text:
# Poynting Jets from Accretion Disks

## 1 Introduction

Highly-collimated, oppositely directed jets are observed in active galaxies and quasars (see for example Bridle & Eilek 1984), and in old compact stars in binaries (Mirabel & Rodriguez 1994; Eikenberry et al. 1998). Further, well collimated emission line jets are seen in young stellar objects (Mundt 1985; Bührke, Mundt, & Ray 1988). Recent work favors models where twisting of an ordered magnetic field threading an accretion disk acts to magnetically accelerate the jets (Meier, Koide, & Uchida 2001). There are two regimes: (1) the hydromagnetic regime, where energy and angular momentum are carried by both the electromagnetic field and the kinetic flux of matter, which is relevant to the jets from young stellar objects; and (2) the Poynting flux regime. where energy and angular from the disk are carried predominantly by the electromagnetic field, which is relevant to extra-galactic and microquasar jets, and possibly to gamma ray burst sources.

Stationary Poynting flux dominated jets have been found in axisymmetric MHD simulations of the opening of magnetic loops threading a Keplerian disk (Romanova et al. (1998); Ustyugova et al. 2000). Theoretical studies have developed models for Poynting outflows from accretion disks (Lovelace, Wang, & Sulkanen 1987; Colgate & Li 1998). The present work represents a continuation of the study by Li et al. (2001) where self-consistent, axisymmetric, non-relativistic solutions of the Grad-Shafranov equation are calculated inside given conducting boundaries. The solutions are self-consistent in the respect that the twist of each field line is that due to the differential rotation of a Keplerian disk.

In §2 we summarize the theory, and in §3 we discuss the different types of solutions found. In §4 we develop an analytic model for Poynting jets. In §5, we discuss the consequences of expanding the boundaries. Sections 6 - 9 discuss the relevant conservation laws. In §10 we compare the Poynting outflows with centrifugally launched winds. In §11 we discuss the collapse of the inner part of the disk due to angular momentum outflow to Poynting jets. In §12 we discuss conditions for occurrence of Poynting jets including the influence of the kink instability. In §13, we give results of MHD simulations which give Poynting jets similar to our Grad-Shafranov solutions. Section 14 gives conclusions from this work.

## 2 Theory of Poynting Outflows

Here, we consider further the theory of Poynting outflows (Li et al. 2001). We assume that magnetic field loops threads a differentially rotating highly conducting Keplerian accretion disk at some initial time $`t=0`$. Above the disk we assume a “coronal” or force-free magnetic field in the non-relativistic limit. This situation is described by the force-free Grad-Shafranov (GS) equation for the flux function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(r,z)`$ which labels the poloidal field lines (in cylindrical coordinates). The GS equation involves a function $`H(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ describing the distribution of poloidal current which is determined by the differential rotation or twist of the disk which increases linearly with time. We numerically solve the GS equation in a sequence of volumes of increasing size corresponding to the expansion of the outer perfectly conducting boundaries at ($`R_m,Z_m`$). The outer boundaries model the influence of an external non-magnetized plasma. The sequence of GS solutions provides a model for the dynamical evolution of the magnetic field in response to (1) the increasing twist of the disk and (2) the pressure of external plasma.

Cylindrical $`(r,\varphi ,z)`$ coordinates are used and axisymmetry is assumed Thus the magnetic field has the form $`𝐁=𝐁_p+B_\varphi \widehat{\text{Œ}},`$ with $`𝐁_p=B_r\widehat{𝐫}+B_z\widehat{𝐳}.`$ We can write $`B_r=(1/r)(\mathrm{\Psi }/z),B_z=(1/r)(\mathrm{\Psi }/r),`$ where $`\mathrm{\Psi }(r,z)rA_\varphi (r,z)`$. In the force-free limit, the magnetic energy density $`𝐁^2/(8\pi )`$ is much larger than the kinetic or thermal energy densities; that is, the flow speeds are sub-Alfvénic, $`𝐯^2v_A^2=𝐁^2/4\pi \rho `$, where $`v_A`$ is the Alfvén velocity. In this limit, $`0𝐉\times 𝐁`$; therefore, $`𝐉=\lambda 𝐁`$ (Gold & Hoyle 1960). Because $`𝐉=0`$, $`(𝐁)\lambda =0`$ and consequently $`\lambda =\lambda (\mathrm{\Psi })`$, as well-known. Thus, Ampère’s equation becomes $`\times 𝐁=4\pi \lambda (\mathrm{\Psi })𝐁/c`$. The $`r`$ and $`z`$ components of Ampère’s equation imply

$$rB_\varphi =H(\mathrm{\Psi }),\mathrm{and}dH(\mathrm{\Psi })/d\mathrm{\Psi }=4\pi \lambda (\mathrm{\Psi })/c,$$

where $`H(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ is another function of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$. Thus, $`H(\mathrm{\Psi })=`$ const are lines of constant poloidal current density; $`𝐉_p=(c/4\pi )(dH/d\mathrm{\Psi })𝐁_p`$ so that $`(𝐉_p)H=0`$. The toroidal component of Ampère’s equation gives

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\mathrm{\Psi }=H(\mathrm{\Psi })\frac{dH(\mathrm{\Psi })}{d\mathrm{\Psi }},$$
(1)
with $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}^2/r^2(1/r)(/r)+^2/z^2,`$ which is the Grad-Shafranov equation for $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ (see e.g. Lovelace et al. 1987; Li et al. 2001).

Ampère’s law gives $`𝑑𝐥𝐁=(4\pi /c)𝑑𝐒𝐉`$, so that $`rB_\varphi (r,z)=H(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ is $`(2/c)`$ times the current flowing through a circular area of radius $`r`$ (with normal $`\widehat{𝐳}`$) labeled by $`\mathrm{\Psi }(r,z)`$= const. Equivalently, $`H[\mathrm{\Psi }(r,0)]`$ is $`(2/c)\times `$ the current flowing into the area of the disk $`r`$. For all cases studied here, $`H(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ has a maximum so that the total current flowing into the disk for $`rr_m`$ is $`I_{tot}=(2/c)(H)_{max},`$ where $`r_m`$ is such that $`H[\mathrm{\Psi }(r_m,0)]=(H)_{max}`$ so that $`r_m`$ is less than the radius of the $`O`$point, $`r_0`$. The same total current $`I_{tot}`$ flows out of the region of the disk $`r=r_m`$ to $`r_0`$.

We consider an initial value problem where the disk at $`t=0`$ is threaded by a dipole-like poloidal magnetic field. The form of $`H(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ is then determined by the differential rotation of the disk: The azimuthal twist of a given field line going from an inner footpoint at $`r_1`$ to an outer footpoint at $`r_2`$ is fixed by the differential rotation of the disk. The field line slippage speed through the disk due to the disk’s finite magnetic diffusivity is estimated to be negligible compared with the Keplerian velocity. For a given field line we have $`rd\varphi /B_\varphi =ds_p/B_p`$, where $`ds_p\sqrt{dr^2+dz^2}`$ is the poloidal arc length along the field line, and $`B_p\sqrt{B_r^2+B_z^2}`$. The total twist of a field line loop is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi (\mathrm{\Psi })=_1^2𝑑s_p\frac{B_\varphi }{rB_p}=H(\mathrm{\Psi })_1^2\frac{ds_p}{r^2B_p},$$
(2)
with the sign included to give $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi >0`$. For a Keplerian disk around an object of mass $`M`$ the angular rotation is $`\omega _K=\sqrt{GM/r^3}`$ so that the field line twist after a time $`t`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi (\mathrm{\Psi })=\omega _0t\left[\left(\frac{r_0}{r_1}\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{r_0}{r_2}\right)^{3/2}\right]=(\omega _0t)(\mathrm{\Psi }/\mathrm{\Psi }_0)$$
(3)
where $`r_0`$ is the radius of the $`O`$point, $`\omega _0\sqrt{GM/r_0^3}`$, and $``$ is a dimensionless function (the quantity in the square brackets). The $`O`$point is the point in the midplane of the disk encircled by the poloidal magnetic field lines; at this point $`𝐁_p=0`$. At sufficiently small $`r_1`$ one reaches the inner radius of the disk $`r_i(r_0)`$ where we assume $`\omega _K`$ saturates at the value $`\omega _{Ki}=\sqrt{GM/r_i^3}`$. For the dipole-like field of Figure 1, $`3^{9/8}(\mathrm{\Psi }_0/\mathrm{\Psi })^{3/4}`$ for $`\mathrm{\Psi }/\mathrm{\Psi }_01`$, while $`3.64(1\mathrm{\Psi }/\mathrm{\Psi }_0)^{1/2}`$ for $`1\mathrm{\Psi }/\mathrm{\Psi }_01`$.

For an accretion disk around a massive black hole $`M=M_810^8M_{}`$ in the nucleus of galaxy, the twist is $`T=(t/3.17\mathrm{d})(r_0/10^{15}\mathrm{cm})^{3/2}/\sqrt{M_8}`$. The inner radius of the disk is $`r_iM_89\times 10^{13}`$ cm for a Schwarzschild black hole.

## 3 Numerical Solutions of Grad-Shafranov Equation

We solve equation (1) inside a cylindrical “box,” $`r=0`$ to $`R_m`$ and $`z=0`$ to $`Z_m`$ with $`H(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ determined by iteratively solving equations (1) - (3) (see Li et al. 2001; Finn & Chen 1990). The outer boundaries ($`r=R_m`$ and $`z=Z_m`$) are treated as conducting surfaces representing the interface between the coronal $`𝐁`$ field and external, non-magnetized plasma. The external plasma will be pushed outward by the coronal field as it is twisted. Thus we consider the $`𝐁`$ field behavior as $`R_m\mathrm{}`$ and $`Z_m\mathrm{}`$.

For a dipole-like field threading the disk (Figure 1), it is natural to measure lengths in terms of the radius of the $`O`$point in the disk, $`r_0`$. The natural value of the flux function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is its maximum value at the $`O`$point, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$. In turn, a natural unit for the magnetic field strength is $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0/r_0^2`$. Notice that for the case of Figure 1, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0/r_0^2B_z(0)/10.4`$. Further, a natural unit for the total current (times $`c/2`$), $`cI_{tot}/2=(H)_{max}`$ is $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0/r_0`$. Also, we measure the total toroidal flux and the magnetic energy,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_t=𝑑r𝑑zB_\varphi ,W_m=\frac{1}{4}r𝑑r𝑑z𝐁^2,$$
(4)
in units of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2/r_0`$, respectively. For boundary conditions, on the disk surface, $`\mathrm{\Psi }(r,0)`$ is fixed and equal to its “initial” value on the disk owing to the disk’s perfect conductivity. On the $`z`$axis we can take $`\mathrm{\Psi }(0,z)=0`$, because $`B_r=(1/r)(\mathrm{\Psi }/z)=0`$. On the conducting outer boundaries, $`\mathrm{\Psi }(r,Z_m)=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R_m,z)=0`$. Note however that in §14 we discuss simulation results for the case of open outer boundaries. A uniform $`(r,z)`$ grid of $`200\times 200`$ was used.

Figure 2 shows the behavior of a set of field solutions of equation (1) as the twist $`T=\omega _0t`$ is increased. The nature of the solutions changes dramatically as the twist increases above a critical value $`T_c1.14`$ rad. For $`T<T_c`$ the nature of the field solutions is shown in Figures 3 and 4. The twisting of the field by the differential rotation of the disk “pumps” magnetic flux and energy into the disk corona and the field tends to “inflate.” This behavior of coronal magnetic field loops of the Sun as a result of footpoint twisting is well known from the works of Aly (1984, 1991) and Sturrock (1991). The self-similar inflation of a force-free field threading a non-Keplerian disk without outer boundaries was studied Lynden-Bell and Boily (1994) and their solution for small twists is analogous to our low-twist solutions. The expansion of a force-free field into finite pressure external plasma has been studied by Lynden-Bell (1996) and Li et al. (2001) and the poloidal field is found to fairly uniformly fill the coronal space.

For $`T>T_c`$, a new field configuration appears with a different topology. This is shown in Figure 5 where it is seen that a “plasmoid” consisting of toroidal flux has detached from the disk and is separated by the dashed field line which has an $`X`$point above the $`O`$point on the disk. Figure 6 shows a 3D view of two representative field lines for the same case. These high-twist equilibria consist of a region near the axis which is magnetically collimated by the toroidal $`B_\varphi `$ field and a region far from the axis, on the outer radial boundary, which is anti-collimated in the sense that it is pushed against the outer boundary. The field lines returning to the disk at $`r>r_0`$ are anti-collimated by the pressure of the toroidal magnetic field. The poloidal field fills only a small part of the coronal space. In a purely analytical analysis, Heyvaerts (2001) has independently found MHD equilibria involving the simultaneous formation of a collimated axial jet and an uncollimated outflow. Figure 6 shows a three dimensional view of sample field lines.

As a test of our numerical solutions note that conservation of axial momentum can be written as

$$(𝐓\widehat{𝐳})=0,𝐓\widehat{𝐳}𝐁^2\widehat{𝐳}/8\pi B_z𝐁_p/4\pi .$$
(5)
Integration of equation (5) over the “box” $`(R_m,Z_m)`$ gives

$$_0^{R_m}r𝑑r(B_r^2+B_\varphi ^2B_z^2)_{z=0}=_0^{R_m}r𝑑r(B_r^2)_{z=Z_m},$$
(6)
where the integral on the left hand side represents the flux of momentum from the disk into the box and the other integral the flux of momentum out of the top of the box. This equation is accurately satisfied by our numerical solutions; the typical errors are $`<0.1\%`$.

## 4 Analytic Solution for Poynting Jet

Most of the twist $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi `$ of a field line of a Poynting jet occurs along the jet from $`z=0`$ to $`Z_m`$. Because $`r^2d\varphi /H(\mathrm{\Psi })=dz/B_z`$, we have

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi (\mathrm{\Psi })}{H(\mathrm{\Psi })}=\frac{(\omega _0t)(\mathrm{\Psi }/\mathrm{\Psi }_0)}{H(\mathrm{\Psi })}\frac{Z_m}{r^2B_z},$$
(7)
where $`r^2B_z(r,z)`$ is evaluated on the straight part of the jet at $`r=r(\mathrm{\Psi })`$. In the core of the jet $`\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$, we have $`3^{9/8}(\mathrm{\Psi }_0/\mathrm{\Psi })^{3/4}`$, and in this region we can take $`\mathrm{\Psi }=C\mathrm{\Psi }_0(r/r_0)^q`$, and $`H=𝒦(\mathrm{\Psi }_0/r_0)(\mathrm{\Psi }/\mathrm{\Psi }_0)^s,`$ where $`C,q,𝒦,`$ and $`s`$ are dimensionless constants. Equation (1) for the straight part of the jet implies $`q=1/(1s)`$ and $`C^{2(1s)}=s(1s)^2𝒦^2/(12s)`$. Thus we find $`s=1/4`$ so that $`q=4/3`$, $`C=[9/32]^{2/3}𝒦^{4/3}`$, and $`𝒦=3^{1/8}4(r_0\omega _0t/Z_m)`$.

In order to have a Poynting jet, we find that $`𝒦`$ must be larger than $`0.5`$. This corresponds directly to the condition $`T>T_c`$ for the occurrence of the high-twist solutions. The condition arises from the fact that there is a competition between the build up of toroidal flux inside the box due to twisting by the disk which acts to increase $`B_\varphi `$ and the expansion of the boundaries which acts to decrease $`B_\varphi `$ (see §12). If the boundaries expand too rapidly $`B_\varphi `$ does not increase sufficiently to give a self-collimated Poynting jet. For the case of uniform expansion of the top boundary, $`Z_m=V_zt`$, this condition is the same as $`V_z<9.2(r_0\omega _0)`$. For the case of Figure (5), $`𝒦0.844`$. The field components in the straight part of the jet are

$$B_\varphi =\sqrt{2}B_z=\sqrt{2}\left(\frac{3}{16}\right)^{1/3}𝒦^{4/3}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{r_0^2}\right)\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{2/3}.$$
(8)
These dependences agree approximately with those found in numerical simulations of Poynting jets (Ustyugova et al. 2000). On the disk, $`\mathrm{\Psi }3^{3/2}\mathrm{\Psi }_0(r/r_0)^2`$ for $`r<r_0/3^{3/4}`$. Using this and the formula for $`\mathrm{\Psi }(r)`$ gives the relation between the radius of a field line in the disk, denoted $`r_d`$, and its radius in the jet, $`r/r_0=6.5(r_d/r_0)^{3/2}𝒦^1`$. Thus the power law for $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is applicable for $`r_1<r<r_2`$, where $`r_1=6.5r_0(r_i/r_0)^{3/2}/𝒦`$ and $`r_2=1.9r_0/𝒦`$, with $`r_i`$ the inner radius of the disk. The outer edge of the Poynting jet has a transition layer where the axial field changes from $`B_z(r_2)`$ to zero while (minus) the toroidal field increases from $`B_\varphi (r_2)`$ to $`(H)_{max}/r_2`$. Using equation (6), which is only approximate at $`r_2`$, gives $`(H)_{max}1.2𝒦\mathrm{\Psi }_0/r_0`$, This dependence agrees approximately with our Grad-Shafranov solutions.

## 5 Expansion of Boundaries

The magnetic forces on the outer wall increase by a large factor in going from the low-twist to high-twist solutions. The radial force on the cylindrical wall and the axial force on the top wall are

$$F_r=\frac{1}{4}R_m_0^{Z_m}𝑑zB_z^2|_{R_m},F_z=\frac{1}{4}_0^{R_m}r𝑑rB_r^2|_{Z_m}.$$
(9)
For the low-twist solution of Figure 3 ($`T=1.1`$), $`(F_r,F_z)(0.0061,0.013)`$, whereas for the high-twist solution of Figure 5 ($`T=1.79`$), $`(F_r,F_z)(0.26,0.45)`$ in units of $`(\mathrm{\Psi }_0/r_0)^2`$.

Figure 7 shows the radial dependence of the magnetic pressure on the top boundary for the cases of low-twist and high-twist solutions.

Different behavior is exhibited by the low-twist and high-twist solutions as the conducting boundaries are moved outward. For the low-twist solutions, the poloidal field tends to expand outward to fairly uniformly fill the available space. As $`R_m\mathrm{}`$ and $`Z_m\mathrm{}`$, we find that these solutions are similar to those obtained by Lynden-Bell and Boily (1994) where there are no outer boundaries.

In contrast, for the high-twist solutions, the poloidal field near the axis maintains its collimation due to $`B_\varphi `$, whereas the “return” poloidal field far from the axis is pushed against the outer cylindrical wall due to the $`B_\varphi `$ field. As $`R_m\mathrm{}`$ and $`Z_m\mathrm{}`$, the collimated field near the axis will extent outward along the $`z`$axis in the absence of instabilities. It is clear from Figure 7 that the magnetic pressure on the top boundary peaks near the axis. Thus, this region of the boundary should expand most rapidly in the physical case where the boundary is an interface with external plasma.

Estimation of the axial expansion of a Poynting jet can readily be made assuming a region of radius $`gr_2`$ ($`g23`$) of the jet expands with velocity $`V_z`$ into a constant density external medium. For likely conditions $`V_z`$ is much larger than the sound speed in the external medium so that the ram pressure due to the jet motion is $`\rho _{ext}V_z^2`$, assuming $`(V_z/c)^21`$ as required by our non-relativistic treatment. Balancing this pressure with the magnetic pressure of the jet gives

$$\rho _{ext}V_z^2\frac{(H)_{max}^2}{4\pi g^2r_2^2}0.14[B_z(0)/g]^2(r_0\omega _0/V_z)^4,$$

or

$$V_z(r_0\omega _0)^{2/3}[B_z(0)/g]^{1/3}/\rho _{ext}^{1/6}.$$
(10)
The condition for a Poynting jet $`𝒦>0.5`$ corresponds to $`V_z<9.2(r_0\omega _0)`$. For $`B_z(0)=100`$G, $`r_0=10^{15}`$cm, and $`M=10^8M_{}`$, the external density $`\rho _{ext}`$ must be larger than $`2\times 10^{22}\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$ in order to have $`V_z<c`$. For larger magnetic fields, a much larger external density is needed to give $`V_z<c`$. This points up the need for a relativistic treatment of the Poynting jet expansion.

## 6 Angular Momentum Conservation

Conservation of angular momentum about the $`z`$axis can be written as

$$\stackrel{}{𝒥}=0,\stackrel{}{𝒥}r𝐁_pB_\varphi /4\pi =𝐁_pH/4\pi ,$$
(11)
where $`\stackrel{}{𝒥}`$ is the angular momentum flux-density vector. Integration of equation (11) over the “box” $`(R_m,Z_m)`$ gives

$$0=\frac{1}{2}_0^{R_m}r𝑑rH(B_z)_{z=0}.$$
(12)
The subscript $`z=0`$ here and subsequently indicates that the quantity is evaluated on the top surface of the disk. For a dipole-like field threading the disk where $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R_m,0)=0=\mathrm{\Psi }(0,0)`$, equation (12) gives

$$0=\frac{1}{2}_0^{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}𝑑\mathrm{\Psi }H(\mathrm{\Psi })\frac{1}{2}_{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}^0𝑑\mathrm{\Psi }H(\mathrm{\Psi }).$$
(13)
The first integral represents the outflow of angular momentum from the inner part of the disk (interior to the $`O`$point), and this equals the angular momentum inflow into the outer part of the disk given by the second integral.

The outflow of angular momentum from the inner part of the disk causes enhanced accretion of this part of the disk, whereas the inflow of angular momentum to the outer disk reduces the accretion rate. Because the Poynting outflows carry negligible matter, the continuity equation for the disk is

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }/t+(\mathrm{\Sigma }v_r\widehat{𝐫})=0,$$
(14)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r,t)`$ is the surface mass density of the disk. The continuity equation for the disk angular momentum is

$$(\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{})/t+(\mathrm{\Sigma }v_r\mathrm{}\widehat{𝐫}+𝒯_r^{vis}\widehat{𝐫})=r(B_\varphi B_z)_{z=0}/2\pi ,$$
(15)
where $`𝒯_r^{vis}`$ represents the viscous transport of angular momentum in the disk, the term on the right-hand side the outflow or inflow of angular momentum (from the two sides of the disk) due to the magnetic field, and $`\mathrm{}`$ is the specific angular momentum of the disk matter. The disk is assumed almost Keplerian so that $`\mathrm{}=\sqrt{GMr}=rv_K`$ and consequently the two continuity equations give the mass accretion rate $`\dot{M}=\dot{M}_B+\dot{M}_{vis}`$, where

$$\dot{M}_B(r)2\pi r\mathrm{\Sigma }v_r=2(r^2/v_K)(B_\varphi B_z)_{z=0},$$
(16)
is the “magnetically driven” mass accretion rate, and $`\dot{M}_{vis}=6\pi \sqrt{r}d(\nu \sqrt{r}\mathrm{\Sigma })/dr`$ is the viscous accretion rate with $`\nu `$ the kinematic viscosity (Lovelace, Newman, & Romanova 1997). We have $`\dot{M}_B>0`$ (or$`<0`$) for $`r<r_0`$ (or $`r>r_0`$). The accretion speed is $`uv_r=u_B+u_{vis}`$ with $`u_B=\dot{M}_B/(2\pi r\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ and $`u_{vis}=\dot{M}_{vis}/(2\pi r\mathrm{\Sigma })`$.

Figure 8 shows the radial dependence of $`\dot{M}_B`$ for a high-twist case. That $`\dot{M}_B`$ due to the Poynting outflow is a function of $`r`$ emphasizes the fact that disk is not stationary.

## 7 Magnetic Field Transport in the Disk

Poloidal magnetic field threading the disk tends to be advected inward with the accretion flow, but at the same time it may diffuse through the disk owing to a finite magnetic diffusivity $`\eta _m`$ of the disk. The continuity equation for poloidal flux through the disk $`B_z(r,0,t)`$ is

$$B_z/t+[v_rB_z\widehat{𝐫}+𝒰_rB_z\widehat{𝐫}]=0,$$
(17)
where $`𝒰_r=(\eta _m/h)\mathrm{tan}(\theta )`$ is the outward diffusive drift speed, $`h`$ the half-thickness of the disk, $`\mathrm{tan}(\theta )(B_r/B_z)_{z=0}`$, and a smaller, second order diffusion term ($`\eta _m^2B_z/r^2`$) has been omitted (see Lovelace et al. 1997). For cases where the diffusivity is of the order of the viscosity and where the viscosity is given the Shakura and Sunyaev (1973) prescription $`\nu =\alpha c_sh`$ (with $`\alpha <1`$ and $`c_s`$ the midplane sound speed), the diffusive drift speed is $`𝒰_r\alpha c_s\mathrm{tan}(\theta )`$. For a strong magnetic field threading the disk, the accretion speed $`u`$ in the inner part of the disk ($`r<r_0`$) may be large with $`u_Bu_{vis}`$ and $`u_B>𝒰_r`$ so that the disk flow advects the $`B_z(r,0)`$ field inward. On the other hand at large radii, the magnitude of $`u`$ is probably much smaller so that the $`B_z(r,0)`$ field tends to drift outward, $`𝒰_r>u`$.

## 8 Energy Conservation

We assume the coronal plasma is perfectly conducting so that $`𝐄=𝐯\times 𝐁/c`$. For quasi-stationary and axisymmetric conditions, $`\times 𝐄=0`$, and thus $`E_\varphi =0,`$and $`𝐄_p=\mathrm{\Phi }`$. so that $`𝐯_p\pm 𝐁_p`$, and the electrostatic potential $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{\Psi })`$. Thus $`𝐄=\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Psi }/c`$ with $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\mathrm{\Psi })d\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{\Psi })/d\mathrm{\Psi }`$. For the situations considered here, all field lines pass through the disk. At the disk surface, $`E_r(r,0)=(v_\varphi )_{disk}B_z(r,0)/c`$ since $`v_z=0`$. Therefore, $`\mathrm{\Omega }[\mathrm{\Psi }(r,0)]=(v_\varphi )_{disk}/r`$.

For a force-free plasma we have

$$\frac{}{t}\left(\frac{𝐁^2}{8\pi }\right)+\left(\frac{c}{4\pi }𝐄\times 𝐁\right)=0.$$
(18)
Integration of equation (18) over the “box” ($`r=0`$ to $`R_m,z=0`$ to $`Z_m`$) gives

$$\frac{dW_m}{dt}=\frac{1}{2}_0^{R_m}r𝑑r(v_\varphi B_\varphi B_z)_{z=0}$$

$$\frac{1}{4}\dot{R}_{max}R_m_0^{Z_m}𝑑z𝐁^2(R_m,z)$$

$$\frac{1}{4}\dot{Z}_m_0^{R_m}r𝑑r𝐁^2(r,Z_m),$$
(19)
where $`W_m`$ is the magnetic field energy in the box (equation 4). The second and third integrals in equation (19) represent the energy expended in “pushing” the boundaries outward (the $`pdV`$ work). The first integral represents the outflow of energy from the inner part of the disk surface (inside the $`O`$point) and the inflow into the outer part of the disk. For a dipole-like field threading the disk where $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R_m,0)=0=\mathrm{\Psi }(0,0)`$, the first integral for the power output from the disk can be rewritten as

$$\frac{1}{2}_0^{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}𝑑\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Delta }\dot{\varphi }(\mathrm{\Psi })H(\mathrm{\Psi })=\frac{\omega _0\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2}{2r_0}_0^1𝑑\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\stackrel{~}{}[\stackrel{~}{H}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }})],$$
(20)
where $`\omega _0\sqrt{GM/r_0^3}`$, and the tildes indicate dimensionless variables. For the low-twist solution ($`T=1.1`$) of Figure 3, the dimensionless integral denoted $``$ $`1.75`$, whereas for the high-twist solution of Figure 5 ($`T=1.84`$) $`3.05`$. Thus, $`\dot{E}`$

$$0.9\times 10^{45}\frac{\mathrm{erg}}{\mathrm{s}}\left(\frac{}{3}\right)\left(\frac{B_z(0)}{3\mathrm{k}\mathrm{G}}\right)^2\left(\frac{r_0}{10^{15}\mathrm{cm}}\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{M}{10^8M_{}}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(21)
for the power output from the two sides of the disk.

The Poynting power outflow per unit radius from the two sides of the disk is

$$d\dot{E}_B/dr=rv_K(B_\varphi B_z)_{z=0}=\left(v_K^2/2r\right)\dot{M}_B,$$
(22)
for quasi-stationary conditions. Figure 8 shows the radial dependence of $`d\dot{E}_B/dr`$ which indicates that most of the power outflow occurs in the inner part of the disk.

## 9 Generation of Toroidal Flux

Perfect conductivity and Faraday’s law imply

$$\frac{𝐁}{t}=\times (𝐯\times 𝐁),$$
(23)
where $`𝐯`$ is the plasma flow velocity. We apply this equation to a “box” extending from the disk at $`z=0`$ to a non-rotating, perfectly conducting surface at $`z=Z_m`$, and from the axis $`r=0`$ to a cylindrical, non-rotating, perfectly conducting surface at $`r=R_m`$. These outer surfaces are allowed to move so that $`R_m`$ and $`Z_m`$ are in general time-dependent. The toroidal flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }_t`$ (equation 4) obeys

$$\frac{d\mathrm{\Phi }_t}{dt}=_0^{R_m}𝑑r(v_\varphi B_zv_zB_\varphi )|_0^{Z_m}_0^{Z_m}𝑑z(v_rB_\varphi v_\varphi B_r)|_0^{R_m}.$$
(24)
On the top boundary $`z=Z_m`$, $`B_z=0`$ and $`B_\varphi =0`$; on the outer cylindrical boundary $`r=R_m`$, $`B_r=0`$ and $`B_\varphi =0`$; on the $`z`$axis $`B_\varphi =0`$ and $`B_r=0`$; and on the disk $`v_z(r,z=0)=0`$. Consequently, equation (24) simplifies to

$$\frac{d\mathrm{\Phi }_t}{dt}=_0^{R_m}𝑑rv_\varphi B_z(r,z=0),$$
(25)
where $`v_\varphi =\sqrt{GM/r}`$ is the azimuthal velocity of the disk. The integrand of equation (25) is independent of time in view of our assumption that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(r,0)`$, and thus $`B_z(r,0)=(1/r)\mathrm{\Psi }(r,0)/r`$, is time-independent.

For a dipole-like field threading the disk \[where $`\mathrm{\Psi }(r,0)`$ increases from zero to a maximum $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ and then decrease to zero at $`r=R_m`$\], equation (25) can be rewritten as

$$\frac{d\mathrm{\Phi }_t}{dt}=_0^{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}𝑑\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Delta }\dot{\varphi }(\mathrm{\Psi }),$$
(26)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }\dot{\varphi }(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ is the time derivative of equation (3), which is independent of time. For the dipole-like field of Figure 1, evaluation of this integral gives $`d\mathrm{\Phi }_t/dt12.1\omega _0\mathrm{\Psi }_012.1\omega _0[B_z(0)/10.4]r_0^2`$. Thus, $`d\mathrm{\Phi }_t/dt`$

$$1.3\times 10^{28}\frac{\mathrm{Gcm}^2}{\mathrm{s}}\left(\frac{B_z(0)}{3\mathrm{k}\mathrm{G}}\right)\left(\frac{r_0}{10^{15}\mathrm{cm}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{M}{10^8M_{}}\right)^{1/2}$$
(27)
is the toroidal flux generation rate from one side of the disk.

## 10 Poynting versus Centrifugal Outflows

The centrifugal force near the surface of a Keplerian disk has a role in launching hydromagnetic outflows (Blandford & Payne 1982). The “centrifugal launching” requires that the field lines (projected into the poloidal plane) be tilted away from the $`z`$axis by an angle $`\theta `$ greater than $`30^{}`$. The magnetic force, dominantly $`d(B_\varphi ^2/8\pi )/dz`$, is comparably important for launching hydromagnetic outflows (Lovelace, Berk, & Contopoulos 1991; Ustyugova et al. 1999); it also increases as $`\theta `$ increases. Figure 8 shows the radial variation of $`\theta (r)=\mathrm{tan}^1(|B_r/B_z|)_{z=0}`$, for a high-twist case. For this case, $`\theta <30^{}`$ for $`r<0.3r_0`$, which includes the part of the disk giving the largest power output per unit radius, $`d\dot{E}_B/dr`$, shown in the top panel of Figure 8. Thus there is a Poynting outflow under conditions where no centrifugal outflow occurs.

However, for the part of the disk where $`\theta >30^{}`$ we predict a centrifugal hydromagnetic outflow with $`(B_\varphi B_z)>0`$ and inward magnetically driven accretion, $`u_B>0`$ (see Ustyugova et al. 1999). Hydromagnetic outflows from the region $`r>r_0`$ are found in the MHD simulations discussed by Ustyugova et al. (2000) and in §13.

## 11 Collapse of Inner Disk

Quasi-stationary Poynting jets from the two sides of the disk within $`r_0`$ give an energy outflow per unit radius of the disk $`d\dot{E}_B/dr=rv_K(B_\varphi B_z)_h`$, where the $`h`$ subscript indicates evaluation at the top surface of the disk. This outflow is $`r_0d\dot{E}_B/drv_K(r_0)(\mathrm{\Psi }_0/r_0)^2`$ is estimated in equation (22), which agrees approximately with the values derived from the simulations (see §14).

For long time-scales, the Poynting jet is of course time-dependent due to the angular momentum it extracts from the inner disk ($`r<r_0`$). This loss of angular momentum leads to a “global magnetic instability” and collapse of the inner disk (Lovelace et al. 1997). An approximate model of this collapse can be made if the inner disk mass $`M_d`$ is concentrated near the $`O`$point radius $`r_0(t)`$, if the field line slippage through the disk is negligible (see §8), $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0=`$const, and if $`(rB_\varphi )_{max}\mathrm{\Psi }_0/r_0(t)`$ (as found here). Then, $`M_ddr_0/dt=2\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2(GMr_0)^{1/2}.`$ If $`t_i`$ denotes the time at which $`r_0(t_i)=r_i`$ (the inner radius of the disk), then $`r_0(t)=r_i[1(tt_i)/t_{coll}]^{2/3},`$ for $`tt_i`$, where $`t_{coll}=\sqrt{GM}M_dr_i^{3/2}/(3\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2)`$ is the time-scale for the collapse of the inner disk. (Note that the time-scale for $`r_0`$ to decrease by a factor of $`2`$ is $`t_i(r_0/r_i)^{3/2}t_i`$ for $`r_0r_i`$.) The power output to the Poynting jets is

$$\dot{E}(t)=\frac{2}{3}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }E_{tot}}{t_{coll}}\left(1\frac{tt_i}{t_{coll}}\right)^{5/3},$$
(28)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{tot}=GMM_d/2r_i`$ is the total energy of the outburst. Roughly, $`t_{coll}2\mathrm{day}M_8^2(M_d/M_{})(6\times 10^{32}\mathrm{Gcm}^2/\mathrm{\Psi }_0)^2`$ for a Schwarzschild black hole, where validity of the analysis requires $`t_{coll}t_i`$. Such outbursts may explain the flares of active galactic nuclei blazar sources (Romanova & Lovelace 1997; Romanova 1999; Levinson 1980) and the one-time outbursts of gamma ray burst sources (Katz 1997).

## 12 Occurrence of Poynting Jets and Kink Instability

The rate at which toroidal flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }_t`$ is created in the region above the disk is $`d\mathrm{\Phi }_t/dt12\omega _0\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ (see §10). If the area $`R_mZ_m`$ of this region is fixed owing to a very dense external plasma, the average value of $`B_\varphi >0`$ in it increases. On the other hand if the area $`R_mZ_m`$ increases rapidly enough, $`B_\varphi `$ will decrease. The Poynting jets occur under conditions where $`B_\varphi `$ increases to a sufficient extent to cause pinching of the poloidal magnetic field. Because the most rapid expansion of the $`𝐁`$ field of occurs in the $`z`$direction, a necessary condition for occurrence of a Poynting jet is that the rate of expansion of the boundary $`V_z=dZ_m/dt`$ be bounded by some constant. In fact the condition obtained in §4 for occurrence of Poynting jets has this form, $`V_z<9.2(\omega _0r_0)`$.

Note that there may be “self-regulation” in the respect that the field configuration which occurs is at the “boundary” between low and high-twist solutions. In view of Figure 7, the low-twist field gives a gradual expansion of the boundaries which allows build up of toroidal flux whereas the high-twist field gives a more rapid expansion which tends to give a slower increase of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_t`$.

The region of collimated field (see Figure 5) - the Poynting jet - has $`𝐯^2v_A^2`$ and is kink unstable according to the standard non-relativistic analysis (e.g., Bateman 1980, ch. 6). The instability will lead to a helical distortion of the jet with the non-linear amplitude of shift of the helix $`\mathrm{\Delta }rv_At`$ and with the helix having the same twist about the $`z`$axis as the axisymmetric $`𝐁`$ field. Note however that for the astrophysical conditions of interest $`v_A|𝐁|/\sqrt{4\pi \rho }`$ is likely to be larger than the speed of light. A relativistic perturbation analysis is then required including the displacement current. The physical Alfvén speed is $`V_A=c/(1+c^2/v_A^2)^{1/2}<c`$. Thus the speed of lateral displacement of the helix is less than c. The evolution of the Poynting jet evidently depends on both $`V_A`$ and the velocity of propagation of the “head” of the jet $`V_z`$ (§5) which may be relativistic. Relativistic propagation of the jet’s head may act to limit the amplitude of helical kink distortion of the jet. On the other hand a sub-relativistic propagation of the head may allow the helix amplitude to grow but this amplitude can be limited by flux conservation as discussed by Kadomtsev (1963).

## 13 MHD Simulations of Poynting Jets

For the MHD simulations described here, the initial magnetic field has a dipole-like form as shown in Figure 1. The computational region $`r=0`$ to $`R_{max}`$, $`z=0`$ to $`Z_{max}`$ is taken to have $`R_{max}=Z_{max}10r_0`$. Initially, the corona of the disk is in isothermal equilibrium without rotation. At $`t=0`$ the disk starts to rotate with Keplerian velocity $`v_\varphi (r,0)=r\mathrm{\Omega }_K`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K=\sqrt{GM}/(r^2+r_i^2)^{3/4}`$, where the smoothing length $`r_i=0.2r_0`$ is interpreted as the inner radius of the disk. The smoothed gravitational potential is $`GM/(r_i^2+𝐫^2)^{1/2}`$.

On the disk surface, the boundary conditions are as follows (Ustyugova et al. 2000). Two of the boundary conditions come from the fact that the tangential electric field $`(𝐄^{})_t`$ in the frame rotating with the disk (at the Keplerian velocity) is zero; $`B_z`$ at the disk surface is time-independent whereas $`B_r`$ and $`B_\varphi `$ at the surface vary with time. Two further boundary conditions fix the entropy of the plasma coming out of the disk to be $`s_d(r)`$ and the density of the outflowing plasma to be $`\rho _d(r)`$. If $`v_z`$ at the disk surface, calculated by solving the MHD equations in the computational region, increases to the point where it is larger than the slow magnetosonic speed in the $`z`$direction at the disk’s surface $`c_{smz}`$, then we clamp it to be equal to $`c_{smz}`$. This condition represents a limit on the mass efflux $`\rho v_z`$ from the disk. For sub-slow magnetosonic outflow from the disk $`v_z<c_{smz}`$, we have four boundary conditions, whereas when $`v_z=c_{smz}`$ we have five boundary conditions.

For the outer boundaries, we first consider the case where these surfaces are perfect conductors. Secondly, we consider the case of “free” outer boundaries where $`F_j/n=0`$ on all scalar variables except for the toroidal magnetic field. For this field component we take $`[𝐁_p(rB_\varphi )]=0`$ on the outer boundaries, which was shown by Ustyugova et al. (1999) to avoid artificial collimation which can come from using the “free” boundary condition on $`rB_\varphi `$. The free outer boundary conditions allow matter and Poynting flux to freely flow out through these surfaces.

For the cases we discuss, the strength of the poloidal magnetic field at the inner radius of the disk corresponds to $`(v_{Ap}/v_K)_i=16.5`$ and $`(c_s/v_K)_i=1`$, where $`v_{Ap}|𝐁_p|/\sqrt{4\pi \rho }`$. The $`i`$subscript indicates evaluation at the inner radius of the disk $`r=r_i`$ on the disk surface. In the midplane of the disk $`(v_{Ap}/v_K)_{z=0}`$ is less than or much less than unity. Different radial profiles of $`c_s`$ on the disk surface have been used with similar results, including $`c_s/v_K=`$ const and $`c_s=`$ const; the density profiles on the disk surface have been obtained as in Ustyugova et al. (1999).

Figure 9 shows the evolution of the coronal plasma for the case of fixed, conducting outer boundaries at $`(R_m,Z_m)`$. After about $`6`$ rotation periods of the inner disk, the outgoing poloidal field collimates along the $`z`$axis, and the returning poloidal field is pressed outwards to the conducting walls. Most of the magnetic field is strongly field-dominated with flow speeds $`𝐯^2v_A^2`$, where $`v_A`$ is the Alfvén velocity. The field configuration is similar to that found for the high-twist Grad-Shafranov solutions as shown in Figure 5.

Figure 10 shows the long time evolution of the coronal plasma for the case where the outer boundaries are free (i.e., open) boundaries. These simulations evolve to a quasi-stationary final state where most of the region is strongly field-dominated. In the jet region along the $`z`$axis, the poloidal field is collimated by the $`B_\varphi `$ field. We find that the profiles of $`B_\varphi (r)`$ and $`B_z(r)`$ from the simulations (Ustyugova et al. 2000) agree to a good approximation with equation (6) of our analytic model. The main respect in which the simulations differ from the Grad-Shafranov solutions is that region close to the disk where the magnetic field returns to the disk is not field-dominated. Instead this region has a hydromagnetic outflow from disk. This is predicted theoretically (Blandford & Payne 1982) and observed in simulations (Ustyugova et al. 1999) to be the case when the angle $`\theta `$ between the disk normal and the poloidal field lines is larger than $`30^{}`$.

## 14 Conclusions

An ordered magnetic field threading an accretion disk can give powerful outflows or jets of matter, energy, and angular momentum. Most of the studies have been in the hydromagnetic regime where there is appreciable mass outflow and find asymptotic flow speeds of the order of the maximum Keplerian velocity of the disk, $`v_{Ki}`$. These flows are clearly relevant to the jets from protostellar systems which have flow speeds of the order of $`v_{Ki}`$. In contrast, observed VLBI jets in quasars and active galaxies point to bulk Lorentz factors $`\mathrm{\Gamma }10`$ \- much larger than the disk Lorentz factor. In the jets of gamma ray burst sources, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }100`$. The large Lorentz factors as well as the small Faraday rotation measures suggest that these jets are in the Poynting flux regime. This work presents self-consistent solutions for the axisymmetric, non-relativistic plasma equilibria described by the force-free Grad-Shafranov equation. We find solutions with magnetically collimated Poynting jets where there is a continuous outflow of energy, angular momentum, and toroidal magnetic flux from the disk into the external space. This behavior contradicts the commonly accepted “theorem” of Solar plasma physics that the motion of the footpoints of a magnetic loop structure leads to a stationary magnetic field configuration with zero power, angular momentum, and flux outflows (Aly 1984, 1991).

Important issues remain to be investigated - the relativistic expansion of the head of a Poynting jets into an external medium and the three-dimensional kink instability of the jet. Further, the magnetic extraction of energy from a rotating black hole may be important (Blandford & Znajek 1977; Livio, Ogilvie, & Pringle 1999).

We thank S.A. Colgate and J.M. Finn for valuable discussions. One of us (RL) thanks J. Chen for for valuable discussions about Coronal magnetic fields. This research was supported in part by NASA grants NAG5-9047 and NAG5-9735 and NSF grant AST-9986936. MMR received partial support from NSF POWRE grant AST-9973366.


format: text

text:
# Some results about geometric Whittaker model

## 1. Introduction

### 1.1.

In this paper $`k`$ will be an algebraically closed field of characteristic $`p>0`$. We choose a prime number $`\mathrm{}`$ which is different from $`p`$. By a sheaf on a $`k`$-scheme $`S`$ we mean an $`\mathrm{}`$-adic etale sheaf. We denote by $`𝒟^b(S)`$ the bounded derived category of such sheaves. For a complex $`𝒟^b(S)`$ we denote by $`{}_{}{}^{p}H_{}^{i}()`$ its $`i`$-th perverse cohomology. Recall that for any finite subfield $`k^{}k`$ and any non-trivial character $`\psi :k^{}\overline{}_l`$ we can construct the Artin-Schreier sheaf $`_\psi `$ on $`𝔾_{a,k}`$.

Let $`G`$ denote a connected reductive group over $`k`$. We shall assume that $`p>h`$ where $`h`$ is the Coxeter number, so that for every unipotent subgroup $`UG`$ with Lie algebra $`𝔲`$ the exponential map $`𝔲U`$ is well defined and is an isomorphism. Under this condition $`𝔤`$ carries an invariant bilinear form $`(,)`$.

Let $`m:G\times GG`$ be the multiplication map. For every $`,𝒢𝒟^b(G)`$ we shall denote by $`𝒢`$ their ”!”-convolution; in other words

$$𝒢=m_!(𝒢).$$
(1.1)
Similarly, we shall denote by $`𝒢`$ the ”\*”-convolution of $``$ and $`𝒢`$, i.e.

$$𝒢=m_{}(𝒢).$$
(1.2)
### 1.2. Generic characters

Let $`PG`$ be a parabolic subgroup of $`G`$ with a Levi decomposition $`U_PL`$. Let $`\overline{P}=U_{\overline{P}}L`$ be an opposite parabolic.

The quotient of $`U`$ modulo commutant is isomorphic to a vector group $`𝔾_a^r`$ canonically up to a linear automorphism: a choice of a maximal torus in $`L`$ yields an isomorphism $`\underset{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_T^{\text{min}}(U_P)}{}𝔾_aU/[U,U]`$; since any two maximal tori in $`L`$ are conjugate while the action of $`L`$ on $`𝔾_a^r`$ is easily seen to be linear, the linear structure does not depend on the maximal torus. All homomorphisms $`U𝔾_a`$ considered in the paper will be assumed to come from a linear map $`𝔾_a^r𝔾_a`$.

We say that a homomorphism $`\chi :U_P𝔾_a`$ is non-degenerate if for any parabolic $`Q`$ conjugate to $`\overline{P}`$ and such that $`QU_P\{1\}`$ the restriction $`\chi |_{QU_P}`$ is nontrivial.

We have a (uniquely defined) element $`e_\chi 𝔲_{\overline{P}}=Lie(U_{\overline{P}})`$ such that $`(e_\chi ,x)=d\chi (x)`$ for $`x𝔲=Lie(U_P)`$

Recall that an element in the radical $`𝔲_Q`$ of a parabolic subalgebra $`𝔮=Lie(Q)`$ is called Richardson if its $`Q`$-orbit is open in $`𝔲_Q`$. It is well known \[7, Theorem 1.3\], \[4, Theorem 7.1.1\], that in this case the neutral component of the centralizer $`Z(e)^0`$ is contained in $`Q`$ and also that the preimage of $`e`$ under the moment map $`\mu _Q:T^{}(G/Q)𝔤^{}=𝔤`$ is finite. We say that $`e𝔲_Q`$ is birationally Richardson if $`Z(e)Q`$. This is equivalent to the map $`\mu _Q`$ being birational onto its image and also to the condition $`|\mu _Q^1(e)|=1`$.

###### Lemma 1.3.

The character $`\chi `$ is non-degenerate if and only if the element $`e_\chi 𝔲_{\overline{P}}`$ is birationally Richardson.

###### Proof.

Suppose that $`e_\chi `$ is birationally Richardson and let $`Q`$ be a parabolic conjugate to $`\overline{P}`$ such that $`QU_P\{1\}`$. We need to show that $`\chi |_{QU_P}`$ is nontrivial. This property is invariant under conjugating $`Q`$ by an element of $`U_P`$. It is well known that every $`U_P`$-orbit on a partial flag manifold contains a $`C_L`$ fixed point where $`C_L`$ is the center of $`L`$. Thus we can assume without loss of generality that $`QC_L`$. Then we have $`𝔮=𝔮𝔲_P𝔤\overline{𝔭}`$. If $`\chi |_{QU}`$ is trivial then $`e_\chi `$ is orthogonal to $`𝔮𝔲`$. It is also orthogonal to $`𝔮\overline{𝔭}`$ by virtue of lying in $`𝔲_{\overline{P}}`$. Thus $`e_\chi `$ is orthogonal to $`𝔮`$, i.e. it is contained in its radical which contradicts the assumption that it does not lie in any subalgebra conjugate to but different from $`𝔲_{\overline{P}}`$.

Suppose now that $`e_\chi `$ is not birationally Richardson. If it is not Richardson then parabolic subalgebras conjugate to $`𝔲_{\overline{P}}`$ and containing $`e_\chi `$ correspond to points of a closed subvariety $`(G/\overline{P})_\chi `$ in $`G/\overline{P}`$ of positive dimension. Being projective, such a variety can not be contained in the affine open orbit of $`U`$ on $`G/\overline{P}`$. If $`x(G/\overline{P})_\chi `$ is not contained in the open orbit then the stabilizer $`Q`$ of $`x`$ satisfies $`\chi |_{QU_P}=0`$.

Assume now that $`e_\chi `$ is Richardson but not birationally Richardson. Then there exists a parabolic $`QP^{}`$ conjugate to $`P^{}`$ and such that $`e_\chi `$ is in the radical of $`𝔮`$. It remains to show that $`QU`$ is nontrivial. If that was not the case then there exists $`uU_P`$ such that $`Q=u\overline{P}u^1`$. Then we claim that $`Ad(u)e_\chi =e_\chi `$. To check this it suffices to check that $`(e_\chi ,x)=(Ad(u)e_\chi ,x)`$ for every $`x𝔤`$. If $`x𝔲_P`$ this is clear since $`e_\chi `$ is orthogonal to the commutator of $`𝔲_P`$. If $`x𝔮`$ then both sides vanish since $`e_\chi `$ is in the radical of $`𝔮`$. Since $`𝔤=𝔲_P𝔮`$ we see that $`e_\chi `$ is invariant under $`Ad(u)`$. On the other hand, since $`e_\chi `$ is Richardson its stabilizer in $`U`$ is trivial, which is a contradiction. ∎

Remark. We now briefly discuss examples and non examples of the above situation.

0. If $`P=B`$ is a Borel subgroup and $`\chi `$ does not vanish on each simple root subgroup then $`\chi `$ is clearly nondegenerate.

1. Let $`(e,f,h)`$ be an $`sl(2)`$ triple in $`𝔤`$ where the nilpotent $`e`$ is assumed to be even. Suppose that $`𝔭=𝔤_0`$, the sum of eigenspaces of $`h`$ with nonpositive eigenvalues (we assume that the characteristic $`p`$ is large enough so that the $`sl(2)`$ triple comes from a homomorphism $`SL(2)G`$ and all weights of $`SL(2)`$ in the adjoint representation are less than $`p`$). Then it is clear that there exists a character $`\chi `$ of $`U_P`$ such that $`e=e_\chi `$. It is well known that $`e`$ is birationally Richardson in this case.

2. The nilpotent radical of any parabolic contains Richardson elements, however, Richardson elements coming from a character of the radical of opposite parabolic (i.e. orthogonal to the commutant of the radical of an opposite parabolic) exist in some but not all cases. For example,111The example was explained to us by Zhiwei Yun. let $`G=SL(n)`$ and let $`P`$ be the group of block upper triangular matrices with blocks of sizes $`n_1,\mathrm{},n_d`$. A Richardson element of this sort exists if and only if we have $`n_1n_2\mathrm{}n_in_{i+1}\mathrm{}n_d`$ for some $`i[1..d]`$. To see this notice that an element $`e`$ is Richardson if and only if the Young diagram $`\lambda `$ corresponding to its Jordan type is transposed to the diagram $`\mu `$ of the partition $`n=n_1+\mathrm{}+n_d`$. In particular, this implies that $`dim(Ker(e))=\mathrm{max}\{n_i\}`$. However, $`dim(Ker(e))n_d+\underset{i,n_i>n_{i+1}}{}n_in_{i+1}`$ which is greater than $`\mathrm{max}\{n_i\}`$ unless $`n_i`$ satisfy the above inequalities. This shows the inequalities are necessary for existence of a Richardson element of the specified form. To see they are sufficient consider the homogeneous ideal $`J`$ in $`k[x,y]`$ corresponding to the partition $`m_1=\mathrm{}=m_i=n_i`$, $`m_j=n_j`$ for $`j>i`$; thus monomials $`x^iy^j`$, $`jm_i`$ form a basis in $`k[x,y]/J`$. The subspace $`Vk[x,y]/J`$ spanned by monomials $`x^iy^j`$, $`jn_i`$ is clearly invariant under multiplication by $`x`$. The operator of multiplication by $`x`$ is easily seen to have the Jordan form given by the diagram $`\lambda `$, while decomposing $`V=V_s`$ where $`V_s`$ is spanned by monomials $`x^sy^j`$ we see that multiplication by $`x`$ corresponds to a matrix with nonzero blocks right above block diagonal as required.

Recall the well known fact that if $`G`$ is of type $`A`$ then every Richardson element is birationally Richardson, thus the previous paragraph provides examples of non-degenerate characters of $`U_PSL(n)`$.

3. Let $`G=Sp(6)`$ and let $`P`$ be the stabilizer of a line in the tautological representation. Then $`U_P`$ is the 5-dimensional Heisenberg group. For any character $`\chi `$ not vanishing on the 1-dimensional center of $`U_P`$ the element $`e_\chi `$ is Richardson but not birationally Richardson.

### 1.4.

Let $`X`$ be a $`G`$-variety. Assume that $`U`$ is a subgroup of $`G`$ and $`\chi :U𝔾_a`$ is a homomorphism. Let $`a:U\times XX`$ denote the action map and let $`p:U\times XX`$ be the projection to the second multiple. Let $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}:𝒟^b(X)𝒟^b(X)`$ be the functor sending $`𝒟^b(X)`$ to $`a_{}(\chi ^{}_\psi )\left(\overline{}_l[1](\frac{1}{2})\right)^{dimU}`$. Similarly we define the functor $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}`$ by replacing $`a_{}`$ by $`a_!`$. We have the natural morphism $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}`$. The main result of this paper is the following:

###### Theorem 1.5.

Let $`UG`$ be the unipotent radical of a parabolic subgroup $`PG`$ and let $`\chi :U𝔾_a`$ be non-degenerate.

1. Let $`\overline{P}`$ denote a parabolic subgroup of $`G`$ opposite to $`P`$ and let $`\overline{U}`$ denote its unipotent radical. Let $`𝒟^b(X)`$ be $`\overline{P}`$-equivariant. Then the natural morphism

$$\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}$$

is an isomorphism.
2. Assume that $`P`$ is a Borel subgroup. Then the above assertion is true for all $`\overline{U}`$-equivariant sheaves $``$ (not just $`\overline{P}`$-equivariant ones).
3. Let $`𝒟^b(G)`$ be equivariant with respect to the adjoint action and assume that $`P`$ is a Borel subgroup. Then the natural morphism

$$\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}$$

is an isomorphism.

Remarks.

0. In the above cases the averaging functors preserve perversity: the functor is defined as a direct image under an affine morphism, thus if $``$ is perverse then $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}`$ is in perverse degrees $`0`$, while $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}`$ is in perverse degrees $`0`$. Since the two complexes are isomorphic, they are perverse.

1. The second statement of Theorem 1.5 was communicated to the first author as a conjecture by B. C. Ngo who also proved it for $`G=GL(n)`$.

2. In the case $`G=GL(n)`$ a (much more involved) analogue of Theorem 1.5(3) is used in  (Theorem 5.1) in order to complete the proof of the geometric Langlands conjecture for $`GL(n)`$.

3. In the next section we also explain how the main step in the proof of Theorem 1.5(1) allows to reprove one of the main results of .

4. Theorem 1.5 also holds, with a parallel proof, when $`k`$ is an algebraically closed field of characteristic 0 and $`\mathrm{}`$-adic sheaves are replaced by holonomic $`𝒟`$-modules (in this case one has to replace $`_\psi `$ by the $`𝒟`$-module corresponding to the function $`e^x`$).

5. In the previous version of this paper  the statement of Theorem 1.5(1) was formulated for an arbitrary parabolic subgroup $`P`$ of $`G`$ under the weaker assumption that $``$ is $`\overline{U}`$-equivariant and with a different definition of a generic character. However, our proof of that assertion was wrong (unless $`P`$ is a Borel subgroup) and the definition of a generic character irrelevant as was recently pointed out to us by Z. Yun. In fact, the statement itself is wrong for any choice of the character as the following counterexample shows. Suppose that $`HG`$ is a subgroup such that

1. $`dim(HU)>0`$.
2. $`HUKer(\chi )`$.
3. $`\overline{U}H`$.

If $`X=G`$ and $``$ is the constant sheaf on $`HG`$ then the stalks of $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}()`$ and $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}()`$ at $`1G`$ are isomorphic to $`H^{}\left(HU\right)[dimU]\left(\frac{dimU}{2}\right)`$ and

$`H_c^{}\left(HU\right)[dimU]\left(\frac{dimU}{2}\right)`$ respectively, thus the two averaging functors produce nonisomorphic complexes. An example of such a subgroup is as follows. Consider $`G=SL(3)`$ and let $`P`$ and $`\overline{P}`$ be the groups of block upper triangular and block lower triangular matrices respectively with blocks of sizes $`(2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1})`$. Let $`H`$ be the group of block lower triangular matrices with blocks of sizes $`(1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2})`$. Then conditions (1) and (3) are clear. Also notice that in this case $`U`$ is abelian and all nontrivial characters of $`U`$ are conjugate under the action of $`L=P/U`$, thus for any choice of the character (2) also holds possibly after replacing $`H`$ by its conjugate by an element of $`L`$.

6. On the other hand, the present formulation of Theorem 1.5(1) may not be optimal: it was pointed out to us by Z. Yun that the statement may hold under a weaker assumption of the character. However, proving the more general statement requires new ideas and is beyond the scope of this document.

7. Originally Theorem 1.5(3) was formulated for any $`P`$, it was deduced from the above (stronger and incorrect) formulation of Theorem 1.5(1).

We do not know if the latter assertion is true. On the other hand, we believe that the following generalization of Theorem 1.5(3) holds. Assume for simplicity that $`p`$ is sufficiently large, let $`U`$ be a (unipotent) Premet group associated to a nilpotent orbit in $`𝔤^{}`$ (cf. e.g. ). It comes with a natural character $`\chi :U𝔾_m`$.

###### Conjecture 1.6.

1. Then the assertion of Theorem 1.5(3) holds for any Premet pair $`(U,\chi )`$.
2. Let $`U`$ and $`\chi `$ be as above. Then for any irreducible perverse sheaf $`𝒟^b(G)`$ equivariant with respect to the adjoint action, $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}`$ is an irreducible perverse sheaf or zero.

## 2. Proof of Theorem 1.5(1)

### 2.1. Cleanness

Let $`Z`$ be an algebraic variety over $`k`$ and let $`j:Z_0Z`$ be an open embedding. We shall say that $`𝒢𝒟^b(Z_0)`$ is clean with respect to $`j`$ if the natural map $`j_!𝒢j_{}𝒢`$ is an isomorphism.

Let $`X`$ be any $`\overline{P}`$-variety. Consider the variety $`G\underset{\overline{P}}{\times }X`$. We have the natural open embedding $`j:U\times XG\underset{\overline{P}}{\times }X`$. We will prove Theorem 1.5(1) by a series of reductions. We claim that Theorem 1.5(1) follows from

###### Theorem 2.2.

Let $`X`$ be a $`\overline{P}`$-variety and let $`𝒟^b(X)`$ be $`\overline{P}`$-equivariant. Then the sheaf $`\chi ^{}_\psi `$ is clean with respect to $`j`$. In other words the natural morphism

$$j_!(\chi ^{}_\psi )j_{}(\chi ^{}_\psi )$$
(2.1)
is an isomorphism. The same thing is true under the assumption that $``$ is $`\overline{U}`$-equivariant if $`P`$ is a Borel subgroup.

### 2.3.  Theorem 2.2 implies Theorem 1.5(1)

Indeed if $`X`$ is a $`G`$-variety then we have the natural proper map $`b:G\underset{\overline{P}}{\times }XX`$ sending every $`(g,x)\text{mod}\overline{P}`$ to $`g(x)`$. Moreover, we have $`bj=a`$ (recall that $`a:U\times XX`$ denotes the action map). Hence Theorem 2.2 and the fact that $`b`$ is proper imply that

$$\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}=b_!(j_!(\chi ^{}_\psi ))=b_{}(j_{}(\chi ^{}_\psi ))=\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}.$$

It remains to prove Theorem 2.2. Note that in the formulation of Theorem 2.2 we do not need $`X`$ to be a $`G`$-variety but only a $`\overline{P}`$-variety.

### 2.4.  A reformulation of the Theorem 2.2

Let $`\pi :G\times XG\underset{\overline{P}}{\times }X`$ be the natural projection. Also let $`\stackrel{~}{j}:U\overline{P}\times XG\times X`$ be the natural embedding. It follows from the smooth base change theorem that it is enough to show that the natural map

$$\stackrel{~}{j}_!\pi ^{}(\chi ^{}_\psi )\stackrel{~}{j}_{}\pi ^{}(\chi ^{}_\psi )$$

is an isomorphism (note that we have the natural identification $`U\overline{P}\times X`$ with $`\pi ^1(U\times X)`$).

The sheaf $`\pi ^{}(\chi ^{}_\psi )`$ is obviously $`(U,\chi )`$-equivariant with respect to the $`U`$-action by multiplication on the left. We claim that it is also $`\overline{P}`$-equivariant with respect to multiplication on the right, i.e. with respect to the $`\overline{P}`$-action on $`U\overline{P}\times X`$ given by $`\overline{q}:(u,\overline{p},x)(u,\overline{p}\overline{q},x)`$. Indeed, the map $`\pi `$ from $`U\overline{P}\times X`$ to $`U\times X`$ is given by $`\pi :(u,\overline{p},x)(u,\overline{p}(x))`$ (since the action of $`\overline{P}`$ on $`G\times X`$ is given by $`\overline{p}:(g,x)(g\overline{p}^1,\overline{p}x)`$). Thus

$$\pi (u,\overline{p}\overline{q},x)=(u,\overline{p}\overline{q}(x))=(u,\overline{p}\overline{q}\overline{p}^1(\overline{p}(x)))$$

and our statement follows from $`\overline{P}`$-equivariance of $``$.

Similar argument shows that if $``$ is only $`\overline{U}`$-equivariant, then $`\pi ^{}(\chi ^{}_\psi )`$ is $`\overline{U}`$-equivariant with respect to the right multiplication.

Hence we see that Theorem 2.2 follows from the following lemma.

###### Lemma 2.5.

Consider the action of $`U\times \overline{P}`$ on $`U\overline{P}G`$ given by left and right multiplications. For any variety $`X`$, if $`𝒢𝒟^b(U\overline{P}\times X)`$ is $`(U,\chi )`$-equivariant on the left and $`\overline{P}`$-equivariant on the right, then the natural map given by the inclusion $`\stackrel{~}{j}:U\overline{P}\times XG\times X`$,

$$\stackrel{~}{j}_!𝒢\stackrel{~}{j}_{}𝒢,$$

is an isomorphism. Similar assertion holds if $``$ is only $`U\times \overline{U}`$ equivariant if $`P`$ is a Borel subgroup.

###### Proof.

Let $`Z`$ denote the complement of $`U\overline{P}`$ in $`G`$ and let $`i`$ be the natural embedding of $`Z\times X`$ to $`G\times X`$. Since $`\stackrel{~}{j}_{}𝒢`$ is also $`(U,\chi )`$-equivariant on the left and $`\overline{U}`$-equivariant on the right it is enough to show that for every complex $``$ on $`G\times X`$ with the above equivariance properties we have $`i^{}=0`$. However, it is clear that this follows from:

###### Lemma 2.6.

1. Let $`gZ`$. Let $`S_gU\times \overline{P}`$ denote the set of all pairs $`(u,\overline{p})`$ such that $`ug\overline{p}=g`$. Let also $`U_g`$ be the projection of $`S_g`$ to $`U`$. Then the restriction of $`\chi `$ to $`U_g`$ is non-trivial.
2. Similarly, assume that $`P`$ is a Borel subgroup. Let $`gZ`$. Let $`S_g^{}U\times \overline{U}`$ denote the set of all pairs $`(u,\overline{u})`$ such that $`ug\overline{u}=g`$. Let also $`U_g^{}`$ be the projection of $`S_g^{}`$ to $`U`$. Then the restriction of $`\chi `$ to $`U_g^{}`$ is non-trivial.

###### Proof.

The first assertion is clear from the definition of a generic character.

If $`P=B`$ then Theorem LABEL:dcikens(1) applies, see Remark 0 after Lemma LABEL:13. Also, in this case $`\overline{U}`$ coincides with the set of unipotent elements in $`\overline{P}`$, thus we have: $`S_g=S_g^{}`$ and $`U_g=U_g^{}`$. Thus (2) follows from (1). ∎

###### Corollary 2.7.

Let $`U`$ be the unipotent radical of a Borel subgroup $`B`$. Let $`j`$ denote the open embedding of $`B`$ into $`G/\overline{U}`$. Let $``$ be any $`(U,\chi )`$-equivariant sheaf on $`B`$ (with respect to the left multiplication action). Then the natural morphism

$$j_!j_{}$$

is an isomorphism. In other words, every $`(U,\chi )`$-equivariant sheaf on $`B`$ is clean with respect to $`j`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`L`$ be the Levi factor of $`B`$ (since $`B`$ is now assumed to be a Borel subgroup, $`L`$ is a maximal torus of $`G`$). The isomorphism $`L\overline{B}/\overline{U}`$ gives rise to a natural action of $`\overline{B}`$ on $`L`$. Since the action of $`\overline{U}`$ on $`L`$ is trivial it follows that every $`𝒟^b(L)`$ is automatically $`\overline{U}`$-equivariant.

We have the natural identifications $`U\times LB`$ (by multiplication map) and $`G\underset{\overline{B}}{\times }LG/\overline{U}`$ (sending every $`(g,l)mod\overline{B}`$ to $`glmod\overline{U}`$). Under these identification the embedding $`j:BG/\overline{U}`$ becomes equal to the natural embedding $`U\times LG\underset{\overline{B}}{\times }L`$ considered in Theorem 2.2 (for $`X=L`$). Also the fact that $``$ is $`(U,\chi )`$-equivariant implies that as a sheaf on $`U\times L`$ it can be decomposed as $`=\chi ^{}_\psi ^{}`$ for some $`^{}𝒟^b(L)`$. Hence Corollary 2.7 is a particular case of Theorem 2.2. ∎

### 2.8. Application to Katz-Laumon theorem

Consider the variety $`𝔸^1\times 𝔾_m`$ with coordinates $`(x,y)`$. Let $`f:𝔸^1\times 𝔾_m𝔸^1`$ be given by $`f(x,y)=\frac{x}{y}`$. Let also $`i:𝔸^1\times 𝔾_m𝔸^2`$ denote the natural embedding and let $`\pi :𝔸^1\times 𝔾_m𝔾_m`$ be the projection to the second variable. The following theorem is proved in .

###### Theorem 2.9.

For every $`𝒟(𝔾_m)`$ the natural map

$$i_!(f^{}_\psi \pi ^{})i_{}(f^{}_\psi \pi ^{})$$
(2.2)
is an isomorphism.

Below we explain that Theorem 2.9 may be viewed as a particular case of Corollary 2.7.

###### Proof.

Take now $`G=SL(2)`$ and let $`B`$ and $`\overline{B}`$ be respectively the subgroups of lower-triangular and upper-triangular matrices, with unipotent radicals $`U`$ and $`\overline{U}`$. We denote the natural isomorphism between $`U`$ and $`𝔾_a`$ by $`\chi `$.

Let us identify $`G/\overline{U}`$ with $`𝔸^2\backslash \{0\}`$ by $`g\overline{U}g(e_1)`$ for the first standard basis vector $`e_1`$ of $`𝔸^2`$. Then $`BG/\overline{U}`$ is identified with $`𝔸^1\times 𝔾_m𝔸^2\backslash \{0\}`$ by $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\lambda & 0\\ t& \lambda ^1\end{array}\right)(t,\lambda ^1)`$. The sheaf $`f^{}_\psi \pi ^{}`$ is $`(U,\chi )`$-equivariant, so by Corollary 2.7 this sheaf is clean for the embedding $`𝔸^1\times 𝔾_m𝔸^2\backslash \{0\}`$. It remains to observe that the resulting sheaf on $`𝔸^2\backslash \{0\}`$ is clean for the embedding into $`𝔸^2`$ since the cone of the canonical map between the shriek and star direct images is zero – it is a $`(U,\chi )`$-equivariant sheaf supported at a point $`\{0\}`$. ∎

## 3. Proof of Theorem 1.5(3)

In this Section we will eventually need to assume that $`P`$ is a Borel subgroup. However, let us start working with arbitrary $`P`$ and make the above assumption later.

### 3.1. Horocycle transform

Let $`P`$ be a parabolic subgroup in $`G`$ and let $`Y_P`$ denote the variety of all parabolic subgroups of $`G`$ which are conjugate to $`P`$. We also denote by $`W_P`$ the variety of $`P`$-horocycles, i.e., the pairs $`(QY_P,xG/U_Q)`$ where $`U_Q`$ denotes the unipotent radical of $`Q`$ (see section Section 3.3 below for a more direct definition of $`W_P`$). We have the natural map $`p:W_PY_P`$.

We also have the natural morphisms $`\alpha :G\times Y_PG`$ and $`\beta :G\times Y_PW_P`$ where $`\alpha `$ is just the projection to the first multiple and $`\beta `$ sends $`(g,Q)`$ to $`(Q,gmodU_Q)`$. We define two functors $`_P:𝒟^b(G)𝒟^b(W_P)`$ and $`𝒮_P:𝒟^b(W_P)𝒟^b(G)`$ by setting

$$_P()=\beta _!\alpha ^{}()\left(\overline{}_l[1](\frac{1}{2})\right)^{dimU_P}$$

and

$$𝒮_P(𝒢)=\alpha _!\beta ^{}(𝒢)\left(\overline{}_l[1](\frac{1}{2})\right)^{dimU_P}.$$

The following lemma is proved in  when $`Q`$ is a Borel subgroup in $`G`$.

###### Lemma 3.2.

The identity functor is a direct summand of $`𝒮_P_P`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`𝒯_Q=\{(QY_P,uU_Q)\}`$. We have the natural map $`p_P:𝒯_QG`$ sending every $`(Q,u)`$ to $`u`$ (clearly the image of $`p_P`$ lies in the set of unipotent elements in $`G`$). Let $`\mathrm{𝐒𝐩𝐫}_P=(p_P)_!\overline{}_l[2dimY_P](dimY_P)`$. It is known (cf. ) that $`\mathrm{𝐒𝐩𝐫}_P`$ is perverse and that it contains the skyscraper sheaf $`\delta _e`$ at the unit element $`eG`$ as a direct summand. We set $`\mathrm{𝐒𝐩𝐫}_P=\delta _e\mathrm{𝐒𝐩𝐫}_P^{}`$.

On the other hand, arguing as in  we can show that for every $`𝒟^b(G)`$ we have a canonical isomorphism

$$𝒮_P_P()=\mathrm{𝐒𝐩𝐫}_P.$$
(3.1)
Hence

$$𝒮_P_P()=(\mathrm{𝐒𝐩𝐫}_P^{})$$
(3.2)
which finishes the proof. ∎

### 3.3. Another definition of $`W_P`$

One can identify $`W_P`$ with $`(G/U_P\times G/U_P)/M`$ where $`M=P/U`$ acts on $`G/U_P\times G/U_P`$ diagonally. The identification is given by the map

$$(x_1modU_P,x_2modU_P)(x_2Px_2^1,x_1x_2^1modU_P).$$

Under this identification the natural left and right $`G`$-actions on $`(G/U_P\times G/U_P)/M`$ give two actions of $`G`$ on $`W_P`$, which we still call the ”left” and ”right” action. The left action is just the natural $`G`$-action in the fibers of $`p`$. The right action is given by

$$g:(Q,x)(gQg^1,xg^1modgU_Qg^1).$$

The corresponding adjoint action is given by

$$g:(Q,x)(gQg^1,gxg^1modgU_Qg^1).$$

We now claim the following

Assume now that we could prove that for any $`𝒢𝒟^b(W_{\overline{P}})`$ which is equivariant with respect to the adjoint action and for every non-degenerate character $`\chi :U𝔾_a`$ the natural map

$$\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}𝒢\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}𝒢$$
(3.3)
is an isomorphism. Then the same would be true for any $`𝒟^b(G)`$ which is equivariant with respect to the adjoint action. the map

$$\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}$$
(3.4)
would be an isomorphism. Indeed, since by Lemma 3.2 $``$ is a direct summand of $`𝒮_{\overline{P}}_{\overline{P}}()`$ it is enough to show that (3.4) holds for the latter. It follows from the fact that $`\alpha `$ is a proper morphism that we have the natural isomorphisms of functors

$$\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}𝒮_{\overline{P}}𝒮_{\overline{P}}\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}\text{and}\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}𝒮_{\overline{P}}𝒮_{\overline{P}}\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}.$$

Hence it is enough to show that (3.4) holds for $`_{\overline{P}}()`$. However, it is clear that $`_{\overline{P}}`$ maps ad-equivariant complexes to ad-equivariant ones which finishes the proof by (3.3).

We do not know if (3.3) is indeed true for arbitrary $`P`$. However, we claim the following:

###### Theorem 3.4.

Let $`P`$ be a Borel subgroup in $`G`$ and let $`U`$ be its unipotent radical. Let $`𝒢𝒟^b(W_{\overline{P}})`$ be equivariant with respect to the adjoint action. Then for every non-degenerate character $`\chi :U𝔾_a`$ the natural map

$$\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}𝒢\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}𝒢$$

is an isomorphism (here averaging is performed with respect to the left action).

### 3.5.

The rest of this section is occupied by the proof of Theorem 3.4.

Let $`Y_{\overline{P}}^0`$ denote the open $`U`$-orbit on $`Y_{\overline{P}}`$ and let $`W_{\overline{P}}^0`$ denote its preimage in $`W_{\overline{P}}`$.

First of all we claim that both $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}𝒢`$ and $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}𝒢`$ are equal to the extension by zero of their restriction to $`W_{\overline{P}}^0`$. Indeed we must show that the $``$-restriction of either of these sheaves to the fiber of $`p:W_{\overline{P}}Y_{\overline{P}}`$ over any parabolic $`Q`$ which is not opposite to $`P`$ is equal to zero. Let us denote this restriction by $``$. This is a complex of sheaves on $`p^1(Q)=G/U_Q`$. The fact that $`𝒢`$ is equivariant with respect to the adjoint action implies that both $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}𝒢`$ and $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}𝒢`$ are equivariant with respect to the adjoint action of $`U`$. Hence $``$ is equivariant with respect to the left action of $`UU_Q`$. On the other hand, it is clear that $``$ is $`(U,\chi )`$-equivariant with respect to the left action of $`U`$. Thus our statement follows from the following result which is equivalent to Lemma 2.6: let $`Q`$ be as above (i.e. $`Q`$ is conjugate to $`\overline{P}`$ but it is not in the generic position with respect to $`P`$); then the restriction of $`\chi `$ to $`UU_Q`$ is non-trivial.

It remains to show that the map $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}𝒢\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}𝒢`$ is an isomorphism when restricted to $`W_{\overline{P}}^0`$.

The map $`uu\overline{P}u^1`$ is an isomorphism between $`U`$ and $`Y_{\overline{P}}^0`$. Let $`\kappa :W_{\overline{P}}^0U`$ be the composition of the natural projection $`W_{\overline{P}}^0Y_{\overline{P}}^0`$ with this isomorphism. Define now a new $`G`$-action on $`W_{\overline{P}}^0`$ (denoted by $`(g,w)g\times w`$) by

$$g\times w=\kappa (w)g\kappa (w)^1(w)$$

(in the right hand side we use the standard left action of $`G`$ on $`W_{\overline{P}}`$).

To finish the argument we need the following general (and basically tautological) result:

###### Lemma 3.6.

a) Let $`H`$ be an algebraic group, and $`X`$ be an algebraic variety equipped with two actions $`\varphi _1`$, $`\varphi _2`$ of $`H`$. Suppose that the two actions differ by a conjugation, i.e. there exists a morphism of algebraic varieties $`c:XH`$, such that

$$\varphi _1(g)(x)=\varphi _2(c(x)gc(x)^1)(x)$$

for all $`gH`$, $`xX`$. Then for any character $`\chi :H𝔾_a`$ we have canonical isomorphisms of the averaging functors corresponding to the two actions:

$$Av_{H,\chi ,!}^{\varphi _1}=Av_{H,\chi ,!}^{\varphi _2},$$

$$Av_{H,\chi ,}^{\varphi _1}=Av_{H,\chi ,}^{\varphi _2}.$$

b) Let $`H_1`$, $`H_2`$ be two algebraic groups, $`\varphi _i`$ be an action of $`H_i`$ on an algebraic variety $`X_i`$ (where $`i=1,2`$). Let $`f:X_1X_2`$ be a morphism, and assume that there exists a morphism $`s:H_1\times X_1H_2`$, such that

$$f(\varphi _1(h_1)(x_1))=\varphi _2(s(h_1,x_1))(f(x))$$

for $`x_1X_1`$, $`h_1H_1`$. Then for any $`H_2`$-equivariant complex of constructible sheaves on $`X_2`$ the complex $`f^{}(X)`$ is also $`H_1`$ equivariant. $`\mathrm{}`$

Part (a) of Lemma 3.6 shows that both averaging functors $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,!}`$ and $`\text{Av}_{U,\chi ,}`$ do not change when we replace the old action by the new one. Also, since our $`𝒢`$ is equivariant with respect to the adjoint action it follows that $`𝒢|_{W_{\overline{P}}^0}`$ is also equivariant with respect to the new action of $`\overline{U}`$ by part (b) of Lemma 3.6. The statement now follows from Theorem 1.5(2).

Acknowledgement. We thank Zhiwei Yun for pointing out the mistake in the published version of the paper and for helpful discussions in the course of our work on its partial correction.