1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex} % for e-submission to ApJ
2:
3: \documentclass[manuscript]{emulateapj} % emulateapj format
4:
5: \usepackage{graphicx}
6:
7: \def\etal{{\sl et al.}}
8: \def\kms{{\rm km/s}}
9: \def\Ms{{\rm M_\odot}}
10:
11: \begin{document}
12:
13: \title{Forming a Primordial Star in a Relic HII Region}
14: \author{Brian W. O'Shea\altaffilmark{1,2,3}, Tom Abel\altaffilmark{4},
15: Dan Whalen\altaffilmark{1,2,3} \& Michael L. Norman\altaffilmark{1}}
16:
17: \altaffiltext{1}{Center for Astrophysics and Space Sciences,
18: University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, U.S.A.
19: Email: bwoshea, mnorman, dwhalen@cosmos.ucsd.edu}
20: \altaffiltext{2}{Department of Physics, University of Illinois in
21: Urbana-Champaign}
22: \altaffiltext{3}{Theoretical Astrophysics (T-6), Los Alamos National
23: Laboratories}
24: \altaffiltext{4}{Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology,
25: Stanford University.
26: Email: tabel@stanford.edu}
27:
28: \begin{abstract}
29: There has been considerable theoretical debate over whether photoionization
30: and supernova feedback from the first Population III stars facilitate or
31: suppress the formation of the next generation of stars. We present results
32: from an Eulerian adaptive mesh refinement simulation demonstrating the
33: formation of a primordial star within a region ionized by an earlier nearby star.
34: Despite the higher temperatures of the ionized gas and its flow out of the dark
35: matter potential wells, this second star formed within 23 million years of its
36: neighbor's death. The enhanced electron fraction within the HII region catalyzes
37: rapid molecular hydrogen formation that leads to faster cooling in the subsequent
38: star forming halos than in the first halos. This ``second generation''
39: primordial protostar has a much lower accretion rate because, unlike the first
40: protostar, it forms in a rotationally supported disk of
41: $\sim 10-100~\Ms$. This is primarily due to the much higher angular momentum of
42: the halo in which the second star forms. In contrast to previously published
43: scenarios, such configurations may allow binaries or multiple systems of
44: lower mass stars to form. These first
45: high resolution calculations offer insight into the impact of feedback upon
46: subsequent populations of stars and clearly demonstrate how primordial chemistry
47: promotes the formation of subsequent generations of stars even in the presence of
48: the entropy injected by the first stars into the IGM.
49: \end{abstract}
50:
51: \keywords{cosmology: theory --- stars: formation --- hydrodynamics}
52:
53: \maketitle
54:
55: \section{Motivation}\label{motivate}
56:
57: Calculations performed by Abel, Bryan and Norman (2002; hereafter ABN02)
58: show that rapid accretion rates driven by molecular hydrogen cooling cause
59: the formation of solitary massive protostars in the range of $30$ to $300~\Ms$
60: in minihalos of $10^5-10^6~\Ms$ at redshifts $\ga 20$. Simulations indicate
61: that the hard UV spectra of these 10$^5$ K zero-metallicity stars
62: will envelop them in large HII regions several kiloparsecs in diameter (Whalen,
63: Abel \& Norman 2004; Kitayama et al. 2004). Over the main sequence lifetime of
64: the central star (on the order of 2-6 Myr for the range of
65: $30-300~\Ms$) half of the baryons within the minihalo are
66: driven beyond its virial radius by ionized flows that quickly steepen into shocks.
67: These shocks exhibit expansion rates of up to ten times the escape velocity of the
68: halo. After the death of the central star, cooling and recombination are out of
69: equilibrium in the ionized gas, which results in significant electron fractions
70: even after its temperature has dropped to 1000 - 2000 K after 20 - 50 Myr. One
71: dimensional, nonrotating calculations (Heger et al. 2003) predict two possible
72: fates for the primordial stars themselves: complete destruction by the pair
73: instability ($140~\Ms < M_* < 260~\Ms$) which is very energetic and leaves no
74: remnant, or direct collapse to black holes above and below this mass range, with
75: the added possibility of SN-like precollapse mass ejections by
76: pulsational pair instabilities from 100-140 $\Ms$ stars (Heger \& Woosley 2002).
77:
78: An important question is whether later generations of stars can efficiently form
79: in the relatively high temperatures and ionization fractions of the relic HII
80: regions left by the first stars. One analytical study (Oh \& Haiman 2003) found
81: that the first stars injected sufficient entropy into the early IGM by photoheating
82: and supernova explosions to prevent further local star formation in their vicinity.
83: Lyman-Werner SUV background radiation is also thought to have contributed negative
84: feedback by photodissociating primordial H$_2$ and quenching the molecular hydrogen
85: cooling processes allowing the first stars to form (Haiman, Abel \& Rees 2000; Machacek,
86: Bryan \& Abel 2001). In this \textit{Letter} we present
87: fully resolved simulations that show a second primordial star can form in the relic HII region
88: of an earlier Pop III star. We determine its properties, considering the effect of
89: Lyman-Werner radiation from the resultant black hole assuming accretion rates
90: consistent with the density fields left by ionized outflows from the parent minihalo.
91:
92:
93: \section{Simulation Setup}\label{setup}
94:
95: We carried out simulations using Enzo, a publicly-available Eulerian adaptive
96: mesh refinement (AMR) hydrodynamics + N-body code (Bryan \& Norman 1997; O'Shea
97: et al. 2004; also see http://cosmos.ucsd.edu/enzo). We initialized a box of
98: size $300~h^{-1}$~kpc at $z = 99$ for a cosmology with $(\Omega_M,\ \Omega_
99: \Lambda,\ \Omega_B,\ h,\ \sigma_8,\ n)=(0.3, 0.7, 0.04, 0.7, 0.9, 1)$. We
100: first ran a simulation with $128^3$ dark matter particles in a $128^3$ root
101: grid with 6 total levels of adaptive mesh, refining on a dark matter overdensity
102: of 4.0. This model was run with dark matter alone in order to identify the most
103: massive halo that evolves in the simulation volume, which at $z \sim 18$ had a
104: mass $\sim 5 \times 10^5 M_{\odot}$.
105:
106: We then re-initialized the calculation in the original simulation volume at $z =
107: 99$ with both baryons and dark matter using a $128^3$ root grid and three
108: static nested subgrids, each of which was twice as refined as its parent grid
109: and was centered on the Lagrangian volume of the peak that later evolved into
110: the identified halo. The effective root grid resolution was $1024^3$ in this
111: volume, which corresponds to a comoving spatial resolution of $\sim 300~h^{-1}$
112: ~pc and a dark matter particle mass of $1.8~h^{-1}~M_{\odot}$ in the most highly
113: refined region. Every dark matter particle that later enters into dark matter
114: halos of interest was within this most highly refined grid at the start of the
115: simulation.
116:
117: We started the simulation with this set of initial conditions at $z =
118: 99$ and followed the collapse of the first star, which occurred at a redshift
119: of 17.76. As a refinement criteria we used a baryon overdensity of 4.0
120: and a dark matter overdensity of 8.0. In addition, to ensure appropriate
121: simulation resolution we mandated that the Jeans length must be resolved by
122: at least 16 cells at all times, which exceeds the Truelove criterion by a
123: factor of 4 along each axis (Truelove et al. 1998). At the collapse redshift
124: the three dimensional structure was resolved with 8727 grids on nine levels
125: containing a total of 49,641,744 unique resolution elements.
126:
127: To compute the extent of the HII region of the $120~\Ms$ Pop III star assumed to
128: form in the collapse, we interpolated the density, energy, and velocity fields
129: from the entire Enzo simulation volume at the formation redshift of this star
130: onto a three dimensional grid of fixed resolution with $256^3$ cells for import
131: into a static radiative transfer code. The code utilizes the ionization front
132: tracking technique of Abel~(2000) to calculate the boundary of the HII region
133: along rays cast outward from the central star by the adaptive ray tracing technique
134: of Abel \& Wandelt (2002).
135: Within the HII region we set the ionization fraction to unity and the
136: H$_2$ and H$^-$ fractions to zero. We assume that the mean energy of ionization
137: for the gas is 2.4 eV, which results in a post-ionization temperature of
138: $\sim 18,000$~K when calculated in our multispecies ZEUS simulations. This is
139: somewhat cooler than one might expect due to the relatively hard spectrum of
140: massive primordial stars, and is a result of our use of monochromatic radiative
141: transfer in the ZEUS code, which underestimates the UV photoheating of the halo
142: by not taking into account contributions from very high energy photons. Whalen et
143: al. (2004) show that an increase in post-front temperatures
144: results in somewhat higher sound speeds. These yield higher shock speeds that
145: promote the photoevaporative flow of gas from the halo in which the first star is
146: formed and could in principle affect the dynamics of nearby halos. We show
147: below that in this case the outflow of gas has
148: a negligible effect on the formation of a second primordial star, which suggests
149: that our result is at worst only weakly affected by post-front temperature.
150: Higher post front temperatures will not significantly retard the cooling and
151: recombination crucial to the formation of molecular hydrogen.
152:
153: We approximated the dynamics of the HII region by imposing the one dimensional
154: velocity, ionization, density and temperature profiles for a $120~\Ms$ star at
155: the end of its main sequence lifetime from Whalen et al. (2004) along every line
156: of sight from the central star. We modified baryon densities and velocities out to
157: $\sim 120$ pc (corresponding to the location of the shock wave in the 1D
158: calculation) but changed only ionization fractions and temperatures beyond this
159: radius out to the boundary of the HII region determined by the ray tracing code.
160: We then mapped this HII region onto the full hierarchy of grids in the Enzo
161: calculation, centering it on the location of the first protostar. This state
162: corresponds to only 2.5 million years after the initial star formed (z $\simeq
163: 17.4$), so we assume that instantaneous ionization is a reasonable approximation
164: for all gas outside the first halo (which has had the hydro profiles from the 1D
165: simulations imposed in it). An important question is whether the satellite halos
166: are also ionized by the I-front propagating outward from the first star,
167: an issue investigated in detail at later redshifts by Shapiro et al. (2004).
168: Simulations we performed in 1D in ZEUS-MP indicate that the neighboring halos
169: are photoionized by the parent star by the end of its main sequence lifetime.
170:
171: We then continued the simulation until the collapse of the next protostar,
172: which occurs at $z = 16.44$, 22.8 million years later. The final time that we
173: analyzed contains 10,710 grid patches on 24 levels with 54,996,560 unique resolution
174: elements. In this calculation we neglect the pulsational pair instability that may eject
175: the hydrogen envelope for this star (Heger \& Woosley 2002).
176:
177: As a check on our simulation setup we also ran a simulation where we simply
178: instantaneously ionized the entire simulation volume by raising the baryon temperature
179: to $\sim 10,000$ K and setting ionization fractions to one and $H_2$ fractions to zero. This
180: simulation tests whether the addition of the one dimensional radial profiles from the Whalen
181: et al. (2004) calculations changed the properties of the second protostar appreciably.
182: We find that the collapse time and accretion rate of the protostar formed in this
183: simulation are essentially identical to the results of our full setup, and only discuss
184: results from the full setup in the rest of this \textit{Letter}.
185:
186: \section{Results}
187: The second primordial protostar forms in a neighboring minihalo approximately 265
188: proper parsecs from the location of the halo in which the first star formed (and where the
189: HII region originated). The halo in which this second protostar forms was completely
190: ionized by the first star to a temperature of $\sim
191: 10^4$ K. Due to its relatively high density, the center of this halo cools very
192: rapidly and molecular hydrogen formation is catalyzed by the extremely high electron
193: fraction. After only a few million years the core of the halo has a molecular
194: hydrogen fraction of $\sim 5 \times 10^{-3}$, well above what one would expect for a
195: halo which has not been ionized. This halo is significantly smaller than the first:
196: $\sim 2 \times 10^5~\Ms$ rather than $\sim 5 \times 10^5~\Ms$.
197:
198: \subsection{Comparison of the First and Second Stars}\label{secondprop}
199: Figure~\ref{maccrete} compares the mass accretion times of the initial and
200: second Population III stars formed in this simulation. In addition, this
201: figure shows the mass accretion time of the halo in ABN02 and an estimate
202: of the Kelvin-Helmholz timescale as a function of mass, using values of
203: luminosity and effective temperature taken from Schaerer (2002). The upper
204: and lower dotted lines correspond to an object with constant accretion rates
205: of $10^{-3}$ and $10^{-2}~\Ms/$year, respectively. Our calculation of accretion
206: timescales for the initial protostar agrees well with that of ABN02. The fact
207: that the two results are in good agreement even though the ABN02 calculations
208: assumed a lower baryon fraction supports the analysis of Ripamonti and Abel (2004)
209: showing that all mass scales in these calculations are set by molecular physics.
210: Comparison of the accretion rates to the Kelvin-Helmholz timescale provides an
211: estimate of $\sim200~\Ms$ for the upper bound of the mass of the star. The
212: accretion timescales suggest a reasonable lower bound of $\sim 80~\Ms$, since this
213: much gas will accrete in $10^4$ years, an insufficient time for fusion to begin. In
214: contrast, the accretion rate of the second protostar is over an order of magnitude
215: lower. This is because the second protostar has a much more pronounced thick disk
216: structure than the first protostar. The disk is rotationally supported past a
217: radius $\sim 0.01$ pc (corresponding to an enclosed mass of $\sim 10~\Ms$), whereas
218: the disk around the first star in the volume is not. Similar accretion timescale
219: arguments as before suggest a mass of $\sim 5-20~\Ms$ for the second star, although
220: accretion physics will ultimately determine the true mass, particularly given the
221: presence of this more pronounced disk.
222:
223: \begin{figure}
224: \resizebox{3in}{!}{\includegraphics{f1.eps}}
225: \caption{Mass accretion time $t_a = M(r)/\dot{M} \equiv M(r)/(4\pi r^2\rho
226: v_r)$~as a function of enclosed gas mass. This is at the final output
227: corresponding to $z=16.437$. The dashed line is the corresponding data dump
228: of the initial star which had formed at $z=17.67$. The red dashed line
229: corresponds to the first star to form in this simulation. The blue
230: dot-dashed line corresponds to the first star calculated in ABN02. The
231: solid black line corresponds to the second star forming in this simulation,
232: and the green long-dashed line corresponds to the Kelvin-Helmholz time of a
233: representative star. The upper and lower black dotted lines correspond to
234: objects with constant mass accretion rates of $10^{-2}$ and
235: $10^{-3}~\Ms/$yr, respectively.}
236: \label{maccrete}
237: \end{figure}
238:
239: Examination of the net angular momentum of the two halos
240: is illuminating. The angular momentum of a cosmological halo can be described
241: by the dimensionless spin parameter: $\lambda \equiv J |E|^{1/2}/G M^{5/2}$
242: where J is angular momentum, E is the total energy, G is the gravitational constant
243: and M is the halo angular momentum. This is roughly equivalent to the ratio of
244: the angular momentum in the halo to the angular momentum needed for the halo
245: to be completely rotationally supported. (Padmanabhan 1993) Typical values of
246: the spin parameter for cosmological halos are $\sim 0.02 - 0.1$,
247: with a mean of $\lambda \simeq 0.05$
248: (Barnes \& Efstathiou 1987; Gardner 2001). We find that the halo
249: in which the first primordial protostar forms has a spin parameter for the gas and
250: dark matter of
251: $(\lambda_{gas} , \lambda_{dm}) = (0.0275, 0. 0363)$, which is slightly lower than
252: the mean. The spin parameter of the second halo is
253: $(\lambda_{gas} , \lambda_{dm}) = (0.1079, 0.1607)$, which is atypically high.
254: Examination of the evolution of angular momentum in the gas of the halos as the
255: two protostars form shows that the angular momentum distributions are different
256: in the two clouds, and if angular momentum is conserved one would expect to see
257: a centrifugally supported disk that is approximately four times larger in the
258: second halo.
259:
260: \subsection{Black Hole Accretion}\label{bhaccrete}
261:
262: Here we consider whether accretion onto a relic black hole could generate enough
263: photodissociative radiation to inhibit H$_2$ formation in the second star's halo.
264: We assume Bondi-Hoyle accretion (Bondi \& Hoyle 1944) for the 120 $\Ms$ black
265: hole that forms after the collapse of the first star to estimate the Lyman-Werner
266: flux from its accretion. This rate depends on the mass of the accretor as
267: well as the local gas temperatures, densities, and relative velocities it
268: encounters. To sample the local environment the black hole would traverse over
269: the duration of the simulation, we followed the 40 dark matter particles closest
270: to the first protostar (within $\sim 0.1$ proper pc) from the end of its main
271: sequence lifetime until the collapse of the second protostar. We tallied the cell
272: quantities they crossed to compile the accretion rate history each particle would
273: have if it were the black hole. The histories for the 40 black hole proxies appear
274: in Figure~\ref{bhacc}. The mass accretion rates grow from $10^{-11}~\Ms$/yr to
275: $10^{-8.5}~\Ms$/yr for most of the tracer particles.
276:
277: \begin{figure}
278: \resizebox{3in}{!}{\includegraphics{f2.eps}}
279: \caption{Bondi-Hoyle mass accretion rate around the black hole calculated
280: from the local gas temperature, density and relative velocity. Integration
281: of these curves lead to estimates of growth of the black hole (initially
282: $120~\Ms$) of that range from 0.009 to 0.032~$\Ms$ over 23 Myrs}
283: \label{bhacc}
284: \end{figure}
285:
286: To estimate the effect of Lyman-Werner radiation from the black hole on molecular
287: hydrogen formation in nearby halos we assume a canonical 10\% radiative efficiency
288: for the accretion. The uppermost accretion curve yields $2.2 \times 10^{37}
289: (M/100~\Ms)$ erg/s ($\sim 4500~L_\odot$) for an upper limit to the total luminosity
290: (which is much lower than the Eddington luminosity of this object, $1.5 \times
291: 10^{40}$ erg/s, or $\sim 4 \times 10^6~L_\odot$). Taking this to be a blackbody
292: spectrum, the flux in the Lyman-Werner band (11.1-13.6 eV) reaching the second
293: protostar is $\sim 1.6 \times 10^{-25} (M/100~\Ms)$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ Hz$^{-1}$,
294: resulting in photodissociation rates that are significantly lower than the formation
295: rates of molecular hydrogen there. The expulsion of gas by ionized flows from the
296: first halo prevents higher accretion rates and greater Lyman-Werner fluxes.
297: A star in this mass range may shed its envelope just prior to collapse,
298: resulting in a smaller black hole and making the results discussed here an upper limit.
299:
300:
301: \section{Discussion}\label{discuss}
302:
303: This first high resolution three dimensional simulation of the evolution of gas
304: within a primordial HII region demonstrates the crucial role of H$_2$ chemistry
305: driven by photoionization in the
306: formation of the next generation of stars. While this has been addressed in
307: previous work (Ricotti, Gnedin \& Shull 2002) our simulations are the first with
308: sufficient resolution to directly examine the formation of individual stars.
309: Further investigation will be necessary
310: to determine if the lower accretion rates leading to the smaller mass of the second
311: star are a coincidental feature of this calculation or a general trend of early star
312: formation in halos preprocessed by HII regions. The low accretion
313: rate that we observe in this calculation is primarily due to the high initial angular momentum of
314: the second halo.
315:
316: One possible source of error lies in the method and assumptions determining
317: whether the neighboring halos are photoionized. While our 1D results indicate
318: that these halos will be ionized, this issue merits further investigation
319: with fully 3D simulations.
320: We further assume that this ionization occurred instantaneously and simply
321: ionize the gas outside of the initial halo without changing the total density
322: or velocity profiles of nearby halos. Instantaneous ionization appears to be a
323: reasonable approximation since the sound crossing time of all of the
324: ionized halos is longer than the main-sequence lifetime of the parent star.
325: Again, full 3D radiation photo-evaporation simulations will be necessary to determine whether
326: the hydrodynamic evolution of these halos during the main sequence lifetime of
327: the parent star is unimportant.
328:
329: We note that our HII region
330: enveloped roughly a dozen minihalos similar to the one that formed the second star. More
331: calculations will be required to see if these too form stars. The evolution of
332: the massive disk also merits examination to ascertain whether it breaks up into
333: a multiple system or fully accretes to form a single star.
334: The situation realized
335: in our cosmological simulation may lead to objects with initial conditions similar to
336: the cases studied by Saigo et al. (2004).
337: Lower mass second
338: generation stars or the possibility of binaries or multiple systems of primordial
339: stars would have strong implications for the observability of such objects and
340: their impact on subsequent structure formation. Less massive stars might have
341: different nucleosynthetic signatures than those of the pair-instability supernovae
342: that may occur in the first generation of primordial stars. The immense size of
343: early HII regions could also make the scenario of primordial stars forming in a
344: relic HII region much
345: more common than extremely massive stars forming in pristine halos. These two facts
346: taken together may account for the lack of detection of the characteristic odd-even
347: abundance pattern from pair-instability supernovae expected in observations of ultra
348: metal poor halo stars (Umeda \& Nomoto 2005 and references therein). How HII regions
349: from the first stars may regulate local star formation by suppressing the collapse of
350: gas in local halos which have not reached relatively high densities also remains to be
351: explored. \\
352: \\
353:
354: \acknowledgments{BWO would like to thank Chris Fryer, Alex Heger and Falk
355: Herwig for useful discussion. This work supported in part by NASA
356: grant NAG5-12140 and NSF grant AST-0307690 for BWO, DW and MLN.
357: BWO has been funded in part
358: under the auspices of the U.S.\ Dept.\ of Energy, and supported by its
359: contract W-7405-ENG-36 to Los Alamos National Laboratory. TA was supported
360: by NSF CAREER award AST-0239709 from the National Science Foundation. The
361: simulations were performed at SDSC and NCSA with computing time provided by
362: NRAC allocation MCA98N020. TA and MLN gratefully acknowledge the Aspen
363: Center for Physics for its hospitality during the final phases of this project.
364: We would like to thank the referee, Nick Gnedin, for suggestions which have
365: significantly improved the quality of this paper.
366: }
367:
368: \bibliographystyle{plainnat}
369: \begin{thebibliography}{wd}
370: \bibitem[Abel(2000)]{2000RMxAC...9..300A} Abel, T.\ 2000, Revista Mexicana
371: de Astronomia y Astrofisica Conference Series, 9, 300
372: \bibitem[Abel, Bryan, \& Norman(2002)]{2002Sci...295...93A} Abel, T., Bryan,
373: G.~L., \& Norman, M.~L.\ 2002, Science, 295, 93
374: \bibitem[Abel \& Wandelt(2002)]{2002MNRAS.330L..53A} Abel, T.~\& Wandelt,
375: B.~D.\ 2002, \mnras, 330, L53
376: \bibitem[Barnes \& Efstathiou (1987)]{} Barnes \& Efstathiou (1987), ApJ, 319, 575
377: \bibitem[Bondi \& Hoyle (1944)]{1944MNRAS.104..273B} Bondi, H. \& Hoyle, F.
378: \ 1944, MNRAS, 104, 273
379: \bibitem[Bryan \& Norman (1997)]{313} Bryan, G. \& Norman, M.L. 1997 \ In
380: ``Workshop on Structured Adaptive Mesh Refinement Grid Methods'', Ed. N.
381: Chrisochoides
382: \bibitem[Gardner (2001)]{2001ApJ...557..616G} Gardner, J.P. \ 2001, \apj, 557, 616
383: \bibitem[Haiman, Abel \& Rees (2002)]{2000ApJ...534...11H} Haiman, Z., Abel, T. \& Rees,
384: M. \ 2000, \apj, 534, 11
385: \bibitem[Heger \& Woosley (2002)]{2002ApJ...567..532H} Heger, A. \& Woosley, S.E. \ 2002, \apj, 567, 232
386: \bibitem[Heger et al. (2003)]{2003ApJ...591..288H} Heger, A., Fryer, C.L.,
387: Woosley, S.E., Langer, N. \& Hartmann, D.H. \ 2003, \apj, 591, 288
388: \bibitem[Kitayama, Yoshida, Susa, \& Umemura(2004)]{2004ApJ...613..631K}
389: Kitayama, T., Yoshida, N., Susa, H., \& Umemura, M.\ 2004, \apj, 613, 631
390: \bibitem[Machacek, Abel \& Bryan (2001)]{2001ApJ...548..509M} Machacek, M.E., Bryan, G.L.
391: \& Abel, T. \ 2001, \apj, 548, 509
392: \bibitem[Oh \& Haiman (2003)]{2003MNRAS.346..456O} Oh, S.P. \& Haiman, Z. \ 2003 MNRAS, 346, 456
393: \bibitem[O'Shea et al. (2004)]{326} O'Shea, B.W., Bryan, G., Bordner, J.,
394: Norman, Michael L., Abel, T., Harknes, R.
395: and Kritsuk, A. \ 2004. In ``Adaptive Mesh Refinement - Theory and
396: Applications'', Eds. T. Plewa, T. Linde \& V. G. Weirs,
397: Springer Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering
398: \bibitem[Padmanabhan (1993)]{Pad1993} Padmanabhan, T., 1993, \emph{Structure formation in the universe},
399: Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press
400: \bibitem[Ricotti et al. (2002b)]{2002ApJ...575...49R} Ricotti, M., Gnedin, N.Y. \& Shull, J.M. \ 2002b \apj, 575, 49
401: \bibitem[Ripamonti \& Abel(2004)]{2004MNRAS.348.1019R} Ripamonti, E.~\&
402: Abel, T.\ 2004, \mnras, 348, 1019
403: \bibitem[Saigo et al.(2004)]{2004ApJ...615L..65S} Saigo, K., Matsumoto, T.,
404: \& Umemura, M.\ 2004, \apjl, 615, L65
405: \bibitem[Schaerer(2002)]{2002A&A...382...28S} Schaerer, D.\ 2002, \aap, 382, 28
406: \bibitem[Shapiro et al.(2004)]{2004MNRAS.348..753S} Shapiro, P.~R., Iliev,
407: I.~T., \& Raga, A.~C.\ 2004, \mnras, 348, 753
408: \bibitem[Truelove et al. (1998)]{1998ApJ...495..821T} Truelove, J.K. et al.
409: \ 1998, \apj, 495, 821
410: \bibitem[Umeda \& Nomoto (2005)]{2005ApJ...619..427U} Umeda, H. \& Nomoto,
411: K. \ 2005, \apj, 619, 427
412: \bibitem[Whalen, Abel, \& Norman(2004)]{2004ApJ...610...14W} Whalen, D.,
413: Abel, T., \& Norman, M.~L.\ 2004, \apj, 610, 14
414: \end{thebibliography}
415:
416: \end{document}
417:
418:
419: