Paper detail

Ambipolar diffusion regulated collapse of filaments threaded by perpendicular magnetic fields

We numerically reproduce the density profiles for filaments that are in magnetohydrostatic and pressure equilibrium with their surroundings obtained in Tomisaka (2014) and show that these equilibria are dynamically stable. If the effect of ambipolar diffusion is considered, these filaments lose magnetic support initiating cloud collapse. The filaments do not lose magnetic flux. Rather the magnetic flux is redistributed within the filament from the centre towards the envelope. The rate of the collapse is inversely proportional to the fractional ionisation and two gravitationally-driven ambipolar diffusion regimes for the collapse are observed as predicted in Mouschovias & Morton (1991). For high values of the ionisation coefficient, that is $X \geq 10^{-7}$, the gas is strongly coupled to the magnetic field and the Jeans length is larger than the ambipolar diffusion length scale. Then the collapse is governed by magnetically-regulated ambipolar diffusion. For $X \lesssim 10^{-8}$, the gas is weakly coupled to the magnetic field and the magnetic support is removed by gravitationally-dominated ambipolar diffusion. Here, neutrals and ions only collide sporadically, that is the ambipolar diffusion length scale is larger than the Jeans length. When decaying turbulence is included, additional support is provided to the filament. This slows down the collapse of the filament even in the absence of a magnetic field. When a magnetic field is present, the collapse rate increases by a ratio smaller than for the non-magnetic case. This is because of a speed-up of the ambipolar diffusion due to larger magnetic field gradients generated by the turbulence and because the ambipolar diffusion aids the dissipation of turbulence below the ambipolar diffusion length scale. The highest increase in the rate is observed for the lowest ionisation coefficient and the highest turbulent intensity.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.