Paper detail

Comparing star formation models with interferometric observations of the protostar NGC 1333 IRAS 4A. I. Magnetohydrodynamic collapse models

Observations of dust polarized emission toward star forming regions trace the magnetic field component in the plane of the sky and provide constraints to theoretical models of cloud collapse. We compare high-angular resolution observations of the submillimeter polarized emission of the low-mass protostellar source NGC 1333 IRAS 4A with the predictions of three different models of collapse of magnetized molecular cloud cores. We compute the Stokes parameters for the dust emission for the three models. We then convolve the results with the instrumental response of the Submillimeter Array observation toward IRAS 4A. Finally, we compare the synthetic maps with the data, varying the model parameters and orientation, and we assess the quality of the fit by a χ^2 analysis. High-angular resolution observations of polarized dust emission can constraint the physical properties of protostars. In the case of IRAS 4A, the best agreements with the data is obtained for models of collapse of clouds with mass-to-flux ratio >2 times the critical value, initial uniform magnetic field of strength ~0.5 mG, and age of the order of a few 10^4 yr since the onset of collapse. Magnetic dissipation, if present, is found to occur below the resolution level of the observations. Including a previously measured temperature profile of IRAS 4A leads to a more realistic morphology and intensity distribution. We also show that ALMA has the capability of distinguishing among the three different models adopted in this work. Our results are consistent with the standard theoretical scenario for the formation of low-mass stars, where clouds initially threaded by large-scale magnetic fields become unstable and collapse, trapping the field in the nascent protostar and the surrounding circumstellar disk. In the collapsing cloud, the dynamics is dominated by gravitational and magnetic forces.

preprint2011arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.