Paper detail

Reconstructing three-dimensional densities from two-dimensional observations of molecular gas

Star formation has long been known to be an inefficient process, in the sense that only a small fraction $ε_{\rm ff}$ of the mass of any given gas cloud is converted to stars per cloud free-fall time. However, developing a successful theory of star formation will require measurements of both the mean value of $ε_{\rm ff}$ and its scatter from one molecular cloud to another. Because $ε_{\rm ff}$ is measured relative to the free-fall time, such measurements require accurate determinations of cloud volume densities. Efforts to measure the volume density from two-dimensional projected data, however, have thus far relied on treating molecular clouds as simple uniform spheres, while their real shapes are likely filamentary and their density distributions far from uniform. The resulting uncertainty in the true volume density is likely one of the major sources of error in observational estimates of $ε_{\rm ff}$. In this paper, we use a suite of simulations of turbulent, magnetized, radiative, self-gravitating star-forming clouds to examine whether it is possible to obtain more accurate volume density estimates and thereby reduce this error. We create mock observations from simulations, and show that current analysis methods relying on the spherical assumption likely yield ~ 0.26 dex underestimations and ~ 0.51 dex errors in volume density estimates, corresponding to a ~ 0.13 dex overestimation and a ~ 0.25 dex scatter in $ε_{\rm ff}$, comparable to the scatter in observed cloud samples. We build a predictive model that uses information accessible in two-dimensional measurements -- most significantly the Gini coefficient of the surface density distribution -- to estimate volume density with ~ 0.3 dex less scatter. We test our method on a recent observation of the Ophiuchus cloud, and show that it successfully reduces the $ε_{\rm ff}$ scatter.

preprint2021arXivOpen 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.