Observations vs TheoryObservations vs Theory

JETS AND TORI IN

PROTO-PNE

JETS AND TORI IN

PROTO-PNE

Patrick Huggins New York UniversityPatrick Huggins New York University

Outline: two questions

Part I. Observations: Are jets and tori related ? examine time domain find evidence for a torus-jet sequence

Part II. What are the implications for jet formation scenarios ?

Jets and tori are traumatic events in the AGB—PN transition Example: AFGL 618 (Trammell & Goodrich 2002)High velocity jets, well-defined tips plus a dense torus – the last major mass ejectionHow do we investigate the ejection sequence ? Determine the age of each component

Expansion Ages

Expansion age of jets t jet = r / V optical or molecular lines

need tilt or from optical proper motions of tip

Expansion age of torus t torus = r / V molecular* lines

need high resolution & tilt use peak or mean for r

*important

Note: The tori in some cases may be more spherical with the holes pierced by the jets. Soker & Rappaport (2000) argued that the tori are formed by jets snow-plowing the AGB wind: but the high masses and high mass-loss rates argue for something different.

100” x 60” M 1-16KjPn 8

40” x 40”

H Lopez 97

HSchwarz 92

CO 2-1

900” x 360”

12” x 12”

Huggins et al. 04 CO 1-0

Forveille et al. 98

Name V torus V jets t torus t jets

km/s km/s yr yr

KjPn 8 5.9 314 5040 3380

M 1-16 9.8 350 2000 1610

M 2-9 7.0 164 1300 1170

M 1-92 5.5 69 1520 1010

M 2-56 8.0 128 1750 1060

He 3-1475 14 530 878 611

V Hya 16 161 543 254

AFGL 618 12 222 422 139

1 Gru 11 55 354 54

DATA: Forveille et al. 1998, Meaburn 1997, Huggins et al. 2000, Schwarz 1992, Zweigle et al. 1997, Schwarz et al. 1997, Bujarrabal et al. 1998, Alcolea et al. 2007, Castro-Carrizo et al. 2002, Huggins et al. 2004, Riera et al. 2003, Hirano et al. 2004, Cox et al. 2003, Trammell & Goodrich 2002, Sanchez Contreras et al. 2004, Chiu et al. 2006

Summary of Observations

low V torus

young PN

AGB

Expansion Ages of Jets and Tori

Jets & tori nearly simultaneous

Jets appear slightly younger

t tori & t jets likely* ~ true ages

If so, jets occur later jet-lag ~ 300 yr

power-up or accretion time?

If jets accelerate: look younger could be simul. – not likely for ensemble

If jets decelerate: look older jet-lag is longer

error bars: inclinations, proper motions, or resolution* Tori are massive with low velocities

Well-studied jets typically exhibit Hubble flows

Evolutionary Sequence

now

jets

tori

t ~ r / Vtorus

All cases are similar: jets are launched with or shortly after torus ejection

Part II: Implications of These Results for Theory

Each scenario has specific implications for torus formation That we can test

Current popular theoretical ingredients mhd jets – disks primary/secondary – common envelopes

Lead to four basic jet formation scenarios: mhd winds of single stars binary accretion disks winds/explosions of spun-up stars disks around the primary cores

1. Magnetic winds from single stars?

Current models can produce jets unclear if they can produce sudden jets recent models* do not produce co-ordinated jets and tori

— dense equators are input independently

evaluation: do not adequately produce jet-torus relations found here

*Garcia-Segura et al. (2005)

Natural mechanism for the mass in equatorial plane

Natural causal and temporal relation of torus to jets: enhanced mass-loss feeds accretion disk: disk makes jets

Natural explanation of jet-lag time to spiral into companion reasonable parameters give ~ 100 yr

Q: No general explanation for onset of discrete torus could be tidal spin-up of the primary – needs futher study

2. Accretion disks of binary companions?

22/1

2

2/31

1.0

/

111.0160

RH

M

M

AU

Ryrt

o

Morris (1987), Soker & Rappaport (2000)

?

viscous accretion time

3. Magnetic/hydro effects in common envelopes?

MHD wind from spin-up + CE ejection expect short time scales: can it produce jet-lag ? can CE ejection produce low velocity tori ?

Variation: CE MHD explosion for jets and torus

expect short time scales: can it produce jet-lag ? can explosions produce low velocity tori ?

Hybrid: companion accretion disk CE ejection

wrong sequence !

Nordhaus & Blackman (2006), Matt et al. (2006)

?

?

(Low mass comp.) CE primary accretion disk later nebula ejection jets and tori un-coordinated ! wrong sequence !

(Intermed. mass comp.) CE ejection primary accretion disk correct sequence short time scale: jet-lag ?

CE ejection RLOF of secondary to form primary accretion disk correct sequence expected time scale too long !

4. Accretion disks around the primary?

Soker & Livio (1994), Soker (1996), Reyes-Ruiz & Lopez (1999), Nordhaus & Blackman (2006)

?

Jets and tori are nearly simultaneous Evidence for a torus-jet sequence with jet-lag Results constrain scenarios

Question: can CE ejection/explosions explain low velocity of tori ?

scenario rating comments

Magnetic wind from single star — jets and torus?

Companion accretion disk discrete torus ejection?

Companion accretion disk + CE ejection — wrong sequence

CE ejection + magnetic polar wind jet-lag?

(CE) mag. polar + equatorial ejection jet-lag?

(CE) primary accretion disk + late neb. ejection — wrong sequence

CE partial ejection + primary accretion disk jet-lag?

Post CE primary accretion disk (from RLOF) — time scale too long?

Summary