4.7 Review

A model of supernova feedback in galaxy formation

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03665.x

关键词

stars : formation; supernovae : general; supernova remnants; galaxies : formation; galaxies : ISM; galaxies : starburst

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A model of supernova feedback during disc galaxy formation is developed. The model incorporates infall of cooling gas from a halo, and outflow of hot gas from a multiphase interstellar medium (ISM). The star formation rate is determined by balancing the energy dissipated in collisions between cold gas clouds with that supplied by supernovae in a disc marginally unstable to axisymmetric instabilities. Hot gas is created by thermal evaporation of cold gas clouds in supernova remnants, and criteria are derived to estimate the characteristic temperature and density of the hot component and hence the net mass outflow rate. A number of refinements of the model are investigated, including a simple model of a galactic fountain, the response of the cold component to the pressure of the hot gas, pressure-induced star formation and chemical evolution. The main conclusion of this paper is that low rates of star formation can expel a large fraction of the gas from a dwarf galaxy. For example, a galaxy with circular speed similar to 50 km s(-1) can expel similar to 60-80 per cent of its gas over a time-scale of similar to 1 Gyr, with a star formation rate that never exceeds similar to 0.1 M. yr(-1) Effective feedback can therefore take place in a quiescent mode and does not require strong bursts of star formation. Even a large galaxy, such as the Milky Way, might have lost as much as 20 per cent of its mass in a supernova-driven wind. The models developed here suggest that dwarf galaxies at high redshifts will have low average star formation rates and may contain extended gaseous discs of largely unprocessed gas. Such extended gaseous discs might explain the numbers, metallicities and metallicity dispersions of damped Lyman alpha systems.

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