Paper detail

Infrared [Fe II] Emission Lines from Radiative Atomic Shocks

[Fe II] emission lines are prominent in the infrared (IR), and they are important diagnostic tools for radiative atomic shocks. We investigate the emission characteristics of [Fe II] lines using a shock code developed by Raymond (1979) with updated atomic parameters. We first review general characteristics of IR [Fe II] emission lines from shocked gas, and derive [Fe II] line fluxes as a function of shock speed and ambient density. We have compiled the available IR [Fe II] line observations of interstellar shocks and compare them to the ratios predicted from our model. The sample includes both young and old supernova remnants in the Galaxy and the Large Magellanic Cloud and several Herbig-Haro objects. We find that the observed ratios of IR [Fe II] lines generally fall on our grid of shock models, but the ratios of some mid-infrared lines, e.g., [Fe II] 35.35 um/[Fe II] 25.99 um, [Fe II] 5.340 um/[Fe II] 25.99 um, and [Fe II] 5.340 um/[Fe II] 17.94 um, are significantly offset from our model grid. We discuss possible explanations and conclude that the uncertainty in atomic rates might be the major source of uncertainty, while uncertainties in the shock modeling and the observations certainly exist.

preprint2016arXivOpen 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.