Paper detail

A Case Against Spinning PAHs as the Source of the Anomalous Microwave Emission

We employ an all-sky map of the anomalous microwave emission (AME) produced by component separation of the microwave sky to study correlations between the AME and Galactic dust properties. We find that while the AME is highly correlated with all tracers of dust emission, the best predictor of the AME strength is the dust radiance. Fluctuations in the AME intensity per dust radiance are uncorrelated with fluctuations in the emission from polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), casting doubt on the association between AME and PAHs. The PAH abundance is strongly correlated with the dust optical depth and dust radiance, consistent with PAH destruction in low density regions. We find that the AME intensity increases with increasing radiation field strength, at variance with predictions from the spinning dust hypothesis. Finally, the temperature-dependence of the AME per dust radiance disfavors the interpretation of the AME as thermal emission. A reconsideration of other AME carriers, such as ultrasmall silicates, and other emission mechanisms, such as magnetic dipole emission, is warranted.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.