Paper detail

Accuracy requirements to test the applicability of the random cascade model to supersonic turbulence

A model, which is widely used for inertial rang statistics of supersonic turbulence in the context of molecular clouds and star formation, expresses (measurable) relative scaling exponents Z_p of two-point velocity statistics as a function of two parameters, beta and Delta. The model relates them to the dimension D of the most dissipative structures, D=3-Delta/(1-beta). While this description has proved most successful for incompressible turbulence (beta=Delta=2/3, and D=1), its applicability in the highly compressible regime remains debated. For this regime, theoretical arguments suggest D=2 and Delta=2/3, or Delta=1. Best estimates based on 3D periodic box simulations of supersonic isothermal turbulence yield Delta=0.71 and D=1.9, with uncertainty ranges of Delta in [0.67, 0.78] and D in [2.04,1.60]. With these 5-10\% uncertainty ranges just marginally including the theoretical values of Delta=2/3 and D=2, doubts remain whether the model indeed applies and, if it applies, for what values of beta and Delta. We use a Monte Carlo approach to mimic actual simulation data and examine what factors are most relevant for the fit quality. We estimate that 0.1% (0.05%) accurate Z_p, with p=1...5, should allow for 2% (1%) accurate estimates of beta and Delta in the highly compressible regime, but not in the mildly compressible regime. We argue that simulation-based Z_p with such accuracy are within reach of today's computer resources. If this kind of data does not allow for the expected high quality fit of beta and Delta, then this may indicate the inapplicability of the model for the simulation data. In fact, other models than the one we examine here have been suggested.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 topics

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.