2022
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stac3223
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamical mass measurements of two protoplanetary discs

Abstract: ALMA observations of line emission from planet forming discs have demonstrated to be an excellent tool to probe the internal disc kinematics, often revealing subtle effects related to important dynamical processes occurring in them, such as turbulence, or the presence of planets, that can be inferred from pressure bumps perturbing the gas motion, or from detection of the planetary wake. In particular, we have recently shown for the case of the massive disc in Elias 2-27 how one can use such kind of observation… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
2
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There is growing evidence of other Class 0/I sources that are marginally gravitationally unstable (e.g., Kwon et al 2011;Tobin et al 2020;Xu 2022). Furthermore, from an evolutionary standpoint, this is in line with evidence of Class II sources with Q that largely falls within 1−10 (e.g., Kwon et al 2015;Cleeves et al 2016;Booth et al 2019;Paneque-Carreño et al 2021;Schwarz et al 2021;Sierra et al 2021;Veronesi et al 2021;Lodato et al 2023;Ueda et al 2022;Yoshida et al 2022).…”
Section: Continuum Forward Ray-tracingsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…There is growing evidence of other Class 0/I sources that are marginally gravitationally unstable (e.g., Kwon et al 2011;Tobin et al 2020;Xu 2022). Furthermore, from an evolutionary standpoint, this is in line with evidence of Class II sources with Q that largely falls within 1−10 (e.g., Kwon et al 2015;Cleeves et al 2016;Booth et al 2019;Paneque-Carreño et al 2021;Schwarz et al 2021;Sierra et al 2021;Veronesi et al 2021;Lodato et al 2023;Ueda et al 2022;Yoshida et al 2022).…”
Section: Continuum Forward Ray-tracingsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…Although IM Lup and HD 142527 are both disks around T Tauri stars, they show more than one order of magnitude difference in their C I column densities. The IM Lup disk is also one order of magnitude more massive (Zhang et al 2021;Lodato et al 2023) than that of HD 142527 (Temmink et al 2023), which implies that the inferred C I column density is not particularly sensitive to the total disk mass, as previously indicated in the models of Pascucci et al (2023). The large millimeter dust cavity (≈100 au) of the HD 142527 disk leads to increased UV transparency, and thus also likely contributes to its larger C I column density.…”
Section: I Emission Morphology and Column Densitysupporting
confidence: 55%
“…IM Lup is a young (∼1 Myr), approximately solar-mass, T Tauri star located in the Lupus star-forming region (Mawet et al 2012;Alcalá et al 2017;) at a distance of d = 158 pc (Gaia Collaboration et al 2018) that hosts a massive (Zhang et al 2021;Lodato et al 2023) and unusually large protoplanetary disk extending to several hundreds of astronomical units in its millimeter dust (Andrews et al 2018;Huang et al 2018), near-infrared (NIR)/scattered light (Avenhaus et al 2018), and molecular line emission (Panić et al 2009;Cleeves et al 2016;Law et al 2021a). The outer region of its 12 CO gas disk, which reaches a maximum radius of ∼1000 au, is diffuse and envelope-like, potentially indicating the presence of an external photoevaporative wind (Haworth et al 2017).…”
Section: The Im Lup Diskmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Later on, Xu (2022) further demonstrates that the majority of Class 0/I disks in a recent multi-wavelength survey are consistent with being gravitationally self-regulated, and the low apparent mass is mainly a result of high optical depth hiding most disk mass. High masses in young disks have also been independently demonstrated in observational studies using techniques that are less affected by high optical depth (e.g., McClure et al 2016;Terry et al 2022;Lodato et al 2023).…”
Section: Motivations Of Model Assumptionsmentioning
confidence: 84%