4.7 Article

PHOTOIONIZATION OF HIGH-ALTITUDE GAS IN A SUPERNOVA-DRIVEN TURBULENT INTERSTELLAR MEDIUM

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 721, 期 2, 页码 1397-1403

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/721/2/1397

关键词

ISM: structure

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [AST-06-07512]
  2. University of Sydney

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigate models for the photoionization of the widespread diffuse ionized gas (DIG) in galaxies. In particular, we address the long standing question of the penetration of Lyman continuum photons from sources close to the galactic midplane to large heights in the galactic halo. We find that recent hydrodynamical simulations of a supernova-driven interstellar medium (ISM) have low-density paths and voids that allow for ionizing photons from midplane OB stars to reach and ionize gas many kiloparsecs above the midplane. We find that ionizing fluxes throughout our simulation grids are larger than predicted by one-dimensional slab models, thus allowing for photoionization by O stars of low altitude neutral clouds in the Galaxy that are also detected in H alpha. In previous studies of such clouds, the photoionization scenario had been rejected and the H alpha had been attributed to enhanced cosmic ray ionization or scattered light from midplane H II regions. We do find that the emission measure distributions in our simulations are wider than those derived from H alpha observations in the Milky Way. In addition, the horizontally averaged height dependence of the gas density in the hydrodynamical models is lower than inferred in the Galaxy. These discrepancies are likely due to the absence of magnetic fields in the hydrodynamic simulations and we discuss how magnetohydrodynamic effects may reconcile models and observations. Nevertheless, we anticipate that the inclusion of magnetic fields in the dynamical simulations will not alter our primary finding that midplane OB stars are capable of producing high-altitude DIG in a realistic three-dimensional ISM.

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