Black hole jets can influence star formation in galaxies by dispersing and heating interstellar gas

November 12, 2016, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
Credit: National and Kapodistrian University of Athens

A new study conducted by a group of astrophysicists led by Dr K. Dasyra suggests that black hole jets can affect the star formation in galaxies by both dispersing and heating large amounts of gas over large areas. The result is based on observations of the nearby galaxy IC5063, collected with the Atacama Large Millimeter Array (ALMA) of the European Southern Observatory (ESO).

This study was conducted following a previous discovery of multiple jet-driven winds in IC5063, which are linked to the in its center (see The jet of a black hole drives multiple winds in a nearby galaxy). About 160 million years ago, charged particles (electrons/protons) that were inflowing toward the black hole were caught in magnetic field lines and ejected outward in the shape of a beam with high velocities. The beam of particles, also known as jet, propagated through the galaxy for more than 3000 light years. It went through a gas disk, driving strong winds at the points where it collided with . The winds lasted for more than a half-million years, as indicated by ESO Very Large Telescope data.

The scientists analyzed the ALMA data aiming to determine whether the gas in the winds has different properties than the gas in the rest of the . For this purpose, they targeted emission lines of CO, originating from molecules in dense interstellar clouds, where the formation of new stars is often taking place, and where the temperature of the gas is typically ~10K.

They showed that the molecular gas impacted by the black hole jet is heated, with temperatures often in the range 30K to 100K. The importance of this result lies in the impediments it poses for star formation—the increased thermal and turbulent motions of the gas delay its gravitational collapse. The gravitational collapse is further delayed by the dispersion of the clouds as the impact of the jet removes gas from dense clouds and disperses it into tenuous winds. The mass of the molecular gas in the winds is at least 2 million solar masses.

Because of the energy deposited by the jet, the is more highly excited in the winds than in the rest of the clouds. This result is encouraging for future studies in the field, as it indicates that the detection of molecular winds will be easier than previously thought for distant galaxies, which can only be observed in high excitation CO lines. Consequently, scientists can evaluate the role of the winds driven by black hole jets in the sizes of the observed galaxies over cosmological scales.

This study was published in the peer-reviewed journal Astronomy & Astrophysics on November 1, 2016.

Explore further: The jet of a black hole drives multiple winds in a nearby galaxy

More information: K. M. Dasyra et al. ALMA reveals optically thin, highly excited CO gasin the jet-driven winds of the galaxy IC 5063, Astronomy & Astrophysics (2016). DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629689 , On Arxiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.03421

The team of the astrophysicists who worked on the study: Drs. K. Dasyra (National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece), F. Combes (College de France, Observatory of Paris, France), T. Oosterloo, R. Morganti (ASTRON and the University of Groningen, The Netherlands), R. Oonk (ASTRON and Leiden University, The Netherlands), P. Salome (Observatory of Paris, France), and N. Vlahakis (National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece).

Related Stories

Black hole hidden within its own exhaust

September 15, 2016

Supermassive black holes, millions to billions of times the mass of our Sun, are found at the centers of galaxies. Many of these galactic behemoths are hidden within a thick doughnut-shape ring of dust and gas known as a ...

ALMA discovers dew drops surrounding dusty spider's web

July 1, 2016

Astronomers have spotted glowing droplets of condensed water in the distant Spiderweb Galaxy – but not where they expected to find them. Detections with the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) show that ...

Recommended for you

30 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

wduckss
1 / 5 (7) Nov 13, 2016
The new "pearl" in science.
Now the "black hole" not ejected the so-called horizon (north-south) already sideways.
A possible event should be observe exclusively through the rotation center of the galaxy due to which orbitriraju around the galactic center per the equator the stars, gas and other bodies.
Elevated temperatures should be observed in the context of friction particles and small fast rotating body (Jupiter and Neptune are 2 x warmer than the received heat from the Sun).
"They have seen a black hole in action ...?" http://www.svemir...ack-hole
Phys1
5 / 5 (7) Nov 13, 2016
@wduckss
Google translate did a poor job for you, this is not intelligible.
Гоогле транслате урадио лоше посао за тебе, то није разумљиво.
hawkingsbrother
Nov 13, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Phys1
5 / 5 (4) Nov 13, 2016
We don't even know what DM is or if it really exists, so how could a few 100 billion solar masses emanate from a 100 million solar mass black hole. Neutrino's don't cause drag, quatsch.
A toddler, wait, an intelligent crow, can see that this does not add up.
wduckss
1 / 5 (5) Nov 13, 2016
@wduckss
Google translate did a poor job for you, this is not intelligible.
Гоогле транслате урадио лоше посао за тебе, то није разумљиво.


It was my fault more than Google.
The horizon "black hole" is on north or south.
Laterally there is only the effects of the rotation of the central body, described in
http://www.svemir....html#4c 2010.y. or
http://www.svemir....html#5b (The forbidden article: Gravity and anti-gravity) or
http://www.svemir...Universe (Rotation of an object and its far-reaching effects), etc.
hawkingsbrother
Nov 13, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
RNP
5 / 5 (4) Nov 14, 2016
@wduckss
You post is still unintelligible and your links all lead to reams of unsupported, indeed nonsensical, opinion. If you wish to communicate here state and support your claims much more clearly.
RNP
4 / 5 (4) Nov 14, 2016
@wduckss
"Celestial objects rotate around their axes; the rotation creates waves, which travel away from an object and in that way create repulsion forces, which prevent the objects, captured in the orbits around them, from falling onto them. Electromagnetic forces constantly direct smaller objects towards the greater, dominant object, which, due to its rotation, constantly repulses and deflects the incoming object until it gets captured in the orbit of the dominant object. That is why objects oscillate on their trajectories; electromagnetic forces of repulsion and attraction simultaneously affect them "

Above is the second paragraph in one of the links you provided. Would you care to give some support/evidence to ANY of these zany claims? E.g.

What waves do rotating bodies emit?
What repulsive forces are created?
How does EM affects the orbits of celestial bodies?
Where are the observations that "objects oscillate on their trajectories"?
Tuxford
1 / 5 (5) Nov 14, 2016
The mass of the molecular gas in the winds is at least 2 million solar masses.

All from accretion of nearby gas flowing inward despite the turbulence generated by the jets???

Want to buy a bridge? Not a good time to be a merger maniac.
RNP
5 / 5 (4) Nov 14, 2016
@Tuxford
The mass of the molecular gas in the winds is at least 2 million solar masses.

All from accretion of nearby gas flowing inward despite the turbulence generated by the jets???

Want to buy a bridge? Not a good time to be a merger maniac.


Would you please give some justification to your implication that this is not believable. Your posts are pointless without such clarification.
Phys1
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 14, 2016
The mass of the molecular gas in the winds is at least 2 million solar masses.

All from accretion of nearby gas flowing inward despite the turbulence generated by the jets???

Why not?

Want to buy a bridge?

What are you talking about, boy?
Not a good time to be a merger maniac.

Know who's a maniac? You :) .
jsdarkdestruction
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 14, 2016
It was my fault more than Google

This is the most accurate statement you've ever made here. Even if you were able to perfectly translate your writings they'd still be unintelligible and incoherent and lacking a Basis in reality. I'm glad you finally realize that you are the main issue.
TogetherinParis
1 / 5 (2) Nov 14, 2016
On earth cyclonic structures serve to redistribute heat more evenly. Similar structures in space could redistribute energy of various forms similarly. It would behoove us to rely upon local testable hypotheses, on admittedly smaller scale, rather than informed speculation de novo.
wduckss
1 / 5 (6) Nov 15, 2016
@RNP
All themes (from links) have been published (Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research (IJSER), etc.).
If the body rotates (eg magnet) rotates and magnetic forces (electric motors ...). The rotation creates the orbit of the body (among other factors). The orbits are in the equatorial plane (or slightly sloping), there is no's orbit around the poles asteroids, planetoids, planets, stars or galaxies.
Always I ask that you observe the evidence, not assumptions and hypotheses.
RNP
5 / 5 (7) Nov 15, 2016
@wduckss

@RNP
All themes (from links) have been published (Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research (IJSER), etc.).
If the body rotates (eg magnet) rotates and magnetic forces (electric motors ...). The rotation creates the orbit of the body (among other factors). The orbits are in the equatorial plane (or slightly sloping), there is no's orbit around the poles asteroids, planetoids, planets, stars or galaxies.
Always I ask that you observe the evidence, not assumptions and hypotheses.


ALL you present are "assumptions and hypotheses" and completely nonsensical ones at that.
It does not matter if you have "published" it or not, NONE of the above has any foundation in reality.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (8) Nov 15, 2016
All themes (from links) have been published (Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research (IJSER), etc.).

IJSER is on the list of predatory journals:
https://scholarly...ore-2846
It is a 'standalone' published rag (i.e. some private guy just knocks out some copies and calls it a journal.)

It is also a fake journal because it claims to have an impact factor but is not listed on Thomson Reuters or Elsevier
http://www.oajour...ls-list/

So, anything published in there is almost guaranteed to be utter crankery.
wduckss
1 / 5 (5) Nov 15, 2016
@ RNP & antialias_physorg

This "your" type has an average of 27,000 visits (add the over 100,000 visitors my themes (without phis.org and space.com) and you conclude who is fake and who is not (and publication costs 10 to 20 x less than "recent" magazine ). Here we constantly argue about the quality of "recent" articles from the "recent" magazine.

In my comment standing, "Always I ask that you observe the evidence, not assumptions and hypotheses.". It I constantly emphasize and it does not matter whether something is or is not published. Important are the truth and evidence. Here in the article you have just fiction and utter ignorance of physics of the universe.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (7) Nov 15, 2016
Here in the article you have just fiction and utter ignorance of physics of the universe.


If it's all the same to you I'll cast my lot with the serious scientists rather than the cranks. Thankyouverymuch.
Phys1
4.8 / 5 (5) Nov 15, 2016
@RNP
All themes (from links) have been published (Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research (IJSER), etc.).
If the body rotates (eg magnet) rotates and magnetic forces (electric motors ...). The rotation creates the orbit of the body (among other factors). The orbits are in the equatorial plane (or slightly sloping), there is no's orbit around the poles asteroids, planetoids, planets, stars or galaxies.
Always I ask that you observe the evidence, not assumptions and hypotheses.

I cannot deny this, because I have no idea what it means.
Tuxford
1.5 / 5 (8) Nov 16, 2016
Simply put...Black holes blow...Against the fanciful wishes of the merger maniacs so prevalently posting ill-considered defenses on this board.

http://phys.org/n...tml#nRlv
RNP
3.7 / 5 (6) Nov 16, 2016
@Tuxford
Simply put...Black holes blow...Against the fanciful wishes of the merger maniacs so prevalently posting ill-considered defenses on this board.

http://phys.org/n...tml#nRlv


Can you give ANY rational argument as to why anyone should believe you? Where is the evidence for your claim in the paper you link? Please do us all the respect of at least giving SOME justification for the things you post.
Tuxford
1 / 5 (6) Nov 16, 2016
Simple logic, which escapes the common merger maniac. Just read and think, rather than lamely accept what you are told. Read the reports. The evidence is prevalent. The interpretations are biased toward fantasy. Otherwise, the maniacs do not get published. Science employs a self-sustaining system that favors only accepted interpretation. And publication and reputation are the primary objective of the common merger maniac, not pure understanding. Without publication, the maniac cannot eat. Pretty basic logic.

The winds are detected in four discrete regions near the jet, at distances as large as ~3000 light years away from the black hole. This discovery indicates that black hole jets can influence the evolution of galaxies by increasing the turbulence of the gas and suppressing the formation of new stars at large scales.


http://phys.org/n...tml#nRlv
Phys1
4.3 / 5 (6) Nov 16, 2016

Can you give ANY rational argument

Why do you even ask.
RNP
2.8 / 5 (4) Nov 17, 2016
@Tuxford
Simple logic.....

So, no actual evidence then? Just your own opinions.

@Phys1
Why do you even ask

I believe that even the insane deserve the right to justify their beliefs, even if the justifications are as ridiculous as Tuxford's.
bschott
2.3 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2016
So, no actual evidence then? Just your own opinions.

Well, there is the observation of the jets, which would indicate that matter is being expelled...what is the evidence that it is being swallowed exactly?
OH yeah....the only "evidence" astrophysicists have when they theorize a BH is "swallowing" matter is that it is expelling matter....That is hilarious.
even the insane deserve the right to justify their beliefs,

How do astrophysicists calculate the amount of mass "swallowed" by a BH?
How does an object that is continuously increasing it's mass NOT affect the galaxy around it?
Do we have observational evidence of ANY claims about BH's
Can you give ANY rational argument

Why do you even ask.

Mainstream Theoretical astrophysics sounds like a gag reel for a bad sci-fi movie when you say in English what they claim math proves.
Scroofinator
not rated yet Nov 17, 2016
which would indicate that matter is being expelled

Not necessarily, it only indicates that there is a flow of energy. If there's no accretion disk, then there is likely no matter being expelled, yet the jets still remain.
Benni
2.3 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2016
@Tuxford

Simple logic.....

So, no actual evidence then? Just your own opinions.


@Phys1

Why do you even ask

I believe that even the insane deserve the right to justify their beliefs, even if the justifications are as ridiculous as Tuxford's.


.....hey Rguy, when is the last time you produced EVIDENCE for anything other than EVIDENCE you are just another name Phys1 uses sign onto this site? You never produce EVIDENCE, almost as if you think EVIDENCE is immaterial in your world of Funny Farm Settled Science.

C'mon, show us a pic of Black Holes which supposedly exist in sizes that are millions of times the mass of the Sun. Maybe the EVIDENCE you actually see for DM is the 80-95% you wished you did not see when you look in a mirror & step on a scale & your refusal to believe such EVIDENCE is real.

cantdrive85
1 / 5 (4) Nov 17, 2016
In plasmas, jets are created w/o invoking pseudoscientific nonsense such as black holes. As a matter of fact, the collimated polar discharge likely originates with double layers as we know from laboratory experiments that the electric fields created by DL's are very efficient at accelerating plasma. And polar jets are also associated with plasmoids.
Tuxford
1 / 5 (1) Nov 28, 2016
..hey Rguy, when is the last time you produced EVIDENCE for anything other than EVIDENCE you are just another name Phys1 uses sign onto this site? You never produce EVIDENCE, almost as if you think EVIDENCE is immaterial in your world of Funny Farm Settled Science.

Clearly he is simply another ultracrepidarian. Likely another NSA spook spewing dis-information. You science types are ultimately naive. The DoD has been dumbing down the technical community for decades, trying to keep a classified physics classified. It started in the aerospace community as early as the early eighties, when there was a concerted effort to kill the super-collider in Texas. Let the Euros waste their money instead.

And in aerospace, better to keep everyone without a high clearance not clued in well enough to put it all together. So divide and dumb down. Likely similar dumbing down occurs in the universities, supporting the Huge Bang Fantasy, etc, through preferential grant money, or ridicule.
nikola_milovic_378
Dec 02, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.