 |  |
Astron. Astrophys. 321, 189-201 (1997)
4. Discussion
4.1. Forbidden line emission
Kwan & Tademaru (1988) proposed that the double-peaked profile
observed in the [OI] 6300 lines of many TTSs is
in fact due to two separate outflow processes, each with distinct
velocities. Their model invokes for the fast component an initially
radially expanding wind which is collimated by the magnetic field of
the circumstellar disk. For the slow component, they propose a wind
from the circumstellar disk and/or a warm disk corona. Such a model
naturally predicts the double-peaked structure observed, for example,
by Edwards et al. (1987). Kwan & Tademaru (1995) have recently
developed a model of a rotating disk wind to explain the origin of the
LVC emission in cTTSs, caused by a magnetic torque and centrifugal
flinging. The mass loss rate for such a disk wind is considerably
smaller ( 10%) than that of the jet responsible
for the HVC emission.
To what degree is this model applicable to HAEBESs? Before
examining this idea we should consider what our observations tell us
about the possibility of disks around HAEBESs. As described in the
Results section, the [OI] 6300 forbidden line
emission falls into one of four categories, examples of which are
shown in Fig. 1. Of those stars in emission category I, all are
known to drive either stellar jets and/or molecular outflows (see, for
example, Mundt & Ray 1994, Fukui et al. 1993). The relative
scarcity of HVC forbidden emission lines in HAEBESs may be taken, in
terms of the Kwan and Tademaru (1988) model, as indication that the
number of HH jets amongst this class is small. This is born out by
imaging studies (e.g. Mundt & Ray 1994). Moreover Bastien &
Ménard (1990) have observed the polarization patterns, in both
the optical and infrared, of a number of HAEBESs and we note that
three of the category I stars (V645 Cyg, LkH
233 and PV Cep) and one of the category II stars (R Mon) all show
polarization patterns indicative of multiple scattering from a
flattened disk-like structure.
In category II we find the largest single group of the observed
stars, with 14/28 stars (50%) showing low (-10 kms
- -55 kms ) velocity
blueshifted lines. There is essentially no corresponding redshifted
group; the majority of the remaining [OI] 6300
profiles clustering closely around zero velocity. Only BD
164 shows a redshifted velocity over +10 kms
. All the category II stars that have detected
[SII] 6716/6731 emission (the 4 category II
stars in Table 2 plus ST 202) have other indications of mass loss
and extended outflows, apart from ST 202 which has not been included
in any published molecular or optical outflow study. In contrast none
of the category II stars without [SII] 6716/6731
emission show any indications of jets or outflows, except MWC 1080
which has weak [SII] emission detected by Poetzel et al. (1992). It is
therefore interesting to note that in the case of cTTSs, those stars
with low veiling continua, and consequently low inferred accretion
rates, show unshifted and symmetric profiles of [OI]
6300 and weak or absent [SII]
6716/6731 emission (Edwards et al. 1987;
Hartigan et al. 1995) .
Knowing that essentially all the category I stars and many of the
category IIa stars are outflow sources and also show [SII]
6716/6731 emission, it is tempting to suggest
that the presence of [SII] 6716/6731 indicates a
certain degree of outflow activity that the stars without [SII]
6716/6731 emission lack. Whether this is simply
a matter of the relatively higher rates of accretion producing
relatively higher mass loss rates and consequently brighter forbidden
lines (Corcoran & Ray 1997a) or because the origin of the observed
[SII] emission (and more generally, all forbidden line emission)
differs between the stars with outflows and the other categories (IIb,
III and IV) is not clear.
The mechanism that gives rise to the forbidden LVC emission appears
much the same in both category I and II, with respect to the line
widths and profiles, although as noted the LVC blueshifted velocities
are uniformly higher in the category I sources. It may be that the
mechanism for accelerating the HVC material entrains LVC material and
accelerates it to the higher velocities seen, as described in the
models of Königl (1989, 1991) and Safier (1993a, b).
The centroid velocity of the [OI] 6300
emission in our few category III stars is only marginally redshifted
(+10 kms
15 kms ). The simplest
explanation is that these small redshifts are due to deviations from
the zero velocity caused by the method used; e.g. velocity differences
between the stellar velocity and the bulk gas velocity responsible for
the Na D absorption lines. No molecular or optical outflow is
associated with any of the category III stars. The 7 stars in category
IV have symmetric and unshifted profiles, centred on the stellar rest
velocity. In this regard it is interesting to note that LkH
234 (Ray et al. 1990) and BD
3471 (Goodrich 1992) are both in category IV
and have been regarded as possible sources of a jet and a HH object
respectively. However, a close-by embedded infrared companion to LkH
234, recently discovered by Weintraub et al.
(1994) now appears to be the true source of the jet. Whether an
infrared companion can also explain the case of BD
3471 is worth investigating. None of the other
category IV stars is associated with a molecular or optical outflow.
Moreover, none of the category III or IV stars show [SII]
6716/6731 emission.
It was mentioned in Sect. 3.1 that our results conflict with
those of Böhm & Catala (1994), and in particular the clear
preference we find for the centroid velocity of the LVC to be
blueshifted argues strongly against the spherical wind model of
Böhm & Catala (1994). At best this model can only apply to a
small subset of the HAEBESs. It must be noted that our sample contains
many more Hillenbrand Group II stars (Hillenbrand et al. 1992), which
are those HAEBESs that show flat or rising spectra in their spectral
energy distributions, than the sample of Böhm & Catala
(1994). This may in part influence the distribution of [OI]
6300 emission, as the Group II stars are
believed to be less evolved and potentially more active in terms of
outflows (Hillenbrand et al. 1992). Certainly all the stars in our
sample that show high velocity blueshifted emission (category I) are
Hillenbrand Group II stars. In the sample presented here 10 out of 28
stars are the sources of molecular outflows, jets and/or HH objects.
Böhm & Catala have only 3 such sources out of 17 stars.
Moreover none of the stars observed by Böhm & Catala with the
MUSICOS echelle spectrograph show any [SII]
6716/6731 emission. As already mentioned, emission from [SII]
6716/6731 appears to be connected to the
conditions that give rise to jets.
Although the centroid velocities of the LVC are blueshifted in most
cases, it is nevertheless very interesting that the LVC is very broad
with significant blue and red wings, at least for the category I and
II stars. If, as we do here, one attributes the LVC to a disk wind
along the lines of the model of Kwan & Tademaru (1988, 1995) then
the broadness of the component cannot be understood in terms of a
poorly collimated wind but instead may be due to the rotation of the
disk (see below).
A number of important results stem from the observation of low
velocity blueshifted components in the forbidden lines of HAEBESs.
Firstly, the systematic blueshift of the [OI]
6300 line in a majority of cases parallels what is seen amongst the
cTTSs. Moreover the analogy between the two groups is strengthened
further with the discovery that the equivalent width of the [OI]
6300 line scales with the near-infrared colour
in the same way as the cTTSs (Corcoran & Ray 1997a). In cTTSs the
consistent blueshifts of the forbidden lines are taken as evidence of
the presence of optically thick circumstellar disks, which occlude the
receding outflow, leaving only the blueshifted material visible to the
observer. While in the case of the HAEBESs only
10% of the observed stars show strongly blueshifted lines similar to
those observed in classical TTSs, a majority of the observed Herbig
stars do show a low velocity blueshift. In Fig. 2 we displayed a
histogram of the distribution of centroid velocities for the [OI]
6300 LVCs in our sample. As the plot shows there
is a distinct asymmetry to the distribution of the LVC centroid
velocities, with no group of HAEBESs with moderately redshifted
forbidden emission lines. Only 5 stars show centroid velocities
blueshifted by -40 kms or greater, 3 of which
are the LVC components of double component (i.e. HVC plus LVC)
profiles (V645 Cyg, Z CMa & PV Cep).
Thus, although the presence of disks around HAEBESs in all cases
may still be in question, the observations presented here of a
blueshifted asymmetry in both the HVCs and LVCs show that disks almost
certainly exist around many HAEBESs. These disks could be purely
reprocessing or actively accreting or a combination of both processes.
The outflow sources have jets, forbidden lines, molecular outflows and
other indicators of activity very similar to the cTTSs that also show
the best evidence for circumstellar disks.
Turning now to the possibility of an evolutionary sequence amongst
the surveyed stars, if, as might be suspected from their degree of
embeddedness (Hillenbrand et al. 1992), the Hillenbrand Group II stars
represent the relatively less evolved HAEBESs, it may be possible to
construct an evolutionary sequence for the various HAEBESs using their
degree of outflow activity. We place the category I stars, as the
least evolved stars, at the beginning of the sequence. Consisting
mainly of Hillenbrand Group II stars they are believed to be comprised
of a central star surrounded by a disk plus a dusty envelope
(Hillenbrand et al. 1992; Natta et al. 1993a, b). Of the 4 stars in
category II with [SII] 6716/6731 emission, 2
stars (R Mon & V376 Cas) also have indications of outflows and/or
jets (Brugel et al. 1984; Corcoran et al. 1995). These stars we also
place at the beginning of the evolutionary sequence.
Those category II stars that have no detectable levels of [SII]
6716/6731 emission but do have blueshifted [OI]
6300 emission at low velocities are probably
representative of the more evolved state where the conditions for high
velocity extended outflows have died away, be it from a weakening of a
disk magnetic field that might be responsible for accelerating a jet
or a reduction in the accretion rate that would have powered the high
velocity outflow. The inner regions of the disk may still produce weak
[OI] 6300 emission in a disk wind or warm disk
corona (see § 4.2) as proposed by Kwan & Tademaru (1988) but
any associated [SII] 6716/6731 emission is too
weak to be observed. Alternatively the category II stars may represent
quiescent jet/outflow sources. The latter idea, however, seems less
likely given the lack of known molecular outflows associated with
these stars. Specifically, according to Padman & Richer (1994)
molecular outflows have characteristic timescales that are much longer
than the inferred dynamical timescales. The lifetimes of molecular
outflows ( yrs) are such that intermittancy in a
stellar jet driving the outflow would not allow the molecular outflow
to dissipate in the short time when the jet is in a quiescent state
( yrs, the dynamical time scale for a typically
observed jet, Mundt et al. 1990).
As the system evolves the disk may at some point have lost
sufficient mass through the action of a stellar wind or other mass
loss process to render it optically thin (see Strom et al. 1993 and
Wolk & Walter 1996 for possible examples of TTSs with such disks).
At such a stage both the redshifted and blueshifted parts of a stellar
or disk wind should be visible and perhaps no longer collimated by the
action of the disk or its magnetic field. The resulting profile
produced by the combination of the two portions of the wind will be
unshifted and symmetric, broadened to roughly twice the outflow
velocity, if viewed edge-on. The category IV stars show just such
emission and may be considered to be the most evolved of the [OI]
6300 stars. Alternatively the category IV stars
may have completely dispersed their circumstellar disks, and produce
the [OI] 6300 emission in the manner proposed by
Böhm & Catala (1994) as a spherically symmetric wind or a sum
of spherically symmetric distributed streams forming at the surface of
the star which produce shocks at great distances from the star. Given
however the apparent power law proportionality between infrared excess
and the strength of the forbidden line emission (Corcoran & Ray
1997a) for all the [OI] 6300 emitting HAEBE
stars, we favour the idea that one mechanism is responsible for the
outflow properties of all categories. Fig. 3 shows a possible
evolutionary sequence from the category I to category II & IV
stars.
![[FIGURE]](img74.gif) |
Fig. 3. Three evolutionary phases of the outflow envisaged from the observations. Firstly, top left, the category I stars associated with jets and molecular outflows have a powerful jet responsible of the HVC emission, with characteristic velocities of 300 kms . A rotating disk wind or disk corona gives rise to the LVC emission with typical outflow velocities of 50 kms and line broadening due to the rotation. As the system evolves the high velocity outflow dies off, leaving only the low velocity wind responsible for the LVC emission. The average radial LVC velocity of category IIa and IIb stars is lower than that of the category I stars. Eventually the circumstellar disk may become optically thin at radii where forbidden emission lines form. Narrow and centred forbidden emission lines result.
|
The proposed evolutionary sequence involves the evolution of the
stellar wind. Initially the wind, presumably driven by accretion, has
a high velocity and may be collimated and drive an outflow, as is
found in the partially embedded (Hillenbrand Group II) stars. Then as
the star and circumstellar material evolve the wind velocity
decreases, perhaps as the accretion rate drops, and the wind is
characterized by the lower blueshifted velocities seen in the category
II stars ([OI] 6300 centroid velocities of
-50 kms ). In the later
stages either a very low wind velocity or an optically thin
circumstellar disk could produce the centred forbidden lines seen in
the category IV stars presented here.
Finally we mention the suggestion (see Königl 1996) that the
absence of a HVC in the [OI] emission of many HAEBESs may not be an
evolutionary effect. Instead it is proposed that the absence of an
[OI] HVC is caused by the lack of neutral oxygen, due to the
photoionization near the outflow axis of the star. Königl (1996)
proposes that in contrast the disk wind, responsible for the LVC
emission, may not have this problem as it may be shielded, at least
close to the disk, from the central radiation field. Although a
plausible explanation, at least for the most luminous sources like MWC
297, if it were to be the case in general then one would expect most
of our category II sources to be associated with extended outflows
(seen, for example, in CO) and this is not the case. That is to say,
there genuinely appears to be a lack of a HVC in many of these
stars.
4.2. The nature and origin of the HVC and LVC
It is generally accepted that the observation of double-peaked
forbidden line profiles in many cTTSs and certain HAEBESs provide
evidence of two distinct velocity gas flows from such stars. The high
velocity component is most readily explained as a jet forming deep in
the gravitational well of the star, either at the stellar surface or
within a few stellar radii and emerging from the system along the
star's rotational axis. Certainly associating the HVC emission with
the presence of a stellar jet appears warranted. In many observations
where both components (HVC & LVC) are observed the radial
velocities of the HVC match those observed for associated stellar jets
and HH objects (e.g. HL Tau, Mundt et al. 1990; Z CMa, Poetzel et al.
1989; DG Tau, Mundt et al. 1987 and Solf & Böhm 1993). Where
the HVC is extended (CW Tau, DO Tau, Hirth et al. 1994b; PV Cep, LkH
233, Corcoran & Ray 1997b) there is clear
evidence for the association of the HVC with the larger scale optical
jet. A number of competing models have been proposed to explain the
formation of high velocity jets and these have been addressed
comprehensively in reviews by Königl & Ruden (1993) and Ray
& Mundt (1993). In synopsis current theories favour either a
stellar wind or disk wind as the source of the jet material and
collimation via a magnetic field, either stellar or disk-generated in
origin. Optical jets are observed to be well collimated on scales
smaller than 150-200 AU (Ray et al. 1996). Fendt et al. (1995) have
examined the relativistic force-free equilibrium equation for the
collimation of YSO winds by a relativistically rotating magnetosphere,
originating in the star and reproduce the observed jet diameters
well.
While the various models proposed have had success in modeling the
jet component's emission, all the models that assume a single velocity
law and single outflow from the young star naturally have difficulty
in modeling the LVC emission. The LVC, however, is not readily
explainable in term of a simple jet model. The low outflow velocities
( 10 kms in cTTSs,
80 kms in HAEBESs)
contrast with the broad width of the lines. Line widths of
100 kms for the LVCs of
cTTSs and 150-200 kms for
the LVCs of HAEBESs make a simple poorly collimated wind unlikely as
edge-on viewing angles are always necessary to explain the
large line widths but small centroid velocities. The simplest
assumption to explain the broad line widths is that of rotational
broadening. This in turn suggests a disk origin for the LVC, at least
in the case of the cTTSs, as these low mass stars do not rotate at
such high velocities. The arguments supporting such an origin are
threefold. Firstly there is the combination of the low outflow
velocity and the broad line widths as already mentioned. Secondly the
observed luminosity of the forbidden lines, for example [SII]
6716/6731, indicate an emitting region of
several tens of AU in diameter (Edwards et al. 1987). Thirdly Hirth et
al. (1994a) & Hartigan et al. (1995) have shown that there is a
progression in the blueshifted velocities of LVC forbidden lines of
young stars showing HVC+LVC emission. The species with the highest
critical densities (e.g. [OI] 5577) show the
smallest blueshifted velocities, those with intermediate critical
densities (such as [OI] 6300) show higher
blueshifted velocities and the species with the lowest critical
density (e.g. [SII] 6716/6731) show the highest
blueshifted velocities. Similar behaviour is observed for all the
stars listed in Table 2 except Z CMa and KK Oph (compare the [OI]
6300 radial velocities in Table 1 and
radial velocities of the [SII] lines in Table 2). The progression
of increasing velocity with decreasing density is consistent with an
accelerating wind from a disk (Solf & Böhm 1993; Böhm
& Solf 1994; Hirth et al. 1994a; Hartigan et al. 1995). Kwan &
Tademaru (1995) have recently extended their qualitative model to a
simulation of a rotating disk wind to explain the origin of the LVC
emission in cTTSs. The disk wind is driven by a magnetic torque and
centrifugal flinging. Essentially the LVC is driven in a manner
similar to the jet but, due to the lower initial z-velocity of the
wind and its location further from the star, the overall acceleration
is much less than that experienced by the HVC.
Having adopted an hypothesis of a disk wind as the origin of the
LVC emission we can directly relate the width of the LVC line to the
inner radius of the disk at which forbidden line emission is observed.
Assuming the disk is in Keplerian rotation around the star then
kms (Kwan & Tademaru
1995) gives the Keplerian velocity at radius r, assuming an
eccentricity of 0. Taking the case of LkH 233,
where the line width of the LVC is about 150 kms
, the inner radius of the emission would be
0.1 AU or about 30 stellar radii (M
= 2.6 and R
= 2.6 , Hillenbrand et
al. 1992). Assuming a velocity of 10 kms for the
slowest material the outer edge of the forbidden line emission is at
about 24 AU.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1997
Online publication: June 30, 1998
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |