4.7 Article

THE INFRARED SPECTRA OF VERY LARGE IRREGULAR POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS (PAHs): OBSERVATIONAL PROBES OF ASTRONOMICAL PAH GEOMETRY, SIZE, AND CHARGE

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 697, 期 1, 页码 311-327

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/697/1/311

关键词

astrochemistry; infrared: ISM; ISM: lines and bands; ISM: molecules; line: identification; molecular data; techniques: spectroscopic

资金

  1. NASA's
  2. Spitzer Space Telescope Archival and General Observer Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mid-infrared (IR) spectra of six large, irregular polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) with formulae (C84H24-C120H36) have been computed using density functional theory (DFT). Trends in the dominant band positions and intensities are compared to those of large, compact PAHs as a function of geometry, size, and charge. Irregular edge moieties that are common in terrestrial PAHs, such as bay regions and rings with quartet hydrogens, are shown to be uncommon in astronomical PAHs. As for all PAHs comprised solely of C and H reported to date, mid-IR emission from irregular PAHs fails to produce a strong CCstr band at 6.2 mu m, the position characteristic of the important, class A astronomical PAH spectra. Earlier studies showed that inclusion of nitrogen within a PAH shifts this to 6.2 mu m for PAH cations. Here we show that this band shifts to 6.3 mu m in nitrogenated PAH anions, close to the position of the CC stretch in class B astronomical PAH spectra. Thus, nitrogenated PAHs may be important in all sources and the peak position of the CC stretch near 6.2 mu m appears to directly reflect the PAH cation to anion ratio. Large irregular PAHs exhibit features at 7.8 mu m but lack them near 8.6 mu m. Hence, the 7.7 mu m astronomical feature is produced by a mixture of small and large PAHs while the 8.6 mu m band can only be produced by large compact PAHs. As with the CCstr, the position and profile of these bands reflect the PAH cation to anion ratio.

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