Paper detail

Observational constraints on star cluster formation theory - I. The mass-radius relation

Stars form predominantly in groups usually denoted as clusters or associations. The observed stellar groups display a broad spectrum of masses, sizes and other properties, so it is often assumed that there is no underlying structure in this diversity. Here we show that the assumption of an unstructured multitude of cluster or association types might be misleading. Current data compilations of clusters show correlations between cluster mass, size, age, maximum stellar mass etc. In this first paper we take a closer look at the correlation of cluster mass and radius. We use literature data to explore relations in cluster and molecular core properties in the solar neighborhood. We show that for embedded clusters in the solar neighborhood there exists a clear correlation between cluster mass and half-mass radius of the form $M_c = C R_c^γ$ with gamma = 1.7 +/-0.2. This correlation holds for infra red K band data as well as X-ray sources and for clusters containing a hundred stars up to those consisting of a few tens of thousands of stars. The correlation is difficult to verify for clusters containing <30 stars due to low-number statistics. Dense clumps of gas are the progenitors of the embedded clusters. We find a similar slope for the mass-size relation of dense, massive clumps as for the embedded star clusters. This might point at a direct translation from gas to stellar mass: however, it is difficult to relate size measurements for clusters (stars) to those for gas profiles. Taking into account multiple paths for clump mass into cluster mass, we obtain an average star-formation efficiency of 18%{+9.3}{-5.7} for the embedded clusters in the solar neighborhood. The derived mass-radius relation gives constraints for the theory of clustered star formation. Analytical models and simulations of clustered star formation have to reproduce this relation in order to be realistic (abridged)

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.