Paper detail

Dust models post-Planck: constraining the far-infrared opacity of dust in the diffuse interstellar medium

We compare the performance of several dust models in reproducing the dust spectral energy distribution (SED) per unit extinction in the diffuse interstellar medium (ISM). We use our results to constrain the variability of the optical properties of big grains in the diffuse ISM, as published by the Planck collaboration. We use two different techniques to compare the predictions of dust models to data from the Planck HFI, IRAS and SDSS surveys. First, we fit the far-infrared emission spectrum to recover the dust extinction and the intensity of the interstellar radiation field (ISRF). Second, we infer the ISRF intensity from the total power emitted by dust per unit extinction, and then predict the emission spectrum. In both cases, we test the ability of the models to reproduce dust emission and extinction at the same time. We identify two issues. Not all models can reproduce the average dust emission per unit extinction: there are differences of up to a factor $\sim2$ between models, and the best accord between model and observation is obtained with the more emissive grains derived from recent laboratory data on silicates and amorphous carbons. All models fail to reproduce the variations in the emission per unit extinction if the only variable parameter is the ISRF intensity: this confirms that the optical properties of dust are indeed variable in the diffuse ISM. Diffuse ISM observations are consistent with a scenario where both ISRF intensity and dust optical properties vary. The ratio of the far-infrared opacity to the $V$ band extinction cross-section presents variations of the order of $\sim20\%$ ($40-50\%$ in extreme cases), while ISRF intensity varies by $\sim30\%$ ($\sim60\%$ in extreme cases). This must be accounted for in future modelling.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 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.

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.