4.7 Article

Shaping planetary nebulae by light jets

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 391, Issue 3, Pages 1063-1074

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13935.x

Keywords

ISM: jets and outflows; planetary nebulae: general; X-rays: ISM

Funding

  1. Asher Fund for Space Research at the Technion

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We conduct numerical simulations of axisymmetrical jets expanding into a spherical asymptotic giant branch (AGB) slow wind. The three-dimensional flow is simulated with an axially symmetric numerical code. We concentrate on jets that are active for a relatively short time. Our results strengthen other studies that show that jets can account for many morphological features observed in planetary nebulae (PNs). Ourmain results are as follows. (1) With a single jet's launching episode, we can reproduce a lobe structure having a 'front lobe', that is a small bulge on the front of the main lobe, such as that in the PN Mz 3. (2) In some runs, dense clumps are formed along the symmetry axis, such as those observed in the pre-PN M1-92. (3) The mass-loss history of the slow wind has a profound influence on the PN structure. (4) A dense expanding torus (ring; disc) is formed in most of our runs. The torus is formed from the inflated lobes and not from a separate equatorial mass-loss episode. (5) The torus and lobes are formed at the same time and from the same mass-loss rate episode. However, when the slow wind density is steep enough, the ratio of the distance divided by the radial velocity is larger for regions closer to the equatorial plane than for regions closer to the symmetry axis. (6) With the short jet-active phase, a linear relation between distance and expansion velocity is obtained in many cases. (7) Regions at the front of the lobe are moving sufficiently fast to excite some visible emission lines.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available