4.6 Article

Skymaps of observables of three-dimensional magnetohydrodynamic astrosphere models

Journal

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
Volume 634, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937017

Keywords

stars: winds, outflows; ISM: bubbles; magnetohydrodynamics (MHD); shock waves

Funding

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [SCHE334/9-2]
  2. Ruhr Astroparticle and Plasma Physics (RAPP) Center [St-2014-040]
  3. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  4. STFC [ST/J001333/1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Context. Three-dimensional models of astrospheres have recently become of interest. However, comparisons between these models and observations are non-trivial because of the two-dimensional nature of observations.Aims. By projecting selected physical values of three-dimensional models of astrospheres onto the surface of a sphere that is centred on a virtual all-sky observer, these models can be compared to observational data in different observables: the column density, bremsstrahlung flux, rotation measure, H alpha flux, and synchrotron or cyclotron flux.Methods. Projections were calculated by rotating and moving the astrosphere model to the desired position and orientation and by then computing the value of a given patch on the sphere by a modified line-of-sight integration. Contributions to the selected observable made by all model cells that are connected to the patch by the line of sight in question were taken into account.Results. When the model produces a bow shock, a distinct parabolic structure produced by the outer astrosheath can be seen in every observable of the projection, the exact shape depending on the orientations of the line of sight and the stellar motion. Of all four examined astrosphere models, only that of lambda Cephei shows fluxes that are higher than current observational thresholds. This is due to the strong stellar wind and interstellar inflow of the lambda Cephei model.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available