psi$, not $I$. However, large $I$ increases $\left\vert B\right\vert $

3104: and so contributes to the effective potential $\mu|B|$ thereby providing

3105: additional possibilities for localization. Thus, if $\mu\ \ $is large, a

3106: particle is not only constrained to stay on a constant $\psi$ surface, but

3107: \ is additionally constrained to stay out of regions on this surface where

3108: $\mu|B|\ $is large. If poloidal currents flow, then the associated

3109: $\mathbf{J}_{pol}\mathbf{\times B}_{tor}$ forces drive jets which inflate and

3110: distend the $\psi$ surfaces. Thus, the orbits will depend indirectly on $I$

3111: when the jet dynamics alter the shape of the constant $\psi$ surfaces.

3112: 

3113: Using the relations

3114: \begin{equation}%

3115: \begin{array}

3116: [c]{cl}%

3117: \frac{\partial\phi}{\ \partial\mathbf{\bar{x}}}= & \frac{\hat{\phi}}{\bar{r}%

3118: }=\frac{-\hat{x}\bar{y}+\hat{y}\bar{x}}{\bar{x}^{2}+\bar{y}^{2}}\ \\

3119: \frac{\partial\bar{\psi}}{\ \partial\mathbf{\bar{x}}}= & \frac{\partial

3120: \bar{\psi}}{\ \partial\bar{r}}\hat{r}+\frac{\partial\bar{\psi}}{\ \partial

3121: \bar{z}}\hat{z}=\frac{\partial\bar{\psi}}{\ \partial\bar{r}}\left(  \frac

3122: {\hat{x}\bar{x}+\hat{y}\bar{y}}{\sqrt{\bar{x}^{2}+\bar{y}^{2}}}\right)

3123: +\frac{\partial\bar{\psi}}{\ \partial\bar{z}}\hat{z}\ ,

3124: \end{array}

3125: \label{grad phi psi}%

3126: \end{equation}

3127: the normalized equation of motion can be expressed in Cartesian coordinates as%

3128: \begin{equation}%

3129: \begin{array}

3130: [c]{cl}%

3131: \frac{d^{2}\mathbf{\bar{x}}}{d\tau^{2}}= & -\frac{\partial\bar{V}}%

3132: {\partial\mathbf{\bar{x}}}\\

3133: & +\frac{\left\langle \omega_{c\sigma}\right\rangle }{2\bar{r}\Omega_{0}}%

3134: \frac{d\mathbf{\bar{x}}}{d\tau}\times\left(

3135: \begin{array}

3136: [c]{c}%

3137: \ \frac{\partial\bar{\psi}}{\ \partial\bar{r}}\hat{z}-\frac{\partial\bar{\psi

3138: }}{\ \partial\bar{z}}\frac{\mathbf{\bar{r}}}{\bar{r}}\smallskip\\

3139: +\frac{\mu_{0}I}{a\pi\left\langle B_{z}\right\rangle }\frac{\left(  -\hat

3140: {x}\bar{y}+\hat{y}\bar{x}\right)  }{\bar{r}}%

3141: \end{array}

3142: \right) \\

3143: & -\ \ \frac{\left(  \mathbf{\bar{r}}+\bar{z}\hat{z}\right)  }{\left\vert

3144: \bar{r}^{2}+\bar{z}^{2}\right\vert ^{3/2}}%

3145: \end{array}

3146: \label{motion Cartesian}%

3147: \end{equation}

3148: where $\mathbf{\bar{r}}=\bar{x}\hat{x}+\bar{y}\hat{y}\ $ and $\bar{r}%

3149: =\sqrt{\bar{x}^{2}+\bar{y}^{2}}$. Equation \ref{motion Cartesian} is in a form

3150: suitable for numerical computation and has been used to provide the orbital

3151: plots shown earlier.

3152: 

3153: At this point it is convenient to use the generic poloidal flux function given

3154: by Eq.\ref{generic} so the unity-maximum, dipole-like, normalized flux

3155: function will be

3156: \begin{equation}

3157: \bar{\psi}(\bar{r},\bar{z})=\ \ \frac{27\bar{r}^{2}}{8\left(  \left(  \bar

3158: {r}+\frac{1}{2}\right)  ^{2}+\bar{z}^{2}\right)  ^{3/2}}\ \label{norm generic}%

3159: \end{equation}

3160: with%

3161: \begin{equation}

3162: \frac{\partial\bar{\psi}}{\ \partial\bar{r}}=\ \frac{27\bar{r}\left(

3163: \ \bar{r}+1+4\bar{z}^{2}-\ 2\bar{r}^{2}\right)  }{16\left(  \left(  \bar

3164: {r}+\frac{1}{2}\right)  ^{2}+\bar{z}^{2}\right)  ^{5/2}} \label{dpsibydr}%

3165: \end{equation}

3166: and

3167: \begin{equation}

3168: \frac{\partial\bar{\psi}}{\ \partial\bar{z}}=-\ \ \frac{81\bar{r}^{2}\bar{z}%

3169: }{8\left(  \left(  \bar{r}+\frac{1}{2}\right)  ^{2}+\bar{z}^{2}\right)

3170: ^{5/2}}. \label{dpsibydz}%

3171: \end{equation}

3172: Thus, the normalized poloidal magnetic field components are

3173: \begin{equation}

3174: \bar{B}_{r}=\frac{81\bar{r}\bar{z}}{16\pi\left(  \left(  \bar{r}+\frac{1}%

3175: {2}\right)  ^{2}+\bar{z}^{2}\right)  ^{5/2}} \label{Br norm}%

3176: \end{equation}

3177: and

3178: \begin{equation}

3179: \bar{B}_{z}=\frac{27\left(  \ \bar{r}+1+4\bar{z}^{2}-\ 2\bar{r}^{2}\right)

3180: }{32\pi\left(  \left(  \bar{r}+\frac{1}{2}\right)  ^{2}+\bar{z}^{2}\right)

3181: ^{5/2}}. \label{Bz norm}%

3182: \end{equation}

3183: 

3184: 

3185: We now consider the problem of establishing appropriate initial conditions for

3186: an incoming neutral particle.\ For purposes of starting a computation we

3187: assume the particle is located at some initial radial position $\bar{\rho}%

3188: _{0}$ in the orbital plane such that $\bar{\rho}_{0}>\bar{\rho}_{pericenter}$

3189: where $\bar{\rho}_{pericenter}~\ $is given by Eq.\ref{perigee}. Solving

3190: Eq.\ref{nondim} for the initial inward radial velocity gives%

3191: \begin{equation}

3192: \bar{v}_{\rho0}=-\sqrt{2\bar{H}-\frac{\bar{L}^{2}}{\bar{\rho}_{0}^{2}}%

3193: +\frac{2\ }{\bar{\rho}_{0}}}. \label{initial vrhro}%

3194: \end{equation}

3195: \bigskip and the corresponding initial orbital frame azimuthal velocity is

3196: \begin{equation}

3197: \bar{v}_{\eta0}=\frac{\bar{L}}{\bar{\rho}_{0}}.

3198: \label{initial orbital azimuthal}%

3199: \end{equation}

3200: 

3201: 

3202: Equation \ref{solution} can be solved for the initial polar angle in the

3203: orbital frame as

3204: \begin{equation}

3205: \eta=\alpha+\cos^{-1}\left(  \frac{1-\bar{L}^{2}/\bar{\rho}_{0}}{\sqrt

3206: {1+2\bar{L}^{2}\ \bar{H}}}\right)  . \label{initial eta}%

3207: \end{equation}

3208: Using Eq.\ref{unbounded Cartesian} the initial orbital frame Cartesian

3209: coordinates are thus%

3210: \begin{equation}%

3211: \begin{array}

3212: [c]{ccl}%

3213: \bar{x}^{\prime} & = & \frac{\bar{L}^{2}\cos\eta_{0}}{1-\sqrt{1+2\bar{L}%

3214: ^{2}\ \bar{H}}\cos\left(  \eta_{0}-\alpha\right)  }\\

3215: \bar{y}^{\prime} & = & \frac{\bar{L}^{2}\sin\eta_{0}}{1-\sqrt{1+2\bar{L}%

3216: ^{2}\ \bar{H}}\cos\left(  \eta_{0}-\alpha\right)  }\\

3217: \bar{z}^{\prime} & = & 0.

3218: \end{array}

3219: \label{initial orbital Cartesian}%

3220: \end{equation}

3221: The orbital frame Cartesian velocity components are related to the orbital

3222: frame cylindrical velocity components by%

3223: \begin{equation}%

3224: \begin{array}

3225: [c]{cl}%

3226: \bar{v}_{x^{\prime}0}= & \bar{v}_{\rho0}\cos\eta_{0}-\bar{v}_{\eta0}\sin

3227: \eta_{0}\\

3228: \bar{v}_{y^{\prime}0}= & \bar{v}_{\rho0}\sin\eta_{0}+\bar{v}_{\eta0}\cos

3229: \eta_{0}\\

3230: \bar{v}_{z^{\prime}0}= & 0.

3231: \end{array}

3232: \label{initial orbital vel}%

3233: \end{equation}

3234: We now take into account that the orbital frame Cartesian coordinate system is

3235: rotated by the angle of inclination $\theta$ about the $x$ axis with respect

3236: to the lab frame coordinate system. The $x$ and $x^{\prime}$ components of

3237: both position and velocity are the same in the two frames but the $y$ and $z$

3238: components are related by \

3239: \begin{equation}%

3240: \begin{array}

3241: [c]{cl}%

3242: \bar{y} & =-\bar{z}^{\prime}\sin\theta+\bar{y}^{\prime}\cos\theta\\

3243: \bar{z} & =\bar{z}^{\prime}\cos\theta+\bar{y}^{\prime}\sin\theta.

3244: \end{array}

3245: \label{oribtal to lab transformation}%

3246: \end{equation}

3247: Since $\bar{z}^{\prime}$ is by definition zero in the orbital frame, the

3248: initial lab frame Cartesian coordinates are%

3249: \begin{equation}%

3250: \begin{array}

3251: [c]{cl}%

3252: \bar{x}_{0}= & \bar{x}_{0}^{\prime}\\

3253: \bar{y}_{0}= & \bar{y}_{0}^{\prime}\cos\theta\\

3254: \bar{z}_{0}= & \bar{y}_{0}^{\prime}\sin\theta.

3255: \end{array}

3256: \label{initial lab Cartesian coord}%

3257: \end{equation}

3258: Since $v_{z}^{\prime}\ $is similarly zero in the orbital frame, in analogy to

3259: Eq.\ref{initial lab Cartesian coord}, the initial lab frame Cartesian

3260: velocities are%

3261: \begin{equation}%

3262: \begin{array}

3263: [c]{cl}%

3264: \bar{v}_{x0}= & \bar{v}_{x^{\prime}0}\\

3265: \bar{v}_{y0}= & \bar{v}_{y^{\prime}0}\cos\theta\\

3266: \bar{v}_{z0}= & \bar{v}_{y^{\prime}0}\sin\theta.

3267: \end{array}

3268: \label{initial lab Cartesian vel}%

3269: \end{equation}

3270: 

3271: 

3272: Thus, if one wishes to start the numerical computation at the radius

3273: $\bar{\rho}_{0}\,$on the trajectory of an incoming particle with orbit

3274: parameters $\{\bar{H}$,$\bar{L},\theta,\alpha\},$ Eqs.\ref{initial vrhro},

3275: \ref{initial orbital azimuthal}, \ref{initial eta},

3276: \ref{initial lab Cartesian coord} and \ref{initial lab Cartesian vel} give the

3277: appropriate initial position and velocity lab frame Cartesian components.

3278: Before charging, the orbits are degenerate with respect to choice of $\theta$

3279: or $\alpha,$ but after charging there is a strong dependence on these two

3280: angles. In particular, if $0\leq\theta<90^{0}$ the orbit is prograde and

3281: Speiser type orbits are possible if the charging occurs near the poloidal

3282: field magnetic axis. On the other hand if $90^{0}<\theta\leq180^{0}$ the orbit

3283: is retrograde and drain-hole orbits are possible. Thus, a subclass of prograde

3284: incident neutral particles transform upon charging into the

3285: toroidal-current/poloidal-field dynamo while a subclass of retrograde neutral

3286: particles transform upon charging into the poloidal-current/toroidal-field

3287: dynamo that drives a bipolar astrophysical jet. Because $\theta$ and $\alpha$

3288: also affect the angle between the velocity vector and the magnetic field at

3289: charging, $\theta$ and $\alpha$ affect the value of $\mu$ and hence the extent

3290: to which accreted particles with cyclotron orbits will be mirror trapped to

3291: subregions of constant $\psi$ surfaces. For example, if $\alpha=0$ then

3292: variation of the angle of inclination $\theta$ for a given $\ $ $\bar{\rho

3293: }_{pericenter},$ and charging radius $\bar{R}_{\ast}$ will determine whether

3294: the charged particles created upon disintegration of an incoming neutral

3295: particle will be normal trapped particles, untrapped particles, drain-hole

3296: particles, or Speiser particles.

3297: 

3298: \pagebreak

3299: 

3300: \bibliographystyle{authordate1}

3301: \bibliography{ApJ-gravitydynamoJuly2006}

3302: \ 

3303: \end{document}