Paper detail

The formation of NGC 3603 young starburst cluster: "prompt" hierarchical assembly or monolithic starburst?

The formation of very young massive clusters or "starburst" clusters is currently one of the most widely debated topic in astronomy. The classical notion dictates that a star cluster is formed in-situ in a dense molecular gas clump followed by a substantial residual gas expulsion. On the other hand, based on the observed morphologies of many young stellar associations, a hierarchical formation scenario is alternatively suggested. A very young (age $\approx$ 1 Myr), massive ($>10^4M_\odot$) star cluster like the Galactic NGC 3603 young cluster (HD 97950) is an appropriate testbed for distinguishing between such "monolithic" and "hierarchical" formation scenarios. A recent study by Banerjee and Kroupa (2014) demonstrates that the monolithic scenario remarkably reproduces the HD 97950 cluster. In the present work, we explore the possibility of the formation of the above cluster via hierarchical assembly of subclusters. These subclusters are initially distributed over a wide range of spatial volumes and have various modes of sub-clustering. Unlike the monolithic model that reproduces HD 97950 very well, the same is found to be prohibitive with hierarchical assembly alone. Only those systems which assemble promptly into a single cluster (in $\lesssim1$ Myr) from a close separation (all within $\lesssim2$ pc) could match the observed density profile of HD 97950 after $\approx70$% gas dispersal. These results therefore suggest that NGC 3603 young cluster has formed essentially monolithically, i.e., either in-situ or via a prompt assembly, followed by a substantial residual gas expulsion. Both scenarios are consistent with the inferred young age and the small age spread of this cluster. Future observations of molecular cloud filaments with ALMA and proper motion measurements of young clusters with Gaia will provide more direct tests of such birth environments. [Abridged]

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

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.