Astronomers uncover properties of a molecular outflow feature in a nearby starburst galaxy

January 24, 2017 by Tomasz Nowakowski, Phys.org report
ALMA CO(1–0) observations of NGC 253. Credit: Walter et al., 2017.

(Phys.org)—An international team of astronomers led by Fabian Walter of the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy in Germany has revealed essential properties of a molecular outflow feature in the nearby starburst galaxy designated NGC253. The findings were presented in a paper published Jan. 18 on the arXiv pre-print repository.

NGC 253, also known as the Sculptor Galaxy, is an intermediate spiral starburst galaxy in the constellation Sculptor some 11 million away. The galaxy is one of the brightest spiral visible and also one of the dustiest. Due to its proximity and the fact that it is currently undergoing a period of intense star formation, it serves as one of the best laboratories to study starburst–driven galactic–scale winds in detail.

NGC 253 is known for the galactic wind emerging from its central area, which carries significant amounts of . In order to better characterize this emission, Walter and his team carried out a series of observations between November 2013 and August 2014 utilizing the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) in Chile. This observational campaign allowed the researchers to uncover crucial properties of the studied molecular outflow.

"We present a detailed study of a molecular outflow feature in the nearby starburst galaxy NGC 253 using ALMA," the paper reads.

According to the study, NGC 253's most prominent outflow feature towards the south has a projected length of about 978 light years, a width of approximately 163 light years, and a velocity dispersion of 40 km s−1. The scientists note that its extent and dispersion are consistent with an ejection from the galaxy's disk starting about 1 million years ago.

The kinematics of the molecular gas in this feature show that the material is approaching us and is also accelerating. However, the astronomers were unable to determine whether or not the molecular mass entrained in the outflow will escape the galaxy, or be recycled to fuel later episodes of . More observations are required to draw final conclusions.

"The kinematics of the molecular gas are consistent with accelerating with a velocity gradient of 1 km s−1 pc−1, and at its last measurable point it approaches the escape velocity. (…) More sensitive ALMA observations will trace the outflow even further out, and will shed light on whether or not part of the ejected molecular material will escape the galaxy," the researchers wrote in the paper.

The team also discovered bright tracers of dense molecular gas like HCN, CN, HCO+, CS in the molecular outflow. Moreover, they found that line ratios HCN/CO measured in the outflow are high and consistent with ratios observed in the central starburst region of NGC253 and in other starbursts, while the HCN/CO line ratio in the galaxy's disk is significantly lower, which is typical for gas in the disks of nearby galaxies. The researchers concluded that this indicates that the dense molecular gas is retaining its properties in the process of its ejection from the central regions into the outflow.

Explore further: Starburst to star bust: Astronomers ID suspect behind dearth of high-mass galaxies

More information: Dense Molecular Gas Tracers in the Outflow of the Starburst Galaxy NGC 253, arXiv:1701.05040 [astro-ph.GA] arxiv.org/abs/1701.05040

Abstract
We present a detailed study of a molecular outflow feature in the nearby starburst galaxy NGC 253 using ALMA. We find that this feature is clearly associated with the edge of NGC 253's prominent ionized outflow, has a projected length of ~300 pc, with a width of ~50 pc and a velocity dispersion of ~40 km s^-1, consistent with an ejection from the disk about 1 Myr ago. The kinematics of the molecular gas in this feature can be interpreted (albeit not uniquely) as accelerating at a rate of 1 km s^-1 pc^-1. In this scenario, the gas is approaching escape velocity at the last measured point. Strikingly, bright tracers of dense molecular gas (HCN, CN, HCO+, CS) are also detected in the molecular outflow: We measure an HCN(1-0)/CO(1-0) line ratio of ~1/10 in the outflow, similar to that in the central starburst region of NGC 253 and other starburst galaxies. By contrast, the HCN/CO line ratio in the NGC 253 disk is significantly lower (~1/30), similar to other nearby galaxy disks. This strongly suggests that the streamer gas originates from the starburst, and that its physical state does not change significantly over timescales of ~1 Myr during its entrainment in the outflow. Simple calculations indicate that radiation pressure is not the main mechanism for driving the outflow. The presence of such dense material in molecular outflows needs to be accounted for in simulations of galactic outflows.

Related Stories

Hubble sees a galaxy with a glowing heart

July 14, 2014

(Phys.org) —This view, captured by the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, shows a nearby spiral galaxy known as NGC 1433. At about 32 million light-years from Earth, it is a type of very active galaxy known as a Seyfert galaxy—a ...

Outflowing gas in ultraluminous galaxies

January 9, 2017

Galaxies evolve over billions of years in part through the activity of star formation and their supermassive nuclear black holes, and also by mergers with other galaxies. Some features of galaxies, in particular the strong ...

Hidden details revealed in nearby starburst galaxy

December 9, 2013

Using the new, high-frequency capabilities of the National Science Foundation's Robert C. Byrd Green Bank Telescope (GBT), astronomers have captured never-before-seen details of the nearby starburst galaxy M82. These new ...

Recommended for you

Unconfirmed near-Earth objects

June 22, 2018

Near-Earth objects (NEOs) are small solar system bodies whose orbits sometimes bring them close to the Earth, potentially threatening a collision. NEOs are tracers of the composition, dynamics and environmental conditions ...

'Red nuggets' are galactic gold for astronomers

June 21, 2018

About a decade ago, astronomers discovered a population of small, but massive galaxies called "red nuggets." A new study using NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory indicates that black holes have squelched star formation in these ...

HESS J1943+213 is an extreme blazar, study finds

June 21, 2018

An international group of astronomers have carried out multi-wavelength observations of HESS J1943+213 and found evidence supporting the hypothesis that this gamma-ray source is an extreme blazar. The finding is reported ...

The Rosetta stone of active galactic nuclei deciphered

June 21, 2018

A galaxy with at least one active supermassive black hole – named OJ 287 – has caused many irritations and questions in the past. The emitted radiation of this object spans a wide range – from the radio up to the highest ...

54 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

cantdrive85
1.6 / 5 (14) Jan 24, 2017
Nice study of this electric current, not that the paper at any point acknowledges this simple fact. Also, any mention of escape velocity is meaningless. What would be of greater value is trying to determine the galactic circuit to which this current connected.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (12) Jan 24, 2017
Nice study of this electric current, not that the paper at any point acknowledges this simple fact.

(Sigh). IF it was "electric", it would have been mentioned..
Also, any mention of escape velocity is meaningless.

Why, pray tell...?
What would be of greater value is trying to determine the galactic circuit to which this current connected.

Sounds like you have it figured out - please elucidate...
jonesdave
4.4 / 5 (13) Jan 24, 2017
@cantthink,
Electric current my arse. Surely any half decent electric current would have ionised the gas, yes? Most of those molecules are neutral, and are not particularly 'excited'. You are only seeing the lower state ro-vibrational transition (1-0).
You people really need to learn some science, before you start commenting on it.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 24, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 24, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
IMP-9
5 / 5 (9) Jan 24, 2017
there's an explanation of Marklund convection and the Lorentz force here ...


You didn't answer the question. Jonesdave asked why the current had not ionised the CO. He did not ask how could a plasma affect a neutral species, try answering the question.
barakn
4.6 / 5 (11) Jan 24, 2017
btw: This alternative explanation should certainly not be news by this point. I've spoken about Marklund convection on countless occasions here on physorg.

It's a crucial aspect of electrical cosmology, and to think that the astrophysical community probably does not even know about it yet is another brewing scandal.

Yes, it was published in an obscure journal called Nature, I'm sure it was overlooked by every single astrophysicist on the planet.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 24, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 24, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
barakn
3.8 / 5 (10) Jan 24, 2017
Please understand me that I am not exaggerating when I say that you should be spending more time asking questions and reading than arguing. This will enable you to better identify where the controversy occurs. If you do that, these discussions will be far more interesting for everybody.
Because arguing involves asking Chris_Reeve/HannesAlfven uncomfortable questions that he can't answer. It would be a lot easier for Chris if you asked yourself questions and not him.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 24, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 24, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
IMP-9
4.4 / 5 (7) Jan 24, 2017
The current would have to have considerable velocity in order to ionize a neutral. This is called critical ionization velocity (CIV)


Does the air in a lightning strike reach tens of kilometers per second before the strike? No. Then how could it be ionised? Because CIV is not the only ionisation process.

We're talking about one structure with current flowing inside it, CIV is not relevant. Because of the current the charged species won't even be in velocity equilibrium so talking about a single velocity doesn't make any sense. If you were relying on CIV to provide all the ionisation in this situation then there would be no plasma because the ionisation energy of CO is pretty much the same as hydrogen. CO would actually dissociate before you had a plasma with CIV.

So that doesn't answer the question.
Hyperfuzzy
1 / 5 (5) Jan 24, 2017
The analysis has just begun. There can be no conclusions. We see an object. At what state relative to the center of mass of the entire object relative to us. Acceleration! Velocity? Temporal Position? Formation of such an object? Mirror image in time?

The hydrogen line defines speed, v is +/-! s = c Le/Lo. Each line defines it's near field. etc.
Benni
1 / 5 (11) Jan 24, 2017
@cantthink,
Electric current my arse. Surely any half decent electric current would have ionised the gas, yes? Most of those molecules are neutral, and are not particularly 'excited'. You are only seeing the lower state ro-vibrational transition (1-0).
You people really need to learn some science, before you start commenting on it.


Coming from a person who makes assassination threats against President Donald Trump as I repost his threat below from earlier in the day:

jonesdave5 / 5 (2) 6 hours ago
What might Trump mean for chemistry?

Don't know. Let's set fire to the b***ard, and find out.


Read more at: https://phys.org/...html#jCp

OK Physorg.......when will you make this guy history at this website. You want civil discourse about science, but making threats against the President of the United States is not an ON TOPIC discourse is it?
barakn
4.3 / 5 (6) Jan 24, 2017
I collect the best critique that's ever been lodged against modern science. If you're smart, you'll realize there is some value to having somebody like that around. -Chris_Reeve
Liar. I've been waiting for 4 years for a cogent response from you about your untenable belief that lavas can't saturate cameras in this thread: https://phys.org/...ars.html Go ahead, surprise me by responding with an intelligent argument.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) Jan 25, 2017
The current would have to have considerable velocity in order to ionize a neutral. This is called critical ionization velocity (CIV)


The current? As in Electrical...?
Doesn't that (generally) run at the speed of light?
Don't you really mean "charge potential"?
RNP
5 / 5 (7) Jan 25, 2017
@Chris_Reeve
I collect the best critique that's ever been lodged against modern science. If you're smart, you'll realize there is some value to having somebody like that around.


Then enlighten us! You should have no trouble explaining how these currents and/or Marklund convection explain the position-velocity diagrams in the paper linked above (Figs. 2 and 6). These clearly show that the filaments contain matter flowing OUTWARD in opposite directions from the central body.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
RNP
4.3 / 5 (6) Jan 25, 2017
@Chris_Reeve
Unable to actually address any of the actual scientific questions/comments your posts have so far elicited, you resort to pure Gish gallop. Either enter into a scientific dialogue with at least one of your critics or continue to be seen as an evangelizing pseudo-scientist.
cantdrive85
1.7 / 5 (6) Jan 25, 2017
Not surprising, well understood EE concepts are considered "gish gallop" by those who kneel at the alter of the thought experiment diety and the "dark" entities.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
cantdrive85
1.7 / 5 (6) Jan 25, 2017
visually manifesting as filaments when a temporary current pathway forms between the globe and the electrode due to the difference in potential.

"Visually manifesting"?
Have you ever seen a continuous filament in one of these? No.

Definitions, relevance, and an understanding of time scales is obviously not your strong point.
Even that filament that lasts a few seconds in a plasma ball is a stable structure. Your belief these must be eternal to qualify as stable is your own problem, not the EU's. BTW, when these structures are scaled to cosmic proportions, the time factor must also be scaled to cosmic proportions.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (4) Jan 25, 2017
Well bshott, you have yet to answer how those magical bowls get magnetized without an electric current. And if magnetism is an inherent property, why then did the magnetic field collapse precisely when Maxwell opened the circuit? Wait, I forgot, you're of the opinion that Maxwell was a quack and his field equations are meaningless and the entirety of our modern electronic society is merely an accident being that EE's have such a skewed understanding of EM theory with their belief that electro and magnetism are intimate hand maidens.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (4) Jan 25, 2017
This conversation is dumb.

Well, it does involve magic bowl guy.
IMP-9
5 / 5 (5) Jan 25, 2017
I'm not even sure where the confusion is at this point.


I'm not sure how I can state it any more clearly. When there's a current the charged species are not in velocity equilibrium (that's how current works) so you cannot define a single velocity between the charged particles and the neutrals. It's not a gas and a plasma coming together as in CIV.

What role does the observed behavior of laboratory plasmas play in this thought process?


What? It's an experimental fact that CIV isn't the only ionisation process, e.g Townsend Avalanche, photoionisation. Most lab experiments won't use CIV to get the plasma going either. Perhaps instead of deflecting completely you could just answer the question.

The ionization does not have to even be occurring near the filament.


That's not what was asked. The question that was asked was why has this electric current not ionised the CO. Please try answering the question.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (4) Jan 25, 2017
This is why it's such a mistake to thoughtlessly apply fluids-based models throughout a plasma universe.

If the fluid models account for variable densities - they're not a mistake or thoughtless...
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Jan 25, 2017
@cantthink,
Electric current my arse. Surely any half decent electric current would have ionised the gas, yes? Most of those molecules are neutral, and are not particularly 'excited'. You are only seeing the lower state ro-vibrational transition (1-0).
You people really need to learn some science, before you start commenting on it.


Coming from a person who makes assassination threats against President Donald Trump as I repost his threat below from earlier in the day:

jonesdave5 / 5 (2) 6 hours ago
What might Trump mean for chemistry?

Don't know. Let's set fire to the b***ard, and find out.


Read more at: https://phys.org/...html#jCp

OK Physorg.......when will you make this guy history at this website. You want civil discourse about science, but making threats against the President of the United States is not an ON TOPIC discourse is it?


Benni, do us a favour: F**k off, yes?
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Jan 25, 2017
This conversation is dumb.

Well, it does involve magic bowl guy.


Jeez, thick or what?
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Jan 25, 2017
I see Reeve is back again. Still putting out this Velikovskian woo, yes? Seen Wal the f***wit lately? How is his electric comet woo getting on? How many more lies is he going to tell to his scientifically challenged followers? How much more evidence against his woo is he going to ignore? Are you thick as pig**it idiots going to buy it all again? Answer; yes, of course you are! You always do.
Here is the reason; you are all scientifically illiterate. No ifs, no buts; you are all as thick as pig**it. End of story. Wouldn't know science if it bit you on the a**e.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Jan 25, 2017
Re: "Unable to actually address any of the actual scientific questions/comments your posts have so far elicited, you resort to pure Gish gallop. Either enter into a scientific dialogue with at least one of your critics or continue to be seen as an evangelizing pseudo-scientist."

Is this a form letter?

What a joke.


No,idiot, it's what you do. In case you haven't noticed, science is actually beyond you. And the idiot Thornhill. And the idiot Talbott. Et bleeding cetera. You just make sh*t up as you go along. Nothing to do with science. Never has been, never will be.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Jan 25, 2017

@Benni the BURKE,
OK Physorg.......when will you make this guy history at this website. You want civil discourse about science, but making threats against the President of the United States is not an ON TOPIC discourse is it?


I only suggested setting fire to the cnut as an experiment. Let's see what happens. Maybe, during the autopsy, we'll find a brain cell. You never know.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Jan 25, 2017
btw: This alternative explanation should certainly not be news by this point. I've spoken about Marklund convection on countless occasions here on physorg.

It's a crucial aspect of electrical cosmology, and to think that the astrophysical community probably does not even know about it yet is another brewing scandal.

When the experts try so hard to ignore controversies, eventually they stop being the experts.


Idiot. There is, yet again, no controversy. Only in the feeble minds that make up your silly cult (think I spelled that right). It doesn't exist, understand? It is like your "insects fell from Venus to Earth" BS. Nobody takes it seriously. For good reason. That reason being - you lot are as thick as pigs**t.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Jan 25, 2017
@Reeve the liar,
Honestly, I'm one of the few people here who actually provides sourced quotes....


Where is your convection? Why so many craters? Why such a thick crust? Why so few volcanos? Et bleeding cetera. You are a liar, and a gobsh*te. Sorry, can't put it more nicely than that. Start answering some questions, woo boy.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (3) Jan 26, 2017
jonesdumb, I know it will be nearly impossible for you, but try and leave the lowbrow vulgarities and name calling out of it. You're emotional again, you take your dementia meds?
MultiverseFilament
not rated yet Feb 03, 2017
"It's a crucial aspect of electrical cosmology, and to think that the astrophysical community probably does not even know about it yet is another brewing scandal."
When the experts try so hard to ignore controversies, eventually they stop being the experts.
Truth .. it is.
And more than that, no one has a corner on the truth, we are all connected, electrically. Thoughts thunk and being thought are not a demonstration of intelligence but in a filtering of the river, the great river of all thoughts thunk.. and so a new 'genius' may enlighten, with each a generator of this spark of thoughts..
My thoughts received say that this is matter creation, as those gases were created, but a spark of lights that coalesced into the falling magnetism, by the 'drop' of electric charge across the coils, inducing the secondary and tertiary.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.