Paper detail

Hot Galactic Winds Constrained by the X-Ray Luminosities of Galaxies

Galactic superwinds may be driven by very hot outflows generated by overlapping supernovae within the host galaxy. We use the Chevalier & Clegg (CC85) wind model and the observed correlation between X-ray luminosities of galaxies and their SFRs to constrain the mass loss rates (\dot{M}_hot) across a wide range of star formation rates (SFRs), from dwarf starbursts to ultra-luminous infrared galaxies. We show that for fixed thermalization efficiency and mass loading rate, the X-ray luminosity of the hot wind scales as L_X ~ SFR^2, significantly steeper than is observed for star-forming galaxies: L_X ~ SFR. Using this difference we constrain the mass-loading and thermalization efficiency of hot galactic winds. For reasonable values of the thermalization efficiency (<~ 1) and for SFR >~ 10 M_sun/yr we find that \dot{M}_hot/SFR <~ 1, significantly lower than required by integrated constraints on the efficiency of stellar feedback in galaxies, and potentially too low to explain observations of winds from rapidly star-forming galaxies. In addition, we highlight the fact that heavily mass-loaded winds cannot be described by the adiabatic CC85 model because they become strongly radiative.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 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.