ayannopoulos 1980), are oriented perpendicularly to the primary bar and serve as attractors to gas motions in their vicinity. We note that the gas distribution in the region is never symmetric with respect to the primary bar axis, with the nuclear ring oriented in the first and third quadrants — this leads to a constant drain of angular momentum from the gas by the primary bar and to a progressively more elongated ring.

Hence it is not surprizing that a large fraction of cold (molecular) gas piles up in ILR(s) region on the $x_2$ orbits, independently of the presence or absence of self-gravitational effects in the gas. The simplest type of decoupling between the gas and the primary bar is not driven by the gas self-gravity (Heller, Shlosman & Englmaier 2001). Instead, the gaseous ring drifts deeper into the potential well because of internal dissipation. As the gas crosses the IILR, it loses the attractor[^2] (i.e., the $x_2$ orbits), which leads to a retrograde precession (in the primary bar frame) because of the mutual bar-ring orientations. One possibility is that the gaseous ring/bar remains trapped by the primary bar potential valley — this results in secondary bar libration about the major axis of the primary. More spectacular is a complete decoupling of the secondary and its substantial slowdown — the gaseous bar tumbles in the retrograde direction (in the primary frame) until it is captured again by the primary potential. This effect is caused by the gravitational torques from the primary bar and the ability of the secondary to adjust its shape (ellipticity) depending on the mutual orientation of the bars. This type of behavior can lead to a mild inflow across the IILR and associated bursts of star formation.

Modeling self-gravitating gaseous bars in nested systems is more difficult. Decoupling was not obtained for this case in numerical simulations by Wada & Habe (1992) and Combes (1994). Understandably, gas exhibits the strongest response to the galactic bar potential which triggers its inflow toward the central regions. While the gas accounts only for a few percent of the mass within the luminous part of a galaxy, its contribution is expected to rise by a factor of $\sim 10$ within the central kpc. Because of this and because the random motions within this gas are substantially lower than within the stellar disk, the gas can be dynamically important within the central kpc —
ayannopoulos 1980), are oriented perpendicularly to the primary bar and service as attraction to gas motions in their vicinity. We note that the flatulence distribution in the region is never symmetric with regard to the elementary bar axis, with the nuclear ring oriented in the beginning and third quadrants — this leads to a ceaseless drain of angular momentum from the accelerator by the primary bar and to a progressively more elongated ring. 

 therefore it is not surprizing that a large fraction of cold (molecular) gas piles up in ILR(s) area on the $ x_2 $ orbits, independently of the presence or absence of self - gravitational effects in the gas. The simplest character of decoupling between the natural gas and the primary bar is not driven by the accelerator self - gravity (Heller, Shlosman & Englmaier 2001). Instead, the gaseous ring drifts deeper into the potential well because of internal dissipation. As the gas crosses the IILR, it loses the attractor[^2 ] (i.e., the $ x_2 $ orbits), which leads to a retrograde precession (in the primary bar frame) because of the mutual barroom - ring orientations. One hypothesis is that the gaseous gang / prevention remains trapped by the primary bar potential valley — this results in secondary bar libration about the major bloc of the primary. More spectacular is a complete decoupling of the secondary and its substantial slowdown — the gaseous bar tumbles in the retrograde direction (in the primary frame) until it is captured again by the primary electric potential. This effect is induce by the gravitational torsion from the basal bar and the ability of the secondary to adjust its form (ellipticity) depending on the mutual orientation of the bars. This type of behavior can lead to a balmy inflow across the IILR and associated bursts of headliner formation. 

 Modeling self - gravitate gaseous bars in nest systems is more unmanageable. Decoupling was not obtained for this case in numeric simulations by Wada & Habe (1992) and Combes (1994). Understandably, natural gas exhibits the hard response to the galactic bar potential which triggers its inflow toward the central regions. While the gas account only for a few percent of the batch within the luminous part of a galaxy, its contribution is expected to rise by a factor of $ \sim 10 $ within the cardinal kpc. Because of this and because the random motions within this gas are substantially lower than within the stellar disk, the gas can be dynamically important within the cardinal kpc —
ayajnopoulos 1980), are oriented kerpendicularly to the pcimary gar and rerve as attractors to gas mltuons un their vicinity. We nute that nhe gas dustrmbution in the rxfion is never dymmztcic with respecj to the prikary bar axis, figh the nuclear ring oriented in the fyrst anc hhird quadrantf — tnys lsads to a constant drain of angulad momenuum from the gas bu the primary bar and to a prohressively more ellngated rint.

Hensw it is not rurprizing that a largg fraction of cold (molecular) gas pilex up in ILT(s) rfcion on the $x_2$ orfits, independently ox the ptesence or abscnce mf welf-gravitational effxcts in the gas. The fimplest dy'e of decoupling betwweb the gas and rhe prjmery bar id nkt driven gy the gas welf-gravity (Heller, Xhjisman & Englmajer 2001). Igseead, the gaseous ring drifts deeper intm tge potential well becauwe of internal dissipwtion. As ehe gas crosses the IILR, it loses the attractor[^2] (i.a., the $b_2$ oxnlts), dyifh leads to a retrograde precession (in the pryjaty bar frame) beccuse of the mutusl bst-ring orientatkons. Ous lossibility is thah the gwseouw ring/bar remsins trapped by the primary bar potenticl calley — this resulcs in secondcry bat librstion about the major aris of the primarj. More spsztacular is a cooplvte gecoupling of the secondarr and its subxtantiau slpwdown — the gaselus bar tumbles in the rftrogtade dhrection (ij the primary frame) until it is captured agaim ty nhe primaxy potcntial. This effqct is caused yy the gxavitagional torsues frmm the primwry bar and tvg ability of vhe seconqary to qdjust kgs shape (ellipyicity) deieuding on rhe mutual orientabion ur the bars. This tyke of behavior csn ueaq no e milq inflow acrovs tfe KOLR avd associatcd cursys of star formation.

Kodeming self-gravitatimg gaseous bars in nested systeks is more difficupt. Deroupliig was noj obtained for this case in numsrical silulwtions by Waqa & Mabe (1992) and Combzs (1994). Understandably, gas exhibits the stroigest response to the gqlactic bar potenticl which trigjers ies inflow toward the central eegions. While the gas accounts only fod a fef perfent of the mass within the luminous part of a galaxy, its contribution is expecveq to rise bg a gactog oy $\snm 10$ witrin vhx central kpc. Becsuse of this and because the raidom motiots within this gas are substanyixlly lower thxn within the stellar diak, the gss can be dynamically important within the central kpc —
ayannopoulos 1980), are oriented perpendicularly to the and as attractors gas motions in the distribution in the is never symmetric respect to the primary bar axis, the nuclear ring oriented in the first and third quadrants — this leads a constant drain of angular momentum from the gas by the primary bar to progressively elongated Hence it is not surprizing that a large fraction of cold (molecular) gas piles up in region on the $x_2$ orbits, independently of the or absence of self-gravitational in the gas. The simplest of between the and primary is not driven the gas self-gravity (Heller, Shlosman & Englmaier 2001). Instead, the gaseous ring drifts deeper into the potential because of As the crosses IILR, loses the attractor[^2] $x_2$ orbits), which leads to a the primary bar frame) because of the mutual orientations. One is that the gaseous ring/bar remains by the primary bar potential valley — this in secondary bar libration about the major axis of the primary. More spectacular is a of the secondary and substantial slowdown — gaseous tumbles the direction (in primary frame) until it is captured again by the primary potential. effect is caused by the gravitational torques from the primary the of the secondary adjust its shape (ellipticity) on mutual orientation of the type behavior a inflow the IILR and associated of star formation. Modeling self-gravitating bars in nested systems not obtained for this case in numerical simulations Wada & Habe (1992) and Combes (1994). gas exhibits the strongest response to the galactic bar potential which triggers inflow toward regions. While the gas accounts only for a percent of the mass the luminous part of a galaxy, its contribution is to by a of $\sim 10$ the central kpc. of this and random motions this are within the stellar disk, the gas be important within the central kpc
ayannopoulos 1980), are oriented peRpendiculaRly to The PriMaRy baR and Serve as attractORs to Gas motions in their vicinIty. We NoTE thaT ThE gas dIstribuTIoN IN thE rEgIon Is NEvEr symMetRic with Respect to tHe pRiMary bar axis, wITh The nuclear RinG oriented in tHe fIrst anD tHirD QuadrAntS — this Leads tO A constAnt drain oF aNGular mOMentum fROM tHe gaS by the primary bar aND tO A progressively More elOnGAtED RinG.

HeNce it is not SuRprizINg that a LArGE FRacTIon of cold (moleCular) gas pilES up In ILR(s) ReGioN On the $x_2$ OrbitS, iNDepEndently of tHe prEsence or aBsence OF self-grAVitatioNal effEctS in The gAS. THe SimPlESt tYPe Of dECouPling betWeEn The gaS and THE PRimaRy bAr is Not drIven by the gas sElf-GravITy (HEller, shlosMan & ENgLmaieR 2001). InsteAd, the GaSeous ring drifts DeepEr into the PotEnTiaL wEll beCAuse of IntErnAl dissiPation. AS The GaS CROsSes the IILR, it loses tHe ATTrActor[^2] (i.e., tHe $x_2$ orbITs), WhICh leads tO a RetRogrADE precEssiON (iN the primAry bar FRaMe) Because Of The mutUaL baR-riNg oriENtatIons. OnE possibiLity iS That the gaseous RIng/bar remains TRaPPEd BY the PriMary bar poteNtiaL VallEy — thIS rEsuLTs in sEcondArY BaR Libration about the maJoR axis oF the pRimary. More speCtacular is A COMplete deCoupLInG Of the secondary And itS substantiAL slowdowN — the gAseous baR tumbles iN THe retrogRadE diRecTioN (IN tHe primary framE) UNtil It Is captuRed Again by The PriMarY poTeNtial. This Effect is CaUsEd By The GraviTAtional tOrQueS fRom The prIMary baR and tHe abIlItY Of tHe seconDArY TO adjUsT iTs shApe (ElLiptiCity) DEpeNding on The mutual OriENtatIoN oF the barS. This type of beHaVior can leaD tO a mIld infLOW across tHe IILR and associated bursTS of star ForMatioN.

ModEling self-GraVitatiNg gASeous bArs in nEsted SySteMS Is morE DIfFicUlT. DecouplinG WAs nOt obtAiNed fOr this cAse in numerical simuLAtiOns by Wada & Habe (1992) And combES (1994). unDerSTaNDabLy, GAs eXHIbits the strongeSt response To THe Galactic baR PotEnTial whiCh triggErs itS Inflow tOward the cEntral regIoNs. WhILE thE gas accounTs only foR a few percENt of tHE mAss wiThiN the luMiNouS part Of a galAXy, iTs conTributIoN is expEcted To Rise by a fActor of $\sim 10$ within the centRal kpc. becauSe oF this and bEcaUSe tHe random mOtioNs within thIs gAs aRe subStaNTiallY lowER tHan WIthin The sTEllar disk, THe Gas CAN bE dynamicallY IMPorTant wIthIN the ceNtraL kpc —
ayannopoulos 1980), are or iented per pendi cul arl yto t he p rimary bar and serv e as attractors to gas  moti on s  int he ir vi cinity. We n ote  t ha t t he ga s dis tri butionin the reg ion  i s never symm e tr ic with re spe ct to the pr ima ry bar  a xis ,  with  th e nuc lear r i ng ori ented inth e  first and thi r d  q uadr ants — this leads to a constant dra in ofan g ul a r  mo men tum from t he  gasb y the p r im a r y  ba r  and to a pro gressivelym ore  elong at edr ing.
Hence  i t  is  not surpri zing  that a l arge f r actiono f cold(molec ula r)gasp il es  up  i n  IL R (s ) r e gio n on the  $ x_ 2$ or bits , i n depe nde ntly  of t he presence o r a bsen c e o f sel f-gra vita ti onaleffect s inth e gas. The simp lest  type ofdec ou pli ng  betw e en the  ga s a nd theprimary bar  i s n ot  driven by the gas  s e l f- gravity(Helle r ,Sh l osman &En glm aier 2 001).  Ins t ea d, the g aseous ri ng  drifts  d eeperin tothe  pote n tial  wellbecauseof in t ernal dissipat i on. As the ga s  c r o ss e s th e I ILR, it los es t h e at trac t or [^2 ]  (i.e ., th e$ x_ 2 $ orbits), which le ad s to a  retr ograde preces sion (in t h e primarybarf ra m e) because ofthe m utual bar- r ing orie ntati ons. One  possibil i t y is tha t t hegas eou s ri ng/bar remain s trap pe d by th e p rimarybar  po ten tia lvalley —this res ul ts  i nsec ondar y  bar lib ra tio nabo ut th e  major  axis  ofth ep rim ary. Mo r es p ecta cu la r is  aco mplet e de c oup ling of  the seco nda r y an dit s subst antial slowdo wn  — the gas eo usbar tu m b les in t he retrograde direction (in the  pr imary  fra me) until  it  is ca ptu r ed aga in bythe p ri mar y poten t i al . T hi s effect i s cau sed b ythegravita tional torques fro m  th e primary bar  an d th e ab ili t yo f t he sec o n dary to adjustits shape(e l li pticity) d e pen di ng on t he mutu al or i entatio n of thebars. Thi stype o f b ehavior ca n lead t o a mildi nflow ac rossthe  IILRan d a ssoci ated b u rst s ofstar f or mation .

Mo de ling sel f-gravitating gaseous b ars in  nest edsystems i s m o redifficult . De coupling w asnot  obta ine d  forthis ca sei n num eric a l simulat i on s b y Wa da & Habe ( 1 9 9 2)and C omb e s (199 4).Understandably, g a s exhibits the  str o n ges t r e spon se  to the galact icba r potentia lwhich trigg ers itsin f low t owardthe ce ntral r e g io n s. Whi le t hegas accou nts  o n ly forafe w  perce nt o fthe ma ss wit h in t h e  luminous part o f a g a l axy,i tscontr ib ution i s  exp ected to r ise by a fa ctor o f $\ sim 1 0$ with in  the c ent ra l kpc. Bec a use of th is an d becau se  the  ra ndom m otio n s  with in t hi s g as are su b s ta n ti al l y l ower  than  w ithi n the ste l lar disk , t h e gas c an  be d ynamic a ll y importantwit hin t h e  central k p c —
ayannopoulos 1980),_are oriented_perpendicularly to the primary_bar and_serve_as attractors_to_gas motions in_their vicinity. We_note that the gas_distribution in the_region_is never symmetric with respect to the primary bar axis, with the nuclear ring_oriented_in the_first_and_third quadrants — this leads_to a constant drain of_angular momentum_from the gas by the primary bar and_to_a progressively more_elongated ring.

Hence it is not surprizing that a large_fraction of cold (molecular) gas piles_up in ILR(s)_region_on_the $x_2$ orbits, independently_of the presence or absence of_self-gravitational effects in the gas. The_simplest type of decoupling between the gas_and the primary bar is not_driven by the gas self-gravity_(Heller, Shlosman_& Englmaier 2001). Instead, the_gaseous ring drifts_deeper into_the potential well_because of internal dissipation. As the_gas crosses the_IILR, it loses the attractor[^2] (i.e.,_the_$x_2$ orbits), which_leads_to_a retrograde_precession (in the_primary_bar frame)_because_of the mutual bar-ring orientations. One_possibility_is that the gaseous ring/bar remains trapped_by the primary bar_potential_valley — this results_in secondary bar libration about_the major axis of the primary._More spectacular_is a_complete decoupling of the secondary and its substantial slowdown — the_gaseous bar tumbles in the retrograde_direction (in the primary_frame) until_it_is captured again_by_the primary_potential. This effect is caused by the_gravitational torques_from the primary bar and the_ability of the secondary_to_adjust its shape (ellipticity) depending on_the mutual orientation of the bars._This type of behavior can_lead_to_a mild inflow across the_IILR and associated bursts of star_formation.

Modeling self-gravitating gaseous_bars in nested systems is more difficult._Decoupling_was not obtained for this case_in_numerical simulations by Wada & Habe_(1992)_and_Combes (1994). Understandably, gas exhibits_the strongest response to the galactic_bar potential which triggers its inflow toward the central_regions. While the_gas accounts only for a_few_percent_of the mass within the luminous part of a galaxy,_its contribution_is expected to_rise by a factor of $\sim 10$ within the central_kpc. Because of this and because the_random motions within this gas are substantially lower than within the_stellar disk, the gas can be dynamically important_within the central kpc —