1: \input psfig.tex
2: \documentstyle[12pt,aasms4]{article}
3: %\documentstyle[aaspptwo]{article}
4: \def\simlt{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}}
5: \def\simgt{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$}}
6:
7: \lefthead{Spaans \& Silk}
8: \righthead{The Equation of State of Interstellar Clouds}
9:
10: \begin{document}
11:
12: \title{The Polytropic Equation of State of Interstellar Gas Clouds}
13:
14: \author{Marco Spaans\footnote{Hubble Fellow}}
15:
16: \affil{Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden Street MS 51,
17: Cambridge, MA 02138}
18:
19: \author{Joseph Silk}
20:
21: \affil{Astrophysics, Department of Physics, University of Oxford,
22: Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH, U.K.\footnote{current address} and
23: Departments of Astronomy and Physics, University of California, 601
24: Campbell Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720}
25:
26: \begin{abstract}
27: Models are presented for the polytropic equation of state of self-gravitating,
28: quiescent interstellar gas clouds.
29: A detailed analysis, including chemistry, thermal balance, and radiative
30: transfer, is performed
31: for the physical state of the gas as a function of density, metallicity,
32: velocity field, and background radiation field. It is found that the stiffness
33: of the equation of state strongly depends on all these physical parameters, and
34: the adiabatic index varies between $\sim 0.2-1.4$. The implications for star formation, in
35: particular at high redshift and in starburst galaxies, and the initial
36: stellar mass function are discussed.
37: \end{abstract}
38:
39: {\it subject headings}: ISM: clouds - ISM: molecular process - radiative transfer - cosmology: theory - galaxies: starburst
40:
41: \section{Introduction}
42:
43: A fundamental problem in the theory of star formation is the physical structure
44: of molecular gas clouds, such as dense cores and Bok globules, from which
45: (low-mass) stars are formed. Early work on the thermal and chemical balance
46: of interstellar clouds has been performed by de Jong, Dalgarno \& Boland (1980)
47: and Falgarone \& Puget (1985). A framework for active regions such as Orion
48: has been developed by Tielens \& Hollenbach (1985). The above work has been
49: extended and refined by many authors (see Hollenbach \& Tielens 1999 for a
50: review), driven to a large extent by recent advances in observational
51: techniques.
52:
53: Examples of such observational progress include the catalog of 248 optically
54: selected Bok globules of Clemens \& Barvainis (1988), the NH$_3$ survey of
55: isolated cores in Taurus by Benson \& Myers (1989, and references therein),
56: the measurement of non-thermal line widths in regions surrounding ammonia
57: cores (Fuller \& Myers 1992, Goodman et al.\ 1998),
58: and the use of spectroscopy of various atoms and molecules as temperature and
59: density diagnostics of different types of interstellar clouds as summarized in
60: van Dishoeck (1997).
61:
62: Despite this wealth of observational data, the nature of their equation of state (EOS) remains
63: a major theoretical problem that
64: concerns the stability and collapse of these molecular clouds The stiffness of the EOS can be
65: largely responsible for the resulting density probability function of
66: interstellar gas in the turbulent ISM (Scalo et al.\ (1998) and Passot \&
67: Vazquez-Semadeni 1998).
68: In particular, the value of gamma affects the densities that can be attained
69: behind shocks (Vazquez-Semadeni, Passot \& Pouquet 1996), the fraction of gas
70: driven to high densities by turbulent interactions (c.f.\ Scalo et al. 1998),
71: and the stability of clouds being overrun by shocks (e.g.\ Tohline, Bodenheimer
72: \& Christodoulou 1987; Foster \& Boss 1996).
73: In the present paper we concentrate on the effects of the EOS for the
74: fragmentation of individual collapsing clouds.
75: Before embarking on an analysis of the EOS of interstellar gas clouds, say of
76: the form $P=P(\rho ,T_{\rm g},T_{\rm d},V,B,I,C)$ for pressure $P$, density
77: $\rho$, gas temperatures $T_{\rm g}$, dust temperature $T_{\rm d}$, velocity
78: $V$, magnetic field $B$, radiation intensity $I$, and chemical composition $C$,
79: one should assess which of the possible physical quantities entering the EOS
80: dominates in the parameter ranges under study.
81:
82: The importance of $\rho$ and $T_{\rm g}$ is self-explanatory. The presence of
83: warm dust can play a role since it can heat the gas through gas-grain coupling
84: and radiatively through optically thick molecular lines (Takahashi, Hollenbach
85: \& Silk 1983). The velocity field, even when it does not contribute to the turbulent
86: pressure, strongly influences the optical depth of atomic and molecular cooling
87: lines, and hence the thermal balance of the medium. The magnetic field plays
88: an important role in the support of interstellar gas (McKee 1999). The presence
89: of ultraviolet or other hard radiation sources strongly influences the
90: chemical, thermal and ionization balance of the ambient medium, and hence the
91: overall EOS. Finally, the chemical composition of the gas also depends on the
92: metallicity since it is the abundance of atoms and molecules which influences
93: the local cooling rate.
94:
95: In the present work, a polytropic equation of state, $P=K\rho^\gamma$, is
96: assumed to describe the physical state of the gas. The exponent $\gamma$ is
97: considered to be a function $\gamma (T_{\rm g},T_{\rm d},V,I,C)$. That is, the
98: magnetic pressure is assumed to be not dominant in the support of the model
99: cloud. The radiation field $I$, in addition to the radiation emitted by the
100: dust grains, is assumed to be given by the cosmic ray ionization rate.
101: In other words,
102: the visual extinction of the model cloud is assumed to be sufficient to shield
103: the gas from any ultraviolet (stellar) sources.
104:
105: We note that $\gamma$ is the
106: logarithmic derivative of $P$ with respect to $\rho$. That is,
107: since $P\sim\rho T$ it follows that
108: $\gamma = 1+{{d {\rm log}T}\over{d{\rm log}\rho}}$. Through implicit
109: differentiation the above derivative is
110: related to the logarithmic derivatives of the heating and cooling
111: functions, which can be quite complex. It is this dependence of $\gamma$ on
112: the details of heating and cooling that is the main topic of the present paper.
113:
114: In the remainder of the paper, a useful guide is the density dependence of
115: the heating and cooling rate. If the density dependence of the heating rate
116: is steeper (shallower) than that of the cooling rate, then $\gamma$ is
117: larger (smaller) than unity. A similar result holds for the kinetic
118: temperature. Here, the cosmic ray ionization rate is always linear in the
119: density and independent of temperature, whereas gas-grain heating and cooling
120: is quadratic in the density and proportional to
121: $T_{\rm g}^{1/2}(T_{\rm g}-T_{\rm d})$.
122: Optically thin, subthermally excited cooling
123: lines have a quadratic density dependence which becomes linear in the
124: thermalized (high density) limit and even effectively sub-linear when
125: radiative trapping
126: (optical depth effects) becomes important. Finally, collisional de-excitation
127: rates are characterized by powers of the temperature on the order of
128: $\sim 0.5-1.5$, whereas excitation rates are modified by an exponential
129: factor which is of the order of unity for kinetic temperatures larger than the
130: pertaining excitation temperatures.
131:
132: In general, our results are applicable mostly to dense and/or well shielded
133: molecular clouds/cores where the pressure appears to be close to thermal, with
134: only a small additional contribution to the line-widths
135: from turbulent motions, and the ionization
136: fraction is small (Goodman et al.\ 1998, and references therein). That is,
137: we assume that the clouds are outside the regime where the so-called Larson
138: (1981) laws apply, which indicate an increase in the non-thermal line width
139: with length scale.
140:
141: One should note that polytropic models can also be extended into the regime
142: where there is a significant contribution to the pressure from turbulence and
143: magnetic fields. The polytropic temperature $T$ should then be interpreted as
144: representing the total velocity dispersion $\sigma$, i.e., $T\propto\sigma^2$
145: (Maloney 1988). A complete description of polytropic models, including
146: composite ones for non-thermal pressure effects and bulk properties like
147: mass, radius and density contrast, is presented in Curry \&
148: McKee (1999). The aim here is to study the thermal regime and to investigate
149: the specific effects of metallicity, radiative transfer and internal sources
150: on the stiffness of the resulting local EOS.
151:
152: \section{Model Description}
153:
154: The results presented here were obtained by application of the numerical
155: code of Spaans (1996), described in detail in Spaans \& Norman (1997);
156: Spaans \& van Dishoeck (1997); and Spaans \& Carollo (1998). The interested
157: reader is referred to these papers for a description of the
158: underlying algorithm. The code has been specifically designed to solve large
159: chemical networks with a self-consistent treatment of the thermal balance for
160: all heating and cooling processes known to be of importance, and to be
161: computable with some sense of rigor, in the interstellar medium
162: (Spaans \& Ehrenfreund 1999).
163: Care has to be taken in the treatment of line trapping for the
164: atomic and molecular cooling lines which dominate the thermal balance.
165: Collisional de-excitation and radiative trapping is most
166: prominent in the density range $\sim10^3-10^4$ cm$^{-3}$ (Scalo et al.\ 1998).
167: Our result were found to be in good agreement with those of
168: Neufeld et al.\ (1995)
169: for their, and our, adopted linear velocity gradient model (see further
170: details below).
171:
172: The adopted chemical network is based on the UMIST compillation (Millar,
173: Farquhar \& Willacy 1997) and is well suited
174: for low temperature dense molecular clouds, with the latest rates for the
175: important neutral-neutral reactions. The radiative transfer is solved by means
176: of a Monte Carlo approach (Spaans \& van Langevelde 1992)
177: with checks provided by an escape probability method
178: for large line optical depths. The thermal balance includes heating by cosmic
179: rays, absorption of infrared photons by H$_2$O molecules and their subsequent
180: collisional de-excitation, and gas-grain heating. The cooling includes
181: the coupling between gas and dust grains (Hollenbach \& McKee 1989), atomic
182: lines of all metals, molecular lines, and all major isotopes, as described in
183: Spaans \& Norman (1997) and Spaans et al.\ (1994), and also in Neufeld,
184: Lepp \& Melnick (1995) for the regime of very large line optical depth.
185: All level populations are computed in statistical equilibrium at a relative
186: accuracy, also imposed on the ambient line radiation field, of no less
187: than $10^{-3}$. The combined chemical and thermal balance is required to obey a
188: convergence criterion between successive iterations of 0.5\%.
189:
190: For the low metallicity computations, the relative contributions to the total
191: cooling by H$_2$ and HD can become significant. Since the value of $\gamma$
192: depends on the logarithmic derivative of the cooling rate with respect to
193: temperature and density, the end result could become quite sensitive to the
194: (quantum mechanical) treatment of H-H$_2$, H$_2$-H$_2$ and He-H$_2$ collional
195: processes.
196:
197: The main differences between calculations of H-H2 and H2-H2 collisions are due
198: to different potentials (surfaces) and whether reactive collisions, i.e., the
199: exchange of an H atom, are included (important above 1000 K).
200: The shape of the potential surface is quite important for the lower
201: temperatures, where rotational quantum effects dominate. This situation has
202: improved greatly over recent years (c.f.\ Forrey et al.\ 1997).
203: Nevertheless, we have restricted our calculations to $Z\ge 0.01$ Z$_\odot$.
204: In this regime, there are other atomic and molecular coolants which still
205: contribute, at the 30\% level, diminishing the relative importance of the
206: aforementioned sensitivities.
207:
208: As an additional check, we have performed runs with the recent le Bourlot et
209: al.\ (1999) H$_2$ rates. We have found no significant changes in $\gamma$ for
210: our adopted metallicities. Finally, for zero metallicity gas, and in the
211: absence of HD cooling, we found (albeit tentatively given the above caveats)
212: that $\gamma$ is always less than unity. The inclusion of HD restricts this
213: result to densities less than $\sim 10^5$ cm$^{-3}$.
214:
215: \section{The Initial Mass Function}
216:
217: Before discussing the results of our computations, we want to outline how the
218: value of $\gamma$ could related to the process of star formation, i.e., how
219: a large value of $\gamma$ might suppress the formation of stars.
220:
221: The polytropic equation
222: of state of interstellar gas clouds may be relevant to determinations of
223: stellar masses. Our starting point is to pose the question: is there a
224: characteristic stellar mass? Observationally, the answer appears to be
225: positive.
226: The IMF, $dN/dM\propto m^{-1-x}$, for the number $N$ of stars per unit of mass
227: $M$, has $x>1$ above $\sim 1 \rm M_\odot.$ Below $\sim 0.3 \rm M_\odot$,
228: virtually all data suggests a flattening to $-1\simlt x\simlt 0.$
229: The critical value that defines a characteristic mass is $x \approx 1$
230: for a logarithmic divergence in total mass toward decreasing mass,
231: and there is no doubt that there is a transition from $x>1$ to $x<1$ in the
232: range $0.2-1\,\rm M_\odot$. Hence there is a characteristic stellar mass.
233: Whether this varies with environment is uncertain, but
234: $m_{\rm char}\approx 0.3\,\rm M_\odot$ fits most data (cf.\ Scalo 1998).
235:
236: The status of theoretical discussions of a critical mass often centers
237: on the thermal Jeans mass, $m_{\rm J}\propto T^{3/2}\rho^{-1/2}$,
238: generalized to include external pressure, $m_{\rm J,P}\propto
239: T^2P^{-1/2}$, turbulence $m_{\rm J,t}\propto \Delta V^{4}P^{-1/2}$, or
240: magnetic flux support $m_{\rm J,B}\propto B^3\rho^{-1}$
241: (c.f.\ Elmegreen 1999, Larson 1998).
242: The generalized Jeans scale most likely applies to the masses of atomic and
243: molecular clouds or to self-gravitating clumps. However, the fact that in the
244: interstellar medium, the Jeans mass in diffuse atomic or molecular
245: clouds generally exceeds stellar masses by a large factor, apart from
246: the very coldest clumps, argues that the physics of the IMF is more
247: complicated than Jeans instability. The Jeans mass is a fragmentation
248: scale according to linear theory, and three-dimensional simulations
249: indeed find that clump masses are described by the Jeans
250: scale. Nevertheless, simulations cannot currently resolve the scales of
251: individual protostars on solar mass scales.
252: Analytic arguments, on the contrary, of opacity-limited
253: fragmentation find scales of $\sim 0.01\,\rm M_\odot$, or far less
254: than the characteristic stellar mass scale.
255:
256: All of this seems to suggest that the Jeans mass is not very
257: relevant to the IMF, not
258: withstanding the Elmegreen (1999) and Larson (1998) results.
259: If it were, of course, the critical polytropic index
260: for fragmentation to occur is 4/3.
261: This has the following significance: one can write $m_{\rm J}\propto
262: \rho^{(3/2)(\gamma-4/3)}$.
263: As collapse occurs, smaller and smaller masses fragment, and one plausibly
264: ends up with a powerlaw IMF only if $\gamma <4/3$.
265: This argument could apply to the clump mass function within molecular clouds.
266: The physics of nonlinear fragmentation is complicated, and this is at least a
267: necessary condition for a power law IMF to continue to very small mass scales
268: (compared to the initial Jeans mass).
269:
270: But what really determines stellar masses? Physical processes that
271: must play a role in determining the characteristic stellar mass scale
272: include clump coagulation (Allen \& Bastien 1995),
273: clump interactions (Klessen, Burkert \& Bate
274: 1998) and protostellar outflows (Nakano, Hasegawa \& Norman 1995; Silk 1995)
275: that halt accretion. One conjecture is that feedback
276: from protostars plays a crucial role in limiting accretion.
277: The latter depends crucially on the
278: accretion rate to protostellar cores (various authors relate inflow to
279: outflow rates on energetic grounds), which in turn depends sensitively
280: on the turbulent
281: velocity. The maximum embedded young stellar object luminosity correlates
282: with NH$_3$ core line width $\Delta V$ (Myers \& Fuller 1993) and clump mass
283: (Kawamura et al.\ 1998) over a wide range. Myers \& Fuller (1993) concluded
284: that variations in the initial velocity dispersion from core to core is a key
285: determinant of the stellar mass formed from such a core. Also, Fuller \& Myers
286: (1992) concluded that the physical basis of line width-size relations (the
287: so-called Larson laws) is part of
288: the initial conditions for star formation. The theoretical
289: justification incorporates disk physics and, at least conceptually, magnetic
290: fields (Adams \& Fatuzzo 1996; Silk 1995).
291: So if the above holds (theoretically and observationally,
292: both aspects are relevant), then one might argue that the characteristic mass
293: of a young stellar object depends primarily on $\Delta V$. The latter is
294: determined by the kinetic temperature if the thermal line width dominates in a
295: prestellar core. This situation holds for low mass star formation but less so
296: for the high mass cores, where the nonthermal contribution to the line width
297: (i.e.\ turbulent or magnetic) can be as large as 50-80\% (c.f.\ Myers \& Fuller
298: 1993). In any case, $\gamma =1$ appears the most natural critical value of
299: interest.
300:
301: If $\gamma =1$ is indeed a critical value in this sense, there is the
302: possibility that the primordial EOS with a stiffer polytropic index,
303: $\gamma >1$, leads to a peaked IMF, i.e.\ one biased toward massive stars,
304: whereas current star formation, where the molecular gas is characterised by an
305: EOS with $\gamma <1$, results in runaway fragmentation and hence a power law
306: IMF.
307:
308: \section{Results}
309:
310: The model results\footnote{Extensive tables can be obtained from MS.} are
311: obtained for self-gravitating, quiescent spherical
312: clouds with total column densities per unit of velocity
313: given by
314: $$N^{\rm SIS}({\rm H}_2)=5.1\times 10^{19} n({\rm H}_2)^{1/2}\quad
315: {\rm cm}^{-2}\ {\rm per}\ {\rm km}\ {\rm s}^{-1},\eqno(1)$$
316: (the singular isothermal sphere value; Neufeld et al.\ 1995) to
317: set the optical depth parameter for any species, total
318: hydrogen densities $n_{\rm H}=10^2-10^6$ cm$^{-3}$, metallicities
319: $Z=1-0.01Z_\odot$ in solar units,
320: and a possible homogeneous background infrared radiation (IR) field given by
321: 100 K dust grains. The total visual extinction through the region containing
322: the model cloud is fixed at $A_{\rm V}=100$ mag, although this is only
323: important for determining the dust emission optical depth in the IR
324: background case. Models are also constructed for a constant velocity gradient
325: field of 3 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$, which is a factor of three larger than the
326: value adopted in Goldsmith \& Langer (1978), corresponding to an optical depth
327: parameter of
328: $$N^{\rm VG}({\rm H}_2)=1.0\times 10^{18} n({\rm H}_2)\quad {\rm cm}^{-2}
329: \ {\rm per}\ {\rm km}\ {\rm s}^{-1}.\eqno(2)$$
330: It has been shown by Neufeld \& Kaufman (1993) that this choice violates the
331: virial theorem in the limit of high density. Therefore, (1) is interpreted
332: to apply to a (statistically) static cloud supported by thermal pressure,
333: whereas (2) should be seen as representative of a dynamic medium in a state of
334: infall or outflow. The cosmic ray ionization rate is taken equal to
335: $\zeta_{\rm CR}=3\times 10^{-17}$ s$^{-1}$.
336:
337: \subsection{Variations in $\gamma$: Competition between Heating and Cooling Processes}
338:
339: Figures 1 and 2 present results which do not include an IR background
340: radiation field, e.g.\ little or no ongoing star formation, or a warm CMB.
341: Figure 1 displays the results for a quiescent velocity field with a
342: velocity dispersion of $\Delta V=0.3$ km s$^{-1}$ for H$_2$. Figure 2
343: is for the
344: corresponding case of a velocity gradient of 3 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$.
345: The value of $\gamma$ becomes of the order of unity for low metallicities,
346: $Z<0.03Z_\odot$, and densities $n_{\rm H}<10^5$ cm$^{-3}$. The reason is that
347: the cooling of the ambient medium becomes dominated by H$_2$ and HD
348: (Norman \& Spaans 1997), which emit optically thin line radiation.
349: At low densities, the level populations are not thermalized and the cooling
350: rate has a density dependence which is steeper than linear and typically
351: quadratic, whereas the cosmic ray heating rate is linear in the density.
352:
353: At higher densities gas-grain cooling becomes
354: important. This has a quadratic density dependence, and the equation
355: of state softens in the absence of any embedded
356: sources (Scalo et al.\ 1998), but to a lesser extent due to the lower
357: dust abundance, for small metallicities. Even though no computations were
358: performed beyond densities of $\sim 3\times 10^6$ cm$^{-3}$, the gas-grain
359: coupling at very large densities is so strong that the gas temperature follows
360: the grain temperature and the value of $\gamma$ will increase again and attain
361: a value of unity if embedded protostars are present and the ambient radiation
362: field is not coupled to the local gas density (see below).
363:
364: The high $\gamma$ region between $\sim 10^3$ and $\sim 10^4$ cm$^{-3}$ is the
365: result of line trapping and collisional de-excitation. Line trapping causes
366: the cooling rate to depend on the density with an effective power less than
367: unity due to absorption and subsequent collisional de-excitation,
368: while the cosmic ray heating rate is always linear in the density, independent
369: of the kinetic temperature.
370: It should be emphasized that the effect of radiative trapping is stronger for
371: the quiescent velocity field, but also depends crucially on the specific
372: implementation that we have chosen. A truly turbulent
373: velocity field (Kegel, Piehler \& Albrecht 1993), i.e.\ one with a finite
374: correlation length, may lead to a quite different value of $\gamma$ in the
375: density range $\sim 10^3-10^4$ cm$^{-3}$.
376:
377: \subsection{High Redshift Star formation}
378:
379: As can be seen in Figure 3, the inclusion of an IR background leads to a much
380: stiffer polytropic equation of state for high, $Z>0.1Z_\odot$, metallicities.
381: The reason is that the abundant presence of water leads to heating through
382: absorption of IR radiation and subsequent collisional de-excitation
383: (Takahashi et al.\ 1983) for densities between $\sim 3\times 10^3$ and
384: $\sim 3\times 10^4$
385: cm$^{-3}$. Temperature effects play a role here in the
386: determination of the line opacities, but this is essentially a heating term
387: that is between linear and quadratic in the ambient density.
388: Since this heating rate is roughly proportional to
389: the abundance of H$_2$O, it is negligible for metallicities $Z<0.1Z_\odot$.
390: At very high densities, $n_{\rm H}>3\times 10^6$ cm$^{-3}$, the gas and dust
391: become completely coupled, and $\gamma$ approaches unity since the gas
392: temperature
393: will simply follow the dust temperature. This only follows provided that the
394: strength of the IR radiation field is independent of the ambient density.
395: This point will re-addressed in the next subsection on starburst galaxies.
396:
397: Note also that $\gamma$ decreases to unity from above for densities larger than
398: $\sim 10^5$ cm$^{-3}$ because of the high temperature of the
399: FIR background. This causes
400: the dust to heat the gas and results in a relatively stiff EOS, even for low
401: metallicities where H$_2$ and HD dominate. This is because at these high
402: densities the overall cooling rates are at their thermodynamic limit, roughly
403: linear in the density, while the dust-gas heating rate goes like the square of
404: the density.
405: Note that for $T<200$ K, HD quickly becomes the dominant
406: coolant of pristine gas. The lower equilibrium temperature of the gas
407: facilitates the thermalization of the level populations. Finally, for
408: densities larger than $3\times 10^5$ cm$^{-3}$ radiative trapping becomes
409: important for HD, leading to a density dependence of its cooling rate of
410: less than unity.
411:
412: Even though no results are shown for intermediate (30-60 K) temperature dust
413: backgrounds, $\gamma$ first
414: decreases to somewhat below unity around $10^5$ cm$^{-3}$ in these cases, if
415: the metallicity is less than 0.1 Z$_\odot$. It
416: then approaches unity from below for the reasons given above.
417: Finally, in the limit of a large velocity gradient, H$_2$O plays a minor role
418: and its heating (or cooling) does not strongly influence the thermal balance
419: of the gas (Takahashi et al.\ 1983).
420:
421: Since an IR background is naturally present in the form of the
422: CMB for redshifts larger than $z\sim 10-30$, one
423: can speculate on the nature of very early star formation.
424: That is, any dense shielded region which has been enriched by metals through
425: the first supernova explosions, viewed here as the product of the very first
426: population III stars, will become more stable in the presence of an intense CMB
427: background. Conversely,
428: metal-poor regions will retain a polytropic exponent of $\approx 1$. Therefore,
429: high redshift star formation may exhibit the counter-intuitive property that
430: metal enrichment {\it and} a warm CMB together ``halt'' the process of star
431: formation for a metallicity $Z_{\rm c}> 0.1Z_\odot$, even though the gas is
432: intrinsically capable of cooling efficiently (Spaans \& Norman 1997).
433:
434: Once the CMB temperature drops below $\sim 40$ K, at $z\sim 15$, any dense,
435: $n_{\rm H}>10^4$ cm$^{-3}$, cloud of high or even modest metallicity rapidly develops a
436: $\gamma$-value smaller than unity and is prone to collapse. In effect, although more
437: detailed calculations are required to substantiate this, the CMB may play an
438: integral part in determing the epoch of efficient early star formation. One
439: also sees that the primordial IMF can change strongly as one goes from a
440: $\gamma >1$ to a $\gamma <1$ EOS. In the former regime one expects only large
441: density excursions to collapse, leading to an IMF biased toward massive stars.
442:
443: \subsection{Starburst Galaxies}
444:
445: A similar phenomenon can occur in luminous (IR) starburst galaxies in
446: that warm, $\sim 50-200$ K, opaque dust hardens the polytropic equation of
447: state of a nuclear starburst region. The system Arp 220 is a possible example,
448: being optically thick at 100 $\mu$m. From the results presented here, one
449: concludes that such IR luminous opaque systems have an IMF which is
450: quite shallow, favoring high mass star formation. This may in fact
451: be desirable
452: to maintain the required power of such galaxies through supernova explosions
453: (c.f.\ Doane \& Mathews 1993).
454:
455: Note though that in these extreme systems there is a strong coupling between
456: the ambient radiation field and the star formation rate $R$, and hence with
457: the gas density. Typical Schmidt star formation laws adopt an observationally
458: motivated value of $1-2$ for the dependence of $R$ on gas density (Kennicutt
459: 1998) in star-forming spiral galaxies, with a best fit value of $r=1.4$. Since
460: the resulting dust temperature depends on the $1/5$ power of the ultraviolet
461: energy density (Tielens \& Hollenbach 1985), the effective $\gamma$ for $r=2$
462: ($r=1$) is 1.4 (1.2), consistent with the above results.
463:
464: \section{Discussion}
465:
466: The polytropic equation of state of interstellar gas clouds has been computed
467: for a range of physical parameters, and its relation to the IMF, high redshift
468: star formation, and starburst galaxies has been investigated. A much needed
469: extension of the results presented here lies in MHD, and particularly
470: turbulence. The magnetic and velocity fields are important for pressure
471: support away from the most centrally condensed part of a molecular cloud core,
472: and radiative transfer effects in a turbulent medium are non-trivial.
473: More to the point, the polytropic EOS indices computed here, with their
474: relevance to the IMF as discussed in Section 4, are to be applied to a medium
475: with a given cloud density probability distribution, as investigated
476: in Scalo et al.\ (1998). Such a cloud density probability distribution can
477: only be derived from detailed hydrodynamic simulations which include magnetic
478: pressure and Coriolis forces.
479: Furthermore, $\gamma$ can also affect, in a way still to be investigated,
480: star formation and the underlying IMF in other scenarios like
481: turbulence-induced condensation or shocked-cloud induced star formation.
482: We would like to mention as well the work by Ogino, Tomisaka \& Nakamura (1999)
483: that shows that the mass accretion rate in their polytropic simulations of
484: collapsing clouds depends a lot on whether gamma is taken as 0.8 or 1.2.
485:
486: Extensions in terms of multiple polytropic models for the core and envelope of
487: a molecular cloud, such as discussed in Curry \& McKee (1999), are another
488: avenue to explore for the bulk properties of interstellar clouds. Caveats in
489: the approach presented here are grain mantle evaporation which can influence
490: the abundance of H$_2$O and hence the heating rate in the presence of an IR
491: background, uncertainties in the chemical reaction rates of neutral-neutral
492: reactions at low temperatures, and details of the freeze-out onto grains of
493: molecular species. We hope that through a synthesis of the approach adopted
494: here and those of others mentioned above, one can address the question of cloud
495: stability and collapse in a more general (cosmological) framework.
496:
497: \acknowledgments
498: We are grateful to the referee, John Scalo, for his constructive comments,
499: which improved the presentation of this paper, and his emphasis on the
500: computation of the zero metallicity case.
501: Discussions with Ewine van Dishoeck and John Black on the collisional
502: cross sections of H$_2$ are also gratefully acknowledged.
503: MS is supported by NASA through grant HF-01101.01-97A,
504: awarded by the Space Telescope Institute, which is
505: operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy,
506: Inc., for NASA under contract NAS 5-26555. J.S. has been supported in part by grants
507: from NSF and NASA at UC Berkeley.
508:
509: \newpage
510: \begin{thebibliography}{}
511: \bibitem[]{}Adams, F.C. \& Fatuzzo, M.\ 1996, ApJ, 464, 256
512: \bibitem[]{}Allen, E.J. \& Bastien, P.\ 1995, ApJ, 452, 652
513: \bibitem[]{}Benson, P.J. \& Myers, P.C.\ 1989, ApJS, 71, 89
514: \bibitem[]{}Clemens, D.P. \& Barvainis, R.\ 1988, ApJS, 68, 257
515: \bibitem[]{}Curry, C.L. \& McKee, C.F.\ 1999, astro-ph/9908071
516: \bibitem[]{}de Jong, T., Dalgarno, A. \& Boland W.\ 1980, A\&A, 91, 68
517: \bibitem[]{}Doane, J. \& Mathews, W.G.\ 1993, ApJ, 419, 573
518: \bibitem[]{}Elmegreen, B.G.\ 1999, ApJ, 515, 323
519: \bibitem[]{}Falgarone, E. \& Puget, J.-L.\ 1985, A\&A, 142, 157
520: \bibitem[]{}Forrey, R.C., Balakrishnan, N., Dalgarno, A. \& Lepp, S.\ 1997,
521: ApJ, 489, 1000
522: \bibitem[]{}Foster, P.N. \& Boss, A.P.\ 1996, ApJ, 468, 784
523: \bibitem[]{}Fuller, G.A. \& Myers, P.C.\ 1992, ApJ, 384, 523
524: \bibitem[]{}Goldsmith, P.F. \& Langer, W.D.\ 1978, ApJ, 222, 881
525: \bibitem[]{}Goodman, A.A., Barranco, J.A., Wilner, D.J. \& Heyer, M.H.\ 1998,
526: ApJ, 504, 223
527: \bibitem[]{}Hollenbach, D.A. \& McKee, C.F.\ 1989, ApJ, 342, 306
528: \bibitem[]{}Hollenbach, D.A. \& Tielens, A.G.G.M.\ 1999, Rev.\ Modern Phys.,
529: 71, 173
530: \bibitem[]{}Kawamura, A., Onishi, T., Yonekura, Y., Dobashi, K., Mizuno, A.,
531: Agawa, H. \& Fukui, Y.\ 1998, ApJS, 117, 387
532: \bibitem[]{}Kegel, W.H., Piehler, G. \& Albrecht, M.A.\ 1993, A\&A, 270, 407
533: \bibitem[]{}Kennicutt, R.J., 1998, ApJ, 498, 541
534: \bibitem[]{}Klessen, R.S., Burkert, A. \& Bate, M.R.\ 1998, ApJ, 501, L205
535: \bibitem[]{}Larson, R.B.\ 1998, MNRAS, 301, 569
536: \bibitem[]{}Larson, R.B.\ 1981, MNRAS, 194, 809
537: \bibitem[]{}le Bourlot, J., Pineau des For\^ets, G. \& Flower, D.R., 1999,
538: MNRAS, 305, 802
539: \bibitem[]{}Maloney, P.\ 1988, ApJ, 334, 761
540: \bibitem[]{}McKee, C.F., 1999, astro-ph/9901370
541: \bibitem[]{}Millar, T.J., Farquhar, P.R.A. \& Willacy, K., 1997, A\&AS, 121,
542: 139
543: \bibitem[]{}Myers, P.C. \& Fuller G.A.\ 1993, ApJ, 402, 635
544: \bibitem[]{}Nakano, T., Hasegawa, T. \& Norman, C.A.\ 1999, ApJ, 450, 183
545: \bibitem[]{}Neufeld, D.A. \& Kaufman, M.J.\ 1993, ApJ, 418, 263
546: \bibitem[]{}Neufeld, D.A., Lepp, S. \& Melnick, G.J.\ 1995, ApJS, 100, 132
547: \bibitem[]{}Norman, C.A. \& Spaans, M.\ 1997, ApJ, 480, 145
548: \bibitem[]{}Ogino, S., Tomisaka, K. \& Nakamura, F.\ 1999, PASJ, 51, 637
549: \bibitem[]{}Passot, T.\& Vazquez-Semadeni, E.\ 1999, Phys.\ Rev.\ E, 58, 4501
550: \bibitem[]{}Scalo, J. \ 1998,
551: in {\it The Stellar Initial Mass Function} (38th Herstmonceux Conference)
552: ASP Conference Series,
553: Vol. 142, 1998, ed. G. Gilmore and D. Howell.
554: \bibitem[]{}Scalo, J., V\'azquez-Semadeni, E., Chappell, D. \& Passot, T.\
555: 1998, ApJ, 504, 835
556: \bibitem[]{}Silk, J.\ 1995, ApJ, 438, L41
557: \bibitem[]{}Spaans, M.\ 1996, A\&A, 307, 271
558: \bibitem[]{}Spaans, M. \& Ehrenfreund, P.\ 1999, in ``Laboratory Physics and
559: Space Research'', ASSL Vol.\ 236, eds.\ P.\ Ehrenfreund, K.\ Krafft, H.\
560: Kochan, and V.\ Pironello (Kluwer:Dordrecht), p.\ 1
561: \bibitem[]{}Spaans, M. \& Carollo, C.M.\ 1998, ApJ, 502, 640
562: \bibitem[]{}Spaans, M. \& van Dishoeck, E.F.\ 1997, A\&A, 323, 953
563: \bibitem[]{}Spaans, M. \& Norman 1997, ApJ, 488, 27
564: \bibitem[]{}Spaans, M., Tielens, A.G.G.M., van Dishoeck, E.F. \& Bakes, E.L.O.,
565: 1994, ApJ, 437, 270
566: \bibitem[]{}Spaans, M. \& van Langevelde, H.J.\ 1992, MNRAS, 258, 159
567: \bibitem[]{}Takahashi, T., Hollenbach, D.J. \& Silk, J.\ 1983, ApJ, 275, 145
568: \bibitem[]{}Tielens, A.G.G.M. \& Hollenbach, D.A., 1985, ApJ, 291, 722
569: \bibitem[]{}Tohline, J.E., Bodenheimer, P.H. \& Christodoulou D.M.\ 1987, ApJ,
570: 322,787
571: \bibitem[]{}van Dishoeck, E.F., ed.\ ``Molecules in Astrophysics: Probes and
572: Processes'', 1997, IAU Symp.\ 178, Kluwer
573: \bibitem[]{}Vazquez-Semadeni, E., Passot, T.\& Pouquet, A.\ 1996, ApJ, 473, 881
574: \end{thebibliography}
575:
576: \newpage
577:
578: \begin{figure}
579: \label{figure1}
580: \caption{Density and metallicity dependence of the polytropic index for
581: model I, discussed in the text, for no IR background and a
582: quiescent velocity field with $\Delta V=0.3$ km s$^{-1}$.}
583: \end{figure}
584:
585: \begin{figure}
586: \label{figure2}
587: \caption{Density and metallicity dependence of the polytropic index for
588: model II, discussed in the text, for no IR background and a spherically
589: symmetric constant velocity gradient field of 3 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$.}
590: \end{figure}
591:
592: \begin{figure}
593: \label{figure3}
594: \caption{Density and metallicity dependence of the polytropic index for
595: model I, discussed in the text, for a $T_{\rm d}=100$ K IR background
596: from dust, $A_{\rm V}=100$ mag, and a quiescent velocity field.}
597: \end{figure}
598:
599: \clearpage
600: \centerline{\psfig{figure=f1.ps,width=15.0truecm}}
601:
602: \clearpage
603: \centerline{\psfig{figure=f2.ps,width=15.0truecm}}
604:
605: \clearpage
606: \centerline{\psfig{figure=f3.ps,width=15.0truecm}}
607:
608: \end{document}
609:
610:
611: