Normalized to: Ganguly, S.
[1]
oai:arXiv.org:2001.03791 [pdf] - 2050360
On the wind-driven relaxation cycle in accretion disks
Submitted: 2020-01-11
A disk wind can cause perturbations that propagate throughout the disk via
diffusive processes. On reaching the inner disk, these perturbations can change
the disk luminosity, which in turn, can change the wind mass loss rate,
$\dot{M}_w$. It has been argued that this so-called "wind driven relaxation
cycle" might explain the observed variability in some disk accreting objects.
Here, we study the response of the innermost mass accretion rate $\dot{M}_a$ to
the loss of matter at different rates and radii. We allow the wind launching
radius, $R_L$, to scale with $\dot{M}_a$. We computed a grid of time-dependent
models for various $\dot{M}_w$-$\dot{M}_a$ and $R_{L}$-$\dot{M}_a$
dependencies. We find that the disk behaviour significantly differs for the
'variable $R_L$' case compared to the 'fixed $R_L$' case. In particular, much
stronger winds are required to destabilize the disk in the former than the
latter case. However, the $\dot{M}_a$ amplitude does not grow significantly
even for unstable cases because the oscillations saturate at a low level either
due to disk depletion or due to the wind being launched at very small radii, or
both. This result implies that disk winds are unlikely to be responsible for
state transitions as those require large changes in the inner disk. Despite
modest changes at the inner disk regions, the disk surface density at large
radii can vary with a large amplitude, i.e., from 0 to a few factors of the
steady state value. This dramatic variation of the outer disk could have
observable consequences.
[2]
oai:arXiv.org:1802.10377 [pdf] - 1944777
Gravity induced geometric phases and entanglement in spinors and
neutrinos: Gravitational Zeeman effect
Submitted: 2018-02-28, last modified: 2019-08-17
We show Zeeman-like splitting in the energy of spinors propagating in the
background gravitational field, analogous to the spinors in electromagnetic
field, otherwise termed as Gravitational Zeeman Effect. These spinors are also
found to acquire a geometric phase, in a similar way as they do in the presence
of magnetic fields. Based on this result, we investigate geometric phases
acquired by neutrinos propagating in a strong gravitational field. We also
explore entanglement of neutrino states due to gravity which could induce
neutrino-antineutrino oscillation in the first place. We show that entangled
states also acquire geometric phases which are determined by the relative
strength between gravitational field and neutrino masses.
[3]
oai:arXiv.org:1706.01202 [pdf] - 1584234
Statistical Significance of spectral lag transition in GRB 160625B
Submitted: 2017-06-05, last modified: 2017-07-30
Recently Wei et al (arXiv:1612.09425) have found evidence for a transition
from positive time lags to negative time lags in the spectral lag data of GRB
160625B. They have fit these observed lags to a sum of two components: an
assumed functional form for intrinsic time lag due to astrophysical mechanisms
and an energy-dependent speed of light due to quadratic and linear Loren tz
invariance violation (LIV) models. Here, we examine the statistical
significance of the evidence for a transition to nega tive time lags. Such a
transition, even if present in GRB 160625B, cannot be due to an energy
dependent speed of light as th is would contradict previous limits by some 3-4
orders of magnitude, and must therefore be of intrinsic astrophysical origin .
We use three different model comparison techniques: a frequentist test and two
information based criteria (AIC and BIC). From the frequentist model comparison
test, we find that the evidence for transition in the spectral lag data is
favored at $3.05\sigma$ and $3.74\sigma$ for the linear and quadratic models
respectively. We find that $\Delta$AIC and $\Delta$BIC have values $\gtrsim$ 10
for the spectral lag transition that was motivated as being due to quadratic
Lorentz invariance vio lating model pointing to "decisive evidence". We note
however that none of the three models (including the model of intr insic
astrophysical emission) provide a good fit to the data.