Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: the acceleration and collimation of powerful bipolar outflows and jets in a variety of astronomical settings are often attributed to the action of magnetic fields ( see , e.g. , @xcite and @xcite for reviews ) . the commonly invoked scenario is that magnetic field lines threading a rotating compact object or its surrounding accretion disk can efficiently tap the rotational energy of the source and accelerate gas to supersonic speeds through centrifugal and/or magnetic pressure - gradient forces . it is argued that the hoop stresses of the twisted field lines can account for the narrowness of many jets and that , in many cases , alternative production mechanisms ( such as thermal driving ) can be excluded on observational grounds . although numerical simulations have provided useful insights into various aspects of hydromagnetic jet production , practical limitations have necessitated complementing this approach with analytic studies . owing to the complexity of the problem , the most general semianalytic solutions obtained so far have been time - independent and self - similar , patterned after the pioneering disk - outflow solutions of @xcite . the advantage of pursuing such solutions is that they are exact and self - consistent , and that they can be systematically classified ( e.g. , * ? ? ? furthermore , these solutions are evidently rich enough to capture most of the relevant physics , as corroborated by numerical calculations ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? almost all of the previous semianalytic work on jet magnetohydrodynamics ( mhd ) was done in the newtonian limit of nonrelativistic bulk and random speeds . relativistic outflows are , however , observed quite commonly in nature  with examples including active galactic nuclei ( agns ) , galactic superluminal sources ( often referred to as `` microquasars '' ) , pulsars , and gamma - ray bursts ( grbs) and in many of these cases magnetic fields are again implicated as the main driving and collimation mechanism ( e.g. , * ? ? ? this provides a motivation for generalizing the newtonian self - similar outflow solutions , although it is readily seen that this can not be done in a totally straightforward manner . for one thing , special - relativistic mhd ( unlike the nonrelativistic theory ) involves a characteristic speed ( the speed of light @xmath1 ) , which precludes the incorporation of gravity into the self - similar equations and a simple matching of the outflow solution to a particular ( e.g. , keplerian ) disk rotation law . furthermore , again in contrast with the nonrelativistic formulation , the displacement current and the charge density can not be neglected in the constitutive equations ( which now must also satisfy relativistic covariance ) .    despite the aforementioned complications , @xcite and @xcite succeeded in generalizing the `` cold , '' radially self - similar solutions of @xcite to the relativistic regime . their solutions are characterized by the thermal pressure playing a negligible role in the flow acceleration and by the flow being trans - alfvnic : the poloidal speed is less than the poloidal component of the alfvn speed at the base of the flow , and comes to exceed it further up . our aim in this paper is to further generalize these solutions to the `` hot '' relativistic case  i.e. , we allow both the bulk _ and _ the random speeds to be relativistic . this is motivated primarily by the desire to apply these solutions to grb outflows , in which thermal driving by an optically thick , hot `` fireball '' composed primarily of radiation and electron - positron pairs could play a role . in fact , most previous models of grb outflows were purely hydrodynamical and included only thermal driving ( see , e.g. , @xcite for a review ) . it has subsequently been realized that energy deposition by annihilating neutrinos , which had been one of the main proposed heating mechanisms , would typically be inefficient ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) , and it was , furthermore , argued @xcite that only a small fraction ( @xmath2 ) of the energy deposited in the source could be in thermal form to avoid generating strong photospheric emission in the outflow ( for which there has been no observational evidence ) . for these ( and other ) reasons , it is now believed that magnetic fields play the dominant role in the driving of grb jets ( e.g. , @xcite ) . nevertheless , some thermal energy injection , either by neutrinos or by magnetic energy dissipation , is likely to take place ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ) , and , as we show in  [ soln_a ] , even if it contributes only a small fraction of the initial energy flux in the flow , it can dominate the early phase of the acceleration . there are indications that thermal energy deposition at the source may also contribute to the initial acceleration of relativistic jets in agns ( e.g. , @xcite ; n. vlahakis & a. knigl , in preparation ) . it thus appears that , to fully understand the nature of such jets , it is necessary to model them in terms of a `` hot '' mhd outflow . the ability of large - scale , ordered magnetic fields to guide , collimate , and accelerate relativistic outflows has been previously discussed by various authors ( including , in the grb context , @xcite , @xcite ; @xcite , @xcite , @xcite , @xcite , and @xcite ) . these discussions , however , did not include exact solutions from which detailed quantitative estimates could be made . in a previous paper , vlahakis & knigl ( 2001 , hereafter vk01 ) presented a semianalytic self - similar solution of the `` hot '' relativistic mhd equations and applied it to the interpretation of grbs . the full formalism underlying this solution is described in the present paper , where we also analyze its dependence on the relevant physical parameters and compare it with other characteristic solutions of trans - alfvnic flows . this discussion is extended in the companion paper ( vlahakis & knigl 2003 , hereafter paper ii ) , where we focus on super - alfvnic flows . the self - similar solutions that we derive correspond to ordered magnetic field configurations in the ideal - mhd limit . although it is quite conceivable that the fields that drive the flow from a differentially rotating star or disk are at least in part small - scale and disordered , the statistical ( temporal and spatial ) averages of such fields could in principle have a similar effect to that of large - scale , ordered field configurations in providing both acceleration @xcite and collimation @xcite . the applicability of ideal mhd to the acceleration of ultrarelativistic flows has been questioned by @xcite ( @xcite ; see also @xcite ) , who proposed instead a force - free electromagnetic formulation . we note in this connection that a force - free behavior can be recovered from the relativistic mhd formulation as a limiting case of negligible particle inertia . furthermore , electromagnetic energy dissipation  perhaps the strongest argument against the ideal - mhd modeling framework  has been claimed to lead , on its own , to an efficient conversion of poynting flux into a highly relativistic bulk motion ( e.g. , * ? ? ? our ideal - mhd solutions may thus be regarded as a first step toward a more comprehensive theory in which dissipation effects will be taken into account ( and possibly further enhance the effectiveness of the magnetic acceleration process ) .    although the formulation presented in this paper is quite general , the main application that we consider is to grb sources . for definiteness , we adopt the `` internal shock '' scenario for the origin of the prompt high - energy emission in grbs ( e.g. , * ? ? ? considerations involving variability time scales ( as interpreted in the context of this picture ) as well as source energetics support the identification of an accretion disk around a newly formed black hole as the source of the grb outflow ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) ; accordingly , we concentrate on modeling jets from accretion disks . however , our solutions should be at least qualitatively applicable also to other source configurations , such as a rapidly spinning neutron star ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ) or a rotating , magnetically threaded black hole ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? since grb outflows have a limited duration ( the value of which is plausibly related to the disk accretion time ) , a naive application of a steady - state similarity solution is not warranted . in previous , purely hydrodynamical models of grb outflows , this difficulty was circumvented by applying the so - called `` frozen pulse '' approximation @xcite . in this paper we prove (  [ governing ] ) that this approximation can be generalized to the relativistic mhd regime , but we also demonstrate (  [ timerecovery ] ) how any inherent time dependence can be recovered . the plan of the paper is as follows . in  [ mhd ] we present the equations of time - dependent relativistic mhd , simplify them using the frozen - pulse approximation , and discuss what effect each of the various forces acting on the plasma has on the flow acceleration and collimation . in  [ r - ss_section ] we describe the @xmath3 self - similar model and in  [ results ] we give the results of the numerical integration of the model equations . we discuss general implications of this work to grb sources and other relativistic jet sources in  [ conclusions ] , where we also summarize our conclusions . the stress - energy tensor of relativistic mhd consists of three parts  matter ( subscript m ) , radiation ( subscript r ) and electromagnetic fields ( subscript em ) : @xmath4 ( @xmath5 ) . the matter component is given by @xmath6 , where @xmath7 is the total comoving matter energy density , @xmath8 is the particle pressure , @xmath9 is the fluid four - velocity , and @xmath10 is the metric tensor ( assuming a flat spacetime and cartesian space coordinates @xmath11 ) . here @xmath12 is the baryon rest - mass density , @xmath13 is the internal energy density , with @xmath14 denoting the polytropic index ( @xmath15 or @xmath16 in the limit of an ultrarelativistic or a nonrelativistic temperature , respectively ) , @xmath17 is the three - velocity measured in the frame of the central object , and @xmath18 is the lorentz factor . the radiation component is given by @xmath19 , where @xmath20 and @xmath21 are , respectively , the radiation energy density and pressure in the fluid rest frame . radiation forces are typically most important in regions that are sufficiently optically thick that one can take the local radiation field to be nearly isotropic and set @xmath22 . we are most interested in the ultrarelativistic case @xmath23 , in which the matter and radiation can be treated ( under optically thick conditions ) as a single fluid . thus , we henceforth write @xmath24 , @xmath25 , and @xmath26 .    introducing the specific ( per baryon mass ) relativistic enthalpy @xmath27 , where @xmath28 and including the contribution of the electric ( @xmath29 ) and magnetic ( @xmath30 ) fields ( measured in the central - object frame ) , the components of the total stress - energy tensor take the form ( @xmath31 )    @xmath32    with @xmath33 , @xmath34 , and @xmath35 representing the energy density , energy flux , and spatial stress contributions , respectively . the electromagnetic field obeys maxwell s equations @xmath36 where @xmath37 is the four - current ( with @xmath38 representing the charge density ) . under the assumption of ideal mhd , the comoving electric field is zero , which implies @xmath39    the baryon mass conservation equation is @xmath40 , or @xmath41 in the absence of a gravitational field or any other external force , the equations of motion are @xmath42 . the momentum conservation equation is given by the @xmath43 components , @xmath44 the entropy conservation equation ( the first law of thermodynamics ) is obtained by setting @xmath45 , @xmath46 which can be rewritten ( using @xmath47 $ ] ) as @xmath48    one can carry out a partial integration of equations ( [ maxwell])([energy ] ) under the assumptions of axisymmetry [ in cylindrical coordinates ( @xmath49 ) , @xmath50 and of a zero azimuthal electric field ( @xmath51 ) if the flow is time - independent ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? we now show that the equations describing a highly relativistic mhd `` pulse '' that could be identified with a grb event may , in fact , be cast in a steady - state form . we start by noting that , with the above assumptions @xmath52 , the poloidal component of faraday s law implies that the poloidal magnetic field is time independent . if the field is anchored in an accretion disk , then the poloidal field near the disk surface would remain quasi steady at least on the timescale of the local radial inflow ( @xmath53 ) . in the case of a grb outflow associated with the emptying up ( by accretion onto a black hole ) of a disk of finite size , the poloidal field may be expected to change significantly only on the timescale of the burst duration . at the end of this time interval , the information that the field has changed starts to propagate with at most the speed of light ( the actual speed of propagation is the fast magnetosonic speed , which is generally @xmath54 in a material medium ) . as we are concerned with highly relativistic outflows , it is reasonable to expect that the poloidal field associated with the outflowing fluid elements that produce the burst will exhibit negligible explicit time dependence ( @xmath55 ) over the duration of the burst . ( note , however , that the azimuthal component of the magnetic field , which is related to the poynting flux , will be time dependent . ) the solenoidal condition on the magnetic field , @xmath56 , implies that there is a poloidal magnetic flux function @xmath57 , defined by @xmath58 , which satisfies @xmath59 where the subscripts @xmath60 and @xmath61 denote the poloidal and azimuthal components , respectively . furthermore , equation ( [ ohm ] ) together with the condition @xmath62 implies @xmath63 , from which it follows that there are functions @xmath64 and @xmath65 ( whose coordinate dependence we discuss below ) such that @xmath66    denoting the arclength along a poloidal fieldline by @xmath67 , we change variables from ( @xmath68 ) to ( @xmath69 ) , with @xmath70 . for any function @xmath71 , we can define the operator @xmath72 we now rewrite the mhd equations using @xmath73    [ mhd - eqs - s ] equation ( [ solenoidal ] ) becomes @xmath74 whereas equation ( [ ohm ] ) gives @xmath75 faraday s law implies @xmath76 and the continuity equation yields @xmath77 where , using equation ( [ v - b ] ) , @xmath78 . turning now to the momentum conservation equation , we employ equation ( [ operators ] ) and the fact that @xmath79 is time independent @xmath80 to write the current density in the form @xmath81 \ .\ ] ] decomposing the vectors using the local cartesian basis @xmath82 we get @xmath83 - e \hat{n }   \\ \nonumber & = & -\left(e+ b_{\phi } \right ) \hat{n } + b_{\phi } \left(\hat{n } \cdot { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\ell \right ) \hat{b }   \,,\end{aligned}\ ] ] and hence @xmath84\ .\ ] ] the charge density , in turn , can be written as @xmath85\ .\ ] ] substituting these expressions into equation ( [ momentum ] ) , we obtain @xmath86 { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}a + \frac{\left({{\mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\times { \boldsymbol{b } } \right ) \times { \boldsymbol{b } } } { 4 \pi } \ .\end{aligned}\ ] ] finally , the entropy conservation equation transforms into @xmath87    for a highly relativistic poloidal motion , when @xmath88 , one can simplify the equations by noting the following : @xmath89 1 ) due to lorentz contraction , the observed width of the outflow is @xmath90 times smaller than its comoving width , @xmath91 . as @xmath92 and @xmath93 , one gets @xmath94 . thus , all terms in equations ( [ mhd - eqs - s ] ) containing @xmath95 are negligible . @xmath89 2 ) the term @xmath96 in equation ( [ continuity - s ] ) is of the order of @xmath97 and is thus negligible in comparison with the first term on the left - hand side of this equation . the arguments above were originally given in the context of a purely hydrodynamic ( hd ) flow by @xcite . @xmath89 3 ) using @xmath98 , @xmath99 , and equations ( [ v - b ] ) and ( [ e_a ] ) , we infer @xmath100 , which remains @xmath101 throughout the flow in view of the scaling @xmath102 ( see   [ validity ] ) . thus , all terms in equation ( [ momentum - s ] ) that contain @xmath103 ( i.e. , the first two terms on the right - hand side ) are a factor @xmath104 smaller than the last term on the right - hand side and can be neglected . the same is true in equation ( [ omega_a ] ) , which implies @xmath105 \sim \gamma \partial ( \omega / \gamma^2 ) \ll \omega$ ] . @xmath89 4 ) the pressure - gradient force in the momentum conservation equation can also be neglected . it is much smaller than the lorentz force in the transfield direction , consistent with the fact that the field is everywhere close to being force - free in that direction ( especially so in the region near the origin , where thermal effects are most important ) . along the field , there is a force that is @xmath106 times larger ( namely , the inertial force component associated with the @xmath107 term ) , as in the purely hd case examined in @xcite . in general , the pressure force is important up to the slow magnetosonic point , where , for highly relativistic temperatures , @xmath108 , and its contribution is negligible in the highly relativistic regime . one can therefore replace the term @xmath109 by @xmath110 or even completely neglect the pressure - gradient force in the momentum equation without introducing a significant error .    with the above approximations , all the @xmath111 terms in the continuity , momentum , and entropy equations can be eliminated , and the conservation equations simplify to a steady - state form . although the label @xmath112 remains attached to the @xmath113 operator , it now serves only to identify a given outflowing shell ( or pulse ) . the motion remains effectively time independent and can be described as a frozen pulse whose internal profile is specified through the variable @xmath112 . as we noted in  [ introduction ] , the frozen - pulse approximation was first applied to relativistic hd outflows in grb sources by @xcite ( @xcite ; see also @xcite ) . we have now shown that this approximation can be extended to relativistic mhd flows . in the remainder of this paper we pursue this effectively steady - state formulation , but we return in  [ timerecovery ] to consider time - dependent effects in grb outflows .    the full set of effectively steady - steady equations can be partially integrated to yield several field - line constants :    [ integrals - s ]    \a ) equations ( [ v - b ] ) and ( [ omega_a ] ) yield the field angular velocity , which equals the matter angular velocity at the footpoint of the fieldline at the midplane of the disk , @xmath114    \b ) the continuity equation ( [ continuity - s ] ) and equation ( [ v - b ] ) imply that the mass - to - magnetic flux ratio has the form @xmath115 \c ) the @xmath116 component of the momentum equation ( [ momentum - s ] ) yields the total ( kinetic + magnetic ) specific angular momentum , @xmath117    \d ) dotting @xmath118 into the momentum equation ( [ momentum - s ] ) gives the total energy - to - mass flux ratio @xmath119 , where @xmath120    \e ) the entropy equation ( [ energy - s ] ) gives the adiabat @xmath121 equation ( [ polytropic ] ) is the usual polytropic relation between density and pressure , but in the current application the polytropic index is only allowed to take the values @xmath122 ( if the temperatures are relativistic , in which case matter and radiation are treated as a single fluid ) and @xmath16 ( if the gas is `` cold , '' in which case radiation forces can be neglected ) . other than 4/3 or 5/3 would imply a nonadiabatic evolution and hence require the incorporation of heating / cooling terms into the entropy and momentum equations . ] two integrals remain to be performed , involving the bernoulli and transfield equations . there are correspondingly two unknown functions , which we choose to be the cylindrical radius of the fieldline in units of the `` light cylinder '' radius , @xmath123 and the `` alfvnic '' mach number ( see * ? ? ? * ) @xmath124    we define the alfvn lever arm by @xmath125 [ and correspondingly @xmath126 and use it to scale the cylindrical radius of the fieldline by introducing @xmath127 to obtain nondimensional variables , we adopt a reference length @xmath128 and a reference magnetic field @xmath129 and define @xmath130    the expressions for the physical quantities in terms of the defined variables and the explicit expressions for the bernoulli and transfield equations are given in appendix [ rmhdeqs ] . except for the @xmath112 label , which serves to identify a given shell ( or pulse ) , these equations are precisely those of steady - state , relativistic mhd . solving these equations requires the specification of seven constraints , of which four are associated with boundary conditions at the source and three are determined by the regularity requirement at the singular points ( the modified - slow , alfvn , and modified - fast points ; see @xcite ) . the momentum equation ( [ momentum ] ) can be written as the sum of the following force densities ( for simplicity we use hereafter the term force ) @xmath131 where    @xmath132    the `` gamma '' force @xmath133 further decomposes into two terms : @xmath134 , with @xmath135 the poloidal part of the @xmath136 force is @xmath137 where @xmath138 is the angle between the poloidal magnetic field and the disk ( @xmath139 ) , and the derivative @xmath140 \partial / \partial \theta )   $ ] is taken keeping @xmath141 ( and @xmath112 ) constant . the radius of curvature of a poloidal fieldline is @xmath142 . the projection of equation ( [ momentum - f ] ) along the poloidal flow is @xmath143 the terms on the right - hand side of equation ( [ momentum - v_p ] ) are recognized as @xmath144 , @xmath145 , @xmath146 , @xmath147 , and @xmath148 respectively , where a subscript @xmath149 denotes the component of a vector along the poloidal fieldline . the first term on the left - hand side of equation ( [ momentum - v_p ] ) is @xmath150 , whereas the second term is @xmath151 ( note that @xmath152 ) . the magnetic force component @xmath153 decomposes into the azimuthal magnetic pressure gradient @xmath154 and the magnetic tension @xmath155 . these two parts cancel each other when @xmath156 ; if @xmath157 decreases faster than @xmath158 then the gradient of the azimuthal magnetic pressure exceeds the magnetic tension , resulting in a positive @xmath153 .    in the nonrelativistic regime ( @xmath159 , @xmath160 ) , the pressure force @xmath147 dominates up to the slow magnetosonic point , but the bulk of the acceleration is either magnetocentrifugal  corresponding to the @xmath146 term , which can be interpreted in the `` bead on a wire '' picture ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) and @xmath161 ( with @xmath162 ) near the base of the flow , implying that the azimuthal field satisfies @xmath163 and hence that the @xmath153 term is negligible and that a near - corotation ( @xmath164 ) holds . the small value of @xmath165 in turn implies a large density and hence a measurable thermal pressure , resulting in a nonnegligible pressure force at the base . ]  or a consequence of the magnetic pressure - gradient force @xmath153 ( which near the surface of the disk can be interpreted in the `` uncoiling spring '' picture ; e.g. , @xcite ) . in the northern hemisphere ( and parallel to @xmath166 in the southern hemisphere ) , and a corresponding outward - directed magnetic pressure gradient @xmath167 . ]    the magnetic force generally becomes important also in flows where the centrifugal acceleration initially dominates : in this case the inertia of the centrifugally accelerated gas amplifies the @xmath168 component , and eventually ( beyond the alfvn point ) @xmath153 becomes the main driving force . this force continues to accelerate the flow beyond the classical fast - magnetosonic point ( which separates the elliptic and hyperbolic regimes of the mhd partial differential equations ) in the central object s frame can exist ( i.e. , eq . [ [ waves_fast ] ] with @xmath169 is satisfied ) . the classical fast - magnetosonic point is equivalently defined by the condition that the poloidal proper speed equals the comoving proper phase speed of a fast - magnetosonic wave whose wavevector is parallel to @xmath170 ( see eq . [ [ theorem ] ] ) . ] and all the way to the modified fast - magnetosonic singular point ( see * ? ? ? the modified ( and _ not _ the classical ) fast - magnetosonic surface has the property that it is a singular surface for the steady mhd equations when one solves simultaneously the bernoulli and transfield equations ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) . only when the magnetic field geometry is given ( and one solves only the bernoulli equation but not the transfield one ) does the singular surface correspond to the classical fast - magnetosonic point . the modified fast - magnetosonic surface coincides with the limiting characteristic , the `` event horizon '' for the propagation of fast - magnetosonic waves , since only beyond this surface all the points inside a fast mach cone have larger fast mach numbers than at the origin of the cone . at smaller distances , for a part of a given cone , the converse is true : the opening angle of the fast mach cone becomes progressively larger as one advances inside that part of the cone ; consequently , a small disturbance in the super - fast regime can affect the entire flow . the situation is similar to that of light propagating close to a kerr black hole , where the ergosphere ( which corresponds to the classical fast - magnetosonic surface ) marks the boundary between the elliptic and hyperbolic regimes , and where the singular event horizon ( which corresponds to the modified fast - magnetosonic surface ) is located within the hyperbolic regime : only for a spherically symmetric ( schwarzschild ) black hole are the ergosphere and event horizon equivalent  in direct analogy with spherically symmetric flows , in which the classical and modified fast - magnetosonic points coincide ( see * ? ? ? * ) .    in the case where the outflow attains a highly relativistic speed , the centrifugal acceleration can not play an important role . this is because the nonnegligible @xmath166 that would be required in this case would constrain the maximum value of the poloidal speed : @xmath171 . therefore , in equation ( [ momentum - v_p ] ) , @xmath172 ( and also @xmath173 ) . the @xmath147 force can be neglected since @xmath174 . the two remaining terms are @xmath145 ( a force with a relativistic origin ) and @xmath175 . the expressions for these terms in equation ( [ momentum - v_p ] ) ( or , equivalently , eq . [ [ int - mu ] ] for the total energy - to - mass flux ratio ) indicate that the bulk lorentz factor can increase in response to the decline in either the enthalpy - to - rest - mass ratio @xmath176 ( the thermal acceleration case ) or the poynting - to - mass flux ratio @xmath177 ( the magnetic acceleration case ) along the flow . when the temperature is relativistic , the initial acceleration is dominated by the temperature force , but after @xmath176 drops to @xmath178 the magnetic force takes over : this is the likely situation in grb outflows ( see vk01 and   [ soln_a ] ) .    when the outflow speed is only mildly relativistic , the magnetocentrifugal force may be important during the initial acceleration phase , especially if the temperatures are nonrelativistic ; this is the situation envisioned in the `` cold '' relativistic - mhd solutions of @xcite . it is , however , also conceivable that the magnetic pressure - gradient force dominates from the start , as might be the case if the azimuthal field component at the disk surface is large enough ; this is the picture outlined in the presentation of the relativistic solutions derived by @xcite ( @xcite ; see also paper ii ) . we can obtain an expression for @xmath179 as follows . by eliminating @xmath180 between equations ( [ int - l ] ) and ( [ int - mu ] ) , we obtain a relation between @xmath181 and @xmath182 : @xmath183 whose divergence along the flow implies @xmath184 employing the relations for @xmath153 , @xmath146 ( see eq . [ [ momentum - v_p ] ] ) , and equations ( [ a1])([rho_p ] ) , we obtain @xmath185 the first term on the right - hand side of equation ( [ f_c - f_b ] ) can give rise to either acceleration ( when @xmath166 decreases along the flowline ) or deceleration ( when @xmath166 increases , as in the corotation regime at the base of the outflow ) . this term , together with @xmath144 , can lead to a situation in which @xmath186 increases ( resp . , decreases ) and @xmath166 decreases ( resp . , increases ) while the lorentz factor remains roughly constant . the second term on the right - hand side of equation ( [ f_c - f_b ] ) , which is proportional to @xmath175 , demonstrates that the centrifugal force also has a magnetic component and accounts for the poynting - to - kinetic energy transfer that underlies the magnetocentrifugal acceleration process ( see also @xcite for a related discussion ) . the form of this term makes it clear why the centrifugal force exceeds the magnetic force during the initial stage of the acceleration , when the flow is still nonrelativistic ( @xmath187 , @xmath188 , with @xmath189 , @xmath190 ) . the conclusion from the above analysis is that , even though centrifugal and thermal effects could dominate initially , the magnetic force eventually takes over and is responsible for the bulk of the acceleration to high terminal speeds . @xcite described the efficient conversion of poynting - to - kinetic energy fluxes in relativistic mhd outflows in terms of a `` magnetic nozzle '' ( see also @xcite ) . the preceding discussion makes it clear that , in essence , this mechanism represents the ability of a collimated hydromagnetic outflow to continue to undergo magnetic acceleration all the way up to the modified fast - magnetosonic point ( which could lie well beyond the classical fast point ) . when interpreted in these terms , it is evident that this effect is not inherently relativistic  this conclusion has , in fact , been verified explicitly in the case of the nonrelativistic self - similar solutions constructed by @xcite . the projection of equation ( [ momentum - f ] ) in the direction perpendicular to the poloidal flow is given by equation ( [ forces - perp ] ) . the two largest terms are the magnetic and electric force components , which almost cancel each other . the magnetic force in the meridional plane has two parts : @xmath191 and @xmath192 . the first term ( which usually dominates ) has components in both the flow ( along @xmath193 ) and the transfield ( along @xmath194 ) directions . the @xmath195 component @xmath196 contributes to the acceleration when @xmath197 , where the subscript @xmath198 denotes the vector component along @xmath199 . ( if a thermally dominated acceleration regime exists near the base of the flow , it is in principle possible to have @xmath200 there , corresponding to an enthalpy - to - poynting energy transfer mediated by the magnetic force ; see paper ii . ) the @xmath199 component @xmath201 acts to collimate or decollimate the flow depending on whether the outflow is , respectively , in the current - carrying ( @xmath202 ) or the return - current ( @xmath203 ) regime ( see fig . [ fig1 ] ) . the second term in the decomposition of the meridional magnetic force is related to the curvature radius @xmath204 , @xmath205 , and is directed along @xmath206 for @xmath207 . the electric field always points in the @xmath199 direction , but the electric force @xmath208 could lie along either @xmath209 or @xmath210 , depending on the sign of the charge density @xmath38 . by employing the curvature radius @xmath204 , one can write @xmath211 . when @xmath212 ( a collimating flow ) , the effect of the curvature term in the expression for the electric force is to oppose collimation , but it is possible for the other term in this expression to dominate , leading to @xmath213 . for highly relativistic motion ( @xmath214 ) , @xmath215 , and the electric force has the sign of @xmath216 . in this case @xmath217 acts to decollimate the flow in the current - carrying regime and to collimate it in the return - current regime ( see fig . [ fig1 ] ) . for comparison , note that , when the motion is nonrelativistic ( @xmath187 ) , @xmath217 is negligible relative to @xmath218 . in this case , a flow in the current - carrying regime is easily collimated ( with @xmath219 balancing the inertial force @xmath220 , resulting in a nonnegligible value of @xmath204 ) . in the return - current regime , collimation ( resp . , decollimation ) is produced if @xmath221 ( resp . , @xmath222 ) ; see @xcite . to obtain semianalytic solutions of the highly nonlinear system of equations ( [ bernoulli ] ) and ( [ transfield ] ) , it is necessary to make additional assumptions : in particular , we look for a way to effect a separation of variables . the most complicated expression is the one for @xmath223 ( eq . [ [ a1 ] ] ) . in view of the importance of the azimuthal field component , which plays a crucial and varied role as part of the magnetic pressure - gradient , magnetic tension , and centrifugal acceleration terms in the momentum equation , the only realistic possibility of deriving exact analytic solutions is to assume that the @xmath224 , @xmath225 , and @xmath226 surfaces coincide , i.e. , that @xmath227 @xcite . we aim to find appropriate forms for the functions of @xmath141 such that the expressions ( [ bernoulli ] ) and ( [ transfield ] ) become ordinary differential equations ( odes ) . from an inspection of the bernoulli equation ( [ bernoulli ] ) we conclude that , in order to separate the variables @xmath228 and @xmath141 and get a _ single _ equation that only has a @xmath228 dependence , it is necessary to assume that the @xmath229 term is a product of a function of @xmath141 times a function of @xmath228 . as @xmath141 is a function of @xmath230 ( see eq . [ [ g ] ] ) , there must exist functions @xmath231 such that @xmath232 ^ 2 = { \cal h}_1 \left(\frac{\varpi } { g}\right ) \ { \cal h}_2 ( g)\,.\ ] ] there always exist the trivial possibilities @xmath233 in spherical coordinates @xmath234 [ @xmath235 when the field is radial ] , and @xmath236 ( @xmath237 for a cylindrical field ) , which are not of interest here . after some algebra one can prove that the only nontrivial case is to have @xmath238 , i.e. , @xmath239 . it thus appears that , to obtain an analytic adiabatic solution , it is necessary to assume @xmath3 self - similarity . the remaining assumptions for constructing an @xmath3 self - similar solution are that the cylindrical distance ( in units of the alfvnic lever arm ) , the poloidal alfvnic mach number , and the relativistic specific enthalpy are also functions of @xmath240 only : @xmath241 , @xmath242 , @xmath243 ( with the result for @xmath176 following from the nonlinearity of the expression for @xmath165 ; see eq . [ [ x - m ] ] ) .    following the algorithm described in @xcite , we change variables from ( @xmath244 ) to ( @xmath245 ) ( see eq . [ [ alpha ] ] ) and obtain the forms of the integrals under the assumption of separability in @xmath246 and @xmath240 . the results are given in equation ( [ integrals ] ) . , and ignoring gravity , so it is possible to assume a polytropic equation of state ) . ] among the five unknown functions of @xmath240 [ @xmath247 , @xmath248 , @xmath249 , @xmath250 , and @xmath251 dependence ; see   [ timerecovery ] . ] there are three algebraic equations ( eqs . [ [ x - rss ] ] , [ [ m - rss ] ] , and [ [ bernoulli - rss ] ] ) and two first - order odes ( eqs . [ [ g - rss ] ] and [ [ transfield - rss ] ] ) . after solving for these functions , the physical quantities can be recovered using    [ quantities - rss ] @xmath252 @xmath253 @xmath254 @xmath255 @xmath256    where @xmath257 is the unit vector along the poloidal fieldline , @xmath258 ( already defined in  [ governing ] ) is the unit vector in the transfield direction in the meridional plane ( toward the axis of rotation ) , and @xmath259 is the opening half - angle of the outflow ( the angle between the poloidal fieldline and the axis of rotation ) .    the @xmath3 dependence of all the physical quantities can be inferred from the expressions ( [ quantities - rss ] ) on the basis of the known @xmath3 dependence of @xmath246 ( @xmath260 ; see eq . [ [ alpha ] ] ) . this is a general characteristic of @xmath3 self - similar models . the parameters of the model are @xmath261 and @xmath14 ( @xmath15 in this study ) , whereas the `` constants '' @xmath262 , @xmath263 , @xmath264 , @xmath265 , and @xmath266 together with two `` initial '' conditions ( corresponding to the two first - order odes ) are related to seven boundary conditions , as we prove in appendix [ appendixrss ] . the @xmath3 self - similar character of the poloidal field - line shape is shown in figure [ fig2 ] . the model described above is the generalization to a `` hot '' ( @xmath267 ) gas of the only known exact semianalytic solution of the relativistic mhd equations , the `` cold '' @xmath3 self - similar wind solution found independently by @xcite and @xcite . ( the force - free model of @xcite can be regarded as a special case of the latter solutions , corresponding to @xmath268 and @xmath269 . ) self - similarity was first employed by @xcite , who examined purely hd flows , but it has become well - known only after @xcite used it to construct a nonrelativistic mhd disk - wind model . the latter work has subsequently been generalized by many authors ( see @xcite and references therein ) . ] it is obvious from equations ( [ quantities - rss ] ) that the alfvn point , where @xmath270 , is singular . at this point @xmath271 in fact , as @xmath63 , this relation holds not only for the @xmath240-components of ( @xmath272 ) , but for components in any direction in the meridional plane . thus , on the alfvn surface , static alfvn waves with wavevector in any direction in the meridional plane ( in the central object s frame ) can exist ( i.e. , eq . [ [ waves_alfven ] ] with @xmath273 and @xmath274 is satisfied ) . ] ) . ]    in order for the solution to pass through the alfvn singular point , the alfvn regularity condition ( [ alfv2 ] ) must be satisfied . the latter determines the slope of the `` alfvnic '' mach number at the alfvn point , @xmath275 , which is related to the alfvnic value of the magnetization function @xmath276 ( see appendix [ appendixrss ] ) . it is seen from equation ( [ alfven - dispersion ] ) that the alfvn point is always located inside the light surface @xmath277 . note , however , that if @xmath278 ( corresponding to the force - free limit , @xmath279 ) , the alfvn and light surfaces almost coincide . it is straightforward to obtain an expression for @xmath280 as a function of @xmath281 using the derivative of the bernoulli equation ( [ bernoulli - rss ] ) . after substituting in the transfield equation ( [ transfield - rss ] ) , the latter takes the form @xmath282 , where the denominator can be written as @xmath283 with @xmath284 being the magnetic field amplitude and with the square of the proper sound speed given by @xmath285 singular points appear wherever @xmath286 ; these are the modified slow and fast - magnetosonic singular points . they correspond to points where static slow / fast - magnetosonic waves with wavevectors along @xmath287 in the central object s frame can exist ( i.e. , eq . [ [ waves_fast ] ] with @xmath288 is satisfied ) . is equal to the comoving proper phase speed of a slow / fast - magnetosonic wave propagating along @xmath287 ( see eq . [ [ theorem ] ] ) . ] the modified singular surfaces , which correspond to the `` limiting characteristics '' of the self - similar flow , have previously been considered in connection with the nonrelativistic solutions ( e.g. , @xcite ) . in order for the solution to pass through a singular point where @xmath286 , @xmath289 must simultaneously hold ( yielding the respective regularity condition ) . when solving the steady , axisymmetric , ideal mhd equations under the assumption that the azimuthal electric field ( as measured in the central object s frame ) vanishes ( @xmath51 ) , seven integrations are required , corresponding to seven unknowns : the gas density and pressure , the three components of the velocity , and two functions related to the magnetic field ( e.g. , @xmath141 and @xmath223 ) . correspondingly , seven boundary conditions determine a unique solution . five of them are the integrals @xmath64 , @xmath65 , @xmath290 , @xmath291 , and @xmath292 , which , as discussed in  [ governing ] , are conserved quantities along the meridional fieldlines . the other two correspond to `` initial conditions '' on the functions @xmath293 and @xmath165 , which are obtained by integrating equations ( [ bernoulli ] ) and ( [ transfield ] ) .    in a physically viable solution , the flow starts with a sub  slow - magnetosonic velocity and must satisfy the causality principle : any disturbance in the asymptotic regime can not influence the solution near the origin through magnetosonic or alfvn waves . since the flow starts with a small velocity , it must cross three singular surfaces : the modified slow - magnetosonic , the alfvn , and the modified fast - magnetosonic . , the latter surface represents the `` event horizon '' for the propagation of the fastest waves . the alfvn surface plays a similar role for the alfvn waves , but the slow - magnetosonic singular surface is not the `` event horizon '' for the propagation of slow - magnetosonic waves ; it is just the limiting characteristic in the sub - slow hyperbolic regime ( see @xcite ) . ] the related three regularity conditions are effectively three boundary conditions that must be satisfied in order for the solution to pass smoothly through the singular points . implementing this procedure is a highly nonlinear task , since the positions of the singular points are not known a priori and must be obtained simultaneously with the solution . all in all , only four boundary conditions remain free and can be specified ( e.g. , on a surface near the origin of the flow ) .    in the @xmath3 self - similar model that we examine , in which we end up integrating odes in the variable @xmath240 , it is convenient to choose as the initial surface a cone @xmath294 ( where here and in what follows , a subscript @xmath295 denotes an initial value ) . one can start the integration by specifying seven initial conditions ( i.e. , seven functions of @xmath3 ) on this cone ( where @xmath3 is the arclength along the conical surface ; it should not to be confused with the distance from the central object , which is given by @xmath296^{1/2}$ ]  see fig . [ fig2 ] ) . for example , one can specify @xmath297 and @xmath298 such that @xmath299 , @xmath300 , @xmath301 , @xmath302 , @xmath303 , @xmath304 , and @xmath305 ( with the @xmath306 being in general functions of @xmath112 ) . note that , in the framework of this self - similar model , the specified functions of @xmath3 must be consistent with equations ( [ quantities - rss ] ) ; if they are not , the given scalings will not be reproduced on subsequent ( @xmath307 ) cones . by inverting the system of equations ( [ quantities - rss ] ) , one can obtain @xmath308 , @xmath309 , @xmath310 , @xmath311 , @xmath312 , @xmath313 , and @xmath314 ( see eqs . [ [ invert ] ] ) . from eq . [ [ bernoulli - rss ] ] and use it in place of @xmath313 as a fieldline constant . ] three of these parameters are adjusted to satisfy the regularity conditions at the three singular points . we recall in this connection that @xmath14 and @xmath261 are regarded in our formulation as model parameters ( see  [ construction ] ) , and we note that @xmath313 , @xmath308 , @xmath309 , and @xmath310 correspond to the fieldline constants @xmath291 , @xmath308 , @xmath64 , and @xmath292 , respectively . next we describe our numerical approach . we have found it most convenient to start the integration from the alfvn point , since this makes it easier to satisfy the alfvn regularity condition . we choose a small angular interval @xmath315 and specify the model parameters @xmath297 together with the following six parameters : @xmath316 , @xmath317 , @xmath308 , @xmath309 , @xmath310 and @xmath314 . ( the latter parameter does not appear in the system of equations [ [ theta - eqs ] ] , but it affects the magnitudes of the electromagnetic field , density , and pressure through eqs . [ [ quantities - rss ] ] . ) the seventh parameter is @xmath318 , which is given from the alfvn regularity condition ( see appendix [ appendixrss ] ) . we start the integration from @xmath319 , setting @xmath320 , @xmath321 , and @xmath322 . using the upper ( lower ) signs , we integrate upstream ( downstream ) from the alfvn point . before the first step , we evaluate the parameter @xmath291 ( which is used along the integration path to yield @xmath138 ) from equation ( [ bernoulli - rss ] ) . whenever the solution hits a singular point , we adjust one of the above six parameters until a smooth crossing is achieved . in our model we have ignored gravity , and consequently we expect the flow to be nonsteady in the sub  slow - magnetosonic regime . we therefore do not attempt to obtain steady trans  slow - magnetosonic solutions , and thus we do not continue the integration upstream of the slow - magnetosonic point . this does not , however , affect our ability to study magnetic effects , as these only become important downstream of this singular point . the polytropic index @xmath14 controls the thermodynamics of the flow . for adiabatic flow problems such as the one considered in this paper , @xmath23 or @xmath16 depending on whether the temperature is relativistic or not .    the exponent @xmath261 controls the current distribution . the poloidal current lines are @xmath324 , where , by equation ( [ b - rss ] ) , @xmath325 thus , for @xmath326 , the current @xmath327 is an increasing function of @xmath246 near the base of a trans - alfvnic flow ( where @xmath328 ) , corresponding to the current - carrying regime ( see the left fieldline in fig . [ fig1 ] ) . the larger the value of @xmath329 , the stronger the magnetic pinching force that collimates the flow , and hence the faster the collimation . the case @xmath330 corresponds to the return - current regime ( represented by the right fieldline in fig . [ fig1 ] ) , whereas @xmath331 corresponds to radial meridional current lines .    in this paper ( as well as in paper ii ) we concentrate on the case @xmath326 , which should provide a good representation of the conditions near the axis of highly collimated flows such as grb jets . however , in view of the inherent simplifications of the self - similar formulation , this choice is not unique . for comparison , we present an @xmath330 solution in  [ soln_d ] , and we also employ a solution of this type in a forthcoming publication ( n. vlahakis & a. knigl , in preparation ) in which we model relativistic agn outflows . a realistic global solution would encompass both the current - carrying and return - current regimes , as sketched in figure [ fig1 ] . this situation might be mimicked with the help of two , properly joined , self - similar models : one ( with @xmath326 ) that applies near the axis , and the other ( with @xmath330 ) that applies further out ( at larger cylindrical distances ) . the parameter @xmath323 ( the @xmath332 coordinate of the disk in the given system of coordinates ; see fig . 2 ) affects only the boundary conditions on the disk . for example , @xmath323 can be used to mimic a keplerian rotation law . ( recall from  [ introduction ] that , in the relativistic case considered here , one can not naturally incorporate a keplerian rotation law as in the nonrelativistic @xmath3 self - similar solutions . ) in our model , @xmath333 ; thus , for @xmath334 , @xmath335 along the conical surface of the disk . however , for @xmath336 , points on the surface of the disk at different cylindrical distances @xmath337 correspond to different values of @xmath338 ( see fig . [ fig2 ] ) , and @xmath65 decreases faster than @xmath339 ( with the rate depending on how fast the function @xmath340 decreases along the surface of the disk ) . the solutions we present in this section are motivated by the grb outflow scenario outlined in  [ introduction ] . we approximate the outflow from a disk around a stellar - mass black hole as a pair of `` pancakes '' ( see , e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) that move in opposite directions away from the disk surfaces . the flow originates from the inner part of the disk , which extends from the last stable orbit around the black hole at @xmath341 to an outer radius @xmath342 , which for definiteness we choose to be @xmath343 . for simplicity we set @xmath334 , so ( see eq . [ [ alpha ] ] ) @xmath344 . we take into account the baryonic matter , the electron - positron / photon fluid , and the large - scale electromagnetic field .    as noted in  [ roles ] , we focus on solutions in the current - carrying regime ( @xmath326 ) . for this choice of @xmath261 , equation ( [ current ] ) implies that the current vanishes smoothly as the axis ( @xmath345 ) is approached . a general property of our solutions is that the flow reaches an asymptotic cylindrical region where the acceleration terminates ( see   [ soln_a ] ) . since we seek to maximize the acceleration efficiency , we consider flows that do not collimate too fast ( see   [ sectioncollimation ] ) , and hence we focus on the smallest possible values of @xmath261 . we therefore choose @xmath346 .    near the origin , the thermal energy associated with the radiation and @xmath347 pairs is nonnegligible ; the optical depth is then large enough to ensure local thermodynamic equilibrium . we therefore assume that the gas ( consisting of baryons with their neutralizing electrons as well as photons and pairs ) evolves adiabatically . the polytropic index is fixed at @xmath23 , corresponding to relativistic temperatures for the matter and to a blackbody distribution for the radiation . using the stephan - boltzmann constant @xmath348 ( where @xmath349 is the temperature ) and equations ( [ p - rss ] ) and ( [ m - rss ] ) , the temperature in units of the electron rest energy is @xmath350 or , equivalently , @xmath351 the matter - to - radiation pressure ratio @xmath352 is constant in the large - temperature limit @xmath353 , where , given that the pair number density greatly exceeds the baryon number density , the pair distribution may be approximated by a maxwellian with zero chemical potential . in this case @xmath354 ( a value very close to the more accurate @xmath355 that characterizes a fermi distribution ) . in the large - temperature limit the pair number density has the @xmath23 polytropic scaling ( @xmath356 ) , but at @xmath357 it decreases exponentially , resulting in @xmath358 . our polytropic model captures both limits but not the intermediate temperatures . which of the two approximations ( @xmath359 or @xmath360 ) is more accurate depends on the initial temperature @xmath361 . for @xmath362 we choose @xmath359 , which yields the correct pressure  temperature relation during the initial stage of the flow , when thermal effects are important . this choice introduces an error ( leading to an underestimate of the lorenz factor ) in regions where @xmath363 but the radiation energy is nonnegligible in comparison with the baryon rest energy . however , because of the weak ( a power of 1/4 ) dependence of @xmath364 on @xmath365 in equation ( [ theta ] ) , this error remains small . we note in this connection that we also neglect the pair rest - energy density , since it is much smaller than the matter pressure in the @xmath366 regime where the pair contribution is maximized . the mass - loss rate in the outflow is @xmath367 , or , @xmath368 if @xmath369 is the burst duration , then @xmath370 is the total baryon mass ejected . the total energy is @xmath371 , and initially it resides predominantly in the electromagnetic field ; the initial thermal energy is approximately @xmath372 . , @xmath373 , and ( for the initial enthalpy - to - kinetic - energy ratio ) @xmath374 . ]    in vk01 we considered two lower limits on the baryon loading , corresponding , respectively , to the requirements ( 1 ) that the flow be optically thick in the region where the pair number density drops below that of the baryons and ( 2 ) that the flow be matter - dominated when it becomes optically thin . we also obtained an upper limit on @xmath12 from the requirement that the flow be optically thin in the internal grb - shock regime . in the solutions presented in this paper we evaluate the optical depths more accurately . specifically , consider two neighboring fieldlines labeled by @xmath141 and @xmath375 . along a direction @xmath376 that makes an angle @xmath377 to the flow velocity , the optical depth is @xcite @xmath378 where @xmath379 is the electron / positron number density , @xmath380 is the thomson cross section , and @xmath381 is the distance between the fieldlines . the optical depth is minimized when @xmath382 , for which @xmath383 ( corresponding to photons moving perpendicular to the flow direction in the comoving frame ) . starting from a point on the inner fieldline , we chart the photon trajectory by using @xmath382 and @xmath383 until the outer fieldline is reached , and use this information to evaluate the optical depth . we now present the results of the numerical integration for four representative solutions ( labeled @xmath384 , @xmath385 , @xmath1 , and @xmath386 ) , for which the parameters are given in table [ table1 ] . the most important physical quantities are plotted in figure [ fig3 ] , in which each column corresponds to a given solution . the properties of these solutions are described in detail in the following subsections . lccccccccccc solution & @xmath261 & @xmath387 & @xmath309 & @xmath310 & @xmath291 & @xmath314(cgs ) & @xmath388 & @xmath389 & @xmath318 & @xmath276 & @xmath128(@xmath390 cm ) + @xmath391 & @xmath392 & @xmath393 & @xmath394 & @xmath395 & @xmath396 & @xmath397 & @xmath398 & @xmath399 & @xmath400 & @xmath401 & @xmath402 + @xmath385 & @xmath392 & @xmath403 & @xmath394 & @xmath360 & @xmath404 & @xmath405 & @xmath398 & @xmath399 & @xmath406 & @xmath407 & @xmath402 + @xmath1 & @xmath392 & @xmath408 & @xmath409 & @xmath410 & @xmath411 & @xmath412 & @xmath398 & @xmath413 & @xmath414 & @xmath415 & @xmath416 + @xmath386 & @xmath417 & @xmath418 & @xmath419 & @xmath420 & @xmath421 & @xmath422 & @xmath423 & @xmath424 & @xmath425 & @xmath426 & @xmath402 +   +   +      this solution represents our fiducial model of a trans - alfvnic grb outflow in which the poynting flux exceeds the enthalpy flux at the origin ( @xmath427 ) . the flow starts from the disk with a nonrelativistic velocity and in a short distance crosses the slow magnetosonic point ( where @xmath428 ) . the acceleration in this regime is due to the pressure gradient force ( the centrifugal acceleration is negligible for @xmath429 ) . the slow magnetosonic point arises from the interplay between the vertical gravitational and pressure - gradient forces . as we neglect gravity , we start the integration slightly above that slow point ( @xmath430 , see fig . [ fig3]a2 ) .    in this initial sub - alfvnic regime , @xmath431 . equation ( [ a2 ] ) for the lorentz factor gives @xmath432 thus , a poynting - dominated flow ( @xmath427 ) is always close to being force - free ( @xmath433 ) , and the initial enthalpy - to - poynting flux ratio satisfies @xmath434 ( @xmath435 in the displayed solution ) . as the flow moves downstream it crosses the alfvn singular point . we solve numerically for the slope @xmath318 of the alfvnic mach number that satisfies the alfvn regularity condition ( see  [ alfven - section ] ) . in the super - alfvnic regime there are three possible cases : + 1 . the flow recollimates ( @xmath436 ) and there is a termination point where the entire energy is suddenly transformed into kinetic motion ( corresponding to the solution hitting the modified fast singular surface but not being able to cross it ) ; + 2 . the flow starts to decelerate at some heigh above the disk ; + 3 . the flow becomes asymptotically cylindrical . the last case is the only physically acceptable one and corresponds to a specific value of one of the model parameters . ( for example , for the chosen parameter set @xmath261 , @xmath316 , @xmath318 , @xmath308 , @xmath309 , and @xmath310 , there is a unique value of @xmath291 that corresponds to the cylindrical solution ) . this is the `` magnetic nozzle '' mechanism first described by @xcite and discussed in  [ pol_accel ] . when the flow has cylindrical asymptotics , the asymptotic regime @xmath437 is the only possible solution of @xmath438 ( where @xmath439 is given by eq . [ [ d ] ] ) . in this case , the modified fast - magnetosonic singular surface ( the `` event horizon '' for the propagation of fast waves ) corresponds to the asymptotic cylindrical regime ( where all the fast mach cones along each fieldline have the same opening angle ) . as in the `` cold '' solutions derived by @xcite , the critical value of @xmath291 is always close to @xmath440 . figure [ fig3]a1 shows the meridional projections of the innermost and outermost fieldlines on a logarithmic scale . our chosen initial cylindrical distances are @xmath441 cm for the innermost fieldline and @xmath442 cm for the outermost one ; these distances are only slightly larger than those of the footpoints of these fieldlines in the disk . figure [ fig3]a1 also depicts the optical paths of photons that originate at three points on the innermost fieldline ; these were calculated according to the procedure described at the beginning of this section and are plotted as dashed lines labeled 1 , 2 , and 3 . figure [ fig3]a7 shows the corresponding optical depths @xmath443 , @xmath444 , and @xmath445 along these paths as a function of @xmath446 . it is seen that , as one moves downstream ( with the initial point on the innermost fieldline shifting to a larger height @xmath332 above the disk ) , the optical depth gets smaller , and the flow eventually becomes optically thin ( @xmath447 for @xmath448 ) . figure [ fig3]a7 also shows the radial profile of the mass - loss rate . for @xmath448 , @xmath449 , corresponding to a total ejected baryonic mass of @xmath450 for a typical burst duration @xmath451 . the total energy flux along the poloidal flow is @xmath452 ( where @xmath453 is the mass flux ) . the main part of the total energy flux ( at least in the initial phase of the flow ) is the poynting flux ( see eq . [ [ tensor_flux ] ] ) , @xmath454 ( note that this term is positive since @xmath455 . ) the remaining part @xmath456 ( see the energy conservation relation , eq . [ [ int - mu ] ] ) includes the kinetic energy flux ( @xmath457 ) and the enthalpy flux . the total energy loss rate is @xmath458 , and for @xmath459s the total energy injected into the two oppositely directed jets is @xmath460 . figure [ fig3]a2 shows the various energy fluxes in units of @xmath461 ( the mass flux @xmath462 ) as well as the lorentz factor @xmath90 as functions of @xmath337 , the distance from the axis of rotation along the innermost fieldline . we distinguish three different regimes :    \1 . + from the initial point ( slightly above the slow point ) up to @xmath463 cm , @xmath464 ( the exact initial values for solution @xmath384 are @xmath465 and @xmath466 . ) the acceleration is primarily thermal : enthalpy is transformed into kinetic energy . in figure [ fig4]a we see that the force @xmath467 ( which measures the increase in @xmath90 ) is equal to the temperature force @xmath145 ( which describes the decrease of @xmath176 ) . the poynting - to - mass flux ratio ( @xmath468 ) is essentially constant , which means that the field is force - free ; it only guides the flow . to a good approximation , @xmath469 and @xmath470 . so long as @xmath471 , equation ( [ theta ] ) gives @xmath472 ; thus , @xmath473 . this is verified in figure [ fig3]a3 , which shows the poloidal magnetic field ( in units of @xmath474 g ) and the baryon rest - mass density ( in units of @xmath475 g @xmath476 ) . it is seen that @xmath477 ( as expected from the polytropic relation @xmath478 ) and @xmath479 ( as expected from the constancy of the mass - to - magnetic flux ratio @xmath480 ) . as the azimuthal velocity is negligible ( for a highly relativistic poloidal motion ) , equation ( [ int - omega ] ) implies @xmath481 , as expected in the force - free regime . in general , @xmath482 , so @xmath483 , consistent with @xmath479 and @xmath484 . + figure [ fig3]a4 shows the angle between the total magnetic field and its azimuthal component ( which , given that @xmath479 and @xmath485 , decreases as @xmath486 ) , the `` causal connection '' opening angle @xmath487 , and the opening half - angle of the outflow @xmath488 ( its initial value is @xmath489 ) . + figure [ fig3]a5 shows the pressures associated with the poloidal , azimuthal , and comoving magnetic field components , as well as the total thermal ( lepton + radiation ) pressure contribution ( @xmath490  dashed lines ; @xmath491  solid lines , respectively ) . in general , @xmath492 . as @xmath340 and @xmath90 are both proportional to @xmath337 , their ratio is a constant , @xmath493 . thus , @xmath494 , as verified by the figure . + figure [ fig3]a6 shows @xmath495 and @xmath496 ( the squares of the `` light cylinder '' radius and the alfvnic mach number , respectively ) as well as the square of the `` classical fast - magnetosonic proper mach number '' @xmath497 , where @xmath498 is the larger solution of the quadratic @xmath499 the point where @xmath277 corresponds to the light surface , which is close to the alfvn surface @xmath500 ( more accurately , the alfvn surface is where @xmath501 ) . + the point @xmath502 is the classical fast - magnetosonic point . it is seen that , up to that point , @xmath503 . this can be understood by noting that , since @xmath504 , the solution of equation ( [ cl_fast ] ) yields @xmath505 . it follows that , so long as @xmath506 ( using @xmath507 ) , @xmath508 . + at the classical fast point ( subscript @xmath509 ) @xmath510 , so equation ( [ a2 ] ) for the lorentz factor gives @xmath511 . if this point is located inside the thermally dominated region ( @xmath512 , as in the depicted solution ) , then , using @xmath513 , one infers @xmath514 . as @xmath515 , it follows that @xmath516 . + from the end of the thermal acceleration zone , where @xmath517 , up to @xmath518 cm , it is seen from figure [ fig3]a2 that the lorentz factor continues to increase as @xmath519 , with @xmath520 a constant @xmath521 . this exponent is in general different for different solutions . we find that for solutions with a given @xmath291 but different @xmath522 , @xmath523 is always less than 1 and decreases with increasing @xmath522 . for larger @xmath522 the magnetic effects are less important , resulting in a weaker collimation of the flow and hence in a larger asymptotic width @xmath524 . since the final lorentz factor is @xmath525 , the exponent @xmath526 should be smaller . centrifugal acceleration can also influence the magnitude of this exponent : for mildly relativistic flows we expect this acceleration to increase the lever arm of the flow , resulting in a lower value of @xmath523 . + the acceleration in this region is due to magnetic effects : poynting energy is transformed into kinetic energy . figure [ fig4]a shows that the force @xmath467 ( which describes the increase in @xmath90 ) is equal to the lorentz force @xmath153 ( which derives from the decrease of @xmath527 ) . the poynting - to - mass flux ratio declines from its initial value @xmath528 as @xmath529 , with @xmath530 , a result verified by figure [ fig3]a2 . however , the deviation from the initial value of @xmath119 is not too strong , so the scalings @xmath479 , @xmath477 , and @xmath531 remain approximately the same as at smaller radii ( see figs . [ fig3]a3 , [ fig3]a4 , and [ fig3]a5 ) . + figure [ fig3]a6 shows that @xmath532 but that @xmath165 increases faster than @xmath340 . as the poynting - to - matter energy flux ratio is @xmath533 / \left[\xi \gamma^2 \rho_0 c^2 v_p\right]= ( \mu - \xi \gamma ) / \xi \gamma   = ( x^2 - x_a^2 ) / ( m^2 + 1 - x_a^2 ) \approx x^2 / m^2   $ ] , this is another manifestation of the poynting - to - kinetic flux conversion . + the bernoulli equation simplifies in this region to @xmath534 , which can be used , along with @xmath535 and equation ( [ v - rss ] ) , to obtain the fieldline slope , @xmath536 ( the same result can be found using eq . [ [ bernoulli - rss ] ] . ) so long as @xmath532 , the slope is @xmath537 ( as the critical value for @xmath291 is close to @xmath538 , and @xmath539 ) . thus , the shape of the fieldlines is parabolic , @xmath540 , as figure [ fig3]a1 verifies ( cf . + at the end of the magnetic acceleration region the flow becomes cylindrical : figure [ fig3]a1 shows that the fieldlines tend to a constant @xmath337 , whereas figure [ fig3]a4 indicates that the opening half - angle @xmath541 tends to zero . + figure [ fig4]b shows that , although the electric force almost cancels the magnetic force ( @xmath542 ) , their sum @xmath543 . on the other hand , @xmath544 , or ( using eqs . [ [ fcbot ] ] and [ [ fibot ] ] ) , @xmath545 , which means that the poloidal curvature radius vanishes ( i.e. , the poloidal fieldlines become straight )  a characteristic of cylindrical collimation . ( in the initial acceleration region near the disk it is seen from fig . [ fig4]b that @xmath546 , which implies that the fieldlines curve toward the axis . ) self - similarity does not allow such a transition , other types of self - similar solutions can be constructed in which such a transition takes place and the flow continues to accelerate ( see * ? ? ? * ) . ] + in the cylindrical region , the transfield force - balance equation becomes @xmath547 or , using @xmath548 and equations ( [ quantities - rss ] ) , @xmath549 as the left - hand side of equation ( [ transf_cyl ] ) is small but positive , @xmath550 . using @xmath551 and @xmath552 , we conclude that @xmath553 is invariably @xmath554 ; hence , only a current - carrying jet ( @xmath326 ) can have cylindrical asymptotics . + equation ( [ bernoulli_asympt ] ) with @xmath555 gives the final kinetic - to - poynting flux ratio , @xmath556 , corresponding to @xmath557 . the value of @xmath558 becomes as large as that of @xmath559 ( see fig . [ fig3]a6 ) , so a rough equipartition holds between the kinetic and poynting fluxes : @xmath560 ( see fig . [ fig3]a2 ) . + the implied conversion efficiency of @xmath561 between the total energy ( injected largely in the form of a poynting flux ) and the final kinetic energy of the flow is consistent with the internal shock scenario for grbs . specifically , the asymptotic kinetic energy in each jet is @xmath562 for our fiducial parameters . with a radiative efficiency of @xmath563 ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ) , this implies a radiated @xmath90-ray energy of a few times @xmath564 ergs , as inferred observationally @xcite . + figure [ fig3]a1 shows that , as the cylindrical region is approached , the lorentz factor increases more slowly than @xmath565 , resulting in a nonnegligible value of @xmath566 . since @xmath567 , this explains the divergence of the @xmath568 and @xmath569 curves in fig . [ fig3]a5 near the cylindrical region . [ [ transf_cyl ] ] can be written as @xmath570 , which shows that @xmath571 in the cylindrical regime . ) + the condition that the grb emission region be optically thin to the prompt @xmath90-ray photons typically implies a lower limit @xmath572 on the lorentz factor of the outflow ( e.g. , @xcite ) . the asymptotic lorentz factor attained in our fiducial solution ( and , in fact , in the other three solutions presented in this section ) readily satisfies this requirement .      as noted at the beginning of  [ results ] , we approximate the outflow as a pair of pancakes that move in opposite directions away from the disk . in the context of the internal - shock scenario , each pancake consists of a number @xmath573 of shells . the width of each shell is @xmath574 cm , where the total duration of the burst is @xmath575 s.    if the ejection of the shells from the disk surface ( @xmath576 ) starts at time @xmath577 and ends at time @xmath369 , then each shell can be labeled by its ejection time @xmath578 , with @xmath579 . the shell `` @xmath112 '' moves along the poloidal fieldline and at time @xmath580 its position is @xmath581 . the distance between two neighboring shells @xmath112 , @xmath582 is ( using @xmath583 ) @xmath584 at early times the second term on the right - hand side of equation ( [ distance_of_shells ] ) is negligible and the frozen - pulse approximation holds ( the distance between the two shells is constant , @xmath585 ) . however , even if the integrand in the second term is tiny , there will eventually come a time ( call it @xmath586 ) when the integral will cancel the @xmath587 term ( for @xmath588 , corresponding to the trailing shell moving faster than the leading one ) . one can integrate the equation of motion for each shell , @xmath589 , with @xmath590 , to show that two neighboring shells with @xmath591 will not collide for as long as they move in the flow acceleration zone . this is a reflection of the fact that the difference in the initial lorentz factors of the two shells is not large enough to compensate for the longer acceleration time of the leading shell as it crosses this region , which also implies that the frozen - pulse assumption continues to hold throughout the acceleration zone . only after the shells reach the constant - velocity , cylindrical - flow region , will the two shells collide ( @xmath592 ) . using equation ( [ distance_of_shells ] ) , this will happen at a distance @xmath593 beyond the end of the acceleration zone . so long as the frozen - pulse approximation is valid , @xmath594 . as we proved in  [ governing ] , it is possible to examine the motion of each shell in this regime using the @xmath3 self - similar model . if we focus on the shell @xmath595 , then the parameter @xmath261 and boundary conditions @xmath596 that we used to specify the solution refer to this particular @xmath595 , and the corresponding solution @xmath597 is valid only for this shell .    in general , we may choose a different set @xmath598 for a different shell @xmath112 , but we have to be careful to also satisfy the assumption of a quasi - steady poloidal field , which requires all the shells to experience the same poloidal magnetic field at any given location . this requirement constrains the choice of boundary conditions . no constraint is necessary in the force - free regime , in which the electromagnetic field is effectively decoupled from the matter in that there is no feedback from the matter acceleration to the field . the electromagnetic field only guides the flow and the motion is effectively hd . as we proved in vk01 , one simply has to replace the spherical @xmath3 in the radial - outflow scalings ( e.g. , @xcite ) with the cylindrical radius @xmath337 to get the correct scalings in the magnetically guided case . however , in the superfast regime ( @xmath599 , @xmath600 ) , one finds that the ( appropriately simplified ) bernoulli and transfield force - balance equations ( eqs . [ [ bernoulli - rss ] ] and [ [ transfield - rss ] ] ) become completely @xmath112-independent if one writes @xmath601 , @xmath602 , and @xmath603 . ( @xmath261 must also be @xmath112-independent . ) thus , we are free to specify the functions @xmath604 , @xmath262 , @xmath264 , and @xmath265 when @xmath605 , and from the fact that @xmath141 is @xmath112-independent we then also have @xmath606 . these functions correspond to the initial conditions for each shell , obeying the quasi - steady poloidal magnetic field assumption .    using @xmath607 in any quantity @xmath608 , we may find either the time dependence following the motion of a particular shell : @xmath609 with @xmath112 held constant , or the time dependence at a given point in space as different shells pass by : @xmath610 , with @xmath611 held fixed . the `` initial '' value @xmath612 corresponds to the time @xmath613 when the shell @xmath112 is ejected from the surface @xmath614 . thus , we see that the @xmath112-dependence in @xmath615 represents the initial conditions at the ejection surface for each shell .    to illustrate how the time dependence in our model can be recovered , we now consider the baryon mass density along the flow . from equation ( [ gamma - rho - rss ] ) , @xmath616^{\frac{4}{f } } \mu(s_0 ) x_a^4(s_0 ) g(s ) \ a^{2-\frac{4}{f } }   } { 4 \pi c^2 f^{\frac{4}{f } } \sigma_m(s_0 ) g^2(s_0 ) \left[{\cal m}^2(\theta ) + { \cal x}^2(\theta)\right ] \sigma_m(s ) }   \nonumber \\ & & \times   \frac{{\cal m}^2(\theta ) g(s)-1+x_a^2(s ) } { { \cal m}^2(\theta ) g(s ) } \frac{{\cal x}^2(\theta ) g(s ) + { \cal m}^2(\theta ) g(s ) } { { \cal x}^2(\theta ) g(s ) + { \cal m}^2(\theta ) g(s)-1}\ .\end{aligned}\ ] ] neglecting the second line ( which is approximately equal to 1 in the non  force - free regime ) , @xmath617 figure [ fig5 ] shows @xmath618 as a function of the arclength along the inner fieldline at various times ( as in the hd case illustrated in fig . 1a of @xcite ) . at each instant of time @xmath580 , one can identify ( using @xmath619 ) which shell @xmath112 is at the point @xmath611 . knowing the distribution of @xmath620 as a function of @xmath611 for the reference shell @xmath595 , one can obtain the density for all the other shells ( corresponding to a particular choice of the function @xmath621 , such as the one depicted in fig . [ fig5]b ) . the ideal - mhd theory is not always a good approximation ; in some cases it must be replaced by an exact multi - fluid theory including a relativistic ohm s law ( e.g. , * ? ? ? a necessary condition for its applicability , derived from the need to attain the requisite charge density and current , implies a lower limit on the matter density ( e.g. , * ? ? ? the limits are @xmath622 , @xmath623 ( where @xmath624 the electron charge ) , and we have verified that they are well satisfied in all of our solutions . in particular , the protons and the neutralizing electrons have a sufficiently large number density to screen the electric field parallel to the flow and to provide the necessary charge density and current .    our neglect of gravity has turned out to be a valid approximation , since the flow near the disk is thermally dominated and the temperature force density near the origin of our fiducial solution ( at @xmath625 , slightly above the slow - magnetosonic point ) is @xmath626 dyne @xmath476 , which is much larger than the gravitational force density associated with a central object of a few solar masses .    in   [ timerecovery ] we demonstrated that the frozen - pulse assumption is valid throughout the acceleration region . we have also neglected the terms @xmath627 and @xmath628 in equation ( [ momentum - s ] ) . our results by and large verify these approximations , as we find that only near the asymptotic cylindrical region does @xmath629 deviate from @xmath630 ( see fig . [ fig3]a5 ) . even so , the ratio of the terms in equation ( [ momentum - s ] ) that contain @xmath631 over the last term in that equation is @xmath632 , which ( using eq . [ [ ohm ] ] ) becomes @xmath633 . an alternative argument supporting the conclusion that @xmath634 is based on the requirements that @xmath635 and @xmath636 . the former gives ( using @xmath637 and eq . [ [ e_a ] ] ) @xmath638 , whereas the latter yields ( using eq . [ [ v - b ] ] ) @xmath639 . thus , the ratio @xmath640 is bounded in a tiny interval around @xmath641 , from @xmath642 to @xmath643 .        in the limit of low temperatures ( @xmath645 , @xmath646 ) , we reproduce the exact cold relativistic solutions of @xcite , using a different parameter regime appropriate to grb outflows . @xcite employed the same model but examined more massive flows that were not close to being force - free and thus were not accelerated as efficiently . we present a cold solution in the second column of figure [ fig3 ] ; it can be readily compared with the fiducial solution @xmath384 . the cold solution is closer to being force - free , since @xmath647 ( using @xmath648 ) , and hence ( by eq . [ [ ximu ] ] ) @xmath649 . ( for comparison , @xmath650 for solution @xmath384 . ) since the flow does not pass through a slow magnetosonic point in this case , we are able to find the solution all the way down to the disk surface . near the origin the flow corotates with the disk ( @xmath651 ) and is accelerated due to the centrifugal force @xmath146 . the lorentz factor does not increase linearly with @xmath337 ( but rather , to a good approximation , as @xmath652 ) . however , the lorentz force soon takes over and thereafter @xmath102 ( see fig . [ fig3]b2 ) .    at the classical fast point @xmath653 , equation ( [ a2 ] ) gives @xmath654 , which ( using @xmath655 ) can be transformed into the familiar form @xmath656 ( e.g. , * ? ? ? unlike the purely monopole case @xcite , this point is located at a finite distance from the origin , and the bulk of the magnetic acceleration occurs further downstream . the flow near the cylindrical regime is similar to that in the fiducial solution , as thermal effects are not important anymore . however , a signature of the cold solution can be seen in figure [ fig3]b6 in the weaker deviation of @xmath165 from @xmath657 . ( the solution of eq . [ [ cl_fast ] ] in this case is @xmath658 , and the deviation of @xmath165 from @xmath657 is due only to @xmath659 becoming larger than @xmath660 , which happens near the cylindrical region . )      this solution describes a slow rotator , in which the poynting flux is smaller than the enthalpy flux ( so @xmath662 ) . the angular velocity of the inner fieldline is @xmath663 rad s@xmath664 ( see table [ table1 ] ) , much smaller than the typical value ( @xmath665 rad s@xmath664 ) near a solar - mass black hole . this solution is characterized by significantly higher @xmath666 ratios ( see fig . [ fig3]c4 ) and much lower values of @xmath340 ( see fig . [ fig3]c6 ) in comparison with solutions @xmath384 and @xmath385 . it is also seen that this solution is not force - free : @xmath667 ( see eq . [ [ ximu ] ] ) . the acceleration in this case is thermal ( @xmath668 ; see fig . [ fig3]c2 ) . nevertheless , since the flow is trans - alfvnic , the poloidal magnetic pressure is much larger than the thermal pressure ( see fig . [ fig3]c5 ) . this can be understood from the fact that , in general , one has at the alfvn point @xmath669 only when the flow is super - alfvnic everywhere ( even near the origin ) can one obtain a hot , radial , hd - like solution with @xmath670 . the magnetic field only guides the flow in this case . the collimation , however , is not very efficient ( see fig . [ fig3]c1 ) . the flowlines `` attempt '' to become conical , but since in the framework of @xmath3 self - similarity the radial distance is given by @xmath671 , the only possible asymptotes as @xmath672 are @xmath673 . for @xmath674 we have cylindrical asymptotics ( as in solutions @xmath384 and @xmath385 ) , and the only other possibility is for all the flowlines to have the same asymptotic opening half - angle , which is the situation depicted in figure [ fig3]c1 . this behavior can be understood if we write the transfield force - balance equation as @xmath675 + \nonumber \\ + \frac{b_p^2}{4 \pi \varpi } \left(\frac{m v_{\phi } } { v_p}\right)^2 \hat{n } \cdot \hat{\varpi } - \hat{n } \cdot { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\left(p+\frac{b_p^2}{8 \pi}\right)\end{aligned}\ ] ] ( see @xcite ) . by neglecting the centrifugal ( @xmath676 ) and the poloidal magnetic pressure terms and using equation ( [ ohm ] ) ( which implies @xmath677 ) , equation ( [ transfield_v03 ] ) can be rewritten as @xmath678 the first term on the right - hand side is positive and acts to collimate the flow ( resulting in a positive poloidal curvature , @xmath212 ) , whereas the second term is negative and has the opposite effect on @xmath204 . in poynting flux - dominated solutions , the pressure term is negligible and the collimation continues ( albeit at a very low rate ; see paper ii ) until the shape becomes cylindrical . however , when the thermal pressure becomes comparable to the comoving magnetic pressure ( as in the present solution ; see fig . [ fig3]c5 ) , the two terms on the right - hand side of equation ( [ transfield_v03_appr ] ) cancel each other . the curvature @xmath679 thus vanishes before the cylindrical regime is reached , resulting in an asymptotic conical flow .      for completeness , we also present a return - current ( @xmath680 ) solution . since , near the disk surface , @xmath681 is a decreasing function of @xmath246 in the @xmath330 case under consideration , the magnetic force acts to _ de_collimate the flow ( see   [ sectioncollimation ] ) . this results in a weaker collimation than in the current - carrying ( @xmath326 ) solutions ( see fig . [ fig3]d1 ) . the electric force succeeds in collimating the flow despite the counter effect of the magnetic force ; as discussed in  [ sectioncollimation ] , this is associated with the positive charge density ( @xmath682 ) expected in the return - current regime . examining the forces in the transfield direction , we find that @xmath683 ; i.e. , the lorentz force is balanced by the inertial force . ( this can be contrasted with the cylindrical solution @xmath384 , where the balance is provided by the centrifugal force : @xmath684 ; see figure [ fig4]b ) . as in the nonrelativistic , cold mhd flow considered by @xcite , the curvature radius is nonnegligible and the solution terminates at a finite height above the disk . we regard the fiducial solution @xmath384 as providing the most plausible representation of an accelerating grb outflow . neutrino energy deposition and magnetic field dissipation are likely to give rise to a nonnegligible thermal component at the origin , as envisioned in the original fireball scenario . such a component is incorporated into solution @xmath384 but is missing in solution @xmath385 . it is , nevertheless , worth reemphasizing that the dominant energy source even in solution @xmath384 is the poynting flux . we note in this connection that one of the potential problems of traditional fireball models has been the `` baryon contamination '' issue : why does the highly super - eddington luminosity that drives the fireball not lead to a more significant mass loading of the flow and thereby keep @xmath685 comparatively low ? if most of the requisite energy were injected in a nonradiative form , then this problem would be alleviated . the expectation that grb outflows are poynting flux - dominated also renders the slow - rotator ( enthalpy flux - dominated ) solution @xmath1 less relevant to their interpretation than the fiducial solution . grb outflows are inferred to be highly collimated at large distances from the origin : this has motivated us to construct our fiducial solution in the current - carrying ( @xmath686 ) regime , which is applicable near the symmetry axis ( see fig . [ fig1 ] ) . however , as demonstrated in figure [ fig3 ] , the illustrative current - carrying solution @xmath386 also becomes well collimated on a similar length scale , so it may also provide an adequate representation of such outflows . in fact , this regime may be a natural choice for modeling the far - downstream region of the flow since it corresponds to a plausible current - configuration on large scales ; furthermore , as shown in @xcite , it also results in a more efficient acceleration . we have opted to focus on the current - carrying regime in this paper since the solutions in this case , unlike the return - current solutions formally extends to infinity . we incorporate the return - current regime into a grb outflow model in @xcite . our fiducial self - similar `` hot '' solution as well as our `` cold '' relativistic mhd solution ( and the corresponding ones derived by @xcite and @xcite ) have cylindrical asymptotics . in the nonrelativistic theory , it was shown @xcite that it is possible to derive exact solutions of radially self - similar flows that have either one of the following three types of asymptotes : cylindrical , parabolic , or conical . although we expect that it should be possible to obtain different asymptotic behaviors also in radially self - similar relativistic flows , this has not yet been studied in detail . our basic conclusions about the magnetic acceleration of the flow do not , however , depend on the shape of the asymptotic flowlines , although the quantitative constraints on the mass loading ( to assure that the flow is optically thin in the shell - collision region ) would be eased if the flow continued to expand rather than collimated to a cylinder . grb jets are often modeled in terms of conical jets , and this picture has gained support from observations of a panchromatic break in the light curve of several grb afterglows ( from which jet half - opening angles in the range of @xmath687 to @xmath688 have been inferred ; e.g. , @xcite ) . however , a sharp physical boundary may not be required for interpreting the data in the context of a beam - patterned outflow ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? furthermore , it has been argued that a cylindrical jet model could provide a better fit to the light curves of at least some afterglows and might perhaps even be able to account for the panchromatic breaks commonly attributed to a finite jet opening angle ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? even if grb jets are not characterized by a global cylindrical geometry , the asymptotically cylindrical solutions that we derived may be applicable to the `` patchy shell '' scenario for variable grb outflows @xcite . in this picture , the outflowing shells are ejected within a given opening angle but do not fill the entire solid angle into which they are injected . in the context of the internal shock model , this scenario alleviates the energy requirements on bright bursts ; it is also consistent with the apparent lack of a strong correlation between the prompt high - energy and the afterglow fluences , and it may account for the early - time variability in the afterglow emission of a source like grb 021004 @xcite . in the phenomenological model considered by @xcite , successive blobs of angular scale @xmath689 are ejected randomly within an opening angle of @xmath690 , and the number of blobs ejected along a given direction ( given that more than one is required for the production of internal shocks ) is also taken to be a random number ( distributed uniformly in a predetermined range ) . this model was intended to mimic the behavior of causally disconnected regions in large - scale ejected shells . an alternative physical picture is that of a collection of magnetically active regions on the surface of the disk that feed the grb outflow . in this picture , the magnetic field associated with each `` patch '' guides successive `` mini '' shells along roughly congruent paths , thereby enhancing the efficiency of internal - shock production . however , the ejection directions from different sites need not be parallel to each other , so some of the beamed @xmath90-ray emission may miss the observer : this might contribute to the appearance of quiescent times between grb pulses @xcite . the high ( @xmath561 ) poynting - to - kinetic energy conversion efficiency exhibited by all our fast - rotator solutions ( solutions @xmath384 , @xmath385 , and @xmath386 ) has made it possible for our models to accommodate the internal - shock emission scenario without requiring a prohibitively large energy input at the source ( see  [ results ] ) . however , currently available data on the radiated @xmath90-ray energy @xmath691 ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) and the outflow kinetic energy @xmath692 ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) , which indicate that they are both approximately equal ( @xmath693 ) , are inconsistent with this scenario for any reasonable radiative energy efficiency of such shocks ( see @xcite for further discussion of this issue ) . one possible resolution of this apparent inconsistency is that the prompt high - energy emission arises directly from electromagnetic energy dissipation without the intermediate step of poynting - to - bulk - kinetic energy conversion ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? our solutions seem to be consistent with this possibility : they imply that about half of the injected energy is converted into bulk kinetic energy ; if the remaining poynting flux can be efficiently converted into high - energy emission , then this would lead to an approximate equality between @xmath691 and @xmath692 . @xcite used ideal - mhd equations with parameterized magnetic energy dissipation to demonstrate ( in the context of a strictly radial flow , i.e. , without taking into account the transfield force - balance equation that determines the fieldline shape ) that the poynting - to - radiation energy conversion could in principle be as high as 50% and that the dissipation may also result in significant bulk acceleration . it would be interesting to combine the approach taken by these authors ( see also @xcite and @xcite ) with the one utilized in this paper to consider the effects of dissipation in a _ nonradial _ flow . we now briefly compare the results of our exact solutions with some of the previous work on mhd effects in grb outflows . the incorporation of `` disposable '' magnetic energy into the traditional fireball model was discussed by @xcite . the behavior that they infer is consistent with our solutions in the regime where @xmath102 ( but not beyond it ) . @xcite interpreted the outflows in terms of pulsar winds that generate intense electromagnetic waves at the point where the ideal - mhd approximation breaks down . he highlighted the fact that the lorentz factors of the particles accelerated by such waves could be as high as @xmath694 and thus greatly exceed the terminal lorentz factors ( @xmath695 ) attained in the @xcite ideal - mhd monopole solution . the acceleration efficiency of our collimating ( and thus nonmonopolar ) ideal - mhd solutions is much higher yet : they yield @xmath696 . @xcite examined a magnetized conical jet with a pure electron - positron composition . they deduced ( and our solutions have confirmed ) that the pair  photon fluid is initially accelerated by thermal pressure , with the magnetic field acting only to guide the flow . they also pointed out that radiation drag effects allow the pairs and photons to remain coupled even beyond the point where the scattering optical depth drops below 1 and that at some point pair annihilation freezes out . @xcite subsequently showed that the surviving pairs carry only a fraction @xmath697 of the initial energy , implying that , in the absence of magnetic acceleration , this scenario is extremely inefficient . we note , however , that if a nonnegligible fraction ( @xmath698 ) of the total injected energy is in magnetic form ( [ with the ratio of magnetic to pairs - plus - photons energy injection rates being @xmath699 , as assumed by @xcite ) , then , based on our `` cold '' solution ( see   [ soln_b ] ) , half of the magnetic energy could be eventually transformed into kinetic energy of the surviving pairs , reaching overall efficiencies @xmath700 . as the rest - mass density of the final pair population , which represents only a tiny fraction of the initial rest - mass density of pairs . ] for @xmath701 this yields an efficiency of @xmath702 , which is significantly higher than the values estimated by @xcite . as was , however , discussed by these authors , the resulting outflow would have a huge lorentz factor and might not by itself be able to reproduce the observed properties of real grbs . although the presentation in this paper and its companion is focused on the application to grbs , our formalism is quite general and the solutions that we present should be relevant also to other magnetically driven relativistic outflow sources , notably agns and microquasars . the possible relationship between the different classes of beamed relativistic outflows in astrophysics has already been noted before by various authors . one potential attraction of adopting a common modeling framework for these outflows is that it could shed new light on each of the different types of sources . for example , the concept of internal shocks was originally proposed in the context of agn jets @xcite , and it has recently been adopted also for modeling microquasars @xcite . in the latter class of objects , there is direct observational evidence ( in the form of correlated x - ray , infrared , and radio flux variations and the appearance of superluminal radio knots ) for a causal connection between a rapid accretion episode onto the central black hole and the ejection of superluminal blobs ( e.g. , * ? ? ? this is the same basic scenario as the one commonly adopted ( albeit without direct observational support ) for grb outflows . a similar correlation between the x - ray and radio flux behavior and the appearance of radio - bright superluminal knots was recently discovered also in an agn jet @xcite . although the observed behavior in this case does not support the notion that agns are a simple scaled - up version of microquasars , this might be attributable to a different origin of the underlying disk instability that induces the accretion / ejection episodes ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) or to different environmental conditions ( e.g. , * ? ? ? there is now also evidence that the high - energy ( gev - range ) @xmath90-ray emission in the blazar class of agns originates in superluminal radio knots  which likely represent discrete blobs or shocks in a relativistic jet  at a large distance from the origin ( e.g. , * ? ? ? this is essentially the picture envisioned for grb outflows . the superluminal knots in blazar jets such as 3c 345 ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) and 3c 279 ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) are inferred to move along distinct curved paths , although in the former case it has been argued @xcite that at least two of the knots follow each other along the same trajectory . this behavior is consistent with the `` patchy shell '' model discussed above in connection with grbs . there are also indications that the outflows continue to accelerate on large scales : for example , the lorentz factor of knot c7 in the quasar 3c 345 was inferred to increase from @xmath703 to @xmath704 as it moved from a distance of @xmath705 from the galactic nucleus to @xmath706 @xcite . a scaled - down version of this behavior was found in the radio galaxy ngc 6251 , where knots in the radio jets were inferred to accelerate from @xmath707 at @xmath708 to @xmath709 at @xmath710 @xcite . such large - scale acceleration is most naturally interpreted in terms of a poynting - dominated jet model of the type discussed in this paper ( n. vlahakis & a. knigl , in preparation ) .    in conclusion , we have derived in this paper the general formalism for radially self - similar , relativistic mhd outflows and presented exact solutions ( obtained by solving the euler and transfield equations and imposing regularity conditions at the relevant critical points ) to illustrate their basic properties . we focused on trans - alfvnic flows , deferring a discussion of super - alfvnic solutions to the companion paper . we considered `` hot '' and `` cold '' rapid - rotator flows ( the latter reproducing previous results by @xcite and @xcite ) as well as slow - rotator flows in the current - carrying regime ( which should apply near the rotation axis ) , but also described a `` hot , '' fast - rotator solution in the return - current regime . in all cases , we demonstrated that the poynting flux injected at the source can be transformed with high ( @xmath561 ) efficiency into kinetic energy of relativistic baryons at a large ( but finite ) distance from the origin . we concentrated on applications to grb outflows , although we pointed out that similar solutions may describe jet acceleration in agns and microquasars . in the application to grbs , we presented a particular `` hot , '' fast - rotator outflow as a fiducial solution . in this case the outflow is initially accelerated thermally , with the magnetic field acting only to guide and collimate it , but subsequently magnetic effects become fully dominant and are responsible for the bulk of the acceleration ( which occurs between the classical fast - magnetosonic and modified fast - magnetosonic surfaces ) and for the final collimation to cylindrical asymptotics . we stress , however , that this solution is only illustrative and is not meant to provide an accurate description of a typical grb flow . in this solution is about an order of magnitude higher than the minimum lorentz factors typically inferred in real grbs ( e.g. , * ? ? ? ] as we discuss in paper ii , super - alfvnic outflows can also provide plausible representations of grb outflows ; their basic properties , however , are quite similar to those of trans - alfvnic flows . we have , furthermore , concluded that solutions in the return - current regime may also be relevant to these flows ; we address this possibility in greater detail in a separate publication @xcite .    this work was supported in part by nasa grant nag5 - 12635 and by the u.s . department of energy under grant b341495 to the center for astrophysical thermonuclear flashes at the university of chicago . n. v. also acknowledges support from a mccormick fellowship at the enrico fermi institute . we may combine equations ( [ int - omega ] ) , ( [ int - l ] ) , and ( [ int - mu ] ) to obtain @xmath712 , and @xmath223 as functions of @xmath713 @xmath340 , and @xmath293 using @xmath714 @xmath715 @xmath716    knowing the field - line constants ( for each @xmath112 ) @xmath717 we can find the quantities @xmath718 ( which in general are functions of @xmath719 , and @xmath112 ) by solving the following system of equations :    @xmath720    the bernoulli equation @xmath721 which is obtained after substituting all quantities in the identity @xmath722 using equations ( [ a1],[a2 ] ) and which in the nonrelativistic limit takes the familiar form ( after taylor expanding in @xmath723 ) @xmath724 and the transfield equation ( obtained from the component of the momentum equation along @xmath725 ) @xmath726 \left(\frac{{{\mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}a}{\varpi } \right)^2 + \nonumber \\ & & + \left [ \frac{2 x_a^2}{\varpi_a^3 g } \left({{\mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}a \right)^2 + \frac{\mu^2 x_a^6 a^2}{\varpi_a^5 \sigma_m^2 m^2 g^3 } \left(\frac{g^2-m^2-x^2}{1-m^2-x^2}\right)^2\right ] \hat{\varpi } \cdot { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}a - \nonumber \\ & & -\frac{m^2}{2 } { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\left[\left(\frac{{{\mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}a } { \varpi } \right)^2\right ] \cdot { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}a -\frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma } { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\left [ \frac{\xi ( \xi-1)}{m^2 }   \frac{a^2 x_a^4}{\sigma_m^2 \varpi_a^4 } \right ] \cdot { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}a - \nonumber \\ & & -   \frac{1}{2 \varpi^2 } { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\left [ \frac{\mu^2 a^2 x_a^6}{\sigma_m^2 \varpi_a^2 } \left(\frac{1-g^2}{1-m^2-x^2}\right)^2\right ] \cdot { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}a = 0\,,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the operator @xmath727 is related to the curvature radius @xmath728 .    the latter equation can be written as    [ forces - perp ] @xmath729 where the subscript @xmath198 denotes the component of a force perpendicular to the poloidal fieldline and pointing toward the axis ( along @xmath730 ) , and where the individual terms are given by @xmath731 \cdot \frac{{{\mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\alpha}{\mid { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\alpha \mid}- \frac { m^2 \varpi_0 ^ 3 \mid { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}{\cal a}\mid}{4 \alpha g^2 } \l { \cal a } \right\}\ , \label{fibot } \\ & & { { { \mathbf { f}}}}_{p \bot}=\frac{b_0 ^ 2}{4 \pi \varpi_0 } \frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma } \varpi_0 { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\left [ \frac{\xi ( \xi-1)}{m^2 } \frac{c^2 \psi_a^2}{b_0 ^ 2}\right ] \cdot \frac{{{\mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\alpha}{\mid { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\alpha \mid}\ , \\ & & { { { \mathbf { f}}}}_{e \bot}=-\frac{b_0 ^ 2}{4 \pi \varpi_0 } \frac{x_a^2 \varpi_0 \mid { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}{\cal a } \mid}{4 \alpha } \left[\varpi_0 ^ 2 \l { \cal a}+\frac{2 } { g \alpha^{1/2 } } \varpi_0 \hat{\varpi } \cdot { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}{\cal a } + \left(\varpi_0 { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}{\cal a } \right)^2 \left(\frac{1}{x_a}\frac{dx_a}{{\cal a}}-\frac{1}{2 \alpha}\frac{d \alpha}{d { \cal a}}\right)\right]\ , \\ & & { { { \mathbf { f}}}}_{b \bot}=\frac{b_0 ^ 2}{4 \pi \varpi_0 } \left \ { \frac{1}{2 \alpha g^2 } \varpi_0 { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\left [ \alpha x_a^2 \mu^2 \frac{c^2 \psi_a^2}{b_0 ^ 2 } \left(\frac{1-g^2}{1-m^2-x^2}\right)^2\right ] \cdot \frac{{{\mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\alpha}{\mid { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}\alpha \mid } + \frac{\varpi_0 \mid { { \mathbf{\nabla}}\!\!_s}{\cal a } \mid}{4 \alpha g^2 } \varpi_0 ^ 2 \l { \cal a } \right\}\ .\end{aligned}\ ] ] in the @xmath3 self - similar model described in  [ r - ss_section ] , the integrals of motion have the following form :    [ integrals ] @xmath732\ , , \quad \mbox{where } \quad \sigma_0\ , , \alpha_0=const\ , , \quad \mu\ , , x_a\ , , q = const\ , , \quad   a=\frac{b_0 \varpi_0 ^ 2}{f } \left(\alpha^{\frac{f}{2}}- \alpha^{\frac{f}{2}}_0 \right)\ , \ ] ] with the fieldline constants given by @xmath733 note that @xmath309 is the `` magnetization parameter '' in the monopole solution of @xcite .    in cases where @xmath734 , the requirement that the magnetic flux function @xmath141 vanishes on the rotation axis @xmath345 implies that @xmath735 when @xmath736 and @xmath737 . we examine solutions with @xmath735 throughout this paper . [ theta - eqs ] equations ( [ x - m ] ) and ( [ bernoulli ] ) take the form @xmath738 @xmath739 @xmath740 and can be solved for @xmath741 , and @xmath138 .    using @xmath742 and equation ( [ alpha ] ) , we get @xmath743 or , @xmath744    the transfield equation ( [ transfield ] ) becomes @xmath745 = & & \left(f-1\right ) \frac{x_a^4 \mu^2 x^2}{f^2 \sigma_m^2 } \left ( \frac{1-g^2}{1-m^2-x^2 } \right)^2 -\sin^2 \theta \frac{m^2+f x^2 -f + 1}{\cos^2 \left(\psi+\theta\right)}- \nonumber \\ & & -\frac{x_a^4 \mu^2 x^2}{f^2 \sigma_m^2 m^2 } \left ( \frac{g^2-m^2-x^2}{1-m^2-x^2 } \right)^2 + 2 \frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma } \frac{f-2}{f^2 \sigma_m^2 } \frac{\xi \left(\xi-1\right)x^4}{m^2 } \ .\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the magnetization function @xmath746 is defined as the poynting - to - matter energy flux ratio : @xmath747    at the alfvn singular point @xmath748 , @xmath749 , @xmath500 , @xmath501 , @xmath750 , @xmath751 , @xmath752 , and , using lh@xmath753spital s rule , @xmath754_a=\frac{1}{\sigma_a+1}\ , , \ \left[\frac{1-g^2}{1-m^2-x^2}\right]_a = \frac{\sigma_a / x_a^2}{\sigma_a+1 } \ , , \ \left[\frac{g^2-m^2-x^2}{1-m^2-x^2}\right]_a = \frac{x_a^2-(1-x_a^2)\sigma_a}{x_a^2 ( \sigma_a+1 ) } \ .\end{aligned}\ ] ] substituting the above ratios into equation ( [ bernoulli - rss ] ) yields @xmath291 as a function of @xmath317 , @xmath316 , and @xmath276 , @xmath755 ^ 2 } \left[x_a^2 \xi_a^2 + \frac{f^2 \sigma_m^2 ( 1-x_a^2)^2 \sin^2 \theta_a } { x_a^2 \cos^2 ( \theta_a + \psi_a)}\right]\,,\ ] ] whereas equation ( [ transfield - rss ] ) gives the alfvn regularity condition @xmath756 \right\ } \nonumber \\ & & = \left[x_a^2-\sigma_a ( 1-x_a^2 ) \right]^2 - ( f-1)\sigma_a^2 ( 1-x_a^2 ) - 2 \frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma}(f-2)\frac{\xi_a-1}{\xi_a }   \left\{x_a^2-\left[x_a^2-\sigma_a ( 1-x_a^2 ) \right]^2 \right\ }   \ .\end{aligned}\ ] ]    next we prove the following statement : if one chooses @xmath757 ( the model parameters ) and specifies seven boundary conditions on a cone @xmath758 , then it is possible to derive all the other model parameters , and the solution is uniquely determined .    _ proof : _ suppose that the quantities @xmath759 , @xmath223 , @xmath760 , @xmath761 , @xmath166 , @xmath12 , and @xmath762 are given as functions of @xmath3 along the cone @xmath758 ; i.e. , @xmath763 , @xmath764 , @xmath765 , @xmath766 , @xmath767 , @xmath768 , and @xmath769 . then one finds    [ invert ] @xmath770    one is thus in a position to start the integration , using equations ( [ bernoulli - rss ] ) , ( [ g - rss ] ) , and ( [ transfield - rss ] ) , and find a solution that uniquely corresponds to the seven boundary conditions ( or , equivalently , to the parameters @xmath771 ) and the model parameters @xmath14 and @xmath261 . _ qed_.    whether the solution actually hits and passes smoothly through any given singular point depends on the choice of the boundary conditions . from a physical standpoint , the most robust solutions cross all the three singular points ( the modified slow - magnetosonic , the alfvn , and the modified fast - magnetosonic points ) . in this case , the three regularity conditions at the ( a priori unknown ) positions of the singular points impose three relationships among the boundary conditions . suppose that we have obtained a solution of the axisymmetric , relativistic , ideal - mhd equations ( [ maxwell])([energy ] ) . if we consider localized , fast varying , axisymmetric disturbances , then we may assume that the unperturbed solution is uniform and time - independent and neglect all its space and time derivatives . we may then look for perturbations having a fourier dependence @xmath772 =   \exp [ i(\omega_{\rm co } t_{\rm co } - { \boldsymbol { k}}_{\rm co}\cdot { \boldsymbol { r}}_{\rm co})]$ ] , where , by using the lorentz transformations between the comoving @xmath773 and observer s frame @xmath774 , we get @xmath775 $ ] . lies in the meridional plane , but that , nonetheless , the comoving wavevector @xmath776 has an azimuthal component ! ] it is more convenient to analyze the disturbances in the ( comoving ) flow frame . define a local cartesian system of coordinates @xmath777 such that @xmath778 , and @xmath779 . after linearizing equations ( [ maxwell])([energy ] ) , we may express all the perturbed quantities in terms of the perturbation @xmath780 . after some manipulation , we obtain @xmath781 where the alfvn speed can be expressed in terms of the corresponding proper speed @xmath782 , which satisfies @xmath783 .      * alfvn waves : @xmath787 , or @xmath788 , corresponding to a displacement @xmath789 normal to the \{@xmath790 } plane . transforming the dispersion relation to the observer s frame , we get @xmath791\ .\ ] ] * slow / fast - magnetosonic waves : @xmath792 , or , @xmath793 , corresponding to a displacement @xmath789 in the \{@xmath794 } plane . in the observer s frame , we have @xmath795=0 \ .\end{aligned}\ ] ]    an interesting property of the waves , related to the discussion on critical / singular surfaces of steady - state mhd , is the following : if the component of the flow proper velocity along the wavevector equals in magnitude , but is opposite in sign , to the comoving proper phase velocity of the wave , then @xmath796 and the wave is static . ( the converse is also true . ) thus , @xmath797 this statement is easily proved by combining @xmath798 with the lorentz invariant @xmath799 and solving for @xmath800 . + equation ( [ theorem ] ) is the generalization of the property of nonrelativistic static waves @xmath801 . it is consistent with the result that proper speeds are the appropriate generalization of ordinary speeds in relativistic theory ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) . piran , t. 2001b , in asp conf . ser . , from x - ray binaries to gamma - ray bursts , ed . e. p. j. van den heuvel , l. kaper , & e. rol . , in press ( astro - ph/0111314 ) piran , t. , shemi , a. , & narayan , r. 1993 , , 263 , 861
Abstract:

Answer: we present a general formulation of special - relativistic magnetohydrodynamics and derive exact radially self - similar solutions for axisymmetric outflows from strongly magnetized , rotating compact objects . we generalize previous work by including thermal effects and analyze in detail the various forces that guide , accelerate , and collimate the flow . we demonstrate that , under the assumptions of a quasi - steady poloidal magnetic field and of a highly relativistic poloidal velocity , the equations become effectively time - independent and the motion can be described as a frozen pulse . we concentrate on trans - alfvnic solutions and consider outflows that are super - alfvnic throughout in the companion paper . our results are applicable to relativistic jets in gamma - ray burst ( grb ) sources , active galactic nuclei , and microquasars , but our discussion focuses on grbs . we envision the outflows in this case to initially consist of a hot and optically thick mixture of baryons , electron - positron pairs , and photons . we show that the flow is at first accelerated thermally but that the bulk of the acceleration is magnetic , with the asymptotic lorentz factor corresponding to a rough equipartition between the poynting and kinetic - energy fluxes ( i.e. , @xmath0 of the injected total energy is converted into baryonic kinetic energy ) . the electromagnetic forces also strongly collimate the flow , giving rise to an asymptotically cylindrical structure .