# 1 Model Description, Governing Equations and the solution Procedure

## 1 Model Description, Governing Equations and the solution Procedure

We consider thin, axisymmetric polytropic inflows in vertical equilibrium (otherwise known as 1.5 dimensional flow). We ignore the self-gravity of the flow and viscosity is assumed to be significant only at the shock so that entropy is generated. We do the calculations using Paczyński-Wiita potential which mimics surroundings of the Schwarzschild black hole. The equations (in dimensionless units) governing the inflow are:   

$$=\frac{u_{e}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{2}+na_{e}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\frac{\lambda ^2}{2r^2}\frac{1}{2(r1)}.$$
$`(1)`$   
$$\dot{M}_{in}=u_e\rho _erh_e(r),$$
$`(2)`$   
(For detail, see  ) The equations governing the polytropic outflow are

$$=\frac{\vartheta ^2}{2}+n^{}a_{e}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\frac{\lambda ^2}{2r_{m}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}(r)}\frac{1}{2(r1)}$$
$`(3)`$   
$$\dot{M}_{out}=\rho \vartheta 𝒜(r).$$
$`(4)`$   
Where $`r_m`$ is the mean axial distance of the flow and $`𝒜(r)`$ is the cross sectional area through which mass is flowing out. (For detalil, see, ) $`\gamma `$ of the outflow was taken to be smaller than that of the inflow because of momentum deposition effects. The outflow angular momentum $`\lambda `$ is chosen to be the same as in the inflow, i.e., no viscous dissipation is assumed to be present in the inner region of the flow close to a black hole. Considering that viscous time scales are longer compared to the inflow time scale, it may be a good assumption in the disk, but it may not be a very strong assumption for the outflows which are slow prior to the acceleration and are therefore, prone to viscous transport of angular momentum. Detailed study of the outflow rates in presence of viscosity and magnetic field is in progress and would be presented elsewhere. The Isothermal outflow is governed by the following equations

$$\frac{\vartheta _{iso}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{2}+C_{s}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}ln\rho +\frac{\lambda ^2}{2r_m(r)^2}\frac{1}{2(r1)}=\mathrm{Constant}$$
$`(5)`$   
$$\dot{M}_{out}=\rho \vartheta _{iso}𝒜(r).$$
$`(6)`$   
Here, the area function remains the same above. A subscript iso of velocity $`\vartheta `$ is kept to distinguish from the velocity in the polytropic case. This is to indicate the velocities are measured here using completely different assumptions. For details, see .

In both the models of the outflow, we assume that the flow is primarily radial. Thus the $`\theta `$-component of the velocity is ignored ($`\vartheta _\theta <<\vartheta `$).

### 1.1 Procedure to solve for disks and outflows simultaneously

For polytropic outflows, we solve equations (1-4) simultaneously using numerical techniques (for detail, see, ). In this case the specific energy $``$ is assumed to remain fixed throughout the flow trajectory as it moves from the disk to the jet. At the shock, entropy is generated and hence the outflow is of higher entropy for the same specific energy.

A supply of parameters $``$, $`\lambda `$, $`\gamma `$ and $`\gamma _o`$ makes a self-consistent computation of $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ possible when the shock is present. In the case where the shocks do not form, the procedure is a bit different. It is assumed that the maximum amount of matter comes out from the place of the disk where the thermal pressure of the inflow attains its maximum and the outflow is assumed to have the same quasi-conical shape with annular cross-section $`𝒜(r)`$ between the funnel wall and the centrifugal barrier as already defined. For this case, the compression ratio of the gas at the pressure maximum between the inflow and outflow $`R_{comp}`$ is supplied as a free parameter, since it may be otherwise very difficult to compute satisfactorily. In the presence of shocks, such problems do not arise as the compression ratio is obtained self-consistently. For isothermal outflow, it is assumed that the outflow has exactly the same temperature as that of the post-shock flow, but the energy is not conserved as matter goes from disk to the wind. The polytropic index of the inflow can vary but that of the outflow is always unity. The other assumptions and logical steps are exactly same as those of the case where the outflow is polytropic. Here we solve equations (1-2) and (5-6) simultaneously using numerical technique to get results. (For details, see, ).

## 2 Results

### 2.1 Polytropic outflow coming from the post-shock accretion disk

Figure 1 shows a typical solution which combines the accretion and the outflow. The input parameters are $`=0.00689`$, $`\lambda =1.65`$ and $`\gamma =4/3`$ corresponding to relativistic inflow. The solid curve with an arrow represents the pre-shock region of the inflow and the long-dashed curve represents the post-shock inflow which

enters the black hole after passing through the inner sonic point (I). The solid vertical line at $`X_{s3}`$ (in the notation of ) with double arrow represents the shock transition. Three dotted curves represent three outflow solutions for the parameters $`\gamma _o=1.3`$ (top), $`1.1`$ (middle) and $`1.03`$ (bottom). The outflow branches shown pass through the corresponding sonic points. It is evident from the figure that the outflow moves along solution curves which are completely different from that of the ‘wind solution’ of the inflow which passes through the outer sonic point ‘O’. The mass loss ratio $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ in these cases are $`0.47`$, $`0.22`$ and $`0.06`$ respectively. Figure 2 shows the ratio $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ as $`\gamma _o`$ is varied. Only the range of $`\gamma _o`$ for which the shock-solution is present is shown here. In Fig. 3a we show the variation of the ratio $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ of the mass outflow rate inflow rate as a function of the shock-strength (solid) $`M_{}/M_+`$ (Here, $`M_{}`$ and $`M_+`$ are the Mach numbers of the pre- and post-shock flows respectively.), the compression ratio (dotted) $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+/\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}`$ (Here, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+`$ are the vertically integrated matter densities in the pre- and post- shock

flows respectively), and the stable shock location (dashed) $`X_{s3}`$. Other parameters are $`\lambda =1.75`$ and $`\gamma _o=1.1`$. Note that the ratio $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ does not peak near the strongest shocks! Shocks are stronger when they are located closer to the black hole, i.e., for smaller energies. In Fig. 3b where $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ is plotted as a function of the specific energy $``$ (along x-axis) and $`\gamma _o`$ (marked on each curve). Specific angular momentum is chosen to be $`\lambda =1.75`$ as before. To have a better insight of the behavior of the outflow we plot in Fig. 4 $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ as a function of the polytropic index of the incoming flow $`\gamma `$. The range of $`\gamma `$ shown is the range for which shock forms in the flow. We also plot the variation of velocity $`\vartheta _o`$, density $`\rho _o`$ and area $`𝒜(r)`$ of the outflow at the location where the outflow leaves the disk. These quantities are scaled from the corresponding dimensionless units as $`\vartheta _o2\times 10^4\vartheta _o558`$, $`\rho _o10^{22}\rho _o`$ and $`𝒜0.0005𝒜`$ respectively in order to bring them in the same scale. The non-monotonic nature of the variation of $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ with $`\gamma `$ is observed.

### 2.2 Polytropic outflow coming from the region of the maximum pressure

In this case, the inflow parameters are chosen from such a region of parameter space so that the shocks do not form (see ). Here, the inflow passes through the inner sonic point only. The outflow is assumed to be coming out from the regions where the polytropic inflow has maximum pressure. Figure 5a shows a typical solution. The arrowed solid curve shows the inflow and the dotted arrowed curves show the outflows for $`\gamma _o=1.3`$ (top), $`1.1`$ (middle) and $`1.01`$ (bottom). The ratio $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ in these cases is given by $`0.66`$, $`0.30`$ and $`0.09`$ respectively. The specific energy and angular momentum are chosen to be $`=0.00584`$ and $`\lambda =1.8145`$ respectively. The pressure maximum occurs outside the inner sonic point at $`r_m`$ when the flow is still subsonic. Figure 5b shows the variation of thermal pressure of the flow with radial distance. The peak is clearly visible. Figure 6 shows the ratio $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ as a function of $`\gamma _o`$ for various choices of the compression ratio $`R_{comp}`$ of the outflowing gas at the pressure maximum: $`R_{comp}=2`$ for the bottom curve and $`7`$ for the top curve. Note that flows with highest compression ratios produce highest outflow rates, evacuating the disk which is responsible for the quiescent states in X-ray Novae systems and also in some systems with massive black holes (e.g., our own galactic centre?). The location of maximum pressure being close to the black hole, it may be very difficult to generate the outflow from this region. Thus, it is expected that the ratio $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ would be larger when the maximum pressure is located farther out. This is exactly what we see in Fig. 7, where we plot $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ against the location of the pressure maximum (solid curve). Secondly, if our guess that the outflow rate could be related to the pressure is correct, then the rate should increase as the pressure at the maximum rises. That’s also what we observe in Fig. 7. We plot $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ as a function of the actual pressure at the pressure maximum (dotted curve). The mass loss is found to be a strongly correlated with the thermal pressure. Here we have multiplied non-dimensional thermal pressure by $`1.5\times 10^{24}`$ in order to bring them in the same scale.

### 2.3 Isothermal outflow coming from the post-shock accretion disk

Here the temperature of the outflow is obtained from the proton temperature of the advective region of the disk. The proton temperature is obtained using the Comptonization, bremsstrahlung, inverse bremsstrahlung and Coulomb processes. . Figure 8 shows the effective proton temperature and the electron temperature of the post-shock advective region as a function of the accretion rate (in logarithmic scale) of the Keplerian component of the disk. In Fig. 9a, we show the ratio $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ as a function of the Eddington rate of the incoming flow for a range of the specific angular momentum. In the low luminosity objects the ratio

is larger. Angular momentum is varied from $`\lambda =1.63`$ (top curve) to $`1.65`$ (bottom curve). An interval of $`\lambda =0.005`$ was used. The ratio is very sensitive to the angular momentum since it changes the shock location rapidly and therefore changes the post-shock temperature very much. We also plot the outflux of angular momentum $`F(\lambda )=\lambda \dot{m}_{in}R_{\dot{m}}`$ which has a maximum at intermediate accretion rates. In dimensional units, these quantities represent significant fractions of angular momentum of the entire disk and therefore the rotating outflow can help accretion processes. Curves are drawn for different $`\lambda `$ as above. In Fig. 9b, we plot the variation of the ratio directly with the proton temperature of the advecting region. The outflow is clearly thermally driven. Hotter flow produces more winds as is expected. The angular momentum associated with each curve is same as before.

### 2.4 Isothermal outflow coming from the region of the maximum pressure

This case produces very similar result as in the above case, except that like Section 2.2 the outflow rate becomes more than a hundred percent of the inflow rate when the proton temperature is very high. This phenomenon may be responsible for producing quiescent states in some black hole candidates.

## 3 Poytropic outflow from quasi-spherical accretion

As already been mentioned in the introduction, for a quasi-spherical Bondi-type accretion onto a compact object (namely, on a massive black hole), a steady state situation can be developed where a standing collisionless shock may form due to the plasma instabilities and for nonlinearyity introduced by small density purturbation. We consider cold inflow ( $`0.001`$) with moderate or high value of accretion rate. Thermal particles freely falling toward black hole are assumed to be shock accelerated via first order Fermi acceleration producing relativistic protons. Those relativistic protons usually scatter several times before being captured by the black hole. These energyzed particles, in turn, provide sufficiently outward pressure to support a standing, collisionless shock. A fraction of the energy flux of infalling matter is assumed to be converted into radiation at the shock standoff distance through hadronic collision and mesonic decay. That fraction is radiated away to support the development and maintanence of a standing, collisionless shock at a given Schwarzschild radius.    
The fraction of energy converted, the shock compression ratio $`R_{comp}`$, along with the ratio of post shock relativistic hadronic pressure to infalling infalling ram pressure at a given shock location are obtained from the steady state shock solution of Eichler  and Ellision and Eichler . The shock location as a function of the specific energy $``$ of the infalling matter and accretion rate is then self consistently obtained using the above mentioned quantities.   
We consider polytropic inflow. The outflow is also assumed to be polytropic except the fact that $`\gamma _{outflow}`$ is assumed to be less than the $`\gamma _{inflow}`$ reason of which has already been discussed in §1. As a fraction of the energy of infalling material is converted into radiation, energy flux of the wind is somewhat less than that of the accretion but is kept constant througout the outflow. Below we present a priliminary report of the result. Detail calculation is presented elsewhere .

### 3.1 Priliminary report of the results

We solve the inflow and outflow equations self consistently as was described in §1.1 except the fact that now there will be no angular momentum related term in the energy expression and as the flow is quasi-connical, the expressions for mass flux rates are now

$$\dot{M}_{(in/out)}=\rho ur_{}^{2}{}_{shock}{}^{}\mathrm{\Theta }_{(in/out)}$$

The value of $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ is distinguishably small compared to the cases previously discussed (i,e, for the rotating flows). This is because matter is ejected out due to the presure of the relativistic particles generated at the shock location which is less enough in comparison to that originated for the presence of angular momentum. In general mass loss rate increases with the energy of the infall for fixed accretion rate. When energy is varied, massloss rate is anti-correlated with the shock location. This is expected because higher energy gives the lower value of shock location in our model and the closer the shock forms to the black hole, the greater will be the amount of gravitational potential available to be put onto relativistic hadrons to apply pressure for the outflow to take place. If the energy is kept fixed and accretion rate is varied it is observed that the shock location increases with increasing accretion rate as expected from the functional form of the formula for calculating the shock standoff distance. Here the mass loss rate is correlated with the shock location and accretion rate. This is because once the energy is fixed, the fraction of it which is converted into radiation is also fixed implying the fact that lower is the shock location, harder is the job to produce the outflow because of the inward pull of gravity strength of which increases as the shock location decreases (for detail, see ).   
Variation of $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ with the compression ratio $`R_{comp}`$ at the shock location follows more or less the same trend as was manifested for the flow with angular momentum (Fig - 3a) except that here the peak is not that much distinct, and, in general, increases with the $`\gamma _{outflow}`$ as was seen in previous case (Fig - 2). See  for detail calculations and figures.   

## 4 Concluding remarks :

In this paper, we have computed the mass outflow rate from the matter accreting onto galactic and extra-galactic black holes. Since the general physics of advective flows are similar around a neutron star, we believe that the conclusions may remain roughly similar provided the shock forms, although the boundary layer of the neutron star, where half of the binding energy could be released, may be more luminous than that of a black hole and may thus affect the outflow rate.   
From numerical simulation using SPH code, it was found that the outflow rate could be as high as 10 - 20 per cent  which we get for moderate accretion rate and for the low value of $`\gamma _{out}`$. Using TVD code , 10 - 15 per cent of the steady outflow is seen and occasionally, even 150 per cent of the inflow is found to be driven away. Our result shows that similar high outflow rate is also possible, especially for low luminosities. Simulation for radiation dominated flows showed $`R_{\dot{m}}0.004`$ , which also agrees with our results when we consider high accretion rate (see Fig. 9a). So it seems that the analytical results of our work are in good agreement with numerical simulation work. Observationally, the exact value of outflow rate from a real system is very difficuilt to obtain as it depends on too many uncertainties, such as filling factors and projection effects etc. In any case, with a general knowledge of the outflow rate, we can proceed to estimate several important quantities. For example, it had been argued that the composition of the disk changes due to nucleosynthesis in accretion disks around black holes and these modified isotopes are deposited in the surroundings by outflows from the disks (Hogan & Applegate 1987; Mukhopadhyay & Chakrabarti, 1998 and references therein). Similarly, it is argued that outflows deposit magnetic flux tubes from accretion disks into the surroundings (Daly & Loeb, 1990). Thus a knowledge of outflows are essential in understanding varied physical phenomena in galactic environments.   
The basic conclusions of this paper (for flows with angular momentum) are the followings:   
a) It is possible that most of the outflows are coming from the centrifugally supported boundary layer (CENBOL) of the accretion disks.   
b) The outflow rate generally increases with the proton temperature of CENBOL. In other words, winds are, at least partially, thermally driven. This is reflected more strongly when the outflow is isothermal.   
c) Even though specific angular momentum of the flow increases the size of the CENBOL, and one would have expected a higher mass flux in the wind, we find that the rate of the outflow is actually anti-correlated with the $`\lambda `$ of the inflow. On the other hand, presenc e of significant viscosity in CENBOL may reduce angular momentum of the outflow. When this is taken into account, we find that the rate of the outflow is correlated with $`\lambda `$ of the outflow. This suggests that the outflow is partially centrifugally driven as well.   
d) The ratio $`R_{\dot{m}}`$ is generally anti-correlated with the inflow accretion rate. That is, disks of lower luminosity would produce higher $`R_{\dot{m}}`$.   
e) Generally speaking, supersonic region of the inflow do not have pressure maxima. Thus, outflows emerge from the subsonic region of the inflow, whether the shock actually forms or not.   
An interesting situation arises when the polytropic index of the outflow is large and the compression ratio of the flow is also very high. In this case, the flow virtually bounces back as the winds and the outflow rate can be temporarily larger compared with the inflow rate, thereby evacuating the disk. In this range of parameters, most, if not all, of our assumptions breakdown completely because the situation becomes inherently time-dependent. It is possible that some of the black hole systems, including that in our own galactic centre, may have undergone such evacuation phase in the past and gone into quiescent phase.   
So far, we made the computations around a Schwarzschild black hole. The mass outflow rates for kerr black holes are being studied and the results would be reported elsewhere . We made a few assumptions, some of which may be questionable. Nevertheless, we believe that our calculation is sufficiently illustrative and gives a direction which can be followed in the future.   

REFERENCES

1. Blandford, R. D. $`\&`$ Payne, D. 1982, MNRAS, 199, 883
2. Chakrabarti, S. K. 1986, Apj, 303, 582
3. Chakrabarti, S. K. $`\&`$ Bhaskaran, P. 1992, 255, 255
4. Hawley, J.W., Smarr, L. $`\&`$ Wilson, J. 1984, Apj, 297, 296.
5. Eggum, G. E., Coroniti, F. V., Katz, J. I. 1985, Apj, 298, L41
6. Molteni, D., Lanzafame, G. $`\&`$ Chakrabarti, S. K. 1994 Apj, 425, 161
7. Nobuta, K., Hanawa, T. 1997 IAUS..184E.245N
8. Ryu, D., Chakrabarti, S. K., $`\&`$ Molteni, D. 1997, Apj, 474, 378
9. Castor, J. I., Abott, D. C. $`\&`$ Klein, R. I. 1975, Apj, 195, 157
10. Das, T., K. $`\&`$ Chakrabarti, S., K. 1998 Apj, (submitted)
11. Kazanas, D. $`\&`$ Ellison, D. C. 1986, Apj 304, 178.
12. Chakrabarti, S. K. 1989, Apj, 347, 365
13. Chakrabarti, S. K. 1997, Apj, 484, 313
14. Eichler, D., 1984, Apj., 277, 429
15. Ellision, D. C., $`\&`$ Eichler, D. 1984, Apj, 286, 691
16. Das, T., K. 1998 (submitted)
17. Das, T., K. 1998, in preparation
18. Chakrabarti, S. K. 1997, Apj, submitted