Paper detail

Rethinking a Mysterious Molecular Cloud

I present high-resolution column density maps of two molecular clouds having strikingly different star formation rates. To better understand the unusual, massive G216-2.5, a molecular cloud with no massive star formation, the distribution of its molecular gas is compared to that of the Rosette Molecular Cloud. Far-infrared data from Herschel are used to derive $N(\mathrm{H}_2)$ maps of each cloud and are combined with $I_{\mathrm{CO}}$ data to determine the CO-to-H$_2$ ratio, $X_{\mathrm{CO}}$. In addition, the probability distribution functions (PDFs) and cumulative mass fractions of the clouds are compared. For G216-2.5, $< N(\mathrm{H}_2) >=7.8\times 10^{20} cm^{-2}$ and $< X_{\mathrm{CO}} > =2.2\times 10^{20} (K km s^{-1})^{-1}$; for the Rosette, $< N(\mathrm{H}_2) > =1.8\times 10^{21} cm^{-2}$ and $ < X_{\mathrm{CO}} > =2.8\times 10^{20} (K km s^{-1})^{-1}$. The PDFs of both clouds are log-normal for extinctions below $\sim 2$ mag and both show departures from log-normality at high extinctions. Although it is the less-massive cloud, the Rosette has a higher fraction of its mass in the form of dense gas and contains $1389 M_\odot$ of gas above the so-called extinction threshold for star formation, $A_V = 7.3$ mag. The G216-2.5 cloud has $874 M_\odot$ of dense gas above this threshold.

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.

Authors

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.