Probing the link between planet-forming disks and their environments

Michael Küffmeier

Temidayo Akinbi and Louis Seyfritz

Students:

Star (and planet) formation

Pineda et al. 2022 'Protostars and Planets VII' review

.

 

 

 

.

Star and planet formation are two sides of the same medal

The disk is not a static entity, but rather a buffer zone

Why care about magnetic fields?

Mocz, Burkhart et al. 2017

hydro

MHD

Santos-Lima et al. 2012

Magnetic fields in simulation

Küffmeier, Reißl et al. 2020

Field strength in bridge: 

about 1 to 2 mG

~1500 AU

bridge structure similar to IRAS 16293--2422 (e.g. Sadavoy+ 2018, van der Wiel+ 2019, Maureira+ 2020)

Dust polarization to measure magnetic fields

Polarization depends on degree of grain alignment and elongation

Credit: B. G. Anderson

Measuring linear polarization of dust grains allows to determine magnetic field orientation ...

... if you know the origin of polarization.

Synthetic observation with POLARIS

Küffmeier, Reißl et al. 2020

Emitted radiation

at 1.3 mm: polarization traces magnetic field structure

(we display e-vectors rotated by 90°)

Wavelength dependence: 1.3 mm vs 53 micron

Emitted radiation

1.3 mm: good tracer of magnetic field

53 micron: poor tracer of magnetic field

Küffmeier, Reißl et al. 2020

Reason for wavelength dependence

Küffmeier, Reißl et al. 2020

Dichroic extinction

Take-away for scales beyond the disk

< 200 micron: dichroic extinction; challenging to trace B reliably

> 200 micron: thermal emission; linear polarization traces B

(see also H. Woodward's 2021 project and Chi Yan "Paul" Law's talk on G28.20-0.05 tomorrow. Stay tuned for Louis Seyfritz's results.)

see also Reissl et al. 2014, 2016 for more discussion of the flip

Star (and planet) formation

Pineda et al. 2022 'Protostars and Planets VII' review

.

 

 

 

.

Possibility of late infall

Late infall 

AB Aurigae

HD 100546

Credit: Grady+ 1999, Fukagawa+ 2004

Can (late) infall cause misalignment of inner and outer disk?

Credit: Ardila+ 2007

SU Aur

Credit: Ginski+ 2021

Extended arc-like structures can be induced by late infall

(Dullemond, Küffmeier, Goicovic+ 2019, Küffmeier, Goicovic & Dullemond 2020)

Possibility of "second-generation" disk

Shadows due to misaligned inner and outer disk

Credit: Marino+ 2015

Simulate cloudlet infall onto disk

AREPO, pure hydrodynamical

isothermal gas

vary infalling angle

vary rotation (prograde, retrograde)

Küffmeier, Dullemond, Reißl, Goicovic 2021

Effect of infall angle on disk

Open questions: What about...

  • ... long-term evolution?
  • ... infall in binary systems?  
  • ... the effect on dust dynamics in the disk? 

(The topic of Temidayo Akinbi's summer project.)

Formation of misaligned disks

Observable as shadows in outer disk

Take-away points

Infall is one explanation for misalignment between inner and outer disk.

Linear polarization of dust reemission at wavelength >200 micron is a good tracer of magnetic field structure on scales beyond the disk.

At smaller wavelengths the signal tends to be dominated by absorption causing a "flip".

WIP: study synthetic observations of infall-induced shadows

RGB image of misaligned system forming from infall with 60°

blue (1.66 micron), green (53 micron), red (870 micron); Credit: S. Reißl

Synthetic dust polarization maps at 1.3 mm

Küffmeier, Reißl et al. 2020

Emitted radiation

Polarization fraction in bridge:

a few %

Polarization fraction in bridge:

up to 20 %

IRAS 16293--2422

Sadavoy et al. 2018

alignment efficiency higher than efficiency produced by standard RAT alignment

(also Le Goeullec+20)

IRAS 16293-2422 highly magnetized?

Synthetic maps from ~pc to ~10 000 au scales

Hannah Woodward

UVA undergraduate; graduate at University Wisconsin-Madison from September 2022

Woodward, Küffmeier & Li in prep

based on MHD simulations of Haugbølle et al. 2018 (see R. Kuruwita's poster)

Simulate cloudlet infall onto disk

AREPO, pure hydrodynamical

R_{\rm i,d}=50\, \rm au
\Sigma(r) = 170 \left(\frac{\rm g}{\rm cm}\right)^{2} \left( \frac{r}{1 \rm au} \right)^{-3/2}
M_{\rm cloudlet}(R_{\rm cloudlet}) = 0.01 {\rm M}_{\odot} \left( \frac{R_{\rm cloudlet}}{5000 \rm au}\right)^{2.3}
R_{\rm cloudlet} = 887\, \rm au

isothermal gas

vary infalling angle

\alpha = 0^{\circ} (35^{\circ}, 60^{\circ}, 90^{\circ})
b = 1774\, \rm au

vary rotation (prograde, retrograde)

Küffmeier, Dullemond, Reißl, Goicovic 2021

M_{*}=2.5\, \mathrm{M}_{\odot}

Outer disk forms around inner disk

Küffmeier+ subm

consistent with star formation simulations by Bate '18

Prograde vs. retrograde infall

Retrograde infall causes:

  • counter-rotating inner and outer disk 
  • shrinking of inner disk
  • enhanced accretion
  • larger and deeper gap between disks

see also Vorobyov+ 2016

Zoom-in on embedded protostellar multiple

Küffmeier et al.

2019

Küffmeier, Reißl et al. 2020

~1500 AU

bridge structure similar to IRAS 16293--2422 (e.g. Sadavoy+ 2018, van der Wiel+ 2019, Maureira+ 2020)