1: %\documentstyle[12pt,aaspp4]{article}
2: \documentclass{aastex}
3: \usepackage{emulateapj5}
4:
5: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
6: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
7: \def\ba{\begin{eqnarray}}
8: \def\ea{\end{eqnarray}}
9: \def\hatl{{\bf\hat l}}
10: \def\bB{{\bf B}}
11:
12: \newenvironment{inlinefigure}{
13: \medskip
14: \def\@captype{figure}
15: \noindent\begin{minipage}{0.999\linewidth}\begin{center}}
16: {\end{center}\end{minipage}\medskip}
17:
18: \begin{document}
19:
20: \title{Warping of Accretion Disks with Magnetically Driven Outflows:\\
21: A Possible Origin for Jet Precession}
22: \author{Dong Lai}
23: \affil{Center for Radiophysics and Space Research, Department of Astronomy,
24: Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853\\
25: Email: dong@astro.cornell.edu}
26:
27: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
28: \begin{abstract}
29: Current theoretical models for the outflows/jets from AGN,
30: X-ray binaries and young stellar objects involve large-scale magnetic
31: fields threading an underlying accretion disk. We suggest that
32: such a disk is subjected to warping instability
33: and retrograde precession driven by magnetic torques associated with the
34: outflow. The growth timescale for the disk warp and the precession
35: period are of order the radial infall time of the disk.
36: These effects may be relevant to jet precession and other variabilities
37: observed in many systems.
38: \end{abstract}
39: \keywords{accretion, accretion disks -- MHD -- instabilities --
40: magnetic fields -- jets and outflow -- binaries: close}
41:
42: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
43: \section{Introduction}
44:
45: Collimated outflows/jets are produced from active galactic nuclei,
46: compact stars in X-ray binaries, and young stellar objects (YSOs)
47: (e.g., Krolik 1999; Mirabel \& Rodriguez 1999;
48: Fender 2003; Reipurth \& Bally 2001).
49: %Bridle \& Perley 1984;
50: Over the last two decades, evidence for jet precession in these systems
51: has steadily increased. The clearest example is the galactic
52: source SS 433, whose jet direction varies with
53: an approximate 164 day period (Margon 1984; Eikenberry et al.~2001).
54: % (half angle of the precession cone is 20 degree).
55: The black hole binary GRO J1655-40 shows jet precession with a
56: period of 3 days (Tingay et al.~1995; Hjellming \& Rupen 1995).
57: % at an angle of 2 degrees.
58: The jets from the super soft source CAL83 may be precessing with
59: a period of $\sim 69$ days (Cowley et al.~1998).
60: In AGNs, indirect evidence for jet precession is seen in the morphology
61: of the radio hot spots, which show ``fossil'' components offset from
62: the ``present'' component positions (e.g., Cygnus A).
63: %The jets in radio galaxies often appear not to be perpendicular to the
64: %dust disks (e.g. Schmitt et al.~2002).
65: Finally, the changes in the flow directions of
66: several YSO jets have been interpreted in terms of jet precession
67: (e.g.
68: %Mundt \& Eisl\"offel 1998;
69: Terquem et al.~1999; Bates et al.~2000).
70:
71: A natural cause for jet precession is the changes of orientation of
72: the underlying accretion disk. In addition, the super-orbital
73: variabilities observed in a number of X-ray binaries (e.g., the
74: 35-day periodicity in Her X-1; see Priedhorsky \& Holt 1987;
75: Ogilvie \& Dubus 2001) have long been interpreted as due to
76: precession of a tilted accretion disk. In both X-ray binaries and YSOs,
77: the tidal force from the companion star could play a role
78: in driving the precession (e.g., Katz 1973; Wijers \& Pringle 1999;
79: Terquem et al.~1999; Bate et al.~2000; Ogilvie \& Dubus 2001), although
80: it may not be the only or the dominant effect
81: (e.g., the 3 day precession period of the GRO J1655-40 jet is too
82: short to be explained by the tidal effect for a 2.6 day binary).
83: Most importantly, for the precession to operate,
84: disk tilt needs to be excited and maintained. In accreting
85: binary systems, the disk plane is expected to be aligned with
86: the orbital plane since the disk angular momentum originates
87: from the binary motion. For YSOs in binaries,
88: the disk plane may be initially misaligned with the orbital plane. However,
89: if we consider the disk as a collection of circular rings, different rings
90: will have different precession rates; it has been recognized that the combined
91: effects of differential precession and internal disk stress/dissipation
92: tend to damp the the disk tilt, so that the disk settles into the binary
93: plane (Lubow \& Ogilvie 2000).
94:
95: Several driving mechanisms for disk tilt/warp have been proposed.
96: Schandl \& Meyer (1994) showed (in the context of Her X-1)
97: that irradiation-driven wind from the outer parts of the disk can carry away
98: momentum flux and make the disk unstable to warping.
99: Pringle (1996) showed that even without wind loss, radiation pressure itself
100: can induce warping instability in the outer region of the disk.
101: Futher studies indicated this radiation-driven warping instability
102: may indeed operate in X-ray binaries (e.g.,
103: %Maloney \& Begelman 1997;
104: Maloney, Begelman \& Nowak 1998; Wijers \& Pringle 1999),
105: although it does not provide a generic explanation for the long-term
106: variabilities in all X-ray binaries (Ogilvie \& Dubus 2001).
107: Quillen (2001) showed that a wind passing over the disk surface may
108: induce warping via Kelvin-Helmholtz instability.
109: Finally, in the case of disk accretion onto magnetic stars (e.g., neutron
110: stars, white dwarfs and T Tauri stars), the stellar magnetic field can
111: induce disk warping and precession (Lai 1999; see also
112: Aly 1980; Lipunov \& Shakura 1980; Terquem \& Papaloizou 2000);
113: this may explain several observed
114: features of quasi-periodic oscillations in low-mass X-ray binaries
115: (Shirakawa \& Lai 2002a), milli-Hertz variabilities in accreting
116: X-ray pulsars (Shirakawa \& Lai 2002b), and variabilities of T Tauri
117: stars (Terquem \& Papaloizou 2000; see also Agapitou et al.~1997).
118:
119: In this paper we suggest a new disk warping mechanism that is directly
120: tied to the production of magnetically driven outflows/jets.
121: Using an idealized setup (\S 2), we show that
122: a disk threaded by a large-scale magnetic field may experience a warping
123: instability and precess around the central object (\S3).
124: These magnetically driven disk warping and precession
125: arise from the interaction between the large-scale magnetic field and the
126: induced electric current in the disk. While more studies are needed,
127: we suggest that these effects may provide a natural explanation for the
128: procession of jets/outflows and other variabilities observed
129: in various systems (\S 4).
130:
131: \section{The Setup}
132:
133: The current paradigm for the origin of astrophysical jets/outflows involves
134: a large-scale magnetic field threading the accretion disk
135: around a central object (star or black hole); this ordered
136: magnetic field plays a crucial role in extracting/channeling mass,
137: energy and angular momentum from the disk. The energy outflow can be either
138: hydromagnetic (with significant mass flux) (Blandford \& Payne 1982)
139: %Lovelace et al.~1986; K\"onigl \& Pudritz 2000)
140: or electromagnetic (dominated by Poynting flux) (Blandford 1976;
141: Lovelace 1976). The origin of the disk-threading magnetic field
142: is not completely clear: the field could be advected inwards by accretion,
143: or generated locally by dynamo processes.
144: In the case of protostellar outflows, the stellar magnetic field may play an
145: important role (Shu et al.~1994,~2000).
146: Many theoretical/numerical studies have been
147: devoted to understanding magnetically driven outflows/jets from accretion
148: disks (e.g., see recent reviews by Lovelace et al.~1999;
149: K\"onigl \& Pudritz 2000; Meier et al.~2001).
150:
151: \begin{inlinefigure}
152: \scalebox{.9}{\rotatebox{0}{\plotone{f1.eps}}}
153: \figcaption{A sketch of the idealized disk -- magnetic field
154: configuration in which hydromagnetic outflows are produced.
155: The disk is threaded by a large-scale poloidal field, which
156: gets twisted by the disk, generating the toroidal field.
157: }\end{inlinefigure}
158:
159: Figure 1 shows an idealized sketch of the magnetic field -- disk configuration
160: in which hydromagnetic outflows are produced. A geometrically
161: thin disk is threaded by the poloidal magnetic field
162: $\bB_p=B_R{\bf\hat R}+B_Z{\bf\hat Z}$
163: (where ${\bf\hat R},~{\bf\hat Z}$ are unit vectors in cylindrical coordinates).
164: This poloidal field is of course curved (with $B_R=0$ at the disk midplane),
165: and we use the superscript ``+'' to denote the field at the upper disk
166: surface. For a sufficiently inclined field (radial pitch angle
167: $\theta=\tan^{-1}|B_R^+/B_Z|>30^\circ$), centrifugally driven outflows
168: are possible (Blandford \& Payne 1982).
169: The twisting of $B_p$ by the disk and the outflow gives rise to
170: a toroidal field $B_\Phi$, which has different signs
171: above and below the disk plane. We introduce the azimuthal pitch
172: $\zeta$, so that $B_{\Phi}^+=-\zeta B_Z$ at the upper disk surface.
173: That $\zeta$ is positive reflects the fact that the disk always rotates
174: faster than the outflow\footnote{In the stationary, axisymmetric, MHD
175: wind theory, $B_\Phi/B_p=R(\Omega-\Omega_d)/V_p$, where $V_p(R,Z)$ is the
176: the poloidal velocity of the outflow and $\Omega(R,Z)$ its rotation
177: rate, $\Omega_d$ is the disk rotation at the midplane. Alternatively,
178: in the absence of outflow, $B_\Phi$ near the disk is governed
179: schematically by the equation $\partial B_\Phi/\partial t=RB_Z
180: {\partial\Omega/\partial Z}-B_\Phi/\tau_{\rm diss}$, where
181: $\tau_{\rm diss}$ is the disspation timescale. In steady state, we find
182: $B_\Phi^\pm=-\zeta B_z$, with $\zeta=(R/H_B)\Omega\tau_{\rm diss}$
183: (where $H_B$ is the vertical scale height in which $\Omega$ in the
184: magnetosphere varies.}.
185: The discontinuities in $B_\Phi$ and $B_R$ across the disk
186: imply a net disk surface current (integrated over the disk thickness)
187: ${\bf K}=(c/2\pi)(-B_\Phi^+{\bf\hat R} + B_R^+ {\bf\hat\Phi})$.
188: Thus, for an unpertutbed (unwarped) disk, the only torque on the disk
189: (per unit area) is the usual magnetic braking torque
190: \be
191: T_Z={1\over 2\pi}\,R\,B_Z\,B_{\Phi}^+=-{1\over 2\pi}\,\zeta\,R\,B_Z^2.
192: \label{eqtz}\ee
193: Angular momentum is extracted out of the disk by the open field lines,
194: and can be carried away by torsional Alfven waves
195: or a centrifugally driven wind (for sufficiently inclined
196: poloidal fields). In addition, the radial magnetic force,
197: \be
198: F_R=B_ZB_R^+/(2\pi),
199: \label{eqfr}\ee
200: provides partial support of the disk
201: against gravity.
202:
203: The configuration shown in Fig.~1 lies at the heart of many
204: theoretical models of magnetic disk outflows. The real situation is
205: certainly much more complicated. Nevertheless, in \S 3 we shall adopt
206: this simple picture in our consideration of magnetically driven
207: disk warping and precession --- our goal is to discuss these physical effects
208: in a way that is as transparent as possible, so as to expose their
209: robustness and potential pitfall.
210:
211: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
212: \section{Magnetically Driven Disk Warping and Precession}
213:
214: We now consider warping perturbations to the disk.
215: The disk can be considered as a collection of circular
216: rings which interact with each other via internal stresses. We specify
217: the disk warping by the unit normal vector ${\bf\hat l}(r)$
218: for the ring at radius $r$. Consider the situation (see Fig.~2)
219: in which the ring around radius $r$ is tilted by an angle $\beta$
220: while most of the disk remains flat ($\hatl_1=\hatl_2={\bf\hat Z}$,
221: where ${\bf\hat Z}$ is the normal vector of the unperturbed disk; see Fig.~1).
222: Since the magnetic field $B_Z$ is produced by all the currents in the
223: disk-outflow system, we posit that $B_Z$ at radius $r$ is not modified
224: by such a local perturbation. For the ring at $r$, the field ${\bf B}_Z$
225: acts as an ``external'' magnetic field. Now set up a coordinate
226: system with the $z$-axis along the $\hatl(r)$
227: (see the lower panel of Fig.~2) and the associated cylindrical coordinate
228: system $(r\phi z)$. As in the case of the unperturbed disk,
229: twisting of $B_z=B_Z\cos\beta$ by the disk rotation produces a toroidal field
230: (in the new coordinate system) $B_{\phi,t}$ (where the subscript ``t''
231: serves as a reminder that this field is due to twisting of $B_z$),
232: whose value (at radius $r$) at the upper disk plane is $B_{\phi,t}^+
233: =-\zeta B_z$, and at the lower disk plane $B_{\phi,t}^-=\zeta B_z$.
234: Note that $B_z$ is necessarily continuous across the disk plane
235: in this perturbation. The radial surface current associated with
236: $(B_{\phi,t}^+ - B_{\phi,t}^-)$ is
237: \be
238: K_r=-{c\over 2\pi} B_{\phi,t}^+={c\over 2\pi}\zeta B_Z\cos\beta.
239: \ee
240: Interaction of this $K_r$ with $B_z$ gives an azimuthal force
241: on the disk, and results in the magnetic braking torque (per unit area)
242: $T_z=-\zeta r B_z^2/(2\pi)=-\zeta r B_Z^2\cos^2\beta/(2\pi)$,
243: analogous to eq.~(\ref{eqtz}). Unlike the unperturbed disk, however,
244: the ``extrenal'' field $\bB_Z$ now has a $\phi$-component, $B_\phi=B_Z\sin\beta
245: \cos\phi$, and the interaction of $K_r$ with $B_\phi$ gives rise to a vertical
246: force (per unit area)
247: \be
248: F_z={1\over 2\pi}\,\zeta\,B_Z^2\sin\beta\,\cos\beta\,\cos\phi.
249: \ee
250: This vertical force can also be seen as arising from the imbalance
251: of magnetic stresses above and below the disk plane:
252: $B_{\phi}^+=B_\phi+ B_{\phi,t}^+$ in the upper disk plane
253: while $B_{\phi}^-=B_\phi- B_{\phi,t}^+$ in the lower disk plane,
254: and thus $F_z=[(B_{\phi}^-)^2-(B_{\phi}^+)^2]/(8\pi)$. Obviously,
255: averaging the force over the azimuthal angle, $\langle F_z\rangle=(1/2\pi)
256: \int_0^{2\pi}F_z\,d\phi$, gives zero. But since $F_z$ is unevenly distributed
257: along the ring, it gives rise to a net torque on the ring.
258: Averaging over $\phi$, the torque per unit area is
259: \ba
260: \langle {\bf T}_{\rm warp}\rangle &=&
261: -{1\over 4\pi}\,\zeta\,r B_Z^2\cos\beta\sin\beta
262: \,{\bf\hat y}\nonumber \\
263: &=& -{1\over 4\pi}\,\zeta\,r B_Z^2\cos\beta \,
264: \left[{\bf\hat Z}-({\bf\hat Z}\cdot\hatl)\right].
265: \ea
266: Clearly, this torque tends to pull the vector $\hatl(r)$ away from
267: ``external'' magnetic field direction ${\hat{\bf B}_Z}$.
268: This is the {\it magnetically driven warping
269: instability}: for small tilt, the angle $\beta$ tends to grow (in the
270: absence of other forces) at the rate
271: \be
272: \Gamma_{\rm warp}={\zeta B_Z^2\over 4\pi \Sigma\,r\,\Omega_d},
273: \label{gwarp}\ee
274: where $\Sigma$ is the surface density, and $\Omega_d$
275: the angular velocity of the disk.
276: In a hypothetical situation, if ${\bf B}_Z$ had a fixed direction for all
277: $\beta$, and if there were no coupling between different rings, the vector
278: $\hatl(r)$ would evolve toward being perpendicular to ${\bf B}_Z$,
279: i.e., the plane of the disk (ring) would prefer to lie along the ``external''
280: magnetic field (cf. Lai 1999).
281:
282: \begin{inlinefigure}
283: \scalebox{.9}{\rotatebox{0}{\plotone{f2.eps}}}
284: \figcaption{Warping perturbation to the disk around radius
285: $r$. For clarity, only the $Z$-component of the magnetic field,
286: $\bB_Z$, is shown.
287: }\end{inlinefigure}
288:
289: In the perturbed disk, the azimuthal surface current $K_\phi
290: \simeq K_\Phi=(c/2\pi)B_{R}^+=(c/2\pi)B_Z\tan\theta$ (for small
291: $\beta$) also interacts
292: with the ``external'' field $\bB_Z$, which can be decomposed into
293: $\bB_Z=B_Z\cos\beta\,{\bf\hat z}+B_Z\sin\beta\,(\sin\phi
294: \,{\bf \hat r}+\cos\phi\,{\bf\hat\phi})$.
295: The interaction between $K_\phi$ and $B_z=B_Z\cos\beta$
296: gives a radial force, as in eq.~(\ref{eqfr}).
297: For the perturbed disk ($\beta\ne 0$), a new vertical force
298: arises from the interaction between $K_\phi$ and
299: $B_r=B_Z\sin\beta\sin\phi$:
300: \be
301: F_z=-{1\over c}\,K_\phi B_Z\sin\beta\,\sin\phi.
302: \ee
303: This force is also equal to $[(B_{r}^-)^2-(B_{r}^+)^2]/(8\pi)$, where
304: $B_{r}^\pm=B_Z\sin\beta\sin\phi\pm B_Z\tan\theta$.
305: Again, $\langle F_z\rangle=0$, but the net torque is non-zero.
306: Averaging over $\phi$, we find the torque per unit area
307: \be
308: \langle {\bf T}_{\rm prec}\rangle
309: =-{1\over 2c}\,K_\phi B_z r\,\sin\beta\,{\bf\hat x}
310: =-{1\over 2c}\,K_\phi B_z r\,{\bf\hat{Z}}\times\hatl.
311: \ee
312: Clearly, the effect of this torque is to make the ring (at radius $r$)
313: precess around the $Z$-axis (the unperturbed disk normal vector).
314: The angular frequnecy of the {\it magnetically driven precession} is
315: \be
316: {\bf \Omega}_{\rm prec}=-{K_\phi B_Z\over 2\,c\,\Sigma\,r\,\Omega_d}
317: \,{\bf\hat{Z}}=-{B_Z^2\tan\theta\over 4\pi\,\Sigma\,r\,\Omega_d}
318: \,{\bf\hat{Z}}.
319: \label{oprec}\ee
320: The negative sign implies that the pecession is retrograde,
321: i.e., opposite to the disk rotation.
322:
323: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
324: \section{Discussion}
325:
326: To get an idea on the warping and precession timescales
327: associated with eqs.~(\ref{gwarp}) and (\ref{oprec}),
328: we note the disk angular momentum
329: equation (for an unwarped disks) can be written as
330: \be
331: \Sigma V_R{d\over dR}(\Omega_d R^2)=-{1\over 2\pi}\zeta RB_Z^2+T_{\rm visc},
332: \ee
333: where $V_R$ is the radial velocity and $T_{\rm visc}$ is the
334: viscous torque. If we set $T_{\rm visc}=(f-1)(-\zeta RB_Z^2/2\pi)$ and
335: use $\Omega_d\simeq (GM/R^3)^{1/2}$, we find
336: \be
337: \Gamma_{\rm warp}={\zeta\over \tan\theta}|\Omega_{\rm prec}|
338: =-{V_R\over 4fR}.
339: \ee
340: For typical parameters ($\zeta\sim\tan\theta\sim f\sim 1$),
341: the warping timescale and precession period are of order the disk infall
342: time $R/|V_R|$.
343:
344: It is important to note that the magnetically driven disk warping
345: and precession discussed in \S 3 are secular effects which operate
346: on timescales much longer than the disk dynamical time.
347: In deriving eqs.~(\ref{gwarp}) and (\ref{oprec}), we have
348: implicitly assumed that the perturbed disk (see Fig.~2) reaches a
349: new steady state so that the magnetic field behaves
350: in a similar way as in the unperturbed disk (e.g.,
351: $B_{\phi,t}^\pm=\mp \zeta B_z$). These effects are not captured in a dynamical
352: perturbation analysis of the disk.
353: Clearly, our derivation of the magnetically driven
354: warping and precession is far from being rigorous. Nevertheless, it suggests
355: that the warped, precessing disk-outflow may be an alternative (and preferred)
356: state for the accretion disk threaded by large-scale magnetic fields.
357:
358: The effects of magnetically driven warping and precession
359: discussed in this paper are analogous to
360: the similar effects that exist in the accretion disks around magnetic
361: stars (Lai 1999; Shirakawa \& Lai 2002a,b; Pfeiffer \& Lai 2003;
362: see also Aly 1980; Lipunov \& Shakura 1980). In those systems,
363: the central star provides the ``external'' magnetic field for the disk.
364: The warping and precessional torques arise from the interaction
365: between the surface current on the disk and the horizontal magnetic
366: field (parallel to the disk) produced by the stellar magnetic dipole.
367: Here, in the absence of the central magnetic star, the ``external''
368: magnetic field (for the warped region of the disk)
369: is generated by the other currents in the disk-outflow system,
370: and we have argued that similar torques exist:
371: the warping torque relies on the surface current
372: generated by the twisting of the vertical field threading the disk, while the
373: precessional torque relies on the azimuthal screening current
374: due to the diamagnetic response of the disk.
375: The simplistic nature of our arguments (perhaps
376: even to the point of being wrong) in \S 3 and the complexity of
377: the real astrophysical systems (see references in \S 2) preclude us from
378: addressing many important issues such as the extent and location of the
379: warped disk region. Nevertheless, we are not aware of
380: any previous discussion of these effects, and we think it is useful to
381: present them so that they may be studied further by the astrophysics
382: community.
383:
384: The magnetically driven warping and precession effects discussed in this
385: paper potentially have advantages over the other disk warping
386: mechanisms that are needed to explain jet precession (see \S 1).
387: For example, the radiation driven warping instability (Pringle 1996),
388: while probably important for X-ray binaries (Ogilvie \& Dubus 2001),
389: is irrelevant for YSOs (since the instability operates
390: at large disk radii). The magnetic effects discussed in this paper
391: are directly connected to the large-scale magnetic field associated with the
392: jet/outflow, and the model naturally predicts retrograde precession
393: of the warped disk (and thus the jet), in agreement with observations
394: in X-ray binaries (e.g., Her X-1).
395:
396:
397: \acknowledgments
398: The idea for this paper was motivated by the questions from
399: Chris McKee and Frank Shu following a seminar that the author
400: gave at UC Berkeley in 2001. I thank Richard Lovelace for
401: useful discussion. This work is supported in part by NSF Grant AST 9986740 and
402: NASA grant NAG 5-12034, as well as by a research fellowship
403: from the Alfred P. Sloan foundation.
404:
405: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
406: \begin{thebibliography}{}
407:
408: \bibitem[]{}
409: Agapitou, V., Papaloizou, J.C.B., \& Terquem, C. 1997, MNRAS, 292, 631
410:
411: \bibitem[]{}
412: Aly, J. J. 1980, A\&A, 86, 192
413:
414: \bibitem[]{}
415: Bate, M.R., et al.~2000, MNRAS, 317, 773
416:
417: \bibitem[]{}
418: Blandford, R.D. 1976, MNRAS, 176, 465
419:
420: \bibitem[]{}
421: Blandford, R.D., \& Payne, D.G. 182, MNRAS, 199, 883
422:
423: %\bibitem[]{}
424: %Bridle, A.H., \& Perley, R.A. 1984, ARAA, 22, 319
425: % Extragalatic tadio jets
426:
427: \bibitem[]{}
428: Cowley, A.P., et al.~1998, ApJ, 504, 854
429: % Six Supersoft X-Ray Binaries: System Parameters and Twin-Jet Outflows
430:
431: \bibitem[]{}
432: Eikenberry, S.S. et al.~2001, ApJ, 561, 1027
433:
434: %\bibitem[]{}
435: %Fender, R. 2001, in Relativistic flows in Astrophysics, eds.
436: %A.W. Guthmann et al. (Springer)
437: % Relativistic outflows from X-ray binaries (a.k.a. `Microquasars')
438:
439: \bibitem[]{}
440: Fender, R. 2003, in Compact Stellar X-ray Sources, eds. W.H.G. Lewin
441: \& M. van der Klis (Cambridge Univ. Press)
442: % Jets from X-ray binaries (astro-ph/0303339)
443:
444: \bibitem[]{}
445: Hjellming, R.M., \& Rupen, M.P. 1995, Nature, 375, 464
446:
447: \bibitem[]{}
448: Katz, J. I. 1973, Nat, 246, 87
449:
450: \bibitem[]{}
451: K\"onigl, A., \& Pudritz, R.E. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV,
452: eds. V. Manning et al. (Univ. of Arizona Press)
453: % Disk Winds and the Accretion-Outflow Connection
454:
455: \bibitem[]{}
456: Krolik, J.H. 1999, Active Galactic Nuclei (Priceton Univ.
457: Press)
458:
459: \bibitem[]{}
460: Lai, D. 1999, ApJ, 524, 1030
461:
462: \bibitem[]{}
463: Lipunov, V.M., \& Shakura, N.I. 1980, Sov. Astron. Lett., 6, 14
464:
465: \bibitem[]{}
466: Lovelace, R.V.E. 1976, Nature, 262, 649
467:
468: \bibitem[]{}
469: Lovelace, R.V.E., et al. 1999, in Active Galactic Nuclei and Related
470: Phenomena (Proceedings of IAU symposium 194), eds. Y. Terzian, et al. (ASP:
471: San Francisco)
472: % Magnetohydrodynamic Origin of Jets from Accretion Disks
473:
474: \bibitem[]{}
475: Lubow, S.H., \& Ogilvie, G.I. 2000, ApJ, 538, 326
476:
477: %\bibitem[]{}
478: %Maloney, P.R., \& Begelman, M.C. 1997, ApJ, 491, L43
479:
480: \bibitem[]{}
481: Maloney, P.R., Begelman, M.C., \& Nowak, M.A. 1998, ApJ, 504, 77
482:
483: \bibitem[]{}
484: Margon, B. 1984, ARA\&A, 22, 507
485:
486: \bibitem[]{}
487: Meier, D.L., Koide, S., \& Uchida, Y. 2001, Science, 291, 84
488: % Magnetohydrodynamic Production of Relativistic Jets
489:
490: \bibitem[]{}
491: Mirabel, I.F., \& Rodriguez, I.F. 1999, ARAA, 37, 409
492: % Sources of Relativistic Jets in the Galaxy
493:
494: %\bibitem[]{}
495: %Ogilvie, G.~I.~1999, MNRAS, 304, 557
496:
497: \bibitem[]{}
498: Ogilvie, G.~I., \& Dubus, G. 2001, MNRAS, 320, 485
499:
500: %\bibitem[]{}
501: %Papaloizou, J.~C., \& Terquem, C. 1995, MNRAS, 274, 987
502:
503: \bibitem[]{}
504: Pfeiffer, H., \& Lai, D. 2003, ApJ, submitted
505:
506: \bibitem[]{}
507: Priedhorsky, W.C., \& Holt, S.S. 1987, Space Science Rev., 45, 291
508:
509: \bibitem[]{}
510: Pringle, J.~E. 1996, MNRAS, 281, 857
511:
512: \bibitem[]{}
513: Quillen, A.~C. 2001, ApJ, 313
514:
515: \bibitem[]{}
516: Reipurth, B., \& Bally, J. 2001, ARAA, 39, 403
517: % Herbig-Haro Flows: Probles of Early Stellar Evolution
518:
519: \bibitem[]{}
520: Schandl, S., \& Meyer, F. 1994, A\&A, 289, 149
521:
522: %\bibitem[]{}
523: %Schmitt, H.R., Pringle, J.E., Clarke, C.J., \& Kinney, A.L. 2002,
524: %ApJ, 575, 150
525: % The Orientation of Jets Relative to Dust Disks in Radio Galaxies
526:
527: \bibitem[]{}
528: Shirakawa, A., \& Lai, D. 2002a, ApJ, 564, 361
529:
530: \bibitem[]{}
531: Shirakawa, A., \& Lai, D. 2002b, ApJ, 565, 1134
532:
533: \bibitem[]{}
534: Shu, F.~H., et al.~1994, ApJ, 429, 781.
535:
536: \bibitem[]{}
537: Shu, F.~H., et al. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, eds.
538: V, Manning et al. (Univ. of Arizona Press)
539: % X-Winds Theory and Observations
540:
541: %\bibitem[]{}
542: %Terquem, C.~E.~J.~M.~L.~J. 1998, ApJ, 509, 819
543:
544: \bibitem[]{}
545: Terquem, C., et al.~1999, ApJ, 512, L131
546: % Precession of Collimated Outflows from Young Stellar Objects
547:
548: \bibitem[]{}
549: Terquem, C., \& Papaloizou, J.C.B. 2000, A\&A, 1031
550: % The response of an accretion disk to an inclined dipole ...
551:
552: \bibitem[]{}
553: Tingay, S.J., et al.~1995, Nature, 374, 141
554:
555: \bibitem[]{}
556: Wijers, R.A.M.J., \& Pringle, J.E. 1999, MNRAS, 308, 207
557:
558: \end{thebibliography}
559:
560:
561: %\clearpage
562: %\begin{figure}
563: %\plotone{f1.eps}
564: %\caption{A sketch of the idealized disk -- magnetic field
565: %configuration in which hydromagnetic outflows are produced.
566: %The disk is threaded by a large-scale poloidal field, which
567: %gets twisted by the disk, generating the toroidal field.
568: %}\end{figure}
569:
570: %\clearpage
571: %\begin{figure}
572: %\plotone{f2.eps}
573: %\caption{Warping perturbation to the disk around radius
574: %$r$. For clarity, only the $Z$-component of the magnetic field,
575: %$\bB_Z$, is shown.
576: %}\end{figure}
577:
578: \end{document}
579: