4.7 Article

Star formation at very low metallicity. II. On the insignificance of metal-line cooling during the early stages of gravitational collapse

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 660, 期 2, 页码 1332-1343

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/513085

关键词

galaxies : formation; molecular processes; stars : formation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We study the influence of low levels of metal enrichment on the cooling and collapse of ionized gas in small protogalactic halos using three-dimensional, smoothed particle hydrodynamics simulations. Our initial conditions represent protogalaxies forming within a fossil'' H ii region, a previously ionized H ii region which has not yet had time to cool and recombine. Prior to cosmological reionization, such regions should be relatively common, since the characteristic lifetimes of the likely ionizing sources are significantly shorter than a Hubble time. We show that in these regions, H-2 is the dominant and most effective coolant, and that it is the amount of H2 formed that determines whether or not the gas can collapse and form stars. At the low metallicities ( Z < 10(-3) Z(circle dot)) thought to be associated with the transition from Population III to early Population II star formation, metal-line cooling has an almost negligible effect on the evolution of low-density gas, altering the density and temperature evolution of the gas by less than 1% compared to the metal-free case at densities below 1 cm(-3) and temperatures above 2000 K. Although there is evidence that metal-line cooling becomes more effective at higher density, we find no significant differences in behavior from the metal-free case at any density below our sink particle creation threshold at n = 500 cm (-3). Increasing the metallicity also increases the importance of metal-line cooling, but it does not significantly affect the dynamical evolution of the low-density gas until Z similar to 0.1 Z(circle dot). This result holds regardless of whether or not an ultraviolet background is present.

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

4.7
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