REVIEW 2 cited by
A 0.2 solar mass protostar with a Keplerian disk in the very young L1527 IRS system
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
In their earliest stages, protostars accrete mass from their surrounding envelopes through circumstellar disks. Until now, the smallest observed protostar/envelope mass ratio was ~2.1. The protostar L1527 IRS is thought to be in the earliest stages of star formation. Its envelope contains ~1 solar mass of material within a ~0.05 pc radius, and earlier observations suggested the presence of an edge-on disk. Here we report observations of dust continuum emission and 13CO (J=2-1) line emission from the disk around L1527, from which we determine a protostellar mass of M = 0.19 +/- 0.04 solar masses and a protostar/envelope mass ratio of ~0.2. We conclude that most of the luminosity is generated through the accretion process, with an accretion rate of ~6.6 x 10^-7 solar masses per year. If it has been accreting at that rate through much of its life, its age is ~300,000 yr, though theory suggests larger accretion rates earlier, so it may be younger. The presence of a rotationally--supported disk is confirmed and significantly more mass may be added to its planet-forming region as well as the protostar itself.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
A Chemical Inventory of the Disk around the Class 0 Protostar L1527 IRS with ALMA
A comprehensive ALMA-based chemical inventory of the Class 0 protostar L1527 IRS finds 39 molecular species and a carbon-rich to oxygen-rich transition from envelope to disk.
-
The Accretion Process on Protostars
The paper reviews techniques for measuring protostellar accretion, analyzes methodological differences and caveats in comparing observations with simulations, and outlines next steps for a fuller picture.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.