First accurate simulation of a supermassive black hole destroying a star

(And of course you should listen to “Supermassive Black Hole” by Muse while enjoying this article. It’s the real only way. ๐Ÿ˜‰)

August 21, 2024 Evrim Yazgin

Astrophysicists at Melbourneโ€™s Monash University have generated the first simulation which accurately depicts what happens when a star ventures too close to a supermassive black hole.

The research, published in Astrophysical Journal Letters, is a technical milestone in our attempts to understand these mysterious cosmic giants.

Video on the page, or here on YouTube.

First author Daniel Price, a professor at Monash, tells Cosmos that there are about 100 events which have been observed over the past decade-and-a-half which astronomers believe fit the bill to be a star being destroyed by a supermassive black hole, also called a tidal disruption event (TDE).

Not X-ray vision

But these observations have thrown up some odd measurements which havenโ€™t been explained until now.

โ€œIf you dump a bunch of material close to black hole and form an accretion disk around that black hole, thereโ€™s a prediction for where the material should land,โ€ Price says. โ€œThe material at that location should be more than a million degrees in temperature. It should generate X-rays.

โ€œSo, if you have unobscured stuff feeding a black hole, you get X-ray emission. For example, the black hole sources in the galaxy, theyโ€™re all X-ray emitters.โ€

Stars falling into supermassive black holes, however, do not result in emission of X-rays. They emit light in the visible, or optical, spectrum.

Current theories can only speculate why such events lead to material being flung toward us at 20,000km per second โ€“ about one-fifteenth the speed of light.

An eating analogy โ€“ but not in the way you think

Price explains that the simulation illuminates why it is optical light, not X-rays, which we observe when our telescopes pick up stars falling into supermassive black holes.

โ€œThe analogy with me eating is that you donโ€™t see my stomach. Youโ€™re not seeing the thing thatโ€™s generating the energy, youโ€™re seeing it reprocessed through my skin,โ€ Price says. โ€œIf you look at my light curve, you see that Iโ€™m a constant temperature of 38ยฐC all day.

โ€œMy light curve is very much like a disruption event. The temperatures are pretty much constant. Luminosity changes a bit, but you infer thatโ€™s because the size of the objects changing, but the temperature evolution is very flat. So, it looks like exactly like me, just a lot warmer and a lot bigger.โ€

In fact, this size of the photosphere โ€“ the object which emits the optical rays โ€“ itself is surprising, says Price.

The photosphere in the simulation, which matches observations, is about 100 astronomical units (AU), where 1 AU is the distance from the Earth to the Sun (roughly 150 million kilometres).

Video on the page, or here on YouTube

โ€œNo one knows what it is,โ€ Price laughs.

What we see is muffled

Price says the simulations confirm a theoretical explanation for these unexpected observations called the Eddington envelope.

โ€œThatโ€™s the concept that youโ€™re stuffing material down towards the black hole faster than it can process it,โ€ Price says. โ€œBy process, I mean like the sun processes the energy from its core โ€“ it just kind of gently radiates it away. So the black hole canโ€™t radiate away the stuff that youโ€™re trying to feed it. And, so, it has to literally blow it away.โ€

This material โ€œsmothersโ€ the black hole, absorbing the X-rays that the black hole emits and re-emitting it as optical light.

Price extends the eating analogy to an unpleasant place.

โ€œBasically, itโ€™s like stuffing your stomach. Youโ€™re going to vomit eventually. Thatโ€™s pretty much what happens.โ€

The power of a simulation

โ€œThatโ€™s the exciting thing in simulations. People have speculated for a long time and drawn illustrations and this kind of thing, but thereโ€™s no physics in that. Thatโ€™s just what we call phenomenology. Thatโ€™s how it must be to explain this phenomena. But we donโ€™t know what produces that kind of envelope or layer, or reprocessing layer,โ€ Price says.

The simulation, Price says, just requires the initial conditions โ€“ the star โ€“ the fluid mechanics governing the star, and the rules of general relativity.

โ€œThen itโ€™s just a technical challenge,โ€ he says.

โ€œIn a lot of simulation work, youโ€™re kind of guessing what might have happened,โ€ he adds. โ€œBut in this case, weโ€™re pretty sure what happens. Itโ€™s really nice to get that connection to the observations of transients from just chucking a star at a computer.โ€

Price explains that the simulation will set astrophysicists and astronomers up to be able to understand such phenomena much better as more observations are expected to be made soon.

โ€œThe first optical transient was only detected in 2010, but whatโ€™s coming is the Rubins observatory being built in Chile. Thatโ€™s expected to boost the population of these things into the thousands.

โ€œHaving a good theoretical understanding of what the kind of phenomena is sets us up really well for that future flood of observations. Itโ€™s not just some theoretical speculation. Thereโ€™s really something we can go after and understand by looking at it.โ€

Leave a comment