Bubble-Wrap

For Bullets:
The Draping of
Magnetic Fields
in Galaxy
Clusters

Jonathan Dursi, CITA

CITA|ICAT Christoph Pfrommer, CITA
 on arXiv: arxiv.org/abs/0711.0213
arxiv.org/abs/0706.3216

Paper with interactive 3D graphics:

http://www.cita.utoronto.ca/~ljdursi/draping/
 Abel 1689
Credit: NASA, N. Benitez (JHU), T.
Broadhurst (The Hebrew
University), H. Ford (JHU), M.
Clampin(STScI), G. Hartig (STScI),
G. Illingworth (UCO/Lick
Observatory), the ACS Science
Team and ESA

Clusters: Thousands of galaxies within a radius of 1-10 Mpc

 Abel 2029

When X-ray satellites started to go up over the past couple of decades, we got a much different
picture of these galaxy clusters; the volume was filled with very hot (10-100 Million K; 1-10 keV),
tenuous plasma that emitted in the X-rays -- and what’s more, this wispy gas actually comprises
more of the normal matter in these galaxy clusters than the galaxies themselves! This gas is a
wonderful laboratory for interesting fluid and plasma dynamics.
 Virgo:
R. White (UA; optical), S. Snowden, R. Mushotzky (NASA/GSFC; X-ray)

Arches
NASA/CXC/Northwestern/F.Zadeh et al.

Hydra A
NASA/CXC/SAO
http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/1999/0087/

But the very fact that we can see this gas poses a puzzle. The gas is radiating in the Xrays at a rate
that should cause catastrophic cooling. As the central regions cool and fall inwards, outer regions
should move inwards, become denser, and start cooling faster; this gas should have collapsed
away billions of years ago, vastly changing the makeup of the galaxies at the centre of the cluster.
What is keeping it hot?
 Bubbles in
Galaxy Clusters
• Radio Bubbles (radii 6-20 kpc),
seen as voids in X-rays
• Thought to be inflated by high-
energy jets from active central
galaxies
• Seen to have very sharp
interfaces
• Conduction should dissipate NASA/IoA/A.Fabian et al.
these in ~108 years

A related puzzle is the presence of bubbles in the cluster gas. These bubbles are thought to be
filled with extremely hot plasma fed by jets -- jets launched by the supermassive black holes in the
centre of the central galaxy. So they represent a very plausible

(Image: The Perseus Cluster: thousands of galaxies, 100Mpc away. At core is the giant cannibal galaxy Perseus A (NGC 1275), accreting
matter as gas and galaxiest. Representing low, medium, and high energy x-rays as red, green, and blue colours respectively, this Chandra X-ray
Observatory image shows remarkable details of x-ray emission from this monster galaxy and surrounding hot (30-70 million degrees C) cluster
gas. The bright central source is the supermassive black hole at the core of Perseus A itself. Dark circular voids just above and below the galaxy
center, each about half the size of our own Milky Way Galaxy, are believed to be magnetic bubbles of energetic particles blown by the accreting
black hole. Settling toward Perseus A, the cluster's x-ray hot gas piles up forming bright regions around the bubble rims.)
 Perseus:
A. Fabian (IoA Cambridge) et al., NASA
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap001031.html

This is the `skull’ picture, showing the same cluster at a somewhat more provocative angle and
color, but it also shows that such bubbles persist for quite some distance through the intercluster
medium
 Cluster Bubbles
Robinson, Dursi et al (2004)

• Bubble’s existence at a
distance from inflation point
is a puzzle
• Purely hydrodynamic bubble
will rip itself to a smoke ring
in one crossing time

Put bubble rise here

 Mergers of
Galaxy Clusters
• Minor mergers involve smaller
cluster falling into more massive
ones

M. Bruggen, Bremen

Where an infalling smaller core or galaxy looses its identity by completely blending in with the
environment has consequences for profiles of enrichment, populations...
This is a poster of a huge cosmological simulation run by a team largely at the MPA in Germany ,
the `Millenium Run’. The history of these clusters is of a constant stream of mergers with infalling
objects, some quite small, some quite large. The final makeup of the cluster will depend on how
the mergers proceed.
 Applications to
Galaxy Clusters:
Mergers
• Minor mergers involve smaller
cluster falling into more massive
ones
• Stripping of small-mass ICM
• When/where does this occur?
• Consequences for M. Bruggen, Bremen
enrichment, ...

Where an infalling smaller core or galaxy looses its identity by completely blending in with the
environment has consequences for profiles of enrichment, populations...
This is a still from the movie that was looping. It shows the basic idea of the `draping’ of a
magnetic field; the moving object sweeps up the field lines that it encounters, building up a
considerable energy density; field lines can also slide around the object if they are far enough away
from the stagnation line. The build up of pressure at the head pushes more field lines aside, so
that there is a natural steady state that is reached. (Save more explanation for going over the movie
again.)
 Draping of
Solar wind field
around Earth
• Happens very quickly (figure to
right -- 600 s)
• Can induce magnetic field in
even a neutral atmosphere
• Earth Magnetic Field reversals
may not be catastrophic to life
Birk et al (2004)

This isn’t a new idea, and has been known (and observed) for many decades in solar-system circles.
Comets and planets moving through solar field & wind undergo this phenomenon, and it has been
measured by satellites both directly and indirectly.
This is a recent work showing what would happen to an unmagnetized Earth...
 Draping of
Saturn’s Field
over Titan
• Observable with Cassini
• Emission from draped field
• Observed: `Magnetic Pile-Up
Boundary’, eg Bertucci et al
2005, Neubauer et al 2006 S. A. Ledvina, UC Berkeley

Other bodies moving through other fields have similar dynamics; this is a figure showing a cartoon
of Titan moving through the field around Saturn, and the resulting radiative processes that can
indicate the strengthened, curved magnetic field. These processes are in principle observable with
Cassini
 Comets in Solar
Wind
• Draping occurs and can distort
velocity, magnetic fields in wind
over significant distances

Wegman (2002)

Comets are another example of objects which may substantially distort an ambient magnetic field
as well; recent work by Wegmen and others have shown that draping can measurably modify the
interplanetary magnetic field and velocity structure of the solar wind over significant distances.
 Applications to
Galaxy Clusters:
Bubbles
• Radio Bubbles (radii 6-20 kpc),
seen as voids in X-rays, are seen
to have very sharp interfaces
• Conduction should dissipate
these in ~108 years
• Could bubble motions sweep
up enough field to suppress
conduction?

Xray/optical/radio; bubbles correspond to under-emission in radio.

 Applications to
Galaxy Clusters:
Mergers
• Does magnetic field draping
significantly effect the dynamics
of infalling material?
• Does it strongly effect stripping?

M. Bruggen, Bremen

Where an infalling smaller core or galaxy looses its identity by completely blending in with the
environment has consequences for profiles of enrichment, populations...
 Previous Work:
Lyutikov 2004
• Analytics
• Particularly along stagnation line
" #
B 1 B 1
=! ; l∼ R
ρ R03 ρ M2A
1− r3
0

Previous application to galaxy clusters -- fairly recent.

 Asai et al
(2004,5,6..)
• Numerics
• 2d, 3d
• `Kitchen sink’ - turbulent
magnetic field, conduction,...
• Can draping effect conduction? Asai et al (2004...)
Yes

On the other extreme is work done in the `kitchen sink’ model, putting everything conceivable into
a simulation and looking to answer one question -- whether the magnetic field built up by draping
can effect conduction. Can certainly answer that question under realistic conditions, but hard to
gain much insight into the process in this mode.
 Our Contributions
• Linear theory analysis - can the thin layer do
anything interesting?
• 3D, AMR numerical experiments of draping
of uniform magnetic fields - like what?
• More careful analytic calculation in potential
flow approximation to compare to
simulations, understand dynamics - how?

We’ve tried to really sink our teeth into this fairly simple problem so that we can really understand it
and its properties, and then can slowly work our way up to including `kitchen sink’ physics. We’re
doing that by using both simple numerical experiments and analytics to get as deep into the
problem as we can.
 Does it matter?
• Can such a thin layer have
interesting dynamic
effects?

• Linear theory analysis

• Three layers; velocity

+/- U, magnetized layer
of some thickness/
strength
 Rayleigh-Taylor Kelvin-Helmholtz

(Alfvén Speed/Shear Speed)2

(Alfvén Speed/Grav Speed)2

10 10

7 7

stable stable
stable
5 5

stable

k v2A
U2

3 3
v2A

g
2 2

1.5 1.5

1 1

0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2

layer thickness layer thickness

l l
Λ Λ

If VA is a few times relevant velocity, can stabilize against

wavelengths an order of magnitude longer than thickness of layer
 U

VA = 0.2 U VA = 1.25 U
Run with v3.0 of the Athena code
Excellent agreement between theory and simulation!

0.8

0.6
Growth Rate

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15
B
 3D Simulations
using FLASH
• AMR very useful for focusing
resolution in near draped layer
• Large dynamic range between
size of traversed region and
thickness of layer
• Magnetic dynamics relatively
straightforward

These types of problems are sort of the poster children for adaptive mesh refinement, where high
resolution can be applied only at the interesting layer, where the magnetic field is being built up,
and in the turbulent wake of the moving projectile. AMR is especially important for 3D
simulations, where the computational cost would be too high otherwise. We used the FLASH code
for these simulations...

Important to emphasize that 3d simulations are necessary

 FLASH MHD

• Compressible
• Ideal MHD:
• Locally neutral
• Nonrelativistic
• No (explicit)
magnetic diffusion,
viscosity, thermal
diffusion

No displacement current
 FLASH MHD
• `8 wave’ Godunov-type
scheme
• 2nd order accurate
• Does not exactly
maintain ∇ · B = 0
• Uses diffusion to ensure
monopoles remain small
• Mostly a problem for
shocks
• AMR, sharp interfaces
more important for this
problem than high order
accuracy
 Sometimes,
2D just
isn’t enough...
 Magnetic Energy Density in 2D

18 18 18

17 17 17

16 16 16

15 15 15

-0.5 0.0 0.5 -0.5 0.0 0.5 -0.5 0.0 0.5

Not only slingshots the bullet backwards, but squishes it, too...
 2D

Foreshadowed
earlier
• Asai et al 2004, 2005 saw strong
growth of magnetic field in 2d,
but only commented on it
• Simulation was not run long
enough to see that there is no
steady state Asai et al (2005) 3D
3d simulations of a massive `bullet’ moving into a magnetized region of uniform field over the
scales of interest. Bullet has a smooth density profile, and it moves into a region where a magnetic
field is `turned on’ . Magnetic field initially
 vx vy vz
!x of kinematic solution !y of kinematic solution !z of kinematic solution
38 38 38

Potential 36 36 36

flow 34 34 34

around
32 32 32

solid
30 30 30

28 28 28

sphere 26
-2 0 2
26
-2 0 2
26
-2 0 2
!x around draped projectile !y around draped projectile !z around draped projectile
38 38 38

36 36 36

3D AMR
34 34 34

results
32 32 32

30 30 30

28 28 28

26 26 26
-2 0 2 -2 0 2 -2 0 2
!x / u !y / u !z / u

-0.07 -0.03 0.00 0.03 0.07 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 -1.0 -0.7 -0.3 0.1 0.4
 ! "
Analytic MHD ! =0
∇ × !v × B
approach
• Flow ahead of projectile agrees ! =0
∇·B
quite well
• Gives hope that potential flow
can tell us something about the
magnetic structure
• Kinematic -- flow advects,
stretches B, no back-reaction
 Agreement with potential flow

Magnetic field strength

ro = 14.0088 r = 1.19687 pow = 3.00000

17
z position

16

z
y

15

14

13

0 1 2 3 4

y x
B

" #
B 1 B 1
=! ; l∼ R
ρ R03 ρ M2A
1− r3
0
 Bx, By, Bz in `draping’ plane
Bx of kinematic MHD solution By of kinematic MHD solution Bz of kinematic MHD solution
38 38 38

36 36 36

Potential 34 34 34

flow around 32 32 32

solid sphere 30 30 30

28 28 28

26 26 26
-2 0 2 -2 0 2 -2 0 2
Bx around draped projectile By around draped projectile Bz around draped projectile
38 38 38

36 36 36

34 34 34

3d AMR 32 32 32

results 30 30 30

28 28 28

26 26 26
-2 0 2 -2 0 2 -2 0 2
Bx / B0 By / B0 Bz / B0

-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 -0.2 0.7 1.6 2.5 3.4 -2.1 -1.1 0.0 1.1 2.1
 Bx, By, Bz in perpendicular plane
Bx of kinematic MHD solution By of kinematic MHD solution Bz of kinematic MHD solution
38 38 38

36 36 36

Potential 34 34 34

flow around 32 32 32

solid sphere 30 30 30

28 28 28

26 26 26
-4 -2 0 2 4 -4 -2 0 2 4 -4 -2 0 2 4
Bx around draped projectile By around draped projectile Bz around draped projectile
38 38 38

36 36 36

34 34 34

3d AMR 32 32 32

results 30 30 30

28 28 28

26 26 26
-4 -2 0 2 4 -4 -2 0 2 4 -4 -2 0 2 4
Bx / B0 By / B0 Bz / B0

-0.3 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.3 -0.2 0.7 1.6 2.5 3.4 -0.4 -0.1 0.2 0.5 0.8
 Magnetic Ram Total
36
Pressure
PB around draped core
36
Pressure
!"2 around draped core
36
Pressure
!"2 + PB around draped core
0.10

34 34 34

0.08

32 32 32

!"2 + PB, plane with x=0

Draping
30 30 30 0.05

Plane
28 28 28

0.03

26 26 26

24 24 24 0.00
-2 0 2 -2 0 2 -2 0 2

PB around draped core !"2 around draped core !"2 + PB around draped core
36 36 36 0.15

34 34 34

0.11

32 32 32

!"2 + PB, plane with y=0

Perpendicular 30 30 30 0.08

Plane 28 28 28

0.04

26 26 26

24 24 24 0.00
-4 -2 0 2 4 -4 -2 0 2 4 -4 -2 0 2 4
 Magnetic Field
Strength in
0.16

Max. Magnetic Pressure on Stagnation Line

0.14

0.12

Draped Layer
0.1

0.08

0.06

• Field has to build not only to 0.04

back react, but to redirect flow 0.02

0
Magnetic pressure = 2 x ram pressure
Data

• To first order, depends only on 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04

Mean Ram Pressure
0.05 0.06 0.07

ram pressure
• Maximum magnetic field
strength ~ 2 x ram pressure

Best fit ~ 2.2x ram pressure

 Magnetic
Tension Force
of Cap
• Bent field lines - magnetic
tension
• Field strength in cap greater B2
than ram pressure seen by Tension force:
projectile 4πR
• Tension is dynamically 4ρu2
important, even in 3D case ∼
R
 Deceleration
Due To
Projectile in magnetized region
0.25

Projectile Velocity <u>

Tension 0.24

0.23

• Can be seen as projectile

moves into magnetized region 0.22

• Hydrodynamic drag significantly 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

less
Time

• Scaling same as viscous drag

• Magnitude can be measured
 Deceleration
Due To
0.002

0.0015

Measured Decelleration
Tension 0.001

• Magnetic layer is strong enough 0.0005

(and curved enough) that it 1.87 x (3/8 (Ram Pressure)/(core dens x R))

dominates deceleration 0

0 0.0002 0.0004
Data

0.0006 0.0008 0.001

3/8 x Ram Pressure / (core dens x R)

• ~ 4x stronger than viscous/

turbulent drag for high Re
• ~ 3x stronger in these
somewhat viscous (Re ~ 200)
simulations
 Opening Angle 1.2

of Drape 0.8

tan !
• Comparison with 9 3D
0.6

simulations
0.4

• Correlation a little rattier than

0.2
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

other quantities --
• Largest scales in simulations,
some effects of Boundary
Conditions
 Opening angle ~ vA/U

Many simulations, varying several parameters; here we vary only the velocity of the `bullet’.
Opening angle ~ vA/U
Opening angle ~ vA/U
 Generation of
Vorticity
• Magnetic contact layer induces
vorticity in fluid elements which
cross it
• Operates primarily in plane
along field lines
• Much less vorticity generation
in other plane
 Long-term
Behaviour
• Evolution of core after it has
swept past roughly its own
mass
• Mixed material `fills up’ drape
• Highly constrained in other
plane!
 Y slice: No Magnetic Field X slice: No Magnetic Field

20 20

19 19

Long-term
18 18

17 17

Behaviour
16 16

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

Y slice: Beta=100 X slice: Beta=100

• Evolution of core after it has 20 20

swept past roughly its own 19 19

mass 18 18

• Mixed material `fills up’ drape 17 17

• Highly constrained in other 16

-2 -1 0 1 2
16

-2 -1 0 1 2

plane!
10 13 4 25 9 38 3 50 7 63 2 75 6
 Conclusions
• Very quickly drape strong magnetized layer
• Even thin layer can have interesting effects
protecting object against indignities of
shearing into environment
• Drape can slow down core by ~4x over
hydro drag
• Geometry gives probe of ambient field
 Future work
• Direct visibility of draped layer?
• Supersonic case
• Underdense Bubble
• Turbulent field (what is smallest scale on
which a field gets draped?)
• Other applications
Irresponsible Speculation:
Containing Mira’s Tail?

NASA Galex
 Y slice: No Magnetic Field X slice: No Magnetic Field

20 20

19 19

Long-term
18 18

17 17

Behaviour
16 16

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

Y slice: Beta=100 X slice: Beta=100

• Evolution of core after it has 20 20

swept past roughly its own 19 19

mass 18 18

• Mixed material `fills up’ drape 17 17

• Highly constrained in other 16

-2 -1 0 1 2
16

-2 -1 0 1 2

plane!
10 13 4 25 9 38 3 50 7 63 2 75 6
 on arXiv: arxiv.org/abs/0711.0213
arxiv.org/abs/0706.3216

Paper with interactive 3D graphics:

http://www.cita.utoronto.ca/~ljdursi/draping/
 FLASH MHD Eqns

Powell et al. 1999

Properly symmetrized; 8-waves

Active Galaxies
to the rescue?
• Central galaxies frequently very
active.
• Massive black holes in the
centre form engines for
extremely strong jets.
• Can this be heating the gas?