Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byBarnard Cobb Modified over 9 years ago
1
Outflow, infall, and rotation in high-mass star forming regions
Riccardo Cesaroni Osservatorio Astrofisico di Arcetri High-mass vs low-mass: the dividing line The formation of high-mass stars: accretion vs coalescence Observations: infall, outflows, and disks Kinematical evidence supports accretion ≡≫≪ 10M⊙ ′″∼
2
Low-mass vs High-mass Theory (Shu et al. 1987): star formation from inside-out collapse onto protostar Two relevant timescales: accretion tacc = M*/(dM/dt) contraction tKH = GM*/R*L* Lowmass (< 8 MO): tacc < tKH Highmass (> 8 MO): tacc > tKH accretion on ZAMS
4
PROBLEM: High-mass stars “switch on” still accreting radiation pressure stops accretion stars > 8 MO cannot form!? SOLUTIONS Yorke (2003): Kdust< Kcrit M*/L* “Reduce’’ L*: non-spherical accretion “Increase’’ M*: large accretion rates Reduce Kdust: large grains (coalescence of lower mass stars)
5
Possible models (Non-spherical) accretion: Behrend & Maeder (2001); Yorke & Sonnhalter (2002); Tan & McKee (2003) ram pressure > radiation pressure Coalescence: Bonnell et al. (2004) many low-mass stars merge into one massive star
6
Implications & predictions
Accretion infall disks outflows isolated star formation possible massive stars form at cluster centre: (dM/dt) FWHM3 (Shu et al. 1987) massive stars form with lower mass stars: t M*1/4 (Tan & Mc Kee 2003)
7
Implications & predictions
Coalescence infall, low-mass disks, multiple outflows isolated star formation impossible massive stars form at cluster centre: large n* (108 */pc3 !) many collisions massive stars form after lower mass stars
8
best discriminant between models: kinematics of molecular gas
infall: accretion large accretion rate coalescence small(?) accretion rate outflow: accretion single massive flow coalescence multiple low-mass flows rotation: infall+ang. mom. conservation rotating disks (“only’’ in accretion model)
9
best discriminant between models: kinematics of molecular gas
infall: accretion large accretion rate coalescence small(?) accretion rate outflow: accretion single massive flow coalescence multiple low-mass flows rotation: infall+ang. mom. conservation rotating disks (“only’’ in accretion model)
10
best discriminant between models: kinematics of molecular gas
infall: accretion large accretion rate coalescence small(?) accretion rate outflow: accretion single massive flow coalescence multiple low-mass flows rotation: infall+ang. mom. conservation rotating disks (“only’’ in accretion model)
11
best discriminant between models: kinematics of molecular gas
infall: accretion large accretion rate coalescence small(?) accretion rate outflow: accretion single massive flow coalescence multiple low-mass flows rotation: infall+ang. mom. conservation rotating disks (“only’’ in accretion model)
12
Discriminating between models: observations
Observational problems: IMF high-mass stars are rare formation in clusters confusion rapid evolution: tacc=20 MO /10-3MOyr-1=2 104yr large distance: >300 pc, typically a few kpc parental environment profoundly altered Advantage: very luminous (cont. & line) and rich (molecules)!
13
High-mass star forming region 0.5 pc
14
G NIR J+H+K 10 pc
15
G 350 micron 0.5 pc Hunter et al. (2000)
16
Testi et al. Cesaroni et al.
17
Infall Difficult to reveal: Vff R-0.5 direct evidence:
red-shifted (self)absorption: ambiguous… position-velocity plots/channel maps indirect evidence: lack of support: Mgas > Mvir model fit to SED dM/dt=10-3—10-2 MOyr-1 accretion possible insufficient resolution: infall on single star?
18
Infall Difficult to reveal: Vff R-0.5 direct evidence:
red-shifted (self)absorption: ambiguous… position-velocity plots/channel maps indirect evidence: lack of support: Mgas > Mvir model fit to SED dM/dt=10-3—10-2 MOyr-1 accretion possible insufficient resolution: infall on single star?
19
Infall Difficult to reveal: Vff R-0.5 direct evidence:
red-shifted (self)absorption: ambiguous… position-velocity plots/channel maps indirect evidence: lack of support: Mgas > Mvir model fit to SED dM/dt=10-3—10-2 MOyr-1 accretion possible insufficient resolution: infall on single star?
20
Outflow Easy to detect even with low angular resolution
single-dish (>10” i.e. >0.5 pc) CO surveys of UCHIIs, IRAS sources, masers (Shepherd & Churchwell 1996; Zhang et al. 2001; Beuther et al. 2002, etc.), H2 (shocked) 2.2m emission outflows in high-mass stars do exist typical parameters: 1 pc, 5—5000 MO , 10-4—10-2 MO yr-1, dM/dt L0.7 BUT… are these from the most massive (proto)star?
21
CO(2-1) outflow & 1mm continuum Beuther et al. (2002)
22
Outflow Easy to detect even with low angular resolution
single-dish (>10” i.e. >0.5 pc) CO surveys of UCHIIs, IRAS sources, masers (Shepherd & Churchwell 1996; Zhang et al. 2001; Beuther et al. 2002, etc.), H2 (shocked) 2.2m emission outflows in high-mass stars do exist typical parms.: 1 pc, MO , MO yr-1 dM/dt L0.7 continuity from low- to high-mass BUT… is outflow from one massive (proto)star?
23
CO outflows in YSOs Churchwell (2002)
dM/dt L0.7
24
Outflow Easy to detect even with low angular resolution
single-dish (>10” i.e. >0.5 pc) CO surveys of UCHIIs, IRAS sources, masers (Shepherd & Churchwell 1996; Zhang et al. 2001; Beuther et al. 2002, etc.), H2 (shocked) 2.2m emission outflows in high-mass stars do exist typical parms.: 1 pc, MO , MO yr-1 dM/dt L0.7 continuity from low- to high-mass BUT… is outflow from one massive (proto)star?
25
infall/outflow insufficient to prove model
interferometric (>1” i.e pc) observations of selected targets in CO, HCO+, SiO, etc. (PdBI, OVRO, BIMA, NMA) “single-dish’’ outflows resolved into (massive & collimated) multiple outflows (Beuther et al. 2002) precession of outflow complicate interpretation (Shepherd et al. 2000; Gibb et al. 2003) powering source difficult to identify infall/outflow insufficient to prove model
26
CO(2-1) & mm cont. Beuther et al. (2002) single-dish (12’’ beam)
27
Beuther et al. (2003) interferometer (4’’ beam)
28
infall/outflow insufficient to prove model
interferometric (>1” i.e pc) observations of selected targets in CO, HCO+, SiO, etc. (PdBI, OVRO, BIMA, NMA) “single-dish’’ outflows resolved into (massive & collimated) multiple outflows (Beuther et al. 2002) precession of outflow complicate interpretation (Shepherd et al. 2000; Gibb et al. 2003) powering source difficult to identify infall/outflow insufficient to prove model
29
IRAS Shepherd et al. (2000) blue lobe red lobe H2 knots
30
IRAS jet in H2 line
31
Cesaroni et al. (in prep.)
IRAS Cesaroni et al. (in prep.)
32
infall/outflow insufficient to prove scenario
interferometric (>1” i.e pc) observations of selected targets in CO, HCO+, SiO, etc. (PdBI, OVRO, BIMA, NMA) “single-dish’’ outflows resolved into (massive & collimated) multiple outflows (Beuther et al. 2002) precession of outflow complicate interpretation (Shepherd et al. 2000; Gibb et al. 2003) powering source difficult to identify infall/outflow insufficient to prove scenario
33
Disks Circumstellar accretion disks predicted only by accretion model! Any evidence? Large scale (1 pc) rotating clumps seen in medium density tracers e.g. NH3 in G (Little et al. 1985) Small scale (<0.1 pc) many claims of rotating “disks’’…
34
Disks Circumstellar accretion disks predicted only by accretion model! Any evidence? Large scale (1 pc) rotating clumps seen in medium density tracers e.g. NH3 in G (Little et al. 1985) Small scale (<0.1 pc) many claims of rotating “disks’’…
35
CH3OH masers ATCA, EVN Ellingsen et al., Walsh et al. Minier et al. OH masers Merlin outflow sources Cohen et al. (2003) SiO & H2O masers VLA, VLBA e.g. Orion source I Greenhill NIR, mm & cm continuum BIMA, VLA jets/outflows in massive stars Hoare et al., Gibb et al. NH3, C18O, CS, C34S, CH3CN PdBI, OVRO, BIMA, NMA UC HIIs, Hot Cores Keto et al., Cesaroni et al., Zhang et al., …
36
CH3OH masers: stellar mass too low; H2 jets parallel to CH3OH spots (De Buizer 2003)
SiO & H2O masers: outflow or disk ? NIR-cm cont.: confusion between disk and wind emission Molecular lines: kinematical signature of disk & outflow
37
CH3OH masers W48 Minier et al. (2000) M*=6 MO
38
H2O masers Cep A HW2 Torrelles et al. (1996)
39
SiO & H2O masers: outflow or disk?
CH3OH masers: stellar mass too low; H2 jets parallel to CH3OH spots (De Buizer 2003) SiO & H2O masers: outflow or disk? NIR-cm cont.: confusion between disk and wind emission? Molecular lines: kinematical signature of disk & outflow core disk outflow outflow
40
G Shepherd & Kurtz (1999) 2.6mm cont. disk CO outflow
41
G Shepherd & Kurtz (1999) 3.6cm cont. & H2O masers
42
NGC7538S Sandell et al. (2003)
43
Cesaroni et al.; Moscadelli et al.
IRAS Cesaroni et al.; Moscadelli et al. M*=7 MO H2O masers prop. motions
44
Disks & Tori L (LO) Mdisk (MO) Ddisk (AU) M* IRAS20126 104 4 1600 7
G192.16 3 103 15 1000 6-10 NGC7538S 30000 40? G24.78 (3) 7 105 80-250 20… G29.96 9 104 300 14000 - G31.41 3 105 490 16000 B stars O stars
45
Gibb et al. (2002) Olmi et al. (2003) Beltran et al. (2004)
46
Beltran et al. (2004)
47
Beltran et al. (2004)
48
Gibb et al. (2002) Olmi et al. (2003)
49
Beltran et al. (2004) 1200 AU Hofner priv comm.
50
Disks & Tori L (LO) Mdisk (MO) Ddisk (AU) M* IRAS20126 104 4 1600 7
G192.16 3 103 15 1000 6-10 NGC7538S 30000 40 G24.78 (3) 7 105 80-250 20… G29.96 9 104 300 14000 - G31.41 3 105 490 16000 B stars O stars
51
Results “Circumcluster’’ (massive) tori in O (proto)stars
Circumstellar (Keplerian) disks in early-B (proto)stars Are disks in O (proto)stars short lived?
52
Assuming (dM/dt)acc (dM/dt)outflow
and Mdisk M* disk ioniz. & accr. rates disk life time B stars O stars B stars O stars
53
Conclusions Circumstellar (Keplerian) disks in early-B (proto)stars disk accretion likely Circumcluster (unstable) tori in O (proto)stars large accretion rates make them long-lived ACCRETION SCENARIO MORE LIKELY
55
G45.47+0.05 NH3(2,2) red-shifted absorption Hofner et al. (1999)
systemic velocity blue-shifted emission
56
Fontani et al. (2001) n R-2.6
57
CO outflows in YSOs Beuther et al. (2002)
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com Inc.
All rights reserved.