N. S. P. Sabalisck , M. Rozas, J. E. Beckman , J. H. Knapen, PASA, 15 (1), 161
The html and gzipped postscript versions of this paper are in preprint form.
To access the final published version, download the pdf file.
| Next Section: References Title/Abstract Page: THE INTERNAL KINEMATICS OF Previous Section: Results | Contents Page: Volume 15, Number 1 |
Interpretation
The wide scatter in the dispersions implies that in general the regions are not in virial equilibrium. We interpret the upper envelope as that of virialized regions, and the higher 
values for the rest as due to dynamical injections from OB winds or even supernovae (the value of 80 km s
in one component is entirely consistent with observations of galactic, well resolved regions). The slope of the virial envelope is not 4, as predicted by Terlevich & Melnick, (1981) because these, the brightest regions are density bounded, (see Rozas et al., 1996, Beckman et al., 1997) so the H
luminosity is a decreasing fraction of the full ionizing luminosity of the region. (Project support: Grant PB94-1107; DGICYT)
Figure 1: : Left: Luminosity versus velocity dispersion () for the H II regions observed, using the principal component from each region. Values of are corrected for instrumental and thermal broadening; values of less than 10 km s are not reliable, and are not included. Note the clean upper envelope (see text for its interpretation). Right: Emission line profiles from a selection of bright H II regions in M100, from the TAURUS map, with the individual kinematic components indicated.
| Next Section: References Title/Abstract Page: THE INTERNAL KINEMATICS OF Previous Section: Results | Contents Page: Volume 15, Number 1 |
© Copyright Astronomical Society of Australia 1997