4.6 Article

The Role of Outflows, Radiation Pressure, and Magnetic Fields in Massive Star Formation

期刊

ASTRONOMICAL JOURNAL
卷 160, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab9abf

关键词

-

资金

  1. NASA through Einstein Postdoctoral Fellowship - Chandra X-ray Center [PF7-180166]
  2. NASA [NAS803060]
  3. Australian Research Council [FT180100375, DP190101258]
  4. Australian National Computational Infrastructure (NCI) [jh2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stellar feedback in the form of radiation pressure and magnetically driven collimated outflows may limit the maximum mass that a star can achieve and affect the star formation efficiency of massive prestellar cores. Here we present a series of 3D adaptive mesh refinement radiation-magnetohydrodynamic simulations of the collapse of initially turbulent, massive prestellar cores. Our simulations include radiative feedback from both the direct stellar and dust-reprocessed radiation fields, and collimated outflow feedback from the accreting stars. We find that protostellar outflows punch holes in the dusty circumstellar gas along the star's polar directions, thereby increasing the size of optically thin regions through which radiation can escape. Precession of the outflows as the star's spin axis changes due to the turbulent accretion flow further broadens the outflow, and causes more material to be entrained. Additionally, the presence of magnetic fields in the entrained material leads to broader entrained outflows that escape the core. We compare the injected and entrained outflow properties and find that the entrained outflow mass is a factor of similar to 3 larger than the injected mass and the momentum and energy contained in the entrained material are similar to 25% and similar to 5% of the injected momentum and energy, respectively. As a result, we find that, when one includes both outflows and radiation pressure, the former are a much more effective and important feedback mechanism, even for massive stars with significant radiative outputs.

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

4.6
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