![]() | ![]() |
Astron. Astrophys. 328, 617-627 (1997) 3. The most intense rotational lines of
|
![]() |
Fig. 1. Emissivities of 16 O18 O lines as a function of the total visual extinction throughout different kinds of clouds and as a function of hydrogen density ![]() |
The second series of models represents clouds with uniform
temperature from T = 10 up to 100 K and
=104 cm-3. Fig. 2 displays the emissivities
of the 234, 298 and 402 GHz lines versus the visual extinction. Unlike
the 16 O18 O abundance, the line intensities,
controlled by the rotational population, are really sensitive to the
temperature. Our model calculations show that the rotational
population of 16 O18 O is close to LTE in opaque
clouds (
10-20) where lines have the best chance
to be detected. In all situations, the (2, 1)-(0, 1) 234 GHz is more
intense than the (2, 2)-(0, 1) 298 GHz and the (3, 2)-(1, 2) 402 GHz
lines.
![]() | Fig. 2. Emissivities of 16 O18 O lines as a function of the total visual extinction throughout different kinds of clouds and as a function of temperature for clouds with nH = 104cm-3 |
In the third series of models, the incident ultraviolet radiation
field has been multiplied by a scaling factor
=10, 100 and 103 to take into account molecular clouds near
HII regions. All cloud models were run with
=104 cm-3 and T =10 K and the
emissivities of the 234, 298 and 402 GHz lines are plotted in
Fig. 3.
![]() |
Fig. 3. Emissivities of 16 O18 O lines as a function of the total visual extinction throughout different kinds of clouds and UV radiation field for clouds with ![]() |
The global decrease of the intensities is due to the decrease of
abundance of 16 O18 O which is more efficiently
destroyed when the UV field is stronger. For a same visual extinction,
the UV radiation field is a determinant parameter for the emissivity
of the 16 O18 O lines until the visual
extinction becomes large enough ( 20) to
attenuate its effect. Typically, even for a cloud with an opacity as
large as
20, the
emissivities are divided by 4 as
increases from
1 to 103, implying a factor of 16 increase of the required
integration time for a given receiver. With the present status of mm
receivers, detection of 16 O18 O appears
completely excluded in molecular clouds where massive star formation
occurs.
Finally, the last two series of models check the influence of the
C/O ratio on 16 O18 O detectability. We have
computed two series of models with C/O=0.1, 0.4 and 0.7, one series
with a constant carbon abundance X =3.8
10-5 and the other one with the oxygen abundance fixed to X
=8.5 10-5. All models are run with
T =10 K and
=104
cm-3. Figs. 4 and 5
display the predicted emissivities of the 16
O18 O lines at 234, 298 and 402 GHz versus the visual
extinction for the two series of models. The C/O ratio is a dramatic
parameter for the abundance and, consequently, for the emissivities of
the 16 O18 O lines: when X
is divided by 7 (Fig. 4) while the carbon
abundance remains constant, the emissivities decrease by a factor of
about 40. When the oxygen abundance is constant and X
is increased by a factor of 7 (Fig. 5),
the emissivities decrease by a factor of about 10. This means an
increase of the integration time for a given receiver by a factor 1600
and 100, respectively. With the sensitivities of present receivers,
16 O18 O could only be detected if the C/O ratio
is lower or of the same order than the "standard" cosmic value (C/O
0.4).
![]() |
Fig. 4. Emissivities of 16 O18 O lines as a function of the total visual extinction throughout different kinds of clouds and as a function of C/O ratio for isothermal clouds (![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Fig. 5. Emissivities of 16 O18 O lines as a function of the total visual extinction througout different kinds of clouds and as a function of C/O ratio for isothermal clouds (![]() ![]() |
For nearly all the different sets of parameters presented in this section, the intensity of the 234 GHz is from 2 to 4 times higher than that of the 298 and 402 GHz lines. As the 234 GHz line has not been detected, detections of the two other lines seem presently unrealistic.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1997
Online publication: March 26, 1998
helpdesk.link@springer.de