Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T05:57:51.605Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Direct Collapse of Supermassive Black Hole Seeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 October 2016

John A. Regan
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Finland email: john.regan@helsinki.fi
Peter H. Johansson
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Finland email: john.regan@helsinki.fi
John H. Wise
Affiliation:
Center for Relativistic Astrophysics, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The direct collapse model of supermassive black hole seed formation requires that the gas cools predominantly via atomic hydrogen. To this end we simulate the effect of an anisotropic radiation source on the collapse of a halo at high redshift. The radiation source is placed at a distance of 3 kpc (physical) from the collapsing object and is set to emit monochromatically in the center of the Lyman-Werner (LW) band. The LW radiation emitted from the high redshift source is followed self-consistently using ray tracing techniques. Due to self-shielding, a small amount of H2 is able to form at the very center of the collapsing halo even under very strong LW radiation. Furthermore, we find that a radiation source, emitting < 1054 (∼103 J21) photons per second is required to cause the collapse of a clump of M ∼ 105 M. The resulting accretion rate onto the collapsing object is ∼ 0.25 M yr−1. Our results display significant differences, compared to the isotropic radiation field case, in terms of H2 fraction at an equivalent radius. These differences will significantly effect the dynamics of the collapse. With the inclusion of a strong anisotropic radiation source, the final mass of the collapsing object is found to be M ∼ 105 M. This is consistent with predictions for the formation of a supermassive star or quasi-star leading to a supermassive black hole.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2016 

References

Bryan, G. L. and The Enzo Collaboration. AstroPhysical Journal, 211:19, April 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, M. et al. Monthly Notices, 391:1961–1972, December 2008.Google Scholar
Mortlock, D. J. et al. Nature, 474:616–619, June 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Regan, J. A. & Haehnelt, M. G.. Monthly Notices, 393:858–871, March 2009.Google Scholar
Regan, J. A. & Haehnelt, M. G.. Monthly Notices, 396:343–353, June 2009.Google Scholar
Regan, J. A. et al. Monthly Notices, 439:1160–1175, March 2014.Google Scholar
Regan, J. A., Johansson, P. H., & Wise, J. H.. ArXiv e-prints:1407.4472, July 2014.Google Scholar