Paper detail

Importance of the Initial Conditions for Star Formation - I. Cloud Evolution and Morphology

We present a detailed parameter study of collapsing turbulent cloud cores, varying the initial density profile and the initial turbulent velocity field. We systematically investigate the influence of different initial conditions on the star formation process, mainly focusing on the fragmentation, the number of formed stars, and the resulting mass distributions. Our study compares four different density profiles (uniform, Bonnor-Ebert type, $ρ\propto r^{-1.5}$, and $ρ\propto r^{-2}$), combined with six different supersonic turbulent velocity fields (compressive, mixed, and solenoidal, initialised with two different random seeds each) in three-dimensional simulations using the adaptive-mesh refinement, hydrodynamics code FLASH. The simulations show that density profiles with flat cores produce hundreds of low-mass stars, either distributed throughout the entire cloud or found in subclusters, depending on the initial turbulence. Concentrated density profiles always lead to the formation of one high-mass star in the centre of the cloud and, if at all, low-mass stars surrounding the central one. In uniform and Bonnor-Ebert type density distributions, compressive initial turbulence leads to local collapse about 25% earlier than solenoidal turbulence. However, central collapse in the steep power-law profiles is too fast for the turbulence to have any significant influence. We conclude that (I) the initial density profile and turbulence mainly determine the cloud evolution and the formation of clusters, (II) the initial mass function (IMF) is not universal for all setups, and (III) that massive stars are much less likely to form in flat density distributions. The IMFs obtained in the uniform and Bonnor-Ebert type density profiles are more consistent with the observed IMF, but shifted to lower masses.

preprint2011arXivOpen 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.