2022
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stac965
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Supernovae and photoionizing feedback in spiral arm molecular clouds

Abstract: We explore the interplay between supernovae and the ionizing radiation of their progenitors in star forming regions. The relative contributions of these stellar feedback processes are not well understood, particularly on scales greater than a single star forming cloud. We focus predominantly on how they affect the interstellar medium. We re-simulate a 500 pc2 region from previous work that included photoionization and add supernovae. Over the course of 10 Myr more than 500 supernovae occur in the region. The s… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 89 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The fact that both the photon production rate and the mechanical luminosity of stellar winds correlate with the outflow velocities indicates that the pre-SN feedback is important and sufficient to drive outflows alone. This is consistent with numerical simulations that highlight the fundamental role that pre-SN feedback has in reprocessing the gas of the natal cloud where SNe will explode (Bending et al 2022).…”
Section: Stellar Feedback As a Driver Of Local Outflowssupporting
confidence: 88%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The fact that both the photon production rate and the mechanical luminosity of stellar winds correlate with the outflow velocities indicates that the pre-SN feedback is important and sufficient to drive outflows alone. This is consistent with numerical simulations that highlight the fundamental role that pre-SN feedback has in reprocessing the gas of the natal cloud where SNe will explode (Bending et al 2022).…”
Section: Stellar Feedback As a Driver Of Local Outflowssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…The absence of strong correlations for the ionized gas outflows is in part due to the presence of the outlier M51-YSC1, but it is likely also due to the larger uncertainties of the outflow measurements that result in a larger scatter of the data points. The correlation of the neutral outflow velocities with the photon production rate and the mechanical luminosity of stellar winds indicates the importance of pre-SN feedback in reprocessing the gas of the natal cloud where SNe will explode (Lopez et al 2014;Barnes et al 2021;McLeod et al 2021;Bending et al 2022;Chevance et al 2022;Della Bruna et al 2022).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Pre-SN feedback helps clear the medium surrounding massive stars before the first SN explosion occurs at around ∼4 Myr (Leitherer et al 2014), and the effect of SN explosions is to mainly inject energy into the ISM outside of the natal cloud, rather than affecting the star formation within the natal cloud itself (Lucas et al 2020;Grudić et al 2022). According to models, radiative feedback may be key for regulating star formation within galaxies (Hopkins et al 2020;Bending et al 2022) and processes that act over timescales shorter than SN explosions may be required to clear channels in the ISM for the escape of ionizing photons from galaxies, as half of the ionizing photons are supplied within the first 3 Myr (Ma et al 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A full accounting of the different mechanisms and the timescales over which they dominate is important because feedback drives the evolution of the star-forming material (e.g. Deharveng et al 2010;Walch et al 2012;Dale et al 2014;Ali 2021;Bending et al 2022), may affect local star formation (e.g. Thompson et al 2012;Dale et al 2015), and enhances the distances out to which eventual supernovae impact the interstellar medium (by carving low-density channels in the star-forming cloud, see e.g., Rogers & Pittard 2013;Lucas et al 2020;Rathjen et al 2021).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%