Paper detail

Self-Consistent Analysis of OH Zeeman Observations

Crutcher, Hakobian, and Troland (2009) used OH Zeeman observations of four nearby molecular dark clouds to show that the ratio of mass to magnetic flux was smaller in the ~0.1 pc cores than in the ~1 pc envelopes, in contradiction to the prediction of ambipolar diffusion driven core formation. A crucial assumption was that the magnetic field direction is nearly the same in the envelope and core regions of each cloud. Mouschovias and Tassis (2009) have argued that the data are not consistent with this assumption, and presented a new analysis that changes the conclusions of the study. Here we show that the data are in fact consistent with the nearly uniform field direction assumption; hence, the original study is internally self-consistent and the conclusions are valid under the assumptions that were made. We also show that the Mouschovias and Tassis model of magnetic fields in cloud envelopes is inconsistent with their own analysis of the data. However, the data do not rule out a more complex field configuration that future observations may discern.

preprint2009arXivOpen 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.