The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Kinetic and Structural Evolution of Self‐gravitating, Magnetized Clouds: 2.5‐dimensional Simulations of Decaying Turbulence
Open accessAbstract
The molecular component of the Galaxy is comprised of turbulent, magnetized clouds, many of which are self-gravitating and form stars. To develop an understanding of how these clouds' kinetic and structural evolution may depend on their level of turbulence, mean magnetization, and degree of self-gravity, we perform a survey of direct numerical MHD simulations in which three parameters are independently varied. Our simulations consist of solutions to the time-dependent MHD equations on a two-dimensional grid with periodic boundary conditions; an additional "half" dimension is also incorporated as dependent variables in the third Cartesian direction. Two of our survey parameters, the mean magnetization parameter β≡ c 2 sound / v 2 Alfven and the Jeans number n J ≡ L cloud / L Jeans , allow us to model clouds that either meet or fail conditions for magneto-Jeans stability and magnetic criticality. Our third survey parameter, the sonic Mach number ≡σ velocity / c sound , allows us to initiate turbulence of either sub- or super-Alfvénic amplitude; we employ an isothermal equation of state throughout. We evaluate the times for each cloud model to become gravitationally bound and measure each model's kinetic energy loss over the fluid-flow crossing time. We compare the evolution of density and magnetic field structural morphology and quantify the differences in the density contrast generated by internal stresses for models of differing mean magnetization. We find that the values of β and n J , but not the initial Mach number , determine the time for cloud gravitational binding and collapse: for mean cloud density n H 2 =100 cm -3 , unmagnetized models collapse after ~5 Myr, and magnetically supercritical models generally collapse after 5-10 Myr (although the smallest magneto-Jeans stable clouds survive gravitational collapse until t ~15 Myr), while magnetically subcritical clouds remain uncollapsed over the entire simulations; these cloud collapse times scale with the mean density as t g ∝ n −½ H 2 . We find, contrary to some previous expectations, less than a factor of 2 difference between turbulent decay times for models with varying magnetic field strength; the maximum decay time, for B ~14 μG and n H 2 =100 cm -3 , is 1.4 flow crossing times t cross = L /σ velocity (or 8 Myr for typical giant molecular cloud parameters). In all models we find turbulent amplification in the magnetic field strength up to at least the level β pert ≡ c 2 sound /δ v 2 Alfven =0.1, with the turbulent magnetic energy between 25% and 60% of the turbulent kinetic energy after one flow crossing time. We find that for non-self-gravitating stages of evolution, when clouds have =5-10, the mass-averaged density contrast magnitudes ⟨log(ρ/ )⟩ are in the range 0.2-0.5, with the contrast increasing both toward low and high β. Although our conclusions about density statistics may be affected by our isothermal assumption, we note that only the more strongly magnetized models appear to be consistent with estimates of clump/interclump density contrasts inferred in Galactic giant molecular clouds.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Galactic Stellar and Substellar Initial Mass Function
Chabrier, G. (2003) · Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific · doi:10.1086/376392 · Cited by 9,071
Control of star formation by supersonic turbulence
Mac Low, M.-M., & Klessen, R. S. (2004) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.76.125 · Cited by 1,761
Krumholz, M. R., & McKee, C. F. (2005) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/431734 · Cited by 1,048
Federrath, C., Roman-Duval, J., Klessen, R. S., Schmidt, W., & Mac Low, M.-M. (2010) · Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200912437 · Cited by 846
Rapid Formation of Molecular Clouds and Stars in the Solar Neighborhood
Hartmann, L., Ballesteros‐Paredes, J., & Bergin, E. A. (2001) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/323863 · Cited by 567
Metadata
- Authors
- Ostriker, E. C., Gammie, C. F., & Stone, J. M.
- Venue
- The Astrophysical Journal
- Publisher
- American Astronomical Society
- Published
- 1999-03
- Volume
- 513
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 259-274
- ISSN
- 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4357
- OpenAlex
- W1988126119
- Cited by
- 214
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Kinetic and Structural Evolution of Self‐gravitating, Magnetized Clouds: 2.5‐dimensional Simulations of Decaying Turbulence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/306842
- The paper
- Ostriker, E. C., Gammie, C. F., & Stone, J. M. (1999). Kinetic and Structural Evolution of Self‐gravitating, Magnetized Clouds: 2.5‐dimensional Simulations of Decaying Turbulence. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1086/306842
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.