2015
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stu2633
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accretion phase of star formation in clouds with different metallicities

Abstract: The main accretion phase of star formation is investigated in clouds with different metallicities in the range of 0 Z Z ⊙ , resolving the protostellar radius. Starting from a near-equilibrium prestellar cloud, we calculate the cloud evolution up to ∼ 100 yr after the first protostar formation. The star formation process considerably differs between clouds with lower (Z 10 −4 Z ⊙ ) and higher (Z > 10 −4 Z ⊙ ) metallicities. Fragmentation frequently occurs and many protostars appear without forming a stable circ… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
45
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 108 publications
3
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This was expected from comparison with disc fragmentation studies in the low-mass star formation regime where the irradiation is negligible, see e.g. Lichtenberg & Schleicher (2015), but also from models in the context of primordial star formation, in which stellar feedback is efficiently at work, see Greif et al (2011);; Machida & Nakamura (2015) and the Fig. 3 of Hosokawa et al (2016) for a resolution study.…”
Section: Effects Of Protostellar Irradiationmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…This was expected from comparison with disc fragmentation studies in the low-mass star formation regime where the irradiation is negligible, see e.g. Lichtenberg & Schleicher (2015), but also from models in the context of primordial star formation, in which stellar feedback is efficiently at work, see Greif et al (2011);; Machida & Nakamura (2015) and the Fig. 3 of Hosokawa et al (2016) for a resolution study.…”
Section: Effects Of Protostellar Irradiationmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…Greif et al (2012) no approx. 10 19 cm −3 Cosmological, 4 halos, averaged Stacy et al (2012) sink 10 12 cm −3 Cosmological, 1 halo, RF/NF Susa (2013) sink 3 × 10 13 cm −3 BE-sphere, 1 cloud, RF/NF Vorobyov et al (2013) 1 sink + stiff EOS 10 14 cm −3 Cosmological, 1 halo, 2D, time averaged Susa et al (2014) sink 3 × 10 13 cm −3 Cosmological, 59 halos, RF, averaged Machida & Nakamura (2015) stiff EOS 10 19 cm −3 BE-sphere, 1 cloud, time averaged Hartwig et al (2015b) sink 10 17 cm −3 Cosmological, 4 halos Hosokawa et al (2016) cut cooling 10 10 − 10 12 cm −3 Cosmological, 5 halos, RF/NF, polar coord. Stacy et al (2016) sink 10 15 cm −3 Cosmological, 1 halo, RF Hirano & Bromm (2017) cut cooling 10 10 , 10 13 , 10 15 cm −3 Cosmological, 1 halo Note.…”
Section: Comparison With Previous Simulations In the Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, the magnetic field rarely dissipates in primordial mini-halos and starburst galaxies with a relatively high ionization degree (or small magnetic diffusivity), while it significantly dissipates in our galaxy and more evolved galaxies with a lower ionization degree (or large magnetic diffusivity). Although using three-dimensional simulations, some studies focused on star formation in different environments with different metallicities (Jappsen et al 2007(Jappsen et al , 2009aDopcke et al 2011Dopcke et al , 2013Bate 2014;Chiaki et al 2016), in addition to our previous studies (Machida 2008b;Machida et al 2009,b;Machida & Nakamura 2015), such studies ignored the effect and dissipation of magnetic field. This is because the diffusion rate for the magnetic field, which is derived from the ionization degree of the star forming cloud, in different environments or different metallicities had not been investigated until they were estimated by Susa et al (2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%