Protostellar/planetary disk observations (and what they might imply)
Download
1 / 38

Protostellar/planetary disk observations (and what they might imply) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 68 Views
  • Uploaded on

Protostellar/planetary disk observations (and what they might imply). Lee Hartmann University of Michigan. What do we want to know?. What are disk masses? How is the mass distributed? Is there “turbulence”? What is it like? where does it occur? What transport processes are operating?.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Protostellar/planetary disk observations (and what they might imply)' - freya


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Protostellar/planetary disk observations (and what they might imply)

Lee Hartmann

University of Michigan


What do we want to know
What do we want to know? might imply)

  • What are disk masses?

  • How is the mass distributed?

  • Is there “turbulence”? What is it like? where does it occur?

  • What transport processes are operating?

  • I’ll talk about observations instead...

    • dust mass estimates

    • disk structure

    • time-dependence


disk masses ≈ dust masses might imply)

measure here,

“optically thin”

star

disk


Disk masses from dust emission
Disk masses from dust emission might imply)

850m fluxes (Taurus)

Protostars

accreting

Andrews & Williams 2005

median MINIMUM mass (100x dust) ≈ 10 M(J)


Caveat: other regions (e.g., Orion Nebula Cluster) may show systematically smaller “disk” masses

(outer disk...)

Eisner et al. 2008


However: systematically smaller “disk” masses

  • The dust opacity problem

  • maybe – the “where” problem


The dust opacity problem
The dust opacity problem systematically smaller “disk” masses

Observed spectral slopes imply that dust must grow from ISM sizes;

if growth is does not stop at ~ few cm, opacities are LOWER than typically adopted – disk masses are then larger than usually estimated

usual value

spectral index

X

Mie calculation for power-law size distribution to a(max); D’Alessio et al. 2001


The dust opacity problem1
The dust opacity problem systematically smaller “disk” masses

“Clint Eastwood question”:

do we feel lucky?

(especially in outer disk)

usual value

D’Alessio et al. 2001

Dominik & Dullemond 05


Where is the mass? systematically smaller “disk” masses

usual MMSN

?

Conventional models (MMSN) yield S ∝ R –p ,

p ~ 1.5 - 0.4, <p> ~ 0.8:

⇒ most mass at large R

Best we can do: however, (1) no k(R) (2) can’t resolve and/or limit R< 10 AU because of optical depth

Andrews et al. 2009


Disk accretion: statistical measure of gas systematically smaller “disk” masses

dM/dt x 106 yr = 0.1M*

Calvet et al. 2004,

Muzerolle et al. 2003,

2005, White & Ghez 2001,

White & Basri 2003, Natta et al 2004

submm <Md> / 106 yr

⇒ masses from dust emission may be underestimates


“large” dust (≥1mm); H = ?? systematically smaller “disk” masses

Protostellar/planetary disks (~ few Myr)

flared disk surface,

“small” (~ 1μm) dust, ~3-5H

optically thick to stellar radiation

not expected; turbulence??

as expected


Grain growth for mm-wave emission but not at 10 systematically smaller “disk” massesmm ⇒ upper layers have small dust

“ISM”

big grains

D’Alessio et al. 2001


Scattered light images – must be some growth/settling, otherwise disks are too “fat”

Stapelfeldt et al

D’Alessio et al. 2001


Dust evolution
Dust evolution otherwise disks are too “fat”

Models for:

 (depletion of small dust =

1

0.1

0.01

0.001

Depletion < 0.1% in inner disk upper layers after 5 Myr

(Hernandez & IRAC disk team, 2007)


Disks flatten with age otherwise disks are too “fat”

Sicilia-Aguilar et al. 2009


some correlation of disappearance of silicate feature with less “flared” disk;

grain growth/settling;

depletions of small dust ≈ 10-1 – 10-3 (good for MRI?)

changes in crystallinity (Bouwman, Sargent et al.)

less flared

Watson, IRS disk team, 2009

Furlan et al. 2006


Disk “frequency” (small dust less “flared” disk; < 10 AU) decreases over few Myr

disk clearing timescales range over an order of magnitude

⇒ initial conditions

⇒ angular momentum

Hernandez et al. 2007


Disk frequencies decrease rapidly above 1 M less “flared” disk; 

Lada et al. 2006

Disk evolution timescales much faster at higher masses (consistent with dM/dt increasing with M* )


not much known about gas content; less “flared” disk;

inner disk gas not detected (warm CO ro-vib transitions) in disks without near-IR dust emission

Najita, Carr, Mathieu 2003

no CO 2mm emission

However accretion stops when the near-IR excess disappears

IR excess


Mass accretion rate decreases with time
Mass accretion rate decreases with time less “flared” disk;

Viscous evolution model

Hartmann et al. (1998), Muzerolle et al. (2001), Calvet et al. (2005)

.50

.23

.12

Fraction of accreting objects decreases with time


Why do t tauri stars accrete turbulence
Why do T Tauri stars accrete? turbulence? less “flared” disk;

  • Inner disk (< 0.1 AU) – dust evaporated, ionized, MRI

  • beyond? MRI active layers (Gammie)?

    • why the dM/dt vs. M* dependence? may work...

    • if dust settling needed to maintain ionization... why not more variable? why not any apparent dependence on SED?

    • GI until dust evaporation? (e.g. Rice & Armitage)


X-ray or EUV heating?... (ionization) less “flared” disk;

Pascucci et al. 2007

Espaillat et al. 2007

CO J=6-5 in TW Hya; may also need X-ray heating (Qi et al. 2006)


Magnetic fields in disks? less “flared” disk;

Cold jets driven by accretion energy

280 AU

Burrows et al.

Calvet 1998


~ 0.1 AU less “flared” disk;

280 AU

Coffey et al. 2007; high-v jet from 0.2-0.5 AU

low-v flow from < 2 AU... but indirect argument

Burrows et al.


T Tauri outflows... less “flared” disk;

low-velocity wind; photoevaporation?

high-velocity wind

accretion rate →

Hartigan et al. 1995



FU Ori objects: ~ 0.01 M(sun) accreted in ~ 100 years; unlikely to be accreted from 100 AU in this time

⇒ large lump of material at ≈ few AU, at least in protostellar phase

Ibrahimov


Zhu et al. 2008, 2009; dead zone + active layer; outbursts during infall to disk

(also Armitage et al. 01, Vorobyov & Basu 05,6,7,8)

M*

Mdisk


Model vs. observation: ridiculous comparison or important suggestion?

model for FU Ori outbursts @ 1 Myr


“Dead zone” (Gammie 1996) suggestion?

Difficult to explain FU Ori outburst without something like a massive dead zone at ~ 1 AU


Zhu et al. 2009 model w/dead zone suggestion?

MRI?

Comparison with Desch reconstruction of solar nebula from “Nice” model


Inner disk holes: consequence of very rapid inner disk accretion?

Hughes et al. 2009

Calvet et al. 2005

TW Hya

D’Alessio et al. 2005


Pre transitional disk lkca 15 gap
Pre-Transitional Disk LkCa 15: accretion?Gap?

median Taurus SED = optically thick full disk

outer radius ≈ 40 AU?

photosphere

large excess, ~optically thick disk

Increasing flux/ optically thick disk

Espaillat & IRS team, 2007


“Transition/evolved disk” timescale? accretion?

≈ 15% of “primordial” disks in Taurus ⇒ < 1 Myr

Luhman et al. 2009 (inconsistent with Currie et al. 2009)


F accretion?l →

l→

“Transition” disks; difficult to detect if the gap/hole is not large (~ 3x in radius)

We are probably missing many gaps


LkCa 15; CO not double-peaked; distributed in radius accretion?

V836 Tau: CO double-peaked; outer truncation (?)

Najita, Crockett, & Carr 2008


Irresponsible speculations accretion?

  • Disks must generally be massive at early times. Unless MRI is much more effective than we now think, ⇒ pileup of mass, especially in inner disk

  • Pileup (aka “dead zone”) is attractive!

    • explains FU Ori outbursts

    • helps explain “luminosity problem” of protostars (accretion rate onto protostar < infall rate; Kenyon et al 1990,94; Enoch et al. 2009)

    • dM/dt(infall) > dM/dt(accretion) helps to make disk evolution more strongly dependent upon initial angular momentum ⇒ variation of disk evolutionary lifetimes

    • more mass to make super Jupiters in the inner disk

    • more mass to throw away or accrete

    • potentially useful effects on migration

  • Minus; direct detection in dust emission not currently feasible, but does not contradict current observations... ALMA


  • summary of disk observations accretion?

    • Disk frequencies (dust emission) not very different from 3m ⇒ 24m  evolution similar from 0.1 to ~ 10 AU

    • decay time ≈ 3 Myr (but varies by 10x)

    • Gas accretion ceases as IR excess disappears- clearing of inner disk

    • T Tauri stars accrete ~ MMSN (gas) during their lifetimes; why?

    • Small dust in upper disk layers: turbulent support?

    • Evidence for dust settling/growth, increasing with age (depletions ~ 0.1-0.001); also X-ray and/or EUV heating in uppermost disk layers

    • “Transitional disks (holes, gaps)” ~10% @ 1-2 Myr

    • Who knows what is happening at 1 AU @ 1 Myr (optically-thick, not spatially-resolved)

    • Disk masses may be systematically underestimated  room for mass loss (migration, ejection)

    • Massive inner disks? needed to explain FU Ori outbursts...


    ad