A&A 423, 169-182 (2004)
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20040285
S. P. Goodwin - A. P. Whitworth - D. Ward-Thompson
Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, Cardiff University, 5 The Parade, Cardiff CF24 3YB, UK
Received 17 February 2004 / Accepted 1 May 2004
Abstract
We explore, by means of a large ensemble of SPH simulations, how the level
of turbulence affects the collapse and fragmentation of a star-forming core.
All our simulated cores have the same mass (
),
the same initial density profile (chosen to fit observations of L1544),
and the same barotropic equation of state, but we vary (a) the initial
level of turbulence (as measured by the ratio of turbulent to gravitational
energy,
)
and (b), for fixed
,
the
details of the initial turbulent velocity field (so as to obtain good
statistics).
A low level of turbulence (
)
suffices to produce multiple systems, and as
is increased,
the number of objects formed and the companion frequency both increase. The mass
function is bimodal, with a flat low-mass segment representing single objects
ejected from the core before they can accrete much, and a Gaussian high-mass
segment representing objects which because they remain in the core grow
by accretion and tend to pair up in multiple systems.
The binary statistics reported for field G-dwarfs by Duquennoy
& Mayor (1991, A&A, 248, 485) are only reproduced with
.
For
much lower values of
(
0.025), insufficient binaries
are formed. For higher values of
(
0.10), there
is a significant sub-population of binaries with small semi-major axis
and large mass-ratio (i.e. close binaries with
components of comparable mass). This sub-population is not present in
Duquennoy & Mayor's sample, although there is some evidence for it in
the pre-Main Sequence population of Taurus analyzed by White & Ghez (2001, ApJ, 556, 265).
It arises because with larger
,
more low-mass objects
are formed, and so there is more scope for the binaries remaining in the
core to be hardened by ejecting these low-mass objects. Hard binaries thus
formed then tend to grow towards comparable mass by competitive accretion
of material with relatively high specific angular momentum.
Key words: methods: numerical - stellar dynamics - stars: formation - ISM: general
Turbulence appears to play a crucial role in the structure and evolution of molecular clouds, in the formation of star-forming cores within molecular clouds, and in the collapse and fragmentation of cores to form protostars.
The main evidence for turbulence in molecular clouds comes from
their apparently fractal substructure (e.g., Elmegreen & Falgarone
1996; Elmegreen 2002), and from the almost universal power-law
scaling relations between size (L) line-width (
)
and
mass (M)
and the almost universal power-law mass function
to which this substructure subscribes, over many orders of magnitude,
from the largest molecular cloud complexes (
,
), down to the smallest resolvable structures
(
,
)
(e.g., Larson 1981;
Myers 1983; Stutzki & Güsten 1990; Hobson 1992; Hobson et al. 1994;
Williams et al. 1994; Elmegreen & Falgarone 1996; Kramer et al. 1996;
Kramer et al. 1998; Heithausen et al. 1998).
Until recently, it had been presumed that molecular clouds were long lived, being supported against collapse by their internal turbulence, and this was advanced as the reason for the low overall efficiency of star formation. However, it is now recognized that turbulence cannot support clouds for long, because - even with a frozen-in magnetic field - the turbulence dissipates on a dynamical timescale (Mac Low et al. 1998; Stone et al. 1998). Instead clouds are presumed to form and disperse on a dynamical timescale, without ever reaching equilibrium (Ballesteros-Paredes et al. 1999; Elmegreen 2000; Pringle et al. 2001; Hartmann et al. 2001).
In this highly dynamical scenario, cores form wherever a sufficiently dense and coherent converging flow is created by the turbulent velocity field (Elmegreen 1997; Padoan et al. 1997; Hartmann et al. 2001; Klessen & Burkert 2000, 2001; Klessen et al. 2000; Padoan & Nordlund 2002; Mac Low & Klessen 2004). Frequently these cores are not gravitationally bound, and therefore they disperse soon after they form. However, occasionally they are gravitationally bound, and in this case they are likely to proceed straight into gravitational collapse; these are the cores we identify as "prestellar''.
This scenario is in contrast to the idea that prestellar cores are supported magnetically, and evolve quasistatically by ambipolar diffusion, until they become magnetically supercritical and collapse (e.g., Basu & Mouschovias 1994, 1995a,b; Ciolek & Mouschovias 1993, 1994, 1995; Morton et al. 1994; Ciolek & Basu 2000). The main effects of the quasistatic ambipolar diffusion phase are (i) to give the core more time to lose angular momentum by magnetic braking; (ii) to organize the material so that its subsequent collapse is rather well focussed; and (iii) to allow turbulence to decay. All three effects mean that such cores are less likely to form multiple systems. Since most stars are observed to be in multiple systems (e.g., Duquennoy & Mayor 1991; Fischer & Marcy 1992; White & Ghez 2001), and since there is no observational evidence for magnetically subcritical cores (e.g., Crutcher 1999; Bourke et al. 2001; Crutcher et al. 2003), we shall assume that ambipolar diffusion does not play an important role in the evolution of prestellar cores. For simplicity, we ignore the magnetic field altogether.
In the highly dynamic scenario the collapse of a prestellar core is far more likely to lead to fragmentation and the formation of multiple systems (e.g., Whitworth et al. 1995; Turner et al. 1995; Whitworth et al. 1996; Klein et al. 2001, 2003; Bate et al. 2002a,b, 2003; Bonnell et al. 2003; Delgado-Donate 2003, 2004; Goodwin et al. 2004a,b; Hennebelle et al. 2003, 2004). This is because in the highly dynamic scenario prestellar cores are formed non-quasistatically and therefore (a) they are launched directly into the non-linear regime of gravitational collapse, and (b) they are likely to have retained some internal turbulence.
Burkert & Bodenheimer (2000) have pointed out that the internal turbulence
in molecular cores can be represented by a Gaussian random velocity field
having a power spectrum of the form
,
with
to -4. This not only reproduces the observed
scaling relation between size and linewidth. It also reproduces the
observed rotation of molecular cores. Thus there is no need to invoke
ordered rotation as an additional source of support in molecular cores,
and indeed there is no observational evidence for significant ordered
rotation in prestellar cores (e.g., Jessop & Ward-Thompson 2001).
We have therefore undertaken a numerical study of the influence of
turbulence on the collapse and fragmentation of prestellar cores. We
have taken as our reference point a simple model of the core L1544,
and in the first paper of this series (Goodwin et al. 2004a, hereafter
Paper I) we have shown that cores with even a low level of turbulent
energy routinely spawn multiple stellar systems. Specifically, in an
ensemble of 20 simulations of the collapse of
cores
having an initial ratio of turbulent to gravitational energy
In this paper we extend the simulations of Paper I to examine the
effect of different levels of turbulence on star formation within
dense molecular cores. Using exactly the same core structure
as in Paper I we simulate ensembles of between 10 and 20 cores with
.
We examine the numbers and masses of stars and brown dwarfs that
form and the properties of the multiple systems to which some of them
belong.
We note that these levels of turbulence involve much lower non-thermal velocities than the earlier work of Whitworth et al. (1995), Turner et al. (1995), Whitworth et al. (1996), Klein et al. (2001, 2003), Bate et al. (2002a,b, 2003), Bonnell et al. (2003), Delgado-Donate (2003, 2004). Consequently they may be applicable to scenarios in which instability develops more quasistatically due to ambipolar diffusion; provided that some turbulence can persist through (or be regenerated after) the ambipolar diffusion phase, and provided the subsequent collapse is sufficiently rapid.
In Sect. 2 we define the initial conditions for the simulations.
In Sect. 3 we describe the code and the constitutive physics used.
In Sect. 4 we outline the different ensembles of simulations
performed with different values of
,
and in
Sect. 5 we collate the statistics from the different ensembles.
Section 6 discusses the statistics in terms of the underlying physics,
and Sect. 7 gives our main conclusions.
![]() |
Figure 1:
The filled circles give estimated values of
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
Molecular cores which are associated with IRAS sources are presumed to have already formed a protostar, and are classified as protostellar cores, whereas those which have no associated IRAS source are classified as starless cores (Beichman et al. 1986). The densest starless cores are presumed to be on their way to forming stars, and are therefore classified as prestellar cores (Ward-Thompson et al. 1994). We base our initial conditions on the observed properties of prestellar cores.
The density in a pre-stellar core is approximately uniform in the inner
few thousand au, but further out it decreases as
with
,
and eventually it merges with the background (e.g.,
Ward-Thompson et al. 1994; André et al. 1996; Ward-Thompson et al.
1999; André et al. 2000; Tafalla et al. 2004). A good fit to the
density in a pre-stellar core is given by a Plummer-like profile,
![]() |
(2) |
![]() |
(3) |
Table 1:
For each value of
,
we list the number of
realizations simulated (
), the mean mass in objects
at the end of the simulations (
), the average number
of objects formed per simulation
,
the companion probability (cp), the companion frequency (cf),
the multiplicity frequency (mf) and the pairing factor (pf).
The companion frequency, cf, is given for all objects and then
seperately for low-mass objects (
)
and for high-mass
objects (
).
Molecular cores show a significant non-thermal contribution to their
line-widths, which is attributable to internal turbulence.
Figure 1 shows the estimated ratios of turbulent to
gravitational energy,
(see Eq. (1)),
and the estimated masses,
,
for prestellar cores
from the Jijina et al. (1999) catalogue. These cores were selected
as prestellar on the basis of their having low temperature (
),
no associated IRAS source and no observed outflow. The shaded area
in Fig. 1 shows the region of parameter space that
the simulations in this paper cover, i.e. a
core with
a range of
from 0 to 0.25.
To model the turbulence, a divergence-free Gaussian random velocity
field is superimposed on the core (cf. Bate et al. 2002a,b; Bate et al.
2003; Fisher 2004; Bonnell et al. 2003; Delgado-Donate et al. 2003, 2004).
The power spectrum of the velocity field is
,
so
as to mimic the observed scaling between size and line-width in
interstellar gas clouds (Larson 1981; Burkert & Bodenheimer 2000).
The magnitude of the velocity field is normalized so that
,
,
and at
least ten realizations have been made with each value of
(as summarised in Table 1).
In each realization the random number seed for the turbulence is different,
and hence the detailed structure of the velocity field is different. It is
essential that many different realizations be performed for a given value of
,
because the mix of protostars and multiple
systems which forms depends critically on the details of the velocity field.
Therefore different values of
can only be compared in a
statistical sense by performing an ensemble of different realizations for
each representative value of
.
Each simulation is evolved for
.
We have chosen this
end-time for three reasons. (i) It facilitates comparison with the
simulations reported in Paper I; (ii) in
most simulations, object formation (i.e. sink creation) ceases around
,
and in only one case is a new object formed
after
;
(iii) by this stage,
of the mass
is already in stars and brown dwarves (this fraction decreases slightly
with increasing
), and so the remaining diffuse gas is
likely to be affected by negative feedback from the existing stars and
brown dwarves; feedback is not included in these simulations, although
we are currently exploring its effect (Boyd et al., in preparation).
The properties of the resulting protostars in each ensemble are
compared, both as a function of
,
and against the observed properties of young
stellar objects. In this latter regard, the observational samples used for
comparison are the local field G-dwarfs studied by DM91 and the
multiple systems in Taurus studied by White & Ghez (2001, hereafter WG01).
The simulations are performed using SPH (Lucy 1977; Gingold &
Monaghan 1977; Monaghan 1992). Our SPH code ( DRAGON) uses
the standard M 4 kernel (Monaghan & Lattanzio 1985) and invokes
variable smoothing lengths (so that each particle has
neighbours). An octal tree is
built to facilitate the computation of gravitational accelerations
and the identification of neighbours. Gravity is kernel-softened
with the particle smoothing length, and standard artificial viscosity
(Monaghan 1992) is included, with
and
.
We use a barotropic equation of state,
Whenever a gravitationally bound condensation forms and the density
of an SPH particle within the condensation rises above
,
all the particles within
of that particle are replaced with a sink particle having radius
.
(From Eq. (4), we can estimate that the temperature
of gas at
is
,
and so
the introduction of sink particles makes it unnecessary to treat the
thermal behavious of the gas at temperatures above
.)
Sink particles interact with the gas both gravitationally, and by
accreting SPH particles that enter the sink radius and are bound to
the sink (see Bate et al. 1995, for a detailed description of sink
particles). As in Paper I, we refer to sink particles as "objects'',
and then more specifically to "stars'' when the sink mass is
and "brown dwarfs'' when the mass is lower than this.
As reported in Paper I, when a core has no turbulence only one object
forms, very close to the centre of the core. The evolution follows
very closely the semi-analytic model of Whitworth & Ward-Thompson
(2001). In particular, the accretion rate is very large early on, and
then decreases. After
the stellar mass reaches
.
(In this case the ten different realizations involve
different initial SPH particle positions.)
The ensemble of ten simulations with
is
virtually identical to that with
(no
turbulence). Only one star ever forms, and this happens about one
free-fall time (
)
after the start of the
simulation, always close to the centre of mass of the core. This
level of turbulence is apparently too low to induce multiple
fragmentation.
appears to be approximately the minimum
level of turbulence required for multiple object formation. Of the ten
simulations with
,
eight produce only a
single star (as with lower levels of turbulence), but one simulation
produces six objects, and one produces nine objects.
Specifically, this last simulation produces three intermediate-mass stars
in an hierarchical triple system embedded in the core (a tight binary with
component masses
and
and semi-major axis
,
plus a third star with mass
orbiting at
). In addition, the simulation produces one very
low-mass star (
)
and five brown dwarfs (
to
), all of which are ejected from the core.
![]() |
Figure 2:
The average number of objects formed in a core,
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
Of the twenty simulations performed with
,
four produce just a single star, and the remaining sixteen produce
71 stars and 16 brown dwarfs between them (between 2 and 10 objects
per simulation). Of these 71 stars, 44
remain in the core in multiple systems, and the rest are ejected
from the core. Of the 16 brown dwarfs, 15 are ejected, and only
one remains in a binary system in the core. The mean number of
objects formed per simulation is 4.55. Further details of this
ensemble of simulations are given in Paper I.
Of the twenty simulations performed with
,
five produce just a single star, and the remaining fifteen produce
76 stars and 19 brown dwarfs between them (between 3 and 10 objects
per simulation). Of these 76 stars, 53 remain in the core in multiple
systems, and the rest are ejected from the core. Of the 19 brown dwarfs,
17 are ejected and only 2 remain in multiple systems in the core. The
mean number of objects formed per simulation is 4.75.
In the ten simulations with
,
a total of 60 objects are produced, 49 stars and 11 brown dwarfs, with each simulation
producing between 3 and 10 objects. Of the 49 stars, 36 remain in the
core in multiple systems, and the rest are ejected from the core. All
11 brown dwarfs are ejected from the core.
Table 2:
A summary of the results of the simulations with
,
at time
.
Column 1 gives the simulation identifier and Col. 2 gives
.
Column 3 gives
,
the total
mass of objects formed (stars plus brown dwarfs), Col. 4 gives
,
the total number of objects formed, and
Col. 5 gives
,
the total number of brown
dwarfs formed. Column 6 gives the multiplicities of the multiple
systems formed, and the final column (Col. 7) gives the mass
of each individual object. Those objects which are part of a
binary system are distinguished with b, those which are part
of a triple system are distinguished with a t, and those
which are part of a quadruple system (or in one case a quintuple
system) are distinguished with q.
Details of the numbers, masses and multiplicities of the objects
produced in each of the fifty simulations with
are shown in Table 2. The
simulations with low turbulence (
)
are
omitted because almost all of them produce only a single object, and
therefore the discussion will now concentrate on the simulations with
.
Increasing the level of turbulence has several effects. In the first instance, it delays somewhat the time at which objects are formed, and at the same time it increases the average number of objects formed.
With
,
the first object (hereafter
the primary protostar) forms
to
after the start of the simulation, and
of all the other
objects have formed by
.
With
,
the primary protostar forms
to
after the start of the simulation, and objects continue forming up to
;
this is because the extra turbulent energy gives
the core extra support, and therefore delays its collapse.
The majority of secondary objects form in a dense disc-like slab around the primary protostar. The instabilities which produce these secondary objects are usually seeded - and propelled into the non-linear condensation regime - by the inhomogeneities in the accretion flow onto the slab. Higher levels of turbulence result in larger inhomogeneities, and hence in more secondary objects.
For
the mean number of objects formed
is
(i.e. there are no secondary
objects), whereas for
,
(i.e. there are on average five secondary
objects). Values of
and
are listed in Table 1, and plotted
in Fig. 2, where the error bars give the standard
deviation, i.e.
![]() |
Figure 3:
The normalized mass functions for
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
![]() |
Figure 4:
The combined (and un-normalized) mass function for all the
simulations having
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
The normalized mass functions (MF) for the ensembles with
are shown in Fig. 3.
In each case the shaded region shows the MF of objects in multiple
systems and the open region shows the MF of single objects. The hashed
region in the top figure shows an unstable triple that formed late on in
one simulation, and is therefore likely to decay into a binary and an
ejected single (see Paper I for more details).
The MFs are clearly very similar for each value of
,
viz. a high-mass peak of predominantly multiple stars and a low-mass
tail of ejected stars and brown dwarfs. However, as
increases,
the MF shifts slightly to lower masses. There are two reasons for this.
(a) For higher
the overall collapse is delayed by
the extra turbulent support, and therefore when the simulations are
terminated at
less mass has been incorporated into
objects (the mean mass incorporated into objects is given in the third
column of Table 1); (b) for higher
,
the accretion
flow onto the disc around the primary protostar is lumpier, so more
objects are formed but individually they are less massive.
The combined mass function for all simulations
with
is shown in Fig. 4.
The distribution of high-mass (predominantly bound) stars is well
fitted by a log-normal distribution having mean
and standard deviation
.
The distribution of low-mass
(predominantly unbound) objects is consistent with being flat in
log-space from our resolution limit at
up to
,
above which it declines. The high-mass
(predominantly bound) stars have an average mass of
because, after ejections have removed some objects, there
are usually two to four stars left in the core, and they are then able
to accrete a total
of
between them. A more massive core would spawn
more massive stars (Goodwin et al., in preparation).
The fraction of objects which are brown dwarfs is
,
and there does not appear to be
a systematic dependence on the level of turbulence. This is
somewhat higher than in Taurus (
;
Briceño et al. 2002), and somewhat lower than in Orion
(
;
Muench et al. 2002).
The fraction of low-mass objects (
)
also appears to
be independent of
,
and approximately
.
In analyzing the multiplicity of the objects formed in our simulations, we define "systems'' to include single objects, and "multiple systems'' to include only systems containing more than one object. The primary is the most massive star in a system; in a single it is the only star. Thus, if S is the number of single objects and B, T, Q and Q' are the numbers of binary, triple, quadruple and quintuple systems, respectively, the total number of objects is (S+2B+3T+4Q+5Q'+...), the total number of systems is (S+B+T+Q+Q'+...) (which is the same as the total number of primaries), and the total number of multiple systems is (B+T+Q+Q'+...).
Many different statistics have been introduced as measures of stellar
(and brown dwarf) multiplicity (e.g., Reipurth & Zinnecker 1993),
and they all reflect slightly different things
. They can be divided into two groups.
The first group of measures is normalized to the total number of objects,
and is useful because it is straightforward to derive these measures for
a subset of objects (for example, low-mass stars, in the range
). The companion probability (Reipurth & Zinnecker 1993),
![]() |
(6) |
![]() |
(7) |
The second group of measures is normalized to the total number of systems or the total number of multiple systems. The multiplicity frequency (RZ93),
![]() |
(8) |
![]() |
(9) |
Table 1 records the values of all these measures for cores
having
.
We have also
calculated the companion frequency, cf, separately for the low-mass
objects (
)
and the high-mass objects (
).
The fraction of objects in multiple systems (i.e. the companion probability, cp) increases steadily with increasing
.
The
mean number of companions (i.e. the companion frequency, cf)
increases even more rapidly with increasing
.
cf
is always larger for high-mass objects than for low-mass objects (i.e.
there are fewer low-mass objects in multiples than high-mass objects),
but the rate of increase of cf with increasing
is greater for the low-mass objects.
The smaller companion frequency for low-mass objects is due to the fact that low-mass objects have usually been ejected from the core before they could accrete much mass (that is why they have low mass), and ejected stars tend to be singles. Stars that end up in stable multiples also tend to remain in the core, and therefore they grow to larger masses by continuing to accrete.
The multiplicity of low-mass stars increases with increasing
,
because a greater number of higher-order multiples
is formed in cores with higher
.
For example, when
,
only
of simulations produce quadruples,
but this fraction rises to
for
.
In
higher-order multiples, the low-mass objects tend to be outlying
members. They are less able to accrete from the remaining
gas, and they tend to remain low-mass.
![]() |
Figure 5:
The histograms show the cumulative distribution functions of
semi-major axes for the ensembles with
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
![]() |
Figure 6:
For each binary system, the semi-major axis, a is plotted against
the number of objects formed in that simulation,
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
Figure 5 shows the cumulative distribution functions
(CDFs) of the semi-major axes of multiple systems, for different
initial levels of turbulence,
.
For comparison the Gaussian fit to the DM91
local G-dwarf sample is plotted as a dashed line.
As noted in Paper I, the semi-major axis distribution for the
ensemble is consistent with the DM91
observations. In contrast, the semi-major axis distributions for
the
ensembles both have
too many hard binaries (a < 20 au), and both are rejected by the KS
test as being drawn from the DM91 fit, at
confidence. A similar
excess of hard binaries is predicted by the core fragmentation simulations
of Delgado-Donate et al. (2003, 2004), which invoke even higher
levels of turbulence (
), and by the N-body
simulations of Sterzik & Durisen (2003).
As described in Paper I, hard binaries are formed primarily by
few-body interactions, including those which eject low mass objects.
Consequently, in simulations where larger numbers of objects are formed,
the binaries are on average harder (regardless of
).
For example, when few objects are formed, say
,
the
average separation of binaries is
,
whereas when
the average separation is
,
and
when
it is
.
Figure 6
shows the semi-major axes of all systems plotted against the number of objects
formed in that simulation. There is clearly a trend of decreasing
semi-major axis with increasing number of objects.
Since the gravitational forces between objects are kernel softened with
a smothing length h equal to the sink radius
,
orbits with small semi-major axes (
)
are also softened. It
follows that the distribution of semi-major axes below
is
distorted. Given that the code conserves angular momentum very accurately,
we infer that these already hard orbits should be even harder. For
this would exacerbate the
difference between the numerically derived distribution of semi-major
axes and the observations of DM91. Conversely, for
,
it would improve the agreement with the DM91 distribution.
![]() |
Figure 7:
The distribution of mass ratios for simulations with
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
Figure 7 shows the distribution of binary mass ratios,
q = M2 / M1, for all simulations having
.
Note that high q means
,
i.e. components of comparable mass.
For
,
the distribution of mass ratios is quite
flat, and reminiscent of the observed distribution for local G dwarfs
(DM91; Mazeh et al. 1992).
For
,
the distribution is dominated by
high-q close binaries. All binaries in these ensembles have
semi-major axes
(the high-a tail is produced by
wider orbits in higher-order systems),
and
of these have q > 0.8. This is very similar to the mass
ratio distribution observed in Taurus-Auriga by WG01, who
found that over
of binaries with separations
had q > 0.8. In our simulations, systems with high mass ratio tend to be
close (all systems
with q > 0.7, and most systems with q > 0.4, are binaries with
), but the reverse is not always true: in other words, there are a
few close binaries with low mass ratios. Close binaries are
presumed to acquire high mass ratios because the material accreting onto the
system has high specific angular momentum, and is therefore more readily
accommodated by the secondary (Whitworth et al. 1995; Bate & Bonnell 1997;
Paper I).
![]() |
Figure 8:
The cumulative distribution function of eccentricities for
all simulations with
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
Figure 8 shows the CDF of eccentricity for all the simulations
having
and the linear fit to the observed
distribution proposed by DM91. The two distributions are consistent.
When the initial level of turbulence is low,
,
it seems that a core can only spawn a single central star. Even for
,
the core is unlikely to spawn a multiple system.
We therefore focus our discussion on the higher levels of turbulence,
,
for which multiple star
formation is the norm. In this range a number of significant systematic
trends are evident.
As
increases from
0.10 to 0.25, the average timescale for star formation increases
somewhat, due to the extra support which turbulence affords the core.
For
,
the primary protostar forms after
,
and most of the secondary protostars have formed by
.
For
,
the
primary protostar forms after
,
and most of the secondary
protostars have formed by
.
In only one case
(run 073) do objects form after 0.25 Myr, and so it appears that the
fragmentation phase is almost always over by the end of the
simulations at 0.3 Myr. After the end of the simulations accretion
will be on-going. However, feedback from the protostars is expected to
become very important, possibly dispersing a significant fraction of
the gas not already in stars or discs around them.
As
increases from 0.10
to 0.25, the average number of objects formed,
,
increases from
to
(see
Fig. 2). This is because a higher level of turbulence
generates more density contrast - i.e. more numerous and more compressed
lumps - and therefore more protostars.
As
increases from 0.10
to 0.25, the average mass of the objects formed decreases slightly (see
Fig. 3). There are two factors involved here. First, as noted
above a higher level of turbulence means that more objects are formed. Second,
a higher level of turbulence means that the core has more support, and
therefore a smaller fraction of its mass has condensed out after
.
Apart from this slight decrease in average
mass with increasing
turbulence, the form of the mass function appears to be independent of
.
Specifically, the mass function is bimodal: the
lower-mass stars (which tend to be single stars ejected from the core)
subscribe to a flat segment of the mass function; and the higher-mass stars
(which tend to be those remaining in the core and pairing up in multiple
systems) subscribe to a Gaussian segment of the mass function (see Fig.
4).
The critical mass seperating the two modes in the mass function,
,
arises because of the interplay
between ejection by dynamical interaction and growth by accretion.
Anosova (1986) has shown that the decay time for small-N systems is
![]() |
(10) |
As
increases from
0.10 to 0.25, the
companion star frequency increases slightly for intermediate-mass stars
(
to
), and quite markedly for low-mass objects
(
).
For
,
the distribution of semi-major
axes is broad and indistinguishable from the distribution inferred for
local G-dwarfs by DM91. There is a lack of very close systems
with
.
This is due to the fact that sinks have a finite
size and their mutual gravity is softened; therefore our code cannot
resolve very close systems.
In contrast, for
,
there are many more close systems (
)
than in the DM91 sample (see Fig. 5),
and this discrepancy would not be alleviated if the code were able to
resolve very close systems.
Much of the hardening which produces close binaries is due to dynamical interactions with other objects, in particular with the low-mass objects which get ejected in the process. The excess of close systems produced by higher levels of turbulence may therefore be due to the greater number of objects formed, and hence the greater potential for dynamical interactions, as suggested by Fig. 6.
For
,
the distribution of mass ratios
is flat and indistinguishable from the distribution for local G-dwarfs
reported by DM91. In contrast, for
,
there is an excess of systems having high mass-ratio, i.e.
components of comparable mass (see Fig. 7). Many of these
systems with high mass-ratio arise because the binary system has accreted
material with relatively high specific angular momentum, and this
material can more easily be accommodated by the secondary (e.g.,
Whitworth et al. 1995).
For
,
the systems with high mass-ratio tend also to
be close, and it is this sub-population of high-mass-ratio close binaries
which is the main difference between the distributions of semi-major axis
and mass-ratio for the protostars formed in these simulations, and the
distributions of semi-major axis and mass-ratio for local G-dwarfs as reported
by DM91. A similar excess of close systems with comparable components was found
by Delgado-Donate et al. (2003, 2004), who simulated the collapse and
fragmentation of cores with even higher levels of turbulence (
).
Taken at face value, this suggests that the local
population of G-dwarfs must have been formed in cores with low
turbulence (
). However, this conclusion
rests on the assumption that the spherically symmetric
core and the
turbulence spectrum which we have
adopted, are representative of the cores forming G-dwarfs, and there
is no firm basis for this assumption.
An alternative explanation is that a significant population of close,
high-mass-ratio systems has escaped detection, but we believe this to
be unlikely.
A significant contrast to this is found in Taurus. Here WG01 find that
binaries in the separation range
do indeed have significantly higher mass
ratios than wider binaries. Therefore they are compatible with formation
in cores having higher levels of turbulence,
.
We have discussed the origin of the mass function and the
binary statistics in Taurus in Goodwin et al. (2004b).
We have explored the influence of turbulence on the fragmentation of
dense molecular cores, by means of a large ensemble of simulations.
In this ensemble, we consider a spherically symmetric
core with a Plummer-like density profile;
this is a good representation of observed cores like L1544. We seed the
core with a turbulent velocity field having power spectrum
.
The number of objects that forms, and the properties
of the resulting multiple systems depend both on the level of turbulence
,
and on the details of the turbulent velocity
field. Therefore for each value of
we we have simulated
many different realizations by changing the random number seed for the
turbulent velocity field. The main conclusions are:
Acknowledgements
S.P.G. acknowledges support of PPARC grant PPA/G/S/1998/00623 and is now a UKAFF Fellow. We thank B. Sathyprakash and R. Balasubramanian for allowing us extensive use of the Beowulf cluster of the gravitational waves group at Cardiff; and Matthew Bate for helpful discussions and for providing the code to generate turbulence.