Paper detail

Testing assumptions and predictions of star-formation theories

(Abridged). We present numerical simulations of isothermal, MHD, supersonic turbulence, designed to test various hypotheses frequently assumed in star formation(SF) theories. We consider three simulations, each with a different combination of physical size, rms sonic Mach number, and Jeans parameter, but chosen as to give the same value of the virial parameter and to conform with Larson's scaling relations. As in the non-magnetic case: we find no simultaneously subsonic and super-Jeans structures in our MHD simulations. We find that the fraction of small-scale super-Jeans structures increases when self gravity is turned on, and that the production of gravitationally unstable dense cores by turbulence alone is very low. This implies that self-gravity is in general necessary not only to induce the collapse of Jeans-unstable cores, but also to form them. We find that denser regions tend to have more negative values of the velocity divergence, implying a net inwards flow towards the regions' centers. We compare the results from our simulations with the predictions from the recent SF theories by Krumholz & McKee, Padoan & Nordlund, and Hennebelle & Chabrier, using the expressions recently provided by Federrath & Klessen. We find that none of these theories reproduces the dependence of the SFEff with Ms observed in our simulations in the MHD case. The SFEff predicted by the theories ranges between half and one order of magnitude larger than what we observe in the simulations in both the HD and the MHD cases. We conclude that the type of flow used in simulations like the ones presented here and assumed in recent SF theories, may not correctly represent the flow within actual clouds, and that theories that assume it does may be missing a fundamental aspect of the flow. We suggest that a more realistic regime may be that of hierarchical gravitational collapse.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.