4.7 Article

Far-infrared SEDs of embedded protostars and dusty galaxies. I. Theory for spherical sources

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 631, 期 2, 页码 792-808

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/432659

关键词

galaxies : formation; galaxies : starburst; infrared : galaxies; radiative transfer; stars : formation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present analytic radiative transfer solutions for the spectra of unresolved, spherically symmetric, centrally heated, dusty sources. We find that the dust thermal spectrum possesses scaling relations that provide a natural classification for a broad range of sources, from low-mass protostars to dusty galaxies. In particular, we find that, given our assumptions, spectral energy distributions (SEDs) can be characterized by two distance-independent parameters, the luminosity-to-mass ratio, L/M, and the surface density, Sigma, for a set of two functions, namely, the density profile and the opacity curve. The goal is to use SEDs as a diagnostic tool in inferring the large-scale physical conditions in protostellar and extragalactic sources, and ultimately, evolutionary parameters. Our approach obviates the need to use SED templates in the millimeter to far-infrared region of the spectrum; this practice, common in the extragalactic community, relies on observed correlations established at low redshift that may not necessarily extend to high redshift. Furthermore, we demarcate the limited region of parameter space in which density profiles can be inferred from the SED, which is of particular import in the protostellar community as competing theories of star formation are characterized by different density profiles. The functionality of our model is unique in that in provides for a self-consistent analytic solution that we have validated by comparison with a well-tested radiative transfer code ( DUSTY) to find excellent agreement with numerical results over a parameter space that spans low-mass protostars to ultra-luminous infrared galaxies (ULIRGs).

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