4.7 Article

Hot and diffuse clouds near the galactic center probed by metastable H+31,2,3

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 632, 期 2, 页码 882-893

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/432679

关键词

astrochemistry; galaxy : center; ISM : clouds; ISM : molecules; molecular processes; radiation mechanisms : nonthermal

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using an absorption line from the metastable (J; K) ( 3; 3) level of H-3(+) together with other lines of H-3(+) and CO observed along several sight lines, we have discovered a vast amount of high-temperature (T similar to 250 K) and low-density (n similar to 100 cm(-3)) gas with a large velocity dispersion in the central molecular zone (CMZ) of the Galaxy, i. e., within 200 pc of the center. Approximately three-fourths of the H-3(+) along the line of sight to the brightest source we observed, the Quintuplet object GCS 3-2, is inferred to be in the CMZ, with the remaining H-3(+) located in intervening spiral arms. About half of the H-3(+) in the CMZ has velocities near similar to -100 km s(-1), indicating that it is associated with the 180 pc radius expanding molecular ring, which approximately forms the outer boundary of the CMZ. The other half, with velocities of similar to -50 and similar to 0 km s(-1), is probably closer to the center. CO is not very abundant in these clouds. Hot and diffuse gas in which the (3, 3) level is populated was not detected toward several dense clouds and diffuse clouds in the Galactic disk where large column densities of colder H-3(+) have been reported previously. Thus, the newly discovered environment appears to be unique to the CMZ. The large observed H-3(+) column densities in the CMZ suggest an ionization rate much higher than in the diffuse interstellar medium in the Galactic disk. Our finding that the H-3(+) in the CMZ is almost entirely in diffuse clouds indicates that the reported volume filling factor (f >= 0.1) for n >= 10(4) cm(-3) clouds in the CMZ is an overestimate by at least an order of magnitude.

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