STELLAR FEEDBACK IN MOLECULAR CLOUDS AND ITS INFLUENCE ON THE MASS FUNCTION OF YOUNG STAR CLUSTERS

By S. M. Fall, Mark R. Krumholz, C. Matzner. 2009

145 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We investigate how the removal of interstellar material by stellar feedback limits the efficiency of star formation in molecular clouds and how this determines the shape of the mass function of young star clusters. In particular, we derive relations between the power-law exponents of the mass functions of the clouds and clusters in the limiting regimes in which the feedback is energy driven and momentum driven, corresponding to minimum and maximum radiative losses, and likely to bracket all realistic cases. We find good agreement between the predicted and observed exponents, especially for momentum-driven feedback, provided the protoclusters have roughly constant mean surface density, as indicated by observations of the star-forming clumps within molecular clouds. We also consider a variety of specific feedback mechanisms, concluding that H ii regions inflated by radiation pressure predominate in massive protoclusters, a momentum-limited process when photons can escape after only a few interactions with dust grains. We show in this case that the star formation efficiency depends on the masses and sizes of the protoclusters only through their mean surface density, thus ensuring consistency between the observed exponents of the mass functions of the clouds and clusters. Our numerical estimate of this efficiency is also consistent with observations.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/761315ac871c6c059a8d7d18ba53bda512b720e2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

Citations in the corpus

TOWARD A COMPLETE ACCOUNTING OF ENERGY AND MOMENTUM FROM STELLAR FEEDBACK IN GALAXY FORMATION SIMULATIONS (2012, background): “The similarity of mass function slopes implies that star formation efficiency in clumps, εcl ≡ M∗,cl/Mcl (where M∗,cl is mass of a star cluster a given clump of mass Mcl forms), is approximately independent of clump mass (Fall et al. 2010b).”
THE ANTENNAE GALAXIES (NGC 4038/4039) REVISITED: ADVANCED CAMERA FOR SURVEYS AND NICMOS OBSERVATIONS OF A PROTOTYPICAL MERGER (2010, background): “…disruption or “infant mortality” associated with the removal of interstellar material (see Hills 1980; Lada, Margulis & Dearborn 1984; Boily & Kroupa 2003; Bastian & Goodwin 2006; and Fall et al. 2010 for theoretical discussions and Lada & Lada 2003, FCW05, and WCF07 for observational evidence).”
Modeling UV Radiation Feedback from Massive Stars. II. Dispersal of Star-forming Giant Molecular Clouds by Photoionization and Radiation Pressure (2018, background): “…SFE and relative role of photoionization to radiation pressure are in qualitative agreement with the predictions of Kim et al. (2016), which adopted the idealizations of instantaneous star formation and spherical shell expansion (see also Fall et al. 2010; Murray et al. 2010; Rahner et al. 2017).”
Dispersal of molecular clouds by ionizing radiation (2012, background): “In more massive clouds disruption by ionisation plays a less important role (Krumholz & Matzner 2009; Murray et al. 2010; Fall et al. 2010).”
Before the first supernova: combined effects of H II regions and winds on molecular clouds (2014, unknown): “Here we take Lbol(M) to be given by Lbol(M) = (M/M⊙) 4L⊙ M < 2M⊙ 0.73(M/M⊙) 3.5L⊙ 2M⊙ < M < 20M⊙ 1140(M/M⊙)L⊙ 20M⊙ < M, (16) (Fall et al. 2010).”
THE LONG-TERM EVOLUTION OF THE GALACTIC DISK TRACED BY DISSOLVING STAR CLUSTERS (2010, background): “Observations of gas-dominated cluster-forming regions show column densities of ∼ 0.1 − 3 g cm−2 (Plume et al. 1997; Mueller et al. 2002; Shirley et al. 2003; Faúndez et al. 2004; Fontani et al. 2005); the data are summarized in Figure 1 of Fall et al. (2010).”
On the fraction of star formation occurring in bound stellar clusters (2012, background): “However, recent work has shown that actually radiative feedback may be the responsible mechanism, especially on small scales (Thompson et al. 2005; Fall et al. 2010; Murray et al. 2010; Dale et al. 2012).”
Dependence of galaxy quenching on halo mass and distance from its centre (2012, background): “Internal mechanisms include active galactic nucleus (AGN) feedback (Granato et al. 2004; Springel et al. 2005), quasar-driven winds generated by collisions of galaxies (Springel et al. 2005), and stellar (radiation, winds and/or supernova) feedback (Dekel & Silk 1986; Fall et al. 2010).”
WHAT DRIVES THE EXPANSION OF GIANT H ii REGIONS?: A STUDY OF STELLAR FEEDBACK IN 30 DORADUS (2010, background): “In particular, Krumholz & Matzner (2009) demonstrated that radiation-driven expansion imparts more momentum to the shell, accelerating the expansion at early times relative to that of gas-driven expansion.”
DIRECT NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF RADIATION PRESSURE-DRIVEN TURBULENCE AND WINDS IN STAR CLUSTERS AND GALACTIC DISKS (2012, methodology): “This condition is expected to be met under many circumstances, particularly in young star clusters (Thompson et al. 2005; Krumholz & Matzner 2009; Fall et al. 2010; Murray et al. 2010), and thus radiation pressure may still be a significant factor in limiting star formation efficiencies.”
Feedback from winds and supernovae in massive stellar clusters – I. Hydrodynamics (2012, background): “…the pressure exerted by stellar radiation may be dynamically important in massive young stellar clusters has received much attention in recent years, with Krumholz & Matzner (2009), Fall et al. (2010) and Murray et al. (2010) all arguing that radiation pressure is the dominant feedback mechanism.”
RADIATION-HYDRODYNAMIC SIMULATIONS OF THE FORMATION OF ORION-LIKE STAR CLUSTERS. II. THE INITIAL MASS FUNCTION FROM WINDS, TURBULENCE, AND RADIATION (2012, background): “Depending on protocluster properties, ionized gas and radiation pressure may also contribute to reducing the star formation rate (e.g. Fall et al. 2010; Lopez et al. 2011).”