Using this equation they model the CO emission from a disk that is believed to be similar to the disk
around HL-Tau. Figure 5.32 is the figure they present in their paper. The graph at the top left of the
figure shows the distribution of emissivity that they used, ie. maximum emission at the very centre of the disk,
dropping to near zero at the outer edge. The modelled cloud line profiles are presented in the form of a
position-velocity diagram in the lower two diagrams. In a position-velocity diagram the line profiles are shown as
contours. To find the line profile at a particular position,
,
in a cloud find that position on the x-axis and
then the line profile is made up from the values of the contours along the line
.
This is an extremely
compact way of showing large amounts of data. In figure 5.32 the lower left diagram is the output for a
point sized beam and the lower right diagram simulates what would be seen by a beam of the size shown in the lower
right corner.
These diagrams can be reproduced by the ASTRA program by having it produce output at many positions in the cloud. These can then be fed into the posvel program which produces a position-velocity diagram. In order to reproduce this model the following parameters were used. The parameters vary only with radius in the disk, there is no variation in the direction perpendicular to the disk. The height of the disk is not important but it has been chosen here to be large enough so that the beam is always filled (if this were not the case the only effect would be to lower the intensity of the lines). The cloud was assumed to be at a distance of 140 pc.
Ring miss problem
[l]
Producing these outputs with pencil beams (ie. only one line of sight used for each beam) revealed a problem with
the program in the outer regions of the cloud that should be noted. The problem is obviously visible in
figure 5.33 where the contours have a rather jagged shape. The cause of this can be examined in a
slightly more exteme case shown in figure 5.35. This figure shows output at a series of points in a
cloud. The first 3 and the last 3 lines are a series 1 arcsecond apart on the cloud (at 23
,
22
,
21
,20
,
19
,
18
), the middle 4 lines are 0.2
apart at 20.2
,
20.4
,
20.6
& 20.8
.
It can clearly be seen that the rise in
intensity of the lines is not linear with position on the cloud. Consideration of figure 5.34 shows
the reason for this: it turns out to be a slightly different manifestation of the problem that was described on
page
. The problem arises when a line of sight passes close to a cylinder boundary (in this
type of model the parameters are invariant with vertical height so the disks play no role). If it is a line similar to line
'a' then all of its emissivity will be caused by the emissivity of cylinder 1. A line slightly further in or out
than line 'a' will have its emissivity changed only very slightly due to the change in line length in cylinder 1.
This is what is occuring for the first three lines in figure 5.35 where only a very slight upward trend
is observed for the lines closer to the centre of the cloud. The right most three lines in figure 5.35
can also be seen to have a slow upward trend for line closer to the centre of the cloud but at a considerably
higher intensity than the first three lines. This is due to ring 2 have a higher emissivity function than ring
1. These are therefore lines similar to line 'c' in figure 5.34.
It now becomes clear why the middle 4 lines display such a rapid increase in intensity. They are equivalent to line
'b' and are very close to the edge of cylinder 2. However, when close to the edge of the ring small movements
towards the centre of the cloud cause large increases in the length of the line of sight in cylinder 2 (and
corresponding decrease in the length of the line in cylinder 1) and since cylinder 2 has a higher emissivity than
cylinder 1 the line strength increases rapidly. In other words this problem is being caused by the function for
emissivity (ie. the density and abundance distributions) not being smooth enough. This was exactly the same problem
as with the velocity steps as described on page
. Unfortunately the solution used there is
not possible here. This is because previously the velocity information was stored as the geometries of the
lines of sight were calculated. It
was therefore possible to add another segment to the line of sight with the exact velocity at the closest point to
the centre of the cloud stored. This is not the case for the density and abundance information and by the time
this information
is needed the absolute position of the line of sight relative to the centre of the cloud is no longer known. There
is therefore no easy solution to this problem without re-writing significant sized sections of the program. However, it is possible
to virtually remove the problem by increasing the number of cylinders used in the model. In this way the density and
abundance distributions are smoothed out. As might be expected this is easier for some models than for others. Figure 5.33
was produced using a model with 18 cylinders. Increasing this to 48 yields figure 5.36 which removes
virtually all signs of the irregularities. However, Richer & Padman also show a model for a cloud with emission
coming from a Gaussian ring (see upper left panel in figure 5.37) where many more cylinders are
necessary to produce a smooth output.
Modelling emission as a Gaussian ring is intended to reproduce either clouds which exhibit depletion of the trace
molecules in their centres or which have an actual cavity in their centres. Figure 5.36 shows the
modelled position velocity diagram for this cloud as published by Richer & Padman. Although they use this
distribution as an example for modelling a much more massive cloud (30 M)
the model reproduced here will
have exactly the same parameters as the previous model in order to enable comparison with the simpler disk model
described above. The position velocity diagram should however remain very similar. The ASTRA version of this model
can be seen in figure 5.38. Due to the emissivity changing much more rapidly within the cloud many more
cylinders are needed to produce smooth looking models. For example 180 cylinders were used to produce
figure 5.38. It is also worth noting here that although it might be thought that 180 cylinders would
dramatically slow the program down this can be compensated for by reducing the number of disks to a minimum - in
this case just 4 were used. This is possible because of the invariance of the parameters with disk height. As a
final test figures 5.39 & 5.40 are produced using exactly the same parameters except this
time a 15
beam was used. These two figures are intended to approximate the two diagrams presented by Richer
& Padman showing the line profiles convolved with a beam.
Despite the minor differences in the models used, the general reproduction of the models is very close to the
originals in figures 5.32 & 5.37. The small differences present are probably mainly due to
different values being used for the contour lines. The contour lines
given by Richer & Padman are arbitrary but linearly spaced and thus it is difficult to exactly reproduce them. The
contour lines in the ASTRA models are also linearly spaced but it is unknown what the linear spacing should be,
nor where the first contour should lie. It should also be noted that the model reproductions with a beam are not
strictly the same as those presented by Richer & Padman as there is no velocity convolution. The beam was modelled
as a JCMT type beam (ie. 15
)
but the velocity steps were kept the same, this may explain the larger discrepancies
for the beam models.