4.5 Review Book Chapter

Accretion onto Pre-Main-Sequence Stars

期刊

出版社

ANNUAL REVIEWS
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023347

关键词

star formation; accretion disks; pre-main-sequence stars; protoplanetary disks

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Accretion through circumstellar disks plays an important role in star formation and in establishing the properties of the regions in which planets form and migrate. The mechanisms by which protostellar and protoplanetary disks accrete onto low-mass stars are not clear; angular momentum transport by magnetic fields is thought to be involved, but the low-ionization conditions in major regions of protoplanetary disks lead to a variety of complex nonideal magnetohydrodynamic effects whose implications are not fully understood. Accretion in pre-main-sequence stars of masses less than or similar to 1 M-circle dot (and in at least some 2-3-M-circle dot systems) is generally funneled by the stellar magnetic field, which disrupts the disk at scales typically of order a few stellar radii. Matter moving at near free-fall velocities shocks at the stellar surface; the resulting accretion luminosities from the dissipation of kinetic energy indicate that mass addition during the T Tauri phase over the typical disk lifetime similar to 3 Myr is modest in terms of stellar evolution, but is comparable to total disk reservoirs as estimated from millimeter-wave dust emission (similar to 10(-2) M-circle dot). Pre-main-sequence accretion is not steady, encompassing timescales ranging from approximately hours to a century, with longer-timescale variations tending to be the largest. Accretion during the protostellar phase-while the protostellar envelope is still falling onto the disk-is much less well understood, mostly because the properties of the central obscured protostar are difficult to estimate. Kinematic measurements of protostellar masses with new interfometric facilities should improve estimates of accretion rates during the earliest phases of star formation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据