Demo V  ·  Accretion Chain

Every Way It Eats

Four distinct channels feed ω Cen's IMBH — from individual tidal captures through full disruptions to the accumulated growth history spanning billions of years. The current JWST silence constrains them all.

Tools: Tidal Capture RateTidal DisruptionJWST Accretion LimitIMBH Growth History  ·  4 steps

Choose an accretion regime

Each scenario emphasises a different feeding channel dominant at different epochs in OC's history.

1
Continuous background channel
Tidal Capture — Stars Skimming Into the Loss Cone

The loss cone is the region of orbital phase space where a star's angular momentum is low enough that it will pass within the tidal radius of the IMBH. Two-body relaxation within the cluster continuously scatters stars into this cone. The resulting capture rate — dN/dt per stellar type — depends on the IMBH mass, stellar density ρ(r), velocity dispersion σ, and the tidal radius r_T = R★ (M_BH/M★)^(1/3).

For ω Cen's IMBH, the natural capture rate spans a wide range across stellar populations. Main-sequence captures dominate by number but release relatively little energy. Neutron star EMRIs are rare but release the most energy per event and produce detectable gravitational wave chirps. White dwarf tidal captures sit between. This tool spans the full Häberle–Bañares-Hernández tension band so you can compare rates at both constraint extremes.

Open Tidal Capture Rate → M = 8,200 M☉ · ρ = 10⁵·⁵ M☉/pc³ · σ = 22 km/s 🔬 Established physics
What to notice
Compare the rate at the Häberle lower bound (8,200 M☉) vs the Bañares-Hernández upper bound (6,000 M☉) using the preset buttons. The rate difference between these two tension endpoints is already ~40% — within observation uncertainty but meaningful for growth calculations. Note that neutron star EMRIs, despite being the rarest capture type, carry the clearest gravitational-wave fingerprint and are LISA's best discriminator.
2
The dramatic channel
Tidal Disruption Events — When Capture Becomes Catastrophe

A star that enters the loss cone on a near-radial orbit reaches the tidal disruption radius — where the BH's tidal force overwhelms stellar self-gravity — before it can be captured intact. The star is shredded. Roughly half the debris escapes; the other half circularises into an accretion disk that feeds the IMBH over months to years, producing a luminous flare. For ω Cen's IMBH, TDEs are the dominant mass-growth channel for main-sequence stars.

The distinction between full TDE and tidal capture (step 1) depends on the star's penetration parameter β = r_T / r_pericenter. At β < 1 the star survives as an EMRI; at β > 1 it is disrupted. The borderline — partial TDEs — strips the envelope and leaves a compact remnant on an eccentric orbit, potentially a recurrent source. The tool covers all three outcomes for MS, WD, and NS star types.

Open Tidal Disruption → Object: MS star · M_BH = 8,200 M☉ · a★ = 0 🔬 Established physics
What to notice
Switch between MS, WD, and NS objects. Notice that for an IMBH in the OCS mass range, the white dwarf tidal disruption radius is smaller than the Schwarzschild radius for low-mass BHs — meaning WDs are swallowed whole unless the BH is large enough. The tool marks this Hills mass boundary. For the managed feeding scenario, compare the accretion rate if brown dwarfs (low mass, compact) are preferentially delivered prograde — they cross the tidal radius inside the ISCO and feed efficiently with minimal flare.
3
The observational constraint
JWST Non-Detection — An Electromagnetically Dark IMBH

Chen et al. (2025) pointed JWST NIRCam at ω Cen's core and found nothing. No near-infrared excess from an accretion disk, no hot dust emission, no central point source above the stellar background. This null result sets an upper limit on the current Eddington fraction: ṁ/ṁ_Edd ≪ 1. For a ~10,000 M☉ IMBH, even a faint Seyfert-level accretion rate would be detectable — the IMBH is either completely starved of gas, or its emission is absorbed and re-emitted at wavelengths JWST did not observe.

This tool lets you set the accretion efficiency η, ambient gas density, and sound speed to find the maximum allowed Bondi-Hoyle accretion rate consistent with the JWST non-detection. The constraint is tight: the environment within ~0.01 pc of the IMBH must be essentially evacuated. This silence is the primary observational tension with the IMBH hypothesis under standard accretion models — and the starting point for both the gas-starvation null hypothesis and the OCS managed-feeding speculation.

Open JWST Accretion Limit → η = 0.1 · ρ_∞ = 10⁻⁴ M☉/pc³ · cs = 10 km/s 🔬 JWST observation 2025
What to notice
Try increasing ambient density ρ to typical globular cluster core values (~10² M☉/pc³). The implied accretion luminosity immediately exceeds the JWST detection limit by orders of magnitude — contradicting the non-detection. The only way to reconcile this is either that the inner core has been evacuated of gas (natural quiescence) or that accretion is so tightly controlled that no thermal emission escapes (OCS managed-feeding scenario). Both explanations predict the same observational silence.
4
The long view
IMBH Growth History — 12 Billion Years of Feeding

The IMBH did not arrive at its current mass in a single event. The growth history reconstructs how the black hole accumulated mass over the cluster's ~12 Gyr lifetime, combining a seed mass from runaway stellar collisions or direct collapse, episodic TDE-driven growth during the cluster's dense early phase, merger contributions from globular cluster in-fall, and the long quiescent period we observe today.

The tool produces a growth curve showing mass vs. time under adjustable channel weights. The current JWST non-detection (step 3) constrains the late-time accretion rate to essentially zero, while the Häberle lower bound constrains the integrated mass. Together these bracket the allowed growth history: almost all growth must have happened in the first ~4–6 Gyr, with the hole effectively idle since ~z ~ 1.

Open IMBH Growth History → Seed: 10²·⁷ M☉ · TDE: 10⁻¹ M☉/yr · Merger: 1.0× ⚠ Model-dependent
What to notice
Try starting with a heavy seed (10³–10⁴ M☉ from a direct-collapse event) vs a light seed from runaway stellar collisions (~500 M☉). The TDE rate needed to reach ≥8,200 M☉ by z = 0 differs by an order of magnitude — constraining the early cluster density. Compare the TDE-dominated and merger-dominated scenarios: mergers produce fast, stochastic mass jumps; TDEs produce smooth growth. LISA will eventually discriminate between these histories by detecting the EMRI inspiral signal described in step 1.
Accretion channel comparison (8,200 M☉ IMBH)
ChannelRate (today)Mass per eventObservable signature
Loss-cone captures (MS)~10⁻⁷ yr⁻¹~0.5 M☉faint X-ray, EMRI GW
Tidal disruptions (MS)~10⁻⁵ yr⁻¹~0.25 M☉bright optical/UV flare
WD TDE~10⁻⁸ yr⁻¹~0.3 M☉soft X-ray, GW chirp
NS EMRI~10⁻⁹ yr⁻¹~1.4 M☉LISA mHz band, years-long
Bondi-Hoyle (ISM)< JWST limitcontinuousNIR — not detected (2025)
⚠ IMBH mass tension: Häberle et al. (2024) lower bound ≥ 8,200 M☉ vs Bañares-Hernández et al. (2025) upper bound < 6,000 M☉. Steps 1 and 4 show both limits. A 6,000 M☉ BH has a ~15% lower tidal disruption rate and requires either a lighter seed or a higher early TDE rate to reach present mass — the tension is internally consistent but model-dependent.
// Synthesis — The Feeding History and the Silence

Four tools, one story: the IMBH ate voraciously during its first few billion years — mostly through tidal disruptions and stellar captures as the primordial dense nucleus relaxed — then went quiet. The JWST non-detection constrains the present Eddington fraction to well below 10⁻⁵, consistent with a gas-starved environment that has had its inner reservoir swept clean over Gyr timescales.

From an OCS perspective, this silence is either the natural end-state of cluster dynamics (the mainstream interpretation) or the signature of a Phase 3+ civilisation that has already managed its feeding environment: prograde brown-dwarf captures, sub-Eddington accretion, all energy routed inward through the ISCO with zero radiative waste. Both scenarios predict the same JWST null result. The growth history chain is the tool that distinguishes them in principle: a managed feeding history will show a resumption of mass growth in the last ~1–2 Gyr as the feeding program begins, while natural quiescence shows a monotonically declining rate since z ~ 2. This distinction requires mass measurements better than ~100 M☉ precision — achievable, in principle, with next-generation astrometry or LISA chirp timing.