1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2:
3: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
4:
5: %% \documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
6:
7: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
8:
9: %% \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
10:
11: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
12: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
13: %% use the longabstract style option.
14:
15: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
16:
17:
18: \newcommand{\msol}{\mathrm{M_{\odot}}}
19: \newcommand{\thco}{^{13}\mathrm{CO}}
20: \newcommand{\twco}{^{12}\mathrm{CO}}
21: \newcommand{\kms}{{\mathrm{km \, s^{-1}}}}
22: \newcommand{\de}{{^{\circ}}}
23: \newcommand{\ls}{\mathrel{\raise0.35ex\hbox{$\scriptstyle <$}\kern-0.6em
24: \lower0.40ex\hbox{{$\scriptstyle \sim$}}}}
25:
26: \slugcomment{For submission to Ap J L }
27:
28: \shorttitle{Scaleheight of GMCs}
29: \shortauthors{Stark and Lee}
30:
31: \begin{document}
32:
33: \title{The Scaleheight of Giant Molecular Clouds is\\
34: Less than that of Smaller Clouds}
35:
36:
37: \author{Antony A. Stark}
38: \affil{Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Cambridge MA 02138}
39: \email{aas@cfa.harvard.edu}
40:
41: \and
42:
43: \author{Youngung Lee}
44: \affil{Korea Astronomy Observatory, Taeduk Radio Astronomy
45: Observatory, Daejeon, Korea}
46: \email{yulee@trao.re.kr}
47:
48: \begin{abstract}
49: We have used an antenna temperature thresholding algorithm
50: on the Bell Laboratories $\thco$ Milky Way Survey to
51: create a catalog of 1,400 molecular clouds.
52: Of these, 281 clouds were selected for having
53: well-determined kinematic distances. The scaleheight,
54: luminosity, internal velocity dispersion, and size of
55: the cloud sample are analyzed to show that clouds smaller than
56: $\sim 10^{5.5} \, \msol$ have a scaleheight which is
57: about 35 pc, roughly independent of cloud mass, while larger
58: clouds, the Giant Molecular Clouds, have a reduced
59: scaleheight which declines with increasing cloud mass.
60:
61: \end{abstract}
62:
63: \keywords{Galaxy: structure---ISM: clouds---ISM: molecules}
64:
65:
66: \section{Introduction}
67:
68: Since star formation occurs in molecular clouds,
69: the formation of molecular clouds is an essential first step
70: to the star formation process.
71: The overall evolution of galactic metallicity
72: implies that hot ejecta from old stars must somehow
73: return to the cold molecular phase in order to
74: form new stars, and that the timescale for this process is
75: short compared to the age of the Galaxy \citep[e.g.][]{freeman02}.
76: Giant Molecular Clouds (GMCs) are
77: the largest concentrations of molecular
78: material, amounting to
79: $2 \times 10^5 \msol$ or more in a region about
80: 50 pc in size \citep{stark78}.
81: GMCs are strongly concentrated to spiral arms \citep{stark79c,lee01},
82: suggesting that they are transient phenomena:
83: hundreds of thousands of solar masses of molecular material
84: collect during the passage of a spiral density wave,
85: and then dissipate some thirty million years later.
86: Thousands of stars are formed during the lifetime of the GMC,
87: including the generators of the giant \ion{H}{2} regions
88: that trace spiral structure.
89: How molecular clouds form, and why they form, has been the subject of
90: ongoing theoretical investigation \citep{elmegreen00,pringle01}.
91: Computer simulations of cloud formation have become
92: increasingly complex and realistic
93: \citep{hartmann01,zhang02}.
94:
95: The cloud formation process gathers and concentrates interstellar
96: matter. However this happens, we
97: expect that the random velocity of the resulting cloud
98: would be less than the velocity dispersion of the precursor
99: material, so that the velocity dispersion of GMCs as a class
100: would be less than that of smaller interstellar clouds.
101: This hypothesis is amenable to observational test.
102: The purpose of this {\em Letter} is to describe such
103: an observational test, and then to
104: quantify the effect in a way which may make for useful
105: comparisons with theory.
106:
107: In \S 2, we take the Bell Laboratories $\thco$ Survey data and use a
108: brightness temperature thresholding algorithm to create a
109: catalog of molecular clouds.
110: We then use our knowledge of Milky Way structure
111: in order to select a subset of clouds with well-determined
112: kinematic distances. This allows us to determine the physical
113: size of the cloud and its distance above the galactic plane.
114: These data are analyzed in \S 3 to show that the scaleheight of
115: large clouds is less than that of smaller clouds.
116:
117:
118: \section{Cloud Identification and Selection}
119:
120: The version of Bell Laboratories $\thco$ Survey used
121: here is described by \citet{lee01}. The survey covers
122: 244 square degrees from
123: $\ell = -5\de \, {\mathrm{to}} \, 117\de$,
124: $b = -1\de \,{\mathrm{to}} \, +1\de$
125: sampled on a $3'$ or $6'$ grid with $\thco$ spectra having an
126: rms noise level of $T_R^{*} = 0.1\, {\mathrm K}$ in
127: channels $0.68 \, \kms$ wide. The survey data consists of
128: 23 million data points (pixels) in a 3-dimensional $(\ell, \, b, \, v)$ space;
129: these are shown in \citet{lee01} as a series of $\ell$---$v$ maps.
130: The survey is not fully sampled, but it is sufficiently well-sampled
131: that no cloud within the survey volume larger than $\sim 1 \times 10^3 \msol$
132: would be missed due to undersampling.
133:
134: Catalogs of clouds were generated from the survey data by
135: a standard thresholding technique
136: \citep{solomon87,lee90,lee92}.
137: In this method, pixels having $T_R^{*} > T_{\mathrm{th}}$ are identified
138: for some value of a threshold brightness temperature $T_{\mathrm{th}}$.
139: The value of $T_{\mathrm{th}}$, typically 1, 2, or 3 K, is the
140: defining parameter of the catalog. Pixels exceeding the
141: threshold are then grouped together in
142: $(\ell, \, b, \, v)$ space to make a ``cloud", where all
143: the pixels constituting the cloud are above the
144: threshold and adjacent to at least one other pixel which
145: is also above the threshold.
146: What we mean by a ``cloud" is then a connected volume of pixels, all
147: of which are above the threshold.
148: This cloud recognition method has the advantage of
149: non-subjectivity---not only is it automated and unambiguous, it
150: makes no assumptions about cloud properties aside from the requirement
151: that a cloud be a connected region which is brighter than its surroundings.
152: A disadvantage of the thresholding method is that physically separated
153: molecular clouds can be bundled together into a single catalog
154: entry if they are projected onto each other
155: such that above-threshold pixels within them appear to touch
156: from our point of view. This happens more often for
157: small values of $T_{\mathrm{th}}$.
158: If the clouds are truly unassociated, the resulting
159: catalog entry will be systematically too large and have
160: too high an internal velocity dispersion.
161: Another disadvantage is that all emission below $T_{\mathrm{th}}$
162: is discarded, cutting off the outer envelopes of the clouds and
163: systematically underestimating their total emissivity and extent.
164: This happens more often for large values of $T_{\mathrm{th}}$.
165: A choice of $T_{\mathrm{th}} = 1 \mathrm K $ for our $\thco$ data
166: is an acceptable compromise. This is approximately $10 \times$ the
167: rms noise level of the survey; since we require that a ``cloud" be
168: at least two pixels wide in each of the three dimensions
169: $(\ell, \, b, \, v)$, there are probably no cloud catalog entries referring to
170: non-existent clouds.
171: Fewer than 1\% of survey pixels exceed the 1 K threshold,
172: as discussed in \S2 of \citet{lee01},
173: so the number of above-threshold adjacencies occurring by
174: chance will be small.
175: Applying the thresholding method with
176: $T_{\mathrm{th}} = 1 \mathrm K $ on the
177: Bell Laboratories $\thco$ Survey
178: yields a catalog of 1,400 clouds.
179:
180: We know the position of each cloud in $(\ell, \, b, \, v)$,
181: but we would also like to know its distance along the line
182: of sight in order to estimate its size and its height above
183: the galactic plane. That can be done, to a greater or
184: lesser extent, by fitting the cloud's position
185: in $(\ell, \, b, \, v)$ to our knowledge of the velocity
186: field of the Galaxy. Many molecular clouds are on a nearly
187: circular orbit around the Galactic Center at a velocity
188: which differs little from
189: $\Theta = 215 \, \kms$,
190: the rotation curve velocity.
191: Other clouds, particularly those near the Galactic Center,
192: can have significant non-circular motions.
193: For each cloud, there are various possible distances,
194: given our knowledge of motions in the Milky Way.
195: We can quantify this situation
196: by considering the set of possible distances.
197: Consider first the simple case of
198: a cloud in the second quadrant
199: at $\ell = 110\de$, $b = 0\de$ and $v = -20 \, \kms$.
200: It is most likely to be at the point 2~kpc distant along the line of
201: sight corresponding to circular motion at that position and velocity,
202: since its total velocity probably does not deviate
203: from the rotation velocity
204: by more than the typical cloud-cloud velocity dispersion.
205: We can set approximate limits to range of possible distances
206: by first adding, then subtracting, the one-dimensional velocity
207: dispersion of $7 \, \kms$ \citep{stark89b} from its observed velocity,
208: finding that it is likely no more than 2.6 kpc distant nor
209: less than 1.3 kpc distant. Next, consider a cloud in the first quadrant at,
210: e.g., $l = 30\de$, which will have
211: two ranges of possible distances because of the rotation curve
212: distance ambiguity, resulting in four endpoints to the two (possibly
213: overlapping) ranges of distances.
214: Another cloud with a large velocity which is
215: projected onto the Galactic Center
216: could be anywhere from 6 to 10 kpc distant.
217: Any cloud with a small velocity ($| v | < 14 \, \kms$)
218: at any longitude could
219: be as near as 0.15 kpc or as distant as 1 kpc, or could be at other
220: distances permitted by the galactic rotation at its longitude and velocity.
221: Table 1 lists the ranges of possible distances for clouds in
222: various regions of $(\ell, \, v)$ space.
223: Each cloud will fall within one or more of these regions,
224: resulting in a cumulative set of several possible distances.
225: Call the largest member of that set $d_{\mathrm{far}}$,
226: and the smallest member $d_{\mathrm{near}}$.
227: These values serve as approximate bounds on the distance to the
228: cloud, but they are not Gaussian errors---in most cases, the
229: true distance will be somewhere between these values, but the
230: distribution of true distances may be bimodal or asymmetric.
231: These limits do, however, allow us to select a
232: subset of the data whose distance ambiguity is not too large.
233:
234: In the analysis below, we select only those clouds for which
235: $d_{\mathrm{far}}/d_{\mathrm{near}} < \sqrt{3}$. This limit
236: is sufficiently large that it
237: does not exclude all clouds in the Galactic Center region.
238: Since luminosity varies as $d^2$, the ambiguity in the
239: luminosity of the distance-selected clouds is less than a factor of 3,
240: and so we know their luminosity within half an order of magnitude.
241: The distance-selected clouds are shown in color in
242: figure 1. The selected sample consists of 281 clouds,
243: and they come from three general locations:
244: the Perseus arm (at
245: $\ell > 80\de$ and $v < -14 \, \kms$),
246: the first quadrant near the tangent velocity, and the Galactic Center.
247: Most of these clouds are several kiloparsec distant.
248: This is good, because one source of bias in the analysis
249: below comes from the limited range of the survey in galactic
250: latitude, $|b| < 1\de$. We do not want this limit to exclude many clouds
251: that would otherwise be in the sample, and that will be true
252: only if most of the selected clouds are distant. Figure 2 shows
253: that only a few of the distance-selected clouds are near the $b$
254: limit of the survey, while the unselected set of survey
255: clouds have a larger range and fill the survey space.
256:
257: \section{Cloud Scaleheights}
258:
259: The scaleheights of the distance-selected sample are shown in
260: figure 3, as a function of cloud luminosity. Each cloud is
261: shown twice, once for the values corresponding to $d_{\mathrm{near}}$,
262: and once for the values corresponding to $d_{\mathrm{far}}$.
263: These points are connected by a line. The true values for each
264: cloud probably lies somewhere near that line. Here we have
265: chosen to simply define scaleheight as the height above
266: the galactic equator at $b = 0\de$, rather than try to better
267: define the galactic midplane. Also shown in this plot are
268: three very similar histograms, where the scaleheights
269: have been averaged in bins an order of magnitude wide in
270: $\thco$ luminosity. The dotted histogram only includes
271: values of $d_{\mathrm{near}}$, the dashed histogram only
272: includes values of
273: $d_{\mathrm{far}}$, and the solid histogram includes both.
274: The essential similarity of these three histograms shows that
275: in the current sample of 281 clouds, the remaining distance
276: ambiguities are not important to the result.
277: For small, low luminosity clouds, the scaleheight is
278: roughly constant at 35 pc, independent of cloud size.
279: This value may be systematically small because of the
280: cutoff at $b = \pm1\de$, but it
281: is not significantly different from the scaleheight
282: of the overall CO brightness distribution
283: found by \citet{malhotra94a} using data with a much
284: larger range in $b$.
285: Note that
286: at a cloud luminosity of
287: about $10^4 \, \mathrm{K \, \kms \, pc^2}$, there is a break
288: in the distribution and the larger clouds have a reduced
289: scaleheight of about 20 pc for clouds in the range
290: $L(\thco) = 10^4$
291: to
292: $10^5 \, \mathrm{K \, \kms \, pc^2}$, and 5 or 10 pc
293: for the few clouds brighter than
294: $10^5 \, \mathrm{K \, \kms \, pc^2}$.
295: For the largest clouds, the derived scaleheight is
296: smaller than the cloud's size and the galactic midplane
297: falls within the boundary of the cloud.
298:
299: Since $\thco$ is in general not optically thick in these clouds,
300: the $\thco$ luminosity will be approximately proportional to
301: cloud mass \citep{lee94}. This is
302: illustrated in figure 4, where the luminosity
303: of the clouds in this sample is plotted against an estimate
304: of the mass obtained from the linewidth and the
305: cloud size.
306: What we have done here is to ignore all
307: terms in the magnetohydrodynamic virial equation
308: \citep{spitzer78} except for the kinetic and potential
309: energy volume integrals. This is likely to be a valid
310: approximation, since the internal pressure in molecular
311: clouds is higher than the surrounding medium,
312: the internal magnetic pressure is in approximate
313: equipartition with other pressures, and the timescale
314: for large-scale dissipation of the clouds is
315: somewhat greater than a free-fall time.
316: The absence of serious outliers in figure 4 is further evidence that
317: the GMCs in our sample are real objects and not chance
318: superpositions of small clouds.
319: The data are well-represented by the relation
320: $M_{\mathrm{vir}} = [20 \, \mathrm{\msol / K \, km \, s^{-1}}]
321: L(\thco)$, which corresponds to a
322: galactic conversion factor \citep[e.g.,][]{sanders84}
323: $X(\thco) = 1.25 \times 10^{21} \mathrm{cm^{-2}/K \, km \, s^{-1}}$.
324: The scaleheight breakpoint at a luminosity of
325: $10^4 \, \mathrm{K \, \kms \, pc^2}$ is therefore seen to correspond
326: to a cloud mass $ \sim 2 \times 10^5 \msol$,
327: the size of a small GMC.
328: The scaleheight of GMCs is less than that of
329: smaller clouds.
330:
331: \section{Conclusion}
332:
333: The data show that small molecular clouds have a scaleheight
334: which is approximately independent of cloud size.
335: Larger clouds, the GMCs, have a scaleheight which falls off
336: with mass. This has been
337: demonstrated with a relatively small sample of clouds, but
338: it is a clean sample, chosen from a large-scale survey by
339: an algorithmic method.
340: The implication is that the Giant Molecular Clouds, those
341: clouds which are concentrated in the spiral arms of the
342: Galaxy, are also concentrated to the galactic plane.
343: We can understand this as a manifestation of the molecular cloud formation
344: process.
345: Atomic gas clouds, with a scaleheight of $\sim 100 \, \mathrm{pc}$
346: and a velocity dispersion $\sim 12 \, \kms$, condense out
347: of the diffuse atomic gas.
348: Their cores become molecular and increasingly more condensed,
349: resulting in a population of high-latitude ($\sim 70 \, \mathrm{pc}$),
350: low mass ($M \ls 100 \, \msol$) partially-molecular clouds with
351: a dispersion $\sim 8 \, \kms$ \citep{malhotra94b,dame94}.
352: These clouds become larger, more centrally condensed, and
353: more bound, with only a slight reduction in scaleheight
354: and velocity dispersion, to
355: become molecular clouds ($ 100 \, \msol \ls M \ls 10^5 \, \msol$),
356: with dispersion $\sim 7 \, \kms$ \citep{stark89b}. These
357: clouds can form stars, but are uniformly distributed throughout
358: the galactic disk, and may survive for many galactic rotations.
359: The largest clouds, the GMCs, are rapidly assembled
360: by the passage of a spiral arm. This process is
361: dissipative, different from the slow addition of material
362: that forms smaller molecular clouds.
363: It results in a significant loss of random velocity
364: per unit mass, and the resulting GMCs are found at the galactic
365: midplane, in the spiral arm. The ensuing formation of massive
366: stars destroys the cloud, fragmenting it into stars, ionized gas,
367: and small clouds
368: before the next interarm passage.
369:
370:
371:
372:
373: \acknowledgments
374:
375: We thank the members of
376: the Bell Laboratories Radio Physics Research Group during the
377: ten-year period of the Bell Labs $\thco$ Survey: R. W. Wilson,
378: J. Bally, D. Mumma, W. Bent, W. Langer, G. R. Knapp,
379: and M. Pound.
380: This work was supported by Basic Research Program
381: R01-2003-000-10513-0 of KOSEF, Republic of Korea,
382: and
383: by the William Rollins Endowment Fund
384: of the Smithsonian Institution.
385:
386: \bibliographystyle{apj}
387:
388: \begin{thebibliography}{18}
389: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
390:
391: \bibitem[{{Dame} \& {Thaddeus}(1994)}]{dame94}
392: {Dame}, T.~M. \& {Thaddeus}, P. 1994, \apjl, 436, L173
393:
394: \bibitem[{{Elmegreen}(2000)}]{elmegreen00}
395: {Elmegreen}, B.~G. 2000, \apj, 530, 277
396:
397: \bibitem[{{Freeman} \& {Bland-Hawthorn}(2002)}]{freeman02}
398: {Freeman}, K. \& {Bland-Hawthorn}, J. 2002, \araa, 40, 487
399:
400: \bibitem[{{Hartmann} {et~al.}(2001){Hartmann}, {Ballesteros-Paredes}, \&
401: {Bergin}}]{hartmann01}
402: {Hartmann}, L., {Ballesteros-Paredes}, J., \& {Bergin}, E.~A. 2001, \apj, 562,
403: 852
404:
405: \bibitem[{Lee(1992)}]{lee92}
406: Lee, Y. 1992, PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts
407:
408: \bibitem[{{Lee}(1994)}]{lee94}
409: {Lee}, Y. 1994, Publication of Korean Astronomical Society, 9, 55
410:
411: \bibitem[{{Lee} {et~al.}(1990){Lee}, {Snell}, \& {Dickman}}]{lee90}
412: {Lee}, Y., {Snell}, R.~L., \& {Dickman}, R.~L. 1990, \apj, 355, 536
413:
414: \bibitem[{Lee {et~al.}(2001)Lee, Stark, Kim, \& Moon}]{lee01}
415: Lee, Y., Stark, A.~A., Kim, H.-G., \& Moon, D.-S. 2001, \apjs, 136, 137
416:
417: \bibitem[{{Malhotra}(1994{\natexlab{a}})}]{malhotra94b}
418: {Malhotra}, S. 1994{\natexlab{a}}, \apj, 437, 194
419:
420: \bibitem[{{Malhotra}(1994{\natexlab{b}})}]{malhotra94a}
421: ---. 1994{\natexlab{b}}, \apj, 433, 687
422:
423: \bibitem[{{Pringle} {et~al.}(2001){Pringle}, {Allen}, \& {Lubow}}]{pringle01}
424: {Pringle}, J.~E., {Allen}, R.~J., \& {Lubow}, S.~H. 2001, \mnras, 327, 663
425:
426: \bibitem[{{Sanders} {et~al.}(1984){Sanders}, {Solomon}, \&
427: {Scoville}}]{sanders84}
428: {Sanders}, D.~B., {Solomon}, P.~M., \& {Scoville}, N.~Z. 1984, \apj, 276, 182
429:
430: \bibitem[{{Solomon} {et~al.}(1987){Solomon}, {Rivolo}, {Barrett}, \&
431: {Yahil}}]{solomon87}
432: {Solomon}, P.~M., {Rivolo}, A.~R., {Barrett}, J., \& {Yahil}, A. 1987, \apj,
433: 319, 730
434:
435: \bibitem[{{Spitzer}(1978)}]{spitzer78}
436: {Spitzer}, Jr., L. 1978, {Physical Processes in the Interstellar Medium} (John
437: Wiley \& Sons)
438:
439: \bibitem[{Stark(1979)}]{stark79c}
440: Stark, A.~A. 1979, PhD thesis, Princeton University
441:
442: \bibitem[{Stark \& Blitz(1978)}]{stark78}
443: Stark, A.~A. \& Blitz, L. 1978, \apjl, 225, L15
444:
445: \bibitem[{Stark \& Brand(1989)}]{stark89b}
446: Stark, A.~A. \& Brand, J. 1989, \apj, 339, 763
447:
448: \bibitem[{{Zhang} {et~al.}(2002){Zhang}, {Song}, {Yang}, {Chen}, {Zhang}, {Li},
449: \& {Cui}}]{zhang02}
450: {Zhang}, T., {Song}, G., {Yang}, Z., {Chen}, L., {Zhang}, B., {Li}, N., \&
451: {Cui}, J. 2002, Chinese Astronomy and Astrophysics, 26, 276
452:
453: \end{thebibliography}
454:
455: \clearpage
456:
457: \begin{deluxetable}{llcl}
458: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
459: \tablecaption{Possible cloud distances. \label{tbl-1}}
460: \tablewidth{0pt}
461: \tablehead{
462: \colhead{Location} & \colhead{$\ell$} & \colhead{$v$} & \colhead{Possible Distances}
463: }
464: \startdata
465: all &\quad any &any &
466: $R_{\sun} \left( \mathrm{cos} \, \ell \, + \, \sqrt{\mathrm{sin^2} \, \ell \, [({v \over \Theta} + \mathrm{sin} \, \ell \,)^{-2} - 1]}\, \right)$\, ,\\
467: & & &$R_{\sun} \left( \mathrm{cos} \, \ell \, + \, \sqrt{\mathrm{sin^2} \, \ell \, [({{v + v_\sigma} \over \Theta} + \mathrm{sin} \, \ell \,)^{-2} - 1]}\, \right)$\, ,\\
468: & & &$R_{\sun} \left( \mathrm{cos} \, \ell \, + \, \sqrt{\mathrm{sin^2} \, \ell \, [({{v - v_\sigma} \over \Theta} + \mathrm{sin} \, \ell \,)^{-2} - 1]}\, \right)$\\
469: \\
470: $1^{\mathrm{st}}$ and $4^{\mathrm{th}}$ quandrants &$|\ell \,| < 90\de$ &
471: $v \, \mathrm{sin} \, \ell \, > 0$ &
472: $R_{\sun} \left( \mathrm{cos} \, \ell \, - \, \sqrt{\mathrm{sin^2} \, \ell \, [({v \over \Theta} + \mathrm{sin} \, \ell \,)^{-2} - 1]}\, \right)$\, ,\\
473: & & &$R_{\sun} \left( \mathrm{cos} \, \ell \, - \, \sqrt{\mathrm{sin^2} \, \ell \, [({{v + v_\sigma} \over \Theta} + \mathrm{sin} \, \ell \,)^{-2} - 1]}\, \right)$\, ,\\
474: & & &$R_{\sun} \left( \mathrm{cos} \, \ell \, - \, \sqrt{\mathrm{sin^2} \, \ell \, [({{v - v_\sigma} \over \Theta} + \mathrm{sin} \, \ell \,)^{-2} - 1]}\, \right)$\\
475: \\
476: Galactic Center region & $|\ell \, | < 8\de$ & any & ${5 \over 4}R_{\sun} \, $,\\
477: & & &${3 \over 4}R_{\sun} $ \\
478: \\
479: 3 kpc arm & $|\ell \, | < 11\de$ & $5 \ell -61\de < {v\over{1 \, \kms}} < 5 \ell -41\de$ &
480: ${5 \over 8}R_{\sun} $\\
481: \\
482: $135 \, \kms$ arm & $|\ell \, | < 5\de$ & $5 \ell + 125\de < {v\over{1 \, \kms}} < 5 \ell + 145\de$ &
483: ${11 \over 8}R_{\sun} $ \\
484: \\
485: solar vicinity &\quad any &$|v| < 2 v_\sigma$ &0.15 kpc,\\
486: & & &1 kpc \\
487: \enddata
488:
489:
490: \tablecomments{
491: The galactic parameters used are:
492: the Sun's distance to the Galactic Center,
493: $R_{\sun} = 8 \, \mathrm{kpc}$,
494: the velocity of the flat rotation curve,
495: $\Theta = 215 \, \kms$, and
496: the one-dimensional velocity dispersion of molecular clouds,
497: $v_\sigma = 7 \, \kms$.
498: Galactic longitude, $\ell$, expressed in degrees,
499: ranges from $-180\de$ to $+180\de$.
500: Any possible distances which are not positive real numbers are discarded.
501: }
502:
503: \end{deluxetable}
504:
505:
506:
507:
508: \clearpage
509:
510:
511:
512: \begin{figure}
513: \plotone{f1.eps}
514: \caption{Distribution in $\ell$ and $v$ of 1400 clouds
515: from a cloud catalog
516: with $T_{th} = 1 \, \mathrm K$
517: made from the Bell Laboratories $\thco$ Survey.
518: The linear size of each symbol is proportional to the
519: velocity width of the corresponding cloud.
520: The 218 clouds which satisfy our distance accuracy requirement
521: are shown in color: red
522: squares for Galactic Center clouds, blue circles
523: for the molecular ring tangent velocities, and green
524: circles for outer Galaxy clouds.
525: \label{fig1}}
526: \end{figure}
527:
528: \clearpage
529:
530: \begin{figure}
531: \plotone{f2.eps}
532: \caption{Distribution in $\ell$ and $b$ of 281 distance-selected
533: clouds.
534: The clouds are color coded as in figure 1.
535: Note that the clouds as they appear on the sky are very much smaller
536: than the size of the symbols used here, especially in
537: the $\ell$ direction, and that the clouds are also
538: separated in velocity. Chance superposition of
539: clouds is therefore unlikely. The limit
540: of the survey in $b$ probably cuts off some clouds which should
541: be in the sample.
542: \label{fig2}}
543: \end{figure}
544:
545: \clearpage
546:
547: \begin{figure}
548: \plotone{f3.eps}
549: \caption{Scaleheight vs. luminosity for 281 molecular clouds
550: selected for small distance uncertainty.
551: Each cloud is shown at its near distance and its far
552: distance, and these symbols are joined by a line.
553: The data points are averaged into bins half an order of magnitude
554: wide. The averages are shown as three histograms: the dotted
555: line includes only the near distance values, the dashed line
556: includes only the far distance values, and the solid line
557: includes both. The linear dimension of each symbol is proportional
558: to the cloud's linewidth.
559: \label{fig3}}
560: \end{figure}
561:
562: \clearpage
563:
564: \begin{figure}
565: \plotone{f4.eps}
566: \caption{Luminosity in $\thco$ vs. estimated virial
567: mass for the 281 molecular clouds
568: selected for small distance uncertainty.
569: The linear dimension of each symbol is proportional
570: to the cloud's linewidth. Galactic Center objects are shown as
571: squares. The line $M_\mathrm{vir} = 20 \, L(\thco)$ is shown for
572: reference.
573: \label{fig4}}
574: \end{figure}
575:
576: \clearpage
577:
578:
579: \end{document}
580:
581: %%
582: %% End of file `scaleheight.tex'.
583: