4.7 Article

FORMATION OF AN O-STAR CLUSTER BY HIERARCHICAL ACCRETION IN G20.08-0.14 N

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 706, 期 2, 页码 1036-1053

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/706/2/1036

关键词

H II regions; ISM: individual (G20.08-0.14); masers; stars: formation

资金

  1. SMA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spectral line and continuum observations of the ionized and molecular gas in G20.08-0.14 N explore the dynamics of accretion over a range of spatial scales in this massive star-forming region. Very Large Array (VLA) observations of NH3 at 4 '' angular resolution show a large-scale (0.5 pc) molecular accretion flow around and into a star cluster with three small, bright H II regions. Higher resolution (0.'' 4) observations with the Submillimeter Array in hot core molecules (CH3CN, OCS, and SO2) and the VLA in NH3 show that the two brightest and smallest H II regions are themselves surrounded by smaller scale (0.05 pc) accretion flows. The axes of rotation of the large- and small-scale flows are aligned, and the timescale for the contraction of the cloud is short enough, 0.1 Myr, for the large-scale accretion flow to deliver significant mass to the smaller scales within the star formation timescale. The flow structure appears to be continuous and hierarchical from larger to smaller scales. Millimeter radio recombination line (RRL) observations at 0.'' 4 angular resolution indicate rotation and outflow of the ionized gas within the brightest H II region (A). The broad recombination lines and a continuum spectral energy distribution (SED) that rises continuously from cm to mm wavelengths, are both characteristic of the class of H II regions known as broad recombination line objects. The SED indicates a density gradient inside this H II region, and the RRLs suggest supersonic flows. These observations are consistent with photoevaporation of the inner part of the rotationally flattened molecular accretion flow. We also report the serendipitous detection of a new NH3 (3,3) maser.

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