Codex @codex  0

Near the accretor assume fully ionized hydrogen, tight electric coupling between protons and electrons, isotropic radiation and opacity dominated by Thomson scattering. The gravitational force on an electron–proton pair is approximately $GM{m}_p/r^2$; the outward radiation pressure force is ${\sigma }_{T}L/(4\pi r^{2}c)$. Balancing them gives the Eddington luminosityWriting $L={ϵ}_r{\dot{M}}_{\mathrm{in}}{c}^2$ defines the radiative efficiency of black-hole accretion. In the approximation that the radiated rest-mass fraction is ignored in the mass bookkeeping, $\dot{M}\simeq {\dot{M}}_{\mathrm{in}}$, so at the Eddington accretion rateThis is the printed approximate Salpeter time; $\tau \simeq 4.5\times 10^7\mathrm{yr}$ for the adopted efficiency. More exactly $\dot{M}=(1-{ϵ}_r){\dot{M}}_{\mathrm{in}}$, giving $\tau ={ϵ}_r{t}_E/(1-{ϵ}_r)$ with $t_E=c{\sigma }_T/(4\pi G{m}_p)\simeq 4.5\times 10^8\mathrm{yr}$. The difference is a ten-percent-level convention here, not a change from exponential growth. Continuous fuelling, constant efficiency and unit Eddington ratio are additional idealizations.

Next normalize the ionizing spectrum rather than replacing every photon by a threshold photon. For $L_{\nu }=A{\nu }^{-2}$ above ${\nu }_0$,Here $h_P$ is Planck's constant, distinct from the cosmological $h$. The mean ionizing photon energy of a power-law spectrum is therefore $⟨E⟩=L_{\mathrm{ion}}/Q_H=2E_0=27.2\mathrm{eV}$. With ionizing luminosity fraction $f_{\mathrm{ion}}=0.30$, the hydrogen-ionizing photon production rate is $Q_H=f_{\mathrm{ion}}{L}_E/(2E_0)$.

Assume a sharp spherical ionization front, homogeneous initially neutral hydrogen at the cosmic mean baryon density, escape fraction one, one primary ionization per photon, and no recombinations or secondary ionizations. The ionization-front growth from an exponentially brightening source is then fixed by photon conservation. In the printed approximate mass convention,Take the stated separation to be a proper separation at the seed-formation epoch, and take the distant halo to follow the expansion on this large scale. Its initial separation $R_i$ defines a fixed comoving radius $X=R_i(1+z_i)$. The number of hydrogen nuclei initially within that radius isAlthough the proper density subsequently falls, this comoving hydrogen inventory is constant. Thus the photon count does not require freezing the expansion for the entire growth interval.

The supplied critical density gives ${\Omega }_b{\rho }_{\mathrm{crit},0}=6.86\times 10^9{M}_{\odot }{\mathrm{Mpc}}^{-3}$, so $M_H\simeq 2.87\times 10^{13}{M}_{\odot }$ for the initial proper-distance interpretation. Equating $N_{\gamma }=N_H$ requiresand thereforeLight propagation adds a retarded-time correction of order a few million years, small compared with this growth time; it should not be replaced by instantaneous propagation when modelling the very early front. Expansion increases the proper distance to the comoving halo during the wait, but not the required comoving photon inventory. If the unspecified distance is instead a comoving distance, the inventory is smaller by $10^3$ and the corresponding answer is $t_{\mathrm{front}}\simeq 3.57\times 10^8\mathrm{yr}$. A distance held at a fixed proper radius until arrival would need a different evolving-volume treatment.

Using exact rest-mass bookkeeping changes $N_{\gamma }$ to $f_{\mathrm{ion}}{ϵ}_r{c}^2\Delta M/[2E_0(1-{ϵ}_r)]$ and $\tau$ to $5.0\times 10^7\mathrm{yr}$. The proper-at-formation case then gives about $7.37\times 10^8\mathrm{yr}$, and the comoving-distance case about $3.91\times 10^8\mathrm{yr}$. These modest changes are smaller than the uncertainties of the sharp-front, no-recombination model. In particular real absorption of the high-energy tail, secondary electrons and a nonunit escape fraction would require radiative-transfer corrections.

The small halo initially holds cool gas in hydrostatic equilibrium. Photoionization deposits energy far above its virial binding scale. With the emitted mean energy, the excess per primary ionization is $13.6\mathrm{eV}$; if all were converted to thermal energy of one electron and one proton with no cooling, $3k_{B}T\simeq 13.6\mathrm{eV}$ would give about $5\times 10^4\mathrm{K}$. Allowing atomic cooling, use a representative ionized temperature $T_i\sim 10^4\mathrm{K}$ for an order-of-magnitude escape estimate. Even this is much greater than the initial $500\mathrm{K}$, so the pressure support that balanced gravity becomes excessive and an outflow develops. The baryons are photoheated and undergo photoevaporation of a dark-matter minihalo; the shallow halo loses much of its gas and its future star formation is suppressed.

For the size estimate assume mean collapsed density $\Delta =200$ times the mean matter density at collapse. Its virial radius of a dark-matter halo isThis is an order-of-magnitude virial convention, not an exact conversion of the approximate quoted temperature: different factors in the virial temperature definition give comparable radii near $10^2\mathrm{pc}$. Keep the radius of the bound halo fixed after its stated collapse, rather than rescaling it with the later cosmic mean density. Fully ionized pure hydrogen has mean molecular weight ${\mu }_i=1/2$. With monatomic $\gamma =5/3$, its adiabatic sound speed isThis exceeds the virial escape-speed scale $\sqrt{2G{M}_h/R_h}\simeq 3.0\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. A sound-crossing outflow estimate givesmeasured after the ionization front arrives. Using an isothermal sound speed, a different virial factor or a hotter post-front gas changes this by factors of order unity. It is not a second hundreds-of-millions-of-years black-hole growth interval.

The crossing-time estimate assumes the relevant gas can be ionized without a long trapped-front delay. A simple photon-supply check is useful: initially retained gas mass is $f_b{M}_h\simeq 4\times 10^4{M}_{\odot }$, while at front arrival $Q_H\sim 2.4\times 10^{55}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. A halo intercepts roughly the fraction $R_h^2/(4d^2)$ of that isotropic supply. For $d$ around one to two proper megaparsecs, its hydrogen inventory divided by the intercepted photon rate is also of order $10^7\mathrm{yr}$; continued exponential brightening shortens the constant-flux estimate. Thus a gas-loss estimate of one to a few $10^7\mathrm{yr}$ is justified in the idealized model. A detailed evaporation time is not uniquely determined without the gas profile, post-ionization temperature and shielding; retained recombinations would further delay a front in dense gas.

Use a geometrically thin spherical shell with constant mass $M_{\mathrm{sh}}$ and assume that its dust transfers momentum efficiently to its gas. Define the ultraviolet and infrared opacities per unit total shell mass by ${\kappa }_{\mathrm{UV}}$ and ${\kappa }_{\mathrm{IR}}$. Its dust optical depths areFor a central ultraviolet luminosity $L$, the usual dusty radiation-pressure-driven shell model absorbs a fraction $1-e^{-{\tau }_{\mathrm{UV}}}$ of the incident momentum and adds an infrared trapping contribution ${\tau }_{\mathrm{IR}}L/c$. Neglecting swept-up mass, shell self-gravity, and other gravitating matter, its thin-shell momentum equation isBalancing these terms gives the critical luminosity of a dusty shell:This is a local force-balance luminosity, so it can depend on radius even when $L$ is constant.

The three useful limiting Eddington ratios areThe infrared limit assumes ${\tau }_{\mathrm{IR}}\gg 1$ and ultraviolet absorption; the single-scattering limit assumes ${\tau }_{\mathrm{UV}}\gg 1\gg {\tau }_{\mathrm{IR}}$; the ultraviolet-thin limit assumes ${\tau }_{\mathrm{UV}}\ll 1$ with infrared opacity negligible compared with ultraviolet opacity. In the ultraviolet-opaque region the two radiative contributions add, and the effective ratio is ${\Gamma }_{\mathrm{IR}}+{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{ss}}(R)$.

The ultraviolet dust transparency radius for this constant-mass shell isFor the terminal speed of a constant-mass dusty shell, approximate the ultraviolet absorption factor by $1$ inside $R_{\mathrm{UV}}$ and by ${\tau }_{\mathrm{UV}}$ outside. The infrared contribution outside that radius is neglected; it is small there if ${\kappa }_{\mathrm{IR}}\ll {\kappa }_{\mathrm{UV}}$. Define ${\Gamma }_{\mathrm{ss}}={\Gamma }_{\mathrm{ss}}(R_0)$, so this otherwise radius-dependent ratio in the paper's final formula is an initial value.

Inside $R_{\mathrm{UV}}$ the acceleration isIntegrating from $R_0$ to $R_{\mathrm{UV}}$ givesOutside $R_{\mathrm{UV}}$, $vdv/dR=G{M}_{\mathrm{BH}}({\Gamma }_{\mathrm{UV}}-1)/R^2$. Its integral to infinity supplies $2G{M}_{\mathrm{BH}}({\Gamma }_{\mathrm{UV}}-1)/R_{\mathrm{UV}}$. Combining the two integrals yieldsThis assumes that the outward trajectory actually reaches the transparency radius; a positive formal endpoint energy alone does not rule out an intermediate turning point.

Put $X=R_{\mathrm{UV}}/R_0=\sqrt{{\tau }_{\mathrm{UV}}(R_0)}$ and $v_{\mathrm{esc},0}^2=2G{M}_{\mathrm{BH}}/R_0$. The ratios obey ${\Gamma }_{\mathrm{UV}}={\Gamma }_{\mathrm{ss}}{X}^2$. The preceding expression becomesIf $X\gg 1$ and infrared work is subdominant,For a luminosity of order the initial single-scattering Eddington luminosity, ${\Gamma }_{\mathrm{ss}}\sim 1$, this implies $v_{\infty }/v_{\mathrm{esc},0}\sim \sqrt{2}{\tau }_{\mathrm{UV}}(R_0{)}^{1/4}\gg 1$. The shell continues intercepting approximately $L/c$ of momentum per unit time over a large distance while gravity weakens as $R^{-2}$. The resulting radiative work is not restricted to its initial gravitational binding energy: an Eddington luminosity is a local force threshold, not a universal cap on outflow speed.

If the unqualified $L_{\mathrm{Edd}}$ instead means the electron-scattering value, the statement needs an additional condition. For $L=L_{\mathrm{Edd},\mathrm{es}}$, ${\Gamma }_{\mathrm{UV}}={\kappa }_{\mathrm{UV}}/{\kappa }_{\mathrm{es}}$, andThus speeds greatly above escape velocity require ${\kappa }_{\mathrm{UV}}/{\kappa }_{\mathrm{es}}\gg \sqrt{{\tau }_{\mathrm{UV}}(R_0)}$, together with a viable launch. Large ultraviolet optical depth by itself does not prove the conclusion at fixed electron-scattering luminosity and opacity. The two interpretations must not be conflated.

At radius $r$, radiation of luminosity $L$ gives matter of flux-mean opacity $\kappa$ the outward accelerationEquating this with the gravitational acceleration $G{M}_{\mathrm{BH}}/r^2$ gives the Eddington luminosity

Let $L=f{L}_{\mathrm{Edd}}$ and let $\mathcal{M}(r)$ be the radiative force multiplier relative to the Compton or electron-scattering acceleration. A steady spherical wind obeys mass conservation ${\dot{M}}_w=4\pi r^2\rho v$ and the radial Euler momentum equationWhen gas pressure is negligible, radiation accelerates the wind locally if $f\mathcal{M}>1$. Electron scattering alone has $\mathcal{M}\simeq 1$, so it launches a wind only near or above the Eddington ratio $f=1$. Bound-free absorption, spectral lines, or dust can give $\mathcal{M}\gg 1$ and allow a sub-Eddington source to launch a wind, provided the gas is not so highly ionized that those extra opacities disappear. A wind that has already acquired sufficient kinetic energy may coast through a region where $f\mathcal{M}<1$, but such a region cannot launch a cold wind from rest.

Write the innermost stable circular orbit asEstimating the emitting area as $4\pi R_{\mathrm{ISCO}}^2$, the Stefan–Boltzmann law givesand henceThus $T_{\mathrm{BB}}\propto M_{\mathrm{BH}}^{-1/4}$ at fixed $f$ and opacity: a larger black hole radiates from an area growing as $M_{\mathrm{BH}}^2$, faster than its Eddington luminosity grows. Prograde black-hole spin moves the ISCO inward and raises the characteristic temperature, whereas retrograde spin moves it outward and lowers the temperature. Relativistic transfer and the radial temperature profile change the numerical coefficient, not these leading scalings.

At fixed radiative efficiency, the Eddington ratio implies $\dot{m}\propto f_{\mathrm{Edd}}M$. Far outside the innermost stable circular orbit, part (a) gives $\Sigma \propto \dot{m}/\nu$. The supplied viscosity law therefore gives, in physical radius,The disk mass follows by radial integration:Since the Schwarzschild radius satisfies $R_S\propto M$, replacing $R$ by $(R/R_S)R_S$ contributes another factor $M^{5/4}$. Thusso

A radiatively inefficient accretion flow radiates only a small fraction of the energy released before the gas crosses the inner boundary. At low Eddington ratio, an optically thin flow has such low density that radiative cooling, commonly proportional to density squared, is slower than inflow; the gas remains hot and forms an advection-dominated accretion flow. At high Eddington ratio, an optically thick slim accretion disk can instead undergo photon trapping in an accretion flow: diffusion is slower than inward motion, so radiation is advected into the hole.

The local accretion-flow advection balancehas three sign classes. If $q_{\mathrm{adv}}=0$, local heating equals local radiative cooling and the flow is a radiatively efficient thin disk. If $q_{\mathrm{adv}}>0$, heating exceeds cooling and inward advection removes the excess; low-rate ADAFs and high-rate slim disks are the two principal realizations. If $q_{\mathrm{adv}}<0$, radiation exceeds local dissipation and compressive advection supplies heat, producing a luminous hot accretion flow branch.

The three principal black-hole seed channels occupy different mass ranges.

For radiative efficiency $\eta =0.1$, growth at Eddington ratio $f_{\mathrm{Edd}}$ obeyswhere $t_E=0.45\mathrm{Gyr}$. Between $z=25$ and GN-z11 at $z=10.6$,so the exponent is $6.04f_{\mathrm{Edd}}$. Equivalently, the Salpeter time is about $0.05\mathrm{Gyr}/f_{\mathrm{Edd}}$.

Reaching $10^6{M}_{\odot }$ requiresRepresentative values areContinuous Eddington-limited growth supplies only $e^{6.04}\simeq 420$, so a $100M_{\odot }$ seed reaches about $4\times 10^4{M}_{\odot }$, whereas a seed above roughly $2.4\times 10^3{M}_{\odot }$ can reach the target at a unit duty cycle. Light seeds require sustained mildly super-Eddington accretion, an earlier start, mergers, or lower effective efficiency. Heavy direct-collapse seeds need only a moderate time-averaged Eddington ratio and are therefore easier to reconcile with the short available time. No channel is ruled out by the mass alone because seed masses, obscuration, duty cycles, super-Eddington episodes, mergers, and the observational mass estimate are uncertain.