text:
# Bow shocks, wiggling jets, and wide-angle winds: a high resolution study of the entrainment mechanism of the PV Ceph molecular (CO) outflow

## 1 Introduction

In order to better understand the effects of winds from young stars on the ambient molecular cloud, it is essential to study how the wind interacts with its surrounding medium. The best evidence that winds from young stars interact with their surrounding ambient gas is the existence of molecular outflows. Many molecular outflows have masses that are larger than their powering young star, by a factor of a few up to an order of magnitude (e.g., Wu, Huang, & He 1996). It is, therefore, highly unlikely that the mass in CO outflows comes directly from the forming star and/or the circumstellar disk, and so molecular outflows consist mainly of swept-up ambient material.

The mechanism by which a wind from a young stellar object entrains and accelerates the ambient gas, thereby producing a molecular outflow, is still a matter of debate, even though several models have been proposed. The three most popular entrainment models are the turbulent jet model, the bow shock model, and the wide-angle wind model.

In the turbulent jet entrainment model (e.g., Cantó & Raga 1991; Stahler 1994; Lizano & Giovanardi 1995), the ambient gas is entrained on the sides of a jet (or wind) through a turbulent viscous mixing layer formed by Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities.

In the bow shock model (e.g., Raga & Cabrit 1993; Stone & Norman 1993a; Masson & Chernin 1993; Stone & Norman 1994; Suttner et al. 1997; Zhang & Zheng 1997; Smith, Suttner, & Yorke 1997; Downes & Ray 1999; Lee et al. 2001) a highly-supersonic collimated wind or jet propagates into the ambient medium, forming a bow shock surface at the head of the jet. The jet carves into the cloud, and the bow shock will move away from the star, interacting with the ambient gas, thereby producing a molecular outflow around the jet. Velocity variations in the jet produce bow shocks along the body of the jet, also referred to as internal working surfaces (e.g., Raga et al. 1990; Raga & Kofman 1992; Cantó, Raga, & D’Alessio 2000), which can also help entrain ambient gas.

In the wide-angle wind model (Shu et al. 1991; Li & Shu 1996; Matzner & McKee 1999; Lee et al. 2000; 2001), the outflow is produced when a momentum-conserving wide-angle wind from a young stellar object interacts with the ambient gas. The wind power is dependent on polar angle, has a constant velocity and blows into a core with radial density profile and angular dependence. The ambient medium is swept up into a shell by a shock at the wind bubble-ambient cloud interface. The molecular outflow is then identified as the molecular gas in the entrained shell.

In Figure 1 we summarize the expected molecular outflow characteristics (i.e., gas morphology, temperature, velocity and momentum distribution), for these three entrainment models.

On the observational front, recent high angular resolution studies of molecular outflows (e.g., Richer, Hills, & Padman 1992; Bence, Richer, & Padman 1996; Cernicharo & Reipurth 1996; Lada & Fich 1996; Davis, Smith, & Moriarty-Schieven 1998; Shepherd et al. 1998; Gueth & Guilloteau 1999; Yu, Billawala, & Bally 1999; Davis et al. 2000; Lee et al. 2000; Arce & Goodman 2001b) have provided important information on the physical parameters of outflows and the entrainment mechanism.

In Arce & Goodman (2002, hereafter Paper I) we studied the interaction of the HH 315 flow with its parent cloud on large scales (see also Paper I for a brief description of HH 315). In this paper, we zoom in on the gas immediately surrounding several HH knots and the outflow source (PV Ceph), in order to study the entrainment mechanism of the HH 315 outflow. In particular, we study the temperature distribution, kinematics, momentum distribution, and morphology of the outflow gas. The results are then used to compare all of these observed outflow characteristics with those expected from different entrainment models. Along with the information from earlier high resolution studies, our results provide important constraints to be considered by future theoretical entrainment models.

In the following section we will describe the observations. This is followed by a section where we describe our results. We later use our results to compare them with the results of the three molecular outflows entrainment models shown in Figure 1. Subsequently, we discuss the episodic and wandering (or wiggling) nature of the HH 315 outflow. Lastly, we give a summary of our findings.

## 2 Observations

In order to study in detail the interaction between the HH 315 flow and the surrounding gas, we made high spatial- and velocity- resolution observations of the gas around several of the HH knots in the flow. The data were obtained using the IRAM 30 m telescope in Pico Veleta, Spain, in September 1999. The 12CO(1–0), 12CO(2–1), and 13CO(1–0), lines were observed simultaneously using three spectral line SIS receivers. The spectrometer used was an autocorrelator split in three parts, each connected to a different receiver. The $`J=10`$ lines were observed with a spectral resolution of 40 kHz and a band width of 20 MHz, and the 12CO(2–1) line was observed with a spectral resolution of 80 kHz and a band width of 40 MHz. The telescope beamwidths (FWHM) at 12CO(1–0), 12CO(2–1), and 13CO(1–0) are about 21″, 11″, and 22″, respectively. The forward efficiency ($`F_{eff}`$) and main beam efficiency ($`B_{eff}`$) of the $`J=10`$ lines are approximately 0.90 and 0.54, respectively, and for the 12CO(2–1) line $`F_{eff}0.86`$ and $`B_{eff}0.42`$ (Wild 1999). Unless it is stated otherwise, the intensity scale of the spectral data from the IRAM 30 m is in units of main beam temperature ($`T_{mb}`$), where $`T_{mb}=(F_{eff}/B_{eff})T_A^{}`$ (Wild 1999; Rohlfs & Wilson 2000).

The on-the-fly mapping technique was used to map three regions of interests The telescope in OTF mode moved across the source at a constant speed of 2″ s-1, while a spectrum was acquired every 2 seconds. Table 1 lists the center position and the size of each of the three major regions (see also Figure 2). The regions were all scanned in both the right ascension and declination directions. The separation, in the direction perpendicular to the scanning direction, between subsequent rows was 4″.

The telescope was pointed to an OFF position, located at R.A. $`20^h45^m30.4^s`$, decl. 67°55′46.7″ (B1950), after every other row, where it would observe the OFF position for 10 to 15 sec. A temperature calibration was done every 5 to 10 minutes. Deep observations of the OFF position showed no significant emission. The different regions were observed several times to improve the signal-to-noise in the spectra. The raw OTF data were reduced using CLASS. A baseline was fitted to and subtracted from each spectrum. The spectral maps of each region were convolved with Gaussian beams of different sizes, and Table 2 shows the resultant RMS noise for each spectral line map convolved with different beams.

## 3 Results

### 3.1 The region surrounding HH 315B and HH 315C

Large scale CO maps of the outflow associated with PV Ceph (Levreault 1984; Paper I) show that the region surrounding the optical knots HH 315B and HH 315C (region hh315b+c) is the area where most of the emission from the northern (mostly blueshifted) outflow lobe resides (see Figure 2). In this section, we present high spatial resolution maps of hh315b+c, which show the structure of the outflowing gas in detail, and its spatial relation with the HH knots.

#### 3.1.1 12CO(2–1) emission

Figure 3 shows 12CO(2–1) velocity-integrated maps of the hh315b+c region, observed with the IRAM 30 m telescope, for 10 different velocity ranges. The emission with the most blueshifted velocities is shown in Figure 3b and the emission with the most redshifted velocities is shown in Figure 3l. Notice that not all velocity integration ranges have the same width. The different ranges of integration were chosen to group different channels with similar 12CO(2–1) emission structure. The grey objects shown in each velocity map panel represent the position of the different S\[II\] knots in the region, as presented by Gómez, Kenyon, & Whitney (1997, hereafter GKW).

The highest-velocity (most blueshifted) CO outflow emission is shown in Figure 3b. The gas at these velocities is concentrated at the position of the HH 315B optical knot. The lowest (plotted) contour of integrated emission shows wing-like extensions which point towards the position of the outflow source (PV Ceph). The shape of the contours at these high velocities is suggestive of a bow shock morphology.

At slightly lower (less blueshifted) velocities, the outflow gas is concentrated along the main HH 315B optical knot (see Figures 3c and 3d). The gas emission surrounding HH 315B in Figures 3c and 3d is mainly concentrated south of the emission peak in Figure 3b, and has an elongated morphology towards the position of PV Ceph. This is consistent with a picture where the highest velocities are at the head of the shock (Figure 3b), where the gas is currently being entrained, and the slower wake of previously entrained gas is found behind the head of the shock (emission in Figures 3c and 3d near HH 315B).

The most striking feature of the velocity maps shown in Figure 3 is the bow shock- (or shell-) like structure of the 12CO(2–1) emission, coincident with the bow shock-like HH 315C optical knot. The head of the CO shell coincides with the region of brightest optical emission from HH 315C, and has wings, on both sides of the head, which point in the general direction of PV Ceph. Hereafter we will refer to this structure as the HH 315C CO shell. The HH 315C CO shell is observed at different outflow velocities (see Figure 3), and at the slowest (less blueshifted) outflow velocities it has a width of about 0.4 pc (see Figures 3h, and 3i). The positional coincidence of HH 315C and the outflowing CO shell, in addition to the bow shock structure of both the optical knot and the CO outflow, are highly suggestive that these are two different outflow manifestations from the same ejection episode.

It is interesting to note that even though HH 315C is expected222Most, but not all, HH objects have been found to have velocities between 100 to 200 km s-1 (Hartigan et al. 2000; Reipurth & Bally 2001).  to have a velocity of $`100`$ km s-1, the outflowing gas associated with the HH 315C CO shell has radial outflow velocities of no more than $`5`$ km s-1 (which at most could indicate maximum true space outflow velocities of about 30 km s-1, if we assume that the angle between the flow axis and the plane of the sky is about $`10\mathrm{°}`$). The disparity between the velocity of optical HH knots and the velocity of their corresponding CO outflow has always been a puzzle. In a momentum-conserving interaction one would expect the more massive component to end up with a slower velocity than the less massive component. So, the apparent disparity between optical and molecular outflow velocities could be explained if the optical flow is much less massive than the molecular outflow (which is what is expected). In addition, it could be that the HH object originally had a larger velocity (the usual 100 to 200 km s-1), but it has decelerated as it interacts with the ambient medium to velocities closer to 30-50 km s-1 —much like the giant HH flow HH 34 (Devine et al. 1997; Cabrit & Raga 2000). If such is the case, then the apparent disparity between optical and CO outflow velocity would be much less (almost negligible). We will not be sure of the exact kinematics of HH 315C until spectra and proper motions are measured for this optical knot. Independent of the kinematics of the HH 315C optical knot, what is really important to the discussion of this paper is that the morphology of the outflowing molecular gas in the hh315b+c region, along with other factors discussed below, strongly suggest that the molecular outflow is bow shock-driven.

In Figure 3j we show the 12CO(2–1) integrated over the velocities between 1.01 and 1.89 km s-1. The ambient cloud velocity in this region is 1.5 km s-1 (see Paper I), and so most of the “ambient” cloud is found at this velocity range. In Figure 3k we plot the 12CO(2–1) integrated over the velocities between 1.89 and 2.55 km s-1. This velocity range also includes emission from “ambient” cloud gas, as the gas emission shows an extended, cloud-like, morphology. In both Figures 3j and 3k the density gradient of the cloud is clearly seen, the cloud’s edge is in the east and the density increases towards the west. At these “ambient” velocities, there is an increase in the column density at the position of the different small knots which comprise the HH 315C knot. In addition, the 12CO(2–1) contours near the HH 315C knots curve, following the bow-like configuration of the optical knots. Thus, we see that the HH 315C CO shell structure is also detectable at ambient cloud velocities —evidence that the HH 315 flow has altered the ambient gas distribution at distances as far as $`1.5`$ pc from the source (see Paper I for more on this).

The 12CO(2–1) map integrated over the range of $`2.55<v<3.65`$ km s-1 (Figure 3l), which is redshifted with respect to the ambient cloud velocity of the region, shows a “clump” of emission coincident with the HH 315C optical knot. Similar to what is seen in the other (blueshifted) velocity-integrated maps in Figure 3, the 12CO(2–1) intensity contours curve, following the bow-like arrangement of the HH 315C optical knots. This redshifted emission is presumably outflowing gas accelerated by the “back side” of the shock front associated with HH 315C.

In Figure 4 we show several sample 12CO(2–1) spectra from the hh315b+c region. It is interesting to note the drastic differences between spectra from regions very close to each other. Also, notice that the outflow emission is not a smooth low-level wing at blueshifted velocities. Instead, it is made of different velocity (spectral) components, which sometimes are stronger than the ambient cloud component.

#### 3.1.2 13CO emission

The 13CO emission in the HH315b+c region has less complicated velocity structure than the 12CO emission. Similar to what is observed in the large-scale map (see Figure 3 in Paper I), the 13CO(1–0) emission at velocities greater than 1.5 km s-1 in this region is very weak ($`T_{mb}0.6`$ K), and hence most of the 13CO emission in this region is blueshifted compared to the cloud’s ambient velocity. In Figure 5 we show three different 13CO velocity-integrated intensity maps. The different ranges of integration were chosen to group different channels with similar 13CO(1–0) emission structure.

The 13CO vaguely follows the 12CO bow shock structure associated with HH 315C. Both the north and the south bow shock wings are clearly present in 13CO emission, yet there is very little 13CO emission at the location of the bow shock apex. The north and south 13CO bow wings are spatially coincident with the 12CO bow wings with similar velocities. We do not detect any 13CO emission associated with the high velocity gas surrounding the HH 315B knot. The structure of the high spatial resolution 13CO is consistent with our original hypothesis (Paper I) that the blueshifted northern lobe of the HH 315 molecular outflow has “pushed” aside gas, creating a shell-like structure at its edges, which is dense enough ($`n500`$ cm-3) that is detected in 13CO(1-0) emission.

#### 3.1.3 Mass

In Table 3 we list the mass for each of the velocity ranges shown in Figure 3. The mass was obtained using our high-resolution (IRAM 30 m) 12CO(1–0) and 13CO(1–0) data, with the procedure described in Paper I. The only difference in the procedure is the use of the average excitation temperature ($`\overline{T}_{ex}`$), given in Table 3, to estimate the outflow mass of a given velocity range (rather than using $`T_{ex}=10.5`$ for all velocities). Notice that the mass of the “ambient cloud” velocity range ($`1.01<v<2.55`$ km s-1) is approximately the same as the sum of the rest of the velocity ranges. This implies that in this region the outflow mass is approximately the “ambient cloud” mass. We first noticed this with our large-scale CO maps (Paper I), and its importance is discussed there.

### 3.2 The region surrounding HH 215 and PV Ceph

The other region studied at high resolution with the IRAM 30 m telescope is the area surrounding the outflow source, PV Ceph. This area is where most of the southern (redshifted) outflow resides (see Figure 2). In addition, the area observed also covers the area north of PV Ceph where the chain of five optical knots that make up HH 215 have been detected (GKW). We call this whole area the hh215 region. We note that in this region, the central ambient cloud velocity is $`v_{LSR,south}=2.5`$ km s-1 (see Paper I), and so outflow velocities in the hh215 region are defined as the observed velocity minus 2.5 km s-1.

#### 3.2.1 12CO(2–1) emission

In Figure 6 we show the integrated intensity, over four different velocity ranges, of the 12CO(2–1) in the hh215 region. Notice that not all velocity integration ranges have the same width. The different ranges of integration were chosen to group different velocity (spectral) channels with similar 12CO(2–1) emission structure.

The most blueshifted velocity range in which we detect 12CO(2–1) emission in this region is shown in Figure 6a. The blueshifted molecular outflow emission in this velocity range ($`0.15<v<0.74`$ km s-1) is concentrated at the source and north of it. The emission detected south (and southeast) of the source in Figure 6a is from another cloud in the same line of sight (cloud X) which we detect in our large scale 12CO and 13CO maps (see Figures 2 and 3 in Paper I). The blueshifted 12CO(2–1) outflow emission in Figure 6a is very poorly collimated —unlike the outflowing redshifted emission discussed below— nor does it show the nice bow shock structure observed in the hh315b+c region.

In Figure 6b we show the (blueshifted) 12CO(2–1) integrated emission over the velocity range between $`1.62<v<2.06`$ km s-1. We do not include an integrated velocity map for velocities between 0.74 and 1.62 km s-1, since at these velocities the 12CO is dominated by the emission from cloud X all through the mapped region, and so no outflow features are observed. The velocity range in Figure 6b includes velocities as close as $`0.5`$ km s-1 to the central ambient velocity of 2.5 km s-1, so there is some ambient cloud emission contribution to the 12CO(2–1) emission at these velocities. The contours were chosen to show the brightest features. It can be seen that the emission peaks near the position of PV Ceph and extends north with a fan-like structure (with an opening angle of $`90\mathrm{°}`$). This wide-angle structure does not resemble any cloud structure observed in our large scale maps. Thus, we believe that the emission north of PV Ceph in Figure 6b comes from the slowest, detectable (blueshifted) outflow emission in the hh215 region. This slow outflow gas has a morphology which is consistent with it being entrained by a wide-angle wind. We further discuss this in §4.3.3.

The emission south of PV Ceph in Figure 6b is ambient cloud emission, which we easily identify with a structure seen in our large scale maps. Notice that this emission south of PV Ceph in Figure 6b delineates the walls of the cavity cleared by the redshifted outflow lobe (Figures 6c and 6d). This cavity is also observed in our large-scale map and we discuss its importance in Paper I.

Between velocities 2.06 and 3.16 km s-1, the detected 12CO(2–1) comes from (extremely optically thick) ambient emission, which shows no (or very little) structure. The slowest detectable redshifted outflow emission is at $`v3.2`$ km s-1, and it is easily identified as outflow gas from the obvious non-cloud-like morphology of the gas emission.

The redshifted outflow gas shows a very peculiar structure, very different from the wide-angle blueshifted outflow emission discussed above. At the lowest redshifted velocities (Figure 6c) the 12CO(2–1) integrated intensity peaks at the position of PV Ceph and has a cometary-like extension towards the east, and a collimated (jet-like) extension towards the south. The east-west cometary-like structure is only clearly detected at the velocities between $``$ 3.2 and 5.2 km s-1 and extends further than the eastern limits of our map. We believe that this cometary-like structure is associated with the motion of PV Ceph through the cloud (see Goodman & Arce 2002). The north-south structure seen in Figure 6c extends about 1.75′ ($`0.25`$ pc), and resembles a curving (or wiggling) CO jet, with an eastward bent at $`1`$′ south of PV Ceph.

At high (redshifted) outflow velocities (see Figure 6d) we detect a north-south 12CO structure similar to the one seen in Figure 6c. About 50 to 60″ south of PV Ceph there is a “bump”, where the collimated north-south structure widens. As discussed later (§4.3.2), this bump is most probably due to the entrainment of the ambient gas by a redshifted counter-episode of HH 215. South of the bump the jet-like structure continues, and it ends about 2′ ($`0.29`$ pc) south of PV Ceph, slightly further south than the north-south structure in Figure 6c.

#### 3.2.2 13CO emission

In Figure 7 we show three different velocity-integrated intensity maps of the 13CO(1–0) emission in the hh215 area. Similar to the other velocity-integrated maps presented here, the ranges of integration were chosen to group different velocity (spectral) channels with similar 13CO(1–0) emission structure.

Figure 7a shows the most blueshifted 13CO emission in the hh215 area, at velocities between 1.73 and 2.28 km s-1. The velocity range is very narrow (only 0.55 km s-1 wide) and the velocities are close to the central ambient gas velocity (2.5 km s-1). The blueshifted 13CO integrated intensity map (Figure 7a) shows a clear V-shaped structure with its apex at the position of PV Ceph. As shown in Figure 8, this 13CO structure is coincident with the the optical reflection nebula north of PV Ceph (Cohen et al. 1981; Gledhill, Warren-Smith, & Scarrot 1987; Levreault & Opal 1987; Neckel et al. 1987 Scarrot, Rolph, & Tadhunter 1991; RBD; GKW), and encloses the wide-angle 12CO(2–1) blueshifted outflow seen in Figure 6b. Thus, it appears that 13CO in this velocity range traces the limb-brightened walls of a wind-blown cavity. We will discuss this further in §4.3.3.

The other two velocity-integrated intensity maps of 13CO(1–0) (Figures 7b and 7c) come from redshifted velocities (compared to the ambient cloud velocity of 2.5 km s-1). The 13CO integrated intensity emission in Figure 7b resembles (and coincides with) the east-west cometary-like structure in the 12CO(2–1) integrated intensity map in Figure 6c. In addition to the east-west structure there is a low-emission north-south elongation, which partly coincides with the north-south 12CO(2–1) jet-like structure in Figure 6c, and extends only $`1.3\mathrm{}`$ (0.18 pc) south of PV Ceph. Figure 7c shows the most redshifted 13CO emission in the hh215 region. At these velocities the 13CO emission is very weak compared to the other velocities shown, and the maximum emission is just south of PV Ceph.

In Table 4 we list the mass for each of the velocity ranges shown in Figure 6. The mass was obtained using our IRAM 30 m 12CO(1–0) and 13CO(1–0) data, using the procedure described in Paper I (with $`T_{ex}=10.5`$ for all velocity ranges). In Figure 9 we show sample 12CO(2–1) and 13CO(1–0) spectra from the hh215 region.

### 3.3 The region surrounding HH 315E

The sensitivity of our observations in the hh315e region is similar to that of the other regions (see Table 2). So, if the column density of the outflowing CO gas in the hh315e region were similar to that of the other regions, then outflowing CO should be easily detectable. But, even though HH 315E is the counter-knot of HH 315B —where we detect CO with the highest blueshifted outflow velocities— we do not detect any outflow emission in the region surrounding the optical knot HH 315E.

In Figure 10 we show an average 12CO(2–1) spectrum of the hh315e region. The spectrum does not show any redshifted low-level wing, or another velocity component redshifted from the ambient emission, as might be expected for a redshifted CO outflow lobe spectrum. Instead, the spectrum shows mainly ambient gas emission from the cloud associated with PV Ceph (the “PV Ceph cloud”), which peaks at $`v2.5`$ km s-1 (see Paper I). The bump in the spectrum seen at blueshifted velocities is due to “contaminating” emission from another cloud on the same line of sight. We fit a double Gaussian to the average spectrum and from the fit we obtain that the PV Ceph cloud component (centered at $`2.5`$ km s-1) has a width (FWHM) of $`0.8`$ km s-1. Even if we fit a single Gaussian, the resultant velocity width is 1.1 km s-1.

A 12CO(2–1) spectrum with such a narrow velocity is usually observed in quiescent ambient gas clouds, rather than in regions affected by stellar outflows. HH knots are shocks arising from the interaction of a high-velocity flow of gas ejected by a young stellar object and the ambient medium. Thus, we know that the outflow mass ejection responsible for the HH 315E optical knot is interacting with its surrounding medium because HH 315E is detected. It is strange that even though the column density of the ambient gas in the hh315e region is more than the column density of the ambient gas surrounding HH 315B, we see no evidence of outflow-cloud interaction in our CO spectra. One possible explanation is that the relatively high CO column density observed is all (or mostly) due to CO in front of HH 315E, and that HH 315E is interacting only with atomic gas behind the PV Ceph cloud.

## 4 Analysis and Discussion

### 4.1 Temperature distribution

We use our 12CO(1–0) and 12CO(2–1) data in concert to study the excitation temperature ($`T_{ex}`$) across the mapped regions. We then use the estimate of the temperature variations in our map to discern between different molecular outflow entrainment models. Since estimating the excitation temperature of optically thick ($`\tau >1`$) gas is very unreliable (see, e.g., Figure 5 in Hatchell et al. 1999), we will only try to estimate the excitation temperature of optically thin ($`\tau <1`$) CO gas. And so, to obtain our temperature estimates we will use the optically thin approximation and use the following equation (Bachiller & Tafalla 1999):

$$R_{21/10}=4e^{11/T_{ex}},$$
(1)
where $`R_{21/10}`$ is the 12CO(2–1) to 12CO(1–0) line ratio.

We warn that Equation 1 is only exact in the optically thin limit ($`\tau <<1`$). Using Equation 1 with gas with an opacity as low as $`\tau 0.1`$ would lead to an underestimation of the real excitation temperature. If $`\tau 0.1`$, the discrepancy stays within 20% for CO line ratios lower than 2.5, but for line ratios higher than 2.8, the error in $`T_{ex}`$ exceeds 40%. In any case, it is still true that for any given opacity, the higher the line ratio, the higher the excitation temperature. So even though Equation 1 does not give a perfect estimate for $`\tau 0.01`$, we can still use it to investigate the relative temperature distribution.

#### 4.1.1 The hh315b+c region

To estimate the excitation temperature of the outflow gas in the region surrounding the optical knots HH 315B and HH 315C we used velocity-integrated maps of the 12CO(2–1) and 12CO(1–0) lines. For each velocity-integrated map, we produced a map of the line ratio ($`R_{12/10}`$), and then a map of the excitation temperature, using Equation 1. Five grey-scale maps of $`T_{ex}`$ are shown in Figure 11 (the velocity ranges of integration are the same as Figures 3b to 3f). Gas with velocities close to the ambient velocity are optically thick, and so we do not obtain an estimate of $`T_{ex}`$ for gas at those velocities. For each grey-scale temperature map, we superimposed the 12CO(2–1) velocity-integrated intensity contours. We only obtain a value of $`T_{ex}`$ for pixels with a signal to noise ratio of at least 5, in both 12CO(2–1) and 12CO(1–0). We masked (set $`T_{ex}=0`$) the low signal-to-noise pixels and those (few) which gave unphysical negative values of $`T_{ex}`$.

In all panels of Figure 11, there is a discernible trend in which there is a temperature increase in regions with high velocity outflowing CO emission. That is, whereas $`T_{ex}=10.5`$ K for ambient cloud velocities (see Paper I), $`T_{ex}>11`$ K for outflowing gas. In addition, the average $`T_{ex}`$ increases with outflow velocity (see also Table 3). This temperature distribution is consistent with the temperature distribution expected for a molecular outflow formed by bow shock prompt-entrainment. Analytical and numerical jet-driven bow shock models show that the temperature of the accelerated gas which forms the molecular outflow should be higher than the ambient gas. In addition, the temperature is also expected to rise with increasing outflow velocity (e.g., Hatchell et al. 1999; Lee et al. 2001).

It should be noted that the warmer outflowing gas observed does not come directly from the shock cooling length behind the shock front. Bow sock-driven outflow models predict that the outflowing gas is heated as a consequence of the acceleration (i.e., increase in kinetic energy) of the gas driven by the momentum-conserving interaction between the bow shock and the ambient medium (see Hatchell et al. 1999 for more on this). Another possible source of heating near an HH object may also be the UV radiation from the jet shock (see Wolfire & Königl 1993; Taylor & Williams 1996).

#### 4.1.2 The hh215 region

The 12CO gas detected (at most velocities) in the hh215 region is moderately optically thick ($`\tau 1`$, see Paper I), and so estimates of the excitation temperature are very unreliable. Hence, we study the relative temperature distribution by studying the spatial distribution of the CO line ratio ($`R_{21/10}`$).

The map of CO line ratio of the blueshifted outflow gas in the hh215 region does not show any significant structure, and hence is not shown. The only clear trend in this map is that there is an increase in $`R_{21/10}`$ at the position of the source, implying there is an increase in temperature at the position of PV Ceph.

In Figure 12 we plot the average line ratio along the axis of the redshifted molecular outflow lobe. To do this, we determine the average value of $`R_{21/10}`$ over the width of the jet-like outflow lobe, for each row of pixels, and then plot it as a function of declination offset from the source. The line ratio shown in Figure 12 has a maximum at the source position, then it decreases with distance from the source up to about 36″ south of PV Ceph. At about 60″ south of the outflow source position $`R_{21/10}`$ reaches a local maximum. Further south, along the outflow lobe axis, the CO line ratio stays approximately constant.

Models where the molecular outflow is formed by turbulent mixing of the ambient gas along the sides of a jet or wind predict that the gas temperature should have a maximum temperature at (Cantó & Raga 1991) or very close to (Lizano & Giovanardi 1995) the position of the source, and decrease monotonically with distance from the source. Entrainment models where the gas is accelerated solely by the leading bow shock in a jet predict that the gas temperature should be minimum at the outflow source, and increase toward the head of the bow shock, where the gas temperature peaks. Therefore, the gas temperature distribution implied by our measurements of $`R_{21/10}`$ is not entirely consistent with an outflow entrained by the leading jet bow shock nor by a turbulent mixing layer along the sides of a jet.

One alternative explanation is that the outflow is entrained by a time-varying (pulsed) jet. A time-varying jet will have internal bow shocks (usually called internal working surfaces) along its axis (see, e.g., Raga et al. 1990; Stone & Norman 1993b; Lee et al. 2001), and the gas temperature should increase at the head of each internal shock. Thus, each local increase in the CO line ratio could arise from the local increase in temperature expected at the head of each internal bow shock. In this picture, the increase in line ratio 60″ south of PV Ceph could be due to the redshifted counter-knot of HH 215(1) —presumably also responsible for the “bump” in the integrated intensity of the redshifted molecular outflow lobe (see Figure 12). We further discuss this in §4.3. The increase in temperature at the source position could arise from an unresolved internal working surface very close to PV Ceph.

### 4.2 Kinematics and momentum distribution

Studying the velocity and momentum distribution of the molecular outflow may help us distinguish between different entrainment models. It also helps us better understand how young stellar outflows interact with the ambient gas.

#### 4.2.1 Kinematics of the hh315b+c region

In Figure 13 we show a 12CO(2–1) position-velocity ($`pv`$) diagram of the hh315b+c region. This $`pv`$ diagram was constructed by rotating our image of the hh315b+c region by 43° and summing the 12CO(2–1) spectra at each row of pixels.

Figure 13 clearly shows that the velocity peaks at the position of HH 315B, and decreases towards the position of the source. This velocity distribution, where the velocity peaks at the shock head and decreases towards the outflow source, is consistent with models of bow shock-entrained molecular outflows. For these models such velocity structure is a natural consequence of the fact that the highest (radial) velocities are found at the head of the bow shock, while the velocity decreases towards the wings.

Lee and coworker’s recent analytical (Lee et al. 2000) and numerical (Lee et al. 2001) studies show detail $`pv`$ diagrams of wide-angle wind-driven molecular outflows. Their results indicate that the $`pv`$ diagrams of wide-angle wind-driven molecular outflows have noticeable differences compared with the predicted $`pv`$ diagram for bow shock-entrained molecular outflows (see Figure 1 for a schematic illustration on this). We do not see any indication in Figure 13 of a structure similar to that shown in the $`pv`$ diagrams of Lee et al. (2000; 2001) for wide-angle wind-driven molecular outflows.

Figure 13 shows that the highest outflow velocities are at the head of the shock (i.e., HH 315B), and that the rise in velocity associated with HH 315B is restricted to a limited region of no more than 100″ ($`0.2`$ pc). This indicates that most, if not all, of the entrainment is taking place at the head of the HH 315B shock. Thus, we totally discard turbulent entrainment along the sides of a jet (or wind) as the mechanism responsible for the outflowing gas associated with the HH 315B optical knot, and we suggest that bow shock entrainment is responsible instead.

North of HH 315B, there are two more local peaks in the velocity (see Figure 13). Both of the velocity peaks come from outflowing gas associated with the HH 315C molecular bow structure. The northernmost local velocity peak is coincident with the brightest optical emission in HH 315C, which is also the head of the optical bow shock. The other local peak in velocity associated with HH 315C (at $`100\mathrm{}`$ north of HH 315B) comes from outflow gas in the wings of the HH 315C CO bow (see Figures 3c and 3d). As discussed above, a bow shock-entrained molecular outflow should have the peak velocity at the head of the shock, and no local peak in velocity is expected at the bow wings. The velocity structure of the outflowing gas associated with HH 315C does not resemble the velocity structure of a wide-angle-wind-driven molecular outflow either (see Lee et al. 2000; 2001). Turbulent entrainment is again discarded as the head of the shock does not show the slowest velocities in the outflow, as predicted by turbulent jet models. Although the kinematics of the molecular outflow associated with HH 315C are not entirely consistent with bow shock entrainment, other pieces of evidence presented here suggest that bow shock entrainment is still the best candidate (see §4.3 for further discussion).

#### 4.2.2 Momentum distribution in the hh315b+c region

In order to study the momentum distribution of the blueshifted outflowing gas surrounding HH 315B and HH315C, we constructed a momentum map of the region. The map was produced using the technique to estimate mass described in Paper I. With this method we obtain a map of the outflow mass for each position pixel and velocity channel $`(x,y,v)`$. We multiply the mass at each $`(x,y,v)`$ by the (radial) outflow velocity corresponding to the given velocity channel ($`v_{out}=vv_{amb,north}`$) to obtain the line-of-sight (or radial) momentum at each pixel and channel. By integrating (summing) over velocity channels $`[\mathrm{\Sigma }m(x,y,v_i)v_{out,i}=P(x,y)]`$, we obtain a momentum map over a given velocity range.

We stress that we are only considering the line-of-sight (or radial) component of the outflow momentum. In order to obtain the true momentum one needs to assume an inclination angle ($`i`$) between the flow’s axis and the plane of the sky. By comparing the $`pv`$ diagram of the hh315b+c region (Figure 13) with the $`pv`$ diagram of modeled bow shock-driven outflows (e.g., Lee et al. 2000; 2001; Smith et al. 1997) it appears that $`0<i<30\mathrm{°}`$ in the hh315b+c region. In addition, the precession model of GKW estimates that HH 315 has an inclination to the plane of the sky of about $`10\mathrm{°}`$. Thus, a value of $`i10\mathrm{°}`$ seems adequate for HH 315. For the purpose of the entrainment mechanism study in this paper, it is not important to correct the momentum by the inclination angle. However, if the true outflow momentum (and kinetic energy) is desired we recommend that a value of $`i10\mathrm{°}`$ should be used.

In Figure 14 we show the momentum map of the hh315b+c region, integrated over the velocity range $`15.27<v<0.09`$ km s-1. The bow-like structure of the outflowing gas associated with HH 315C is clearly seen in the momentum map. In this structure the bow wings show more momentum than the head of the bow. In addition, the southwestern wing has considerably more momentum than the northeastern bow wing. The maximum momentum in Figure 14 is nearly coincident with the brightest optical emission in HH 315B, and it is surrounded by a region of relatively high momentum extending south and extending east of the momentum peak. This extension traces the bow wings of the HH 315B CO bow shock, similar to what is seen in the HH 315C CO bow shock, but at a smaller scale.

In a bow shock-driven outflow model the outflowing gas velocity peaks at the head of the bow shock. The momentum ($`p=mv`$), on the other hand, is dependent on the underlying ambient cloud mass distribution (Chernin & Masson 1995). If a bow shock from a stellar wind mass ejection were to interact with an ambient gas with a perfectly uniform density distribution, the resultant molecular outflow momentum would peak at the head of the bow shock. This is not the case for HH 315C. As discussed in §3.1, in this region there is a gradient in the ambient cloud density (seen in the ambient CO emission, see Figures 3j and 3k), which increases from east to west. This explains why the southwest bow wing has more momentum than the northeast bow wings. Near both southwest and northeast bow wings the gas is denser than the gas at the head of the bow structure (we only detect 13CO emission near the HH 315C CO bow wings, see Figure 5). Thus, the increase in momentum along the bow wings with respect to the bow head. We conclude that the momentum distribution of the HH 315C molecular bow structure can be explained by the bow shock entrainment of ambient gas with a non-uniform density distribution.

The momentum distribution of the outflowing gas associated with HH 315B follows what is expected for a bow shock-entrained outflow in a relatively flat ambient density distribution. As can be seen in Figure 3 the outflowing gas associated with HH 315B is constrained to a small area surrounding HH 315B, and the ambient cloud density is approximately constant within that area. In Figure 14, the momentum peaks practically at the presumed bow shock head, and the momentum decreases away from the head, along the wings, towards the direction of the outflow source.

#### 4.2.3 Velocity distribution in the hh215 Region

Similar to hh315b+c, we studied the velocity distribution of the hh215 area by constructing a position-velocity diagram of the 12CO(2–1) emission. The $`pv`$, shown in Figure 15, was made by summing all spectra over the width of the hh215 area at each different row of pixels, resulting in a declination-velocity diagram.

There are several interesting features in the hh215 $`pv`$ diagram. The redshifted gas, shows two distinctive velocity peaks; one is coincident with the position of PV Ceph, and the other is $`60\mathrm{}`$ (0.15 pc) south of PV Ceph. Most of the slow redshifted velocity coincident with the outflow source position comes from the east-west cometary-like structure seen in Figure 6c. We believe that most of this structure is a result of the motion of PV Ceph through its parent cloud (see Goodman & Arce 2002). So, most of the slow redshifted gas at the position of PV Ceph is not related to the HH 315 outflow. Thus, we only consider the redshifted gas south of PV Ceph as being part of the outflow.

The peak in velocity, $`0.15`$ pc south of PV Ceph, is coincident (within the 11″ beam of the telescope) with the “outflow clump” (or local maximum in the outflowing CO) south of PV Ceph, seen in the 12CO(2–1) velocity-integrated map shown in Figure 6d. A peak in outflow velocity coincident with the position of an outflow clump has been attributed, in other outflows, to be evidence for bow shock (prompt) entrainment from a mass ejection episode (e.g., RNO 43, Bence et al. 1996; HH 300, Arce & Goodman 2001b).

We believe the optically undetected redshifted counter-knots of the HH 215 chain of knots (see Figure 6) are responsible for the entrainment of the redshifted outflow gas south of PV Ceph. Each of the 3 major blueshifted knots of HH 315 (knots A, B, and C) have a redshifted counter-knot (see Figure 2), and for each of the three redshifted-blueshifted knot pairs the distance from PV Ceph to the blueshifted knot is the same (within 10%) to the distance from PV Ceph to the corresponding redshifted counter-knot (RBD). One would reasonably expect the same for the HH 215 knots, and so we believe that the rise in velocity $`0.15`$ pc south of PV Ceph is produced by the (unseen) counter-knot of HH 215(1). It is very probable that optical observations have not detected HH knots in the corresponding location south of PV Ceph because of the high extinction in this region.

As discussed in §3.2, we detect a wide-angle blueshifted outflow emission north of PV Ceph, in the hh215 region. In the $`pv`$ diagram (Figure 15), the blueshifted gas shows a Hubble-like velocity distribution; the slowest blueshifted velocity (detached from the ambient cloud emission in the $`pv`$ diagram) is at $`0.1`$ pc north of PV Ceph and the average blueshifted outflow velocity increases with distance from the source, off our map limits (see Figure 15). Given the limited coverage of the area, we cannot conclude if such velocity distribution is consistent with bow a shock-driven outflow model or wide-angle wind-driven molecular outflow model.

#### 4.2.4 Momentum distribution in the hh215 region

As discussed in §3.2, we are unable to estimate the total mass and momentum from the blueshifted outflow gas just north of PV Ceph (in the hh215 region) because of contamination from the emission from another cloud in the same line of sight. This hinders our ability to compare the total blueshifted momentum with that expected by different entrainment models. Hence, we do not consider it here.

One the other hand, we can study the outflow momentum distribution of the redshifted lobe. In Figure 16, we plot the average momentum along the redshifted outflow axis, using a momentum map integrated over the velocity range of $`3.16<v<6.46`$ km s-1. This plot was constructed by calculating the average momentum at each horizontal row of pixels along the north-south axis of the outflow, and then plotting the average momentum as a function of distance from the source. In order to avoid redshifted emission not associated with the redshifted outflow lobe (i.e., the cometary-like east-west structure), we averaged the momentum over a restricted area, which only includes the north-south redshifted jet-like outflow structure (see Figure 16). The average momentum along the redshifted lobe axis has a maximum at the source position and it decreases with distance from the source. This momentum distribution is very similar to that predicted by Chernin & Masson (1995) for an outflow consisting of material swept-up by a jet bow shock traveling through an ambient cloud with a density gradient proportional to $`r^a`$, where to $`1a2`$. In this model the outflow momentum decreases with distance from the outflow source because the ambient cloud density decreases with distance from the young star. The ambient density of the PV Ceph cloud (as implied by the integrated intensity 13CO maps of the cloud in Paper I) monotonically decreases with distance from PV Ceph in the region where we detect the redshifted jet-like outflow feature. Therefore, the bow shock entrainment model of Chernin & Masson (1995) can be used to explain the momentum distribution along the axis of the redshifted outflow lobe in the hh215 region.

### 4.3 Bow shocks, jets, and wide-angle winds

The temperature distribution, the kinematics, the momentum distribution, and the morphology of the outflow gas may all be used to deduce the most likely entrainment mechanism responsible for the molecular outflow. In this section we summarize our results, and discuss which are the most likely entrainment mechanisms that accelerate the molecular gas of the outflow associated with PV Ceph.

#### 4.3.1 Blueshifted CO bow shocks in HH 315C and HH 315B

In Table 5 we list the properties of the outflow gas associated with HH 315B. The morphology, as well as the temperature, velocity, and momentum distribution of the outflow gas are all consistent with bow shock entrainment models. Thus, we conclude that the outflow gas associated with HH 315B is bow shock-driven.

In Table 6 we list the characteristics of the molecular outflow gas associated with HH 315C. Some of the properties listed are both consistent with bow shock and wide-angle wind entrainment. As discussed below, HH 315 is an episodic outflow, in which HH 315C and HH 315B come from consecutive episodes. The mass ejection episode responsible for HH 315B entrains the ambient gas with a bow shock, so the same is expected for HH 315C. It is highly unlikely that two consecutive mass ejection episodes interact with the environment through two different mechanisms. Thus, we suspect that the outflow gas associated with HH 315B and HH 315C are both produced by the bow shock entrainment of an episodic jet.

We note that there is still the possibility that the the underlying stellar wind that produces the outflow in this area is technically not a jet bow shock, but a very collimated angle-dependent wind. How a wide-angle wind interacts with the ambient gas depends on the angular distribution of the wind force (e.g, Matzner & McKee 1999, and references therein). If the wind force is highly concentrated on the pole, then the wind would essentially be jet-like. This jet-like wind would interact with the ambient medium very much like a bona fide jet. Thus, outflows created by a highly collimated angle-dependent wind and outflows created by a jet show very similar morphologies, and velocity and momentum distributions —any differences would be indistinguishable by our observations. Thus, a very collimated angle-dependent wind, and a bona fide jet will produce practically the same entrainment mechanism.

#### 4.3.2 The redshifted CO jet south of PV Ceph

The properties of the redshifted molecular outflow lobe (south of PV Ceph in the hh215 region) are listed in Table 7. The redshifted outflow gas in this region shows a clear jet-like (very collimated) structure that extends south of PV Ceph (see Figure 17). Turbulent entrainment has been proposed as an attractive model to explain other molecular outflows with similar highly collimated morphologies (e.g., HH211, Gueth & Guilloteau; and NGC 2024, Richer et al. 1992). But, as can be seen in Table 7, the morphology is the only characteristic of the redshifted outflow lobe that is consistent with turbulent jet entrainment models.

Bow shock entrainment by a variable jet with internal working surfaces seems to better explain our results. A major internal working surface at $`60\mathrm{}`$ (0.15 pc) south of PV Ceph may naturally explain all of the following characteristics which are seen there: 1) the local increase in outflow gas column density (i.e., outflow clump or hot spot) seen in Figure 6d; 2) the slight rise in the CO line ratio (Figure 12); and 3) the peak in outflow velocity (Figure 15). We thus conclude that the redshifted outflow gas south of PV Ceph has most likely been entrained by a variable jet with internal bow shocks.

The chain of optical HH knots that form HH 215 is also highly suggestive of a variable jet morphology. The average axis of HH 215 is coincident with the general north-south axis of the redshifted molecular outflow lobe south of PV Ceph (see Figure 17). The HH 215 knots show a wiggling pattern somewhat similar to the redshifted outflow lobe axis (see Figure 17). In addition, HH 215(1) —the brightest knot in HH 215— is $`55\mathrm{}`$ north of PV Ceph. Thus, we strongly believe that the redshifted molecular outflow is entrained by the counter jet of HH 215, and that the features observed $`60\mathrm{}`$ south of PV Ceph are produced by the counter-knot of HH 215(1).

It is interesting to note that although the outflow gas in the hh315b+c region (Figure 3) and the redshifted outflow in the hh215 region, south of PV Ceph, (Figure 17) are both presumably entrained by the same mechanism, they have very different morphologies. The source of this seeming inconsistency is apparent from the morphology of the optical HH 315 flow. Similar to other HH flows \[e.g., HH 34 (Reipurth et al. 1986; Devine et al. 1997); and HH 111 (Reipurth et al. 1992; Reipurth et al. 1997; RBD)\] the HH objects which make up the HH 315, increase in size, the further away they are from the outflow source. We should expect the redshifted counter-knots of HH 215, south of PV Ceph, to be as compact and small as HH 215. Therefore, the redshifted gas south of PV Ceph has a jet-like appearance because it is most probably entrained by a continuous (unresolved) chain of small bow shocks, which have a jet-like appearance. On the other hand, the transverse size of the bow shock responsible for the blueshifted outflow associated with HH 315C is larger than the shocks associated with HH 215, and so the CO outflow bow shock-like structure produced is very well resolved by our observations.

#### 4.3.3 Evidence for a blueshifted wide-angle wind north of PV Ceph

The blueshifted 12CO and 13CO gas just north of PV Ceph, in the hh215 region, shows a wide-angle structure. The 13CO integrated emission has a V-like structure which encloses the blueshifted emission seen in 12CO (see Figure 8). In addition, the 13CO V-structure coincides with the walls of the optical conical reflection nebula. Thus, we are confident that the observed blueshifted 13CO structure traces the limb-brightened walls of a wind-blown cavity. This structure is similar to that observed in the inner regions of the B5-IRS1 outflow (Langer, Velusamy, & Xie 1996; Velusamy & Langer 1998; Yu et al. 1999, hereafter YBB).

Approximately coincident with the cavity axis, lie the HH 215 chain of knots. These optical knots trace gas that has recently been excited by a very collimated wind —which seems to be very different from the wide-angle wind responsible for the V-shape cavity. One explanation which could explain the observations is that there are two different wind components in the northern (blueshifted) lobe close to PV Ceph: 1) a collimated (jet-like) wind responsible for the HH 215 knots; and 2) a wide-angle wind responsible for the poorly collimated blueshifted 12CO immediately north of PV Ceph, and the 13CO V-shaped structure. A similar two-component wind is observed in the inner region of the B5-IRS1 outflow (see YBB).

There is evidence that a “dual wind component” is also present in the southern (redshifted) lobe of the outflow associated with PV Ceph. As discussed above, the collimated outflow lobe south of PV Ceph is most probably produced by a variable jet (the counter jet of HH 215). We do not detect a wide-angle wind in the redshifted lobe south of PV Ceph, but optical observations of the region close to PV Ceph (Gledhill et al. 1987; Levreault & Opal 1987; Neckel et al. 1987; RBD) have detected a fan-shaped reflection nebula south of PV Ceph, similar to the reflection nebula north of PV Ceph (see Figure 8). It is very probable that the redshifted molecular gas emission of the wide-angle wind south of PV Ceph is “hidden” under the optically thick ambient cloud emission of the region.

If the above picture is correct, a model which allows for the coexistence of both a wide-angle and a very collimated wind is needed to explain the outflow from PV Ceph, similar to the B5-IRS1 outflow (YBB). So, we believe, as YBB do for B5-IRS1, that the sum of all the observations of the PV Ceph outflow near the source can be best described with a two-component wind model (like that of Hirose et al. 1997) or a single-wind model in which the wind splits into a very collimated (axial) component and a wide-angle component (like the X-wind model of Shu et al. 1995, and references therein; see also Shang, Shu, & Glassgold 1998).

Alternatively, as proposed to us by the anonymous referee, the wide-angle cavity could be a result of the episodic and precessing nature of the HH 315 flow. Sideways splashing from each HH flow episode could, in principle, slowly burrow through the ambient gas, creating a wide-angle cavity without the need of invoking another (wide-angle) wind component. Although it is possible that a wide-angle cavity could be formed in such a way, we find that this picture does not entirely fit the observations of PV Ceph. For example, sideways splashing from the HH 315C,B,A episodes would have helped formed a cavity with an axis tilted towards the west, unlike the observed nice V-shape cavity with an almost perfect north-south axis. Also, the V-shape cavity is unlikely to have been produced solely by the sideways splashing of the HH 215 episode since the cavity extends more towards the north than the HH 215 chain of optical knots. Thus, we prefer a wide-angle wind component in order to explain the existing observational data. Further kinematic studies of the molecular gas near PV Ceph should help clarify the nature of the wide-angle cavity.

### 4.4 Episodicity and axis wandering of the HH 315 flow

#### 4.4.1 Episodicity

Previous optical studies have pointed out the possible episodic nature of the HH 315 giant HH flow (GKW, RBD). The optical evidence for the episodicity of HH 315 comes from the fact that each of the three major HH knots in each lobe is about 0.35 pc from each other, with no HH-like emission between them. An HH knot is produced by the shock arising from the interaction of a high-velocity flow of gas ejected by a young star and the ambient medium. In HH 315, the HH knot pairs C-F, B-E, and A-D (see Figure 2) are thought to arise from three different mass ejection episodes.

Our millimeter line data shows further evidence for the episodic nature of the HH 315 flow. The outflow gas surrounding the HH 315B and HH 315C knots has a spatially discrete structure (Figure 3) which shows a shell-like or bow-like structure at the position of each of the two knots. At the head of each of these shell-like structures there is an increase in outflow velocity (Figure 13). A velocity increase at the position of the optical HH knots A, B, C, and D is also observed in the large-scale 12CO(2–1) $`pv`$ diagram of the HH 315 outflow (Figure 13 in Paper I). Such morphology and velocity distribution in the molecular outflow gas is not expected if the underlying stellar wind responsible for the creation of the molecular outflow were made of a continuous constant flow of ejected mass. The multiple CO shell structure, and the peak molecular outflow velocity at the head of the shock (the position of the HH knot) is better understood if the molecular outflow from PV Ceph is formed by a wind with sporadic episodes of copious mass loss (see also Arce & Goodman 2001a).

#### 4.4.2 Wandering ejection axis

The fact that the ejection axis of HH 315 changes over time has been well established by the optical images of the flow, where it is clearly seen that the HH knots trace an S-shaped path. Tracing a line from PV Ceph to the location of each knot, it is seen that each major knot has a different position angle on the sky. Each mass ejection should travel in a straight line after being ejected by the young star, unless it collides with a dense clump which could change its trajectory. Our large scale molecular gas maps (Paper I) do not show any evidence for dense clumps which could have perturbed the ballistic trajectory of any ejection. Thus, the HH knots in HH 315 are at different angles with respect to PV Ceph, because PV Ceph’s angle of ejection is changing over time (i.e., wandering or precessing). GKW have successfully reproduced the morphology of the HH 315 flow with a simple precession model, assuming a jet velocity of 200 km s-1, a precession cone with full opening angle of $`45\mathrm{°}`$, an inclination to the plane of the sky of $`10\mathrm{°}`$, and a precession period of about 8300 yr. Goodman & Arce (2002) show that a westward motion of PV Ceph, in addition to a time-varying ejection angle, explain the position of the HH knot pairs (A-D, B-E, and C-F) with respect to the source better than models without transverse source motion.

In addition to the “precession” (or change in ejection angle) traced by the optical HH knots, our millimeter CO data for the redshifted outflow gas in the hh215 region show signs of a small scale time-varying ejection angle. In Figure 17 we show the integrated intensity contours of the redshifted gas in the hh215 region, integrated over the velocity range where we detect outflow emission. We made east-west intensity cuts for all pixel rows, for the extent of the north-south (jet-like) outflow structure. Most of the cuts show Gaussian-like intensity profiles, so we fit a Gaussian to each cut and obtained the position of the Gaussian centroid from each fit. In Figure 17, the thick black solid line plotted over the intensity contours indicates the position of the integrated emission centroid (obtained from the Gaussian fit) along the length of the redshifted CO jet-like structure. Assuming the emission centroid indicates the position of the outflow axis, we can state that the axis varies in direction over time (it wiggles). Similar wiggling morphology has been detected in optical HH jets (e.g., Heathcote et al. 1996) and other molecular outflows (Davis et al. 1997).

In Figure 18a we plot the presumed trajectory of the jet axis, traced by the 12CO(2–1) velocity-integrated intensity centroid. It can be seen in Figure 18a that the points trace a sine-like path with a slope. We fit the centroid path with a straight line, and we then subtract the fit to the points, and show the result in Figure 18b. A sine wave was subsequently fitted to the slope-corrected points (see Figure 18b). Notice that the points at the peaks and valleys (of the sinusoidal trace) increasingly deviate from the sine fit, the furthest away from the source. This behavior, where the axis traces a cone (projected on the plane of the sky) rather than a cylinder, is suggestive of a “precession cone” expected for a flow with a quasi-periodic time-varying ejection axis (due to pure periodic precession or to a quasi-periodic random wandering of the ejection axis).

Assuming the sinusoidal appearance of the redshifted lobe comes from a purely periodic precession in the ejection axis, we may use the “wavelength” ($`\lambda 28,820`$ AU) of the sine fit made to the points in Figure 18b to obtain a precession period. If we assume a jet velocity of 200 km s-1 (the same as GKW and RBD), we then obtain a precession period ($`T=\lambda /v_{jet}`$) of $`680`$ yr.

Tidal interactions between binary components and a circumstellar disk is one possible mechanism which could induce precession on a young star. Terquem et al. (1999) give an approximate expression for the precession period of a disk around a young star in a binary system, where the disk surrounds only the primary star. The expression is given in terms of the primary mass ($`M_p`$), the mass ratio of the two stars, the disk radius ($`R`$), and the binary separation ($`D`$) . Observations show that if PV Ceph has a binary companion it must be less than 50 AU apart (Leinert et al. 1997). We can use Equation 1 in Terquem et al. (1999) and solve for the binary separation, to see if a precession period of $`680`$ yr is possible for a binary system with a separation of less than 50 AU between its members. If we assume PV Ceph is the primary star with a mass of 4 M (Fuente et al. 1998a), a primary to secondary mass ratio of about 0.25, and a 15 AU disk radius, then a binary separation of $`21`$ AU would be needed to drive a precession with a period of 680 yr. Even if we were to change our assumptions to a primary-to secondary mass ration of 1 and a disk radius of 25 AU, the binary separation would be 43 AU. Thus, it is possible that the wiggling of the jet is due to precession of the outflow source induced by tidal interactions between PV Ceph, a yet undetected binary companion, and PV Ceph’s circumstellar disk.

The precession period of $`680`$ yr, from our observations of the wiggling redshifted CO outflow lobe, is about a factor of 12 less than the precession period obtained by GKW (from modeling the trajectory traced by the optical HH knots in HH 315). This apparent difference in precession period seems to indicate that: 1) the precession period is changing over time; or 2) there are two different mechanisms which are responsible for the different apparent precession-like motions.

Theoretically, the ejection of a third companion in a hierarchical triple system could lead to the formation of a tighter binary (see Reipurth 2000 for more details). But, in the case of PV Ceph the tightening of the binary system would had to occur in a very short time-scale of $`2000`$ yr.333This is the approximate time-scale between the eruptions responsible for the HH 215 chain of knots and the HH 315A-D knot pair (see Figure 2), assuming $`v_{jet}200`$ km s-1. In addition, it is extremely coincidental that we would be observing PV Ceph right at the moment after the tightening of the binary system. Thus, it is unlikely that this scenario applies to PV Ceph. It seems more likely then, that the large-scale axis wandering is due to some other (unknown) mechanism. Some other possible mechanisms which could produce precession-like motions of the outflow ejection axis are: changes in the outflow source’s magnetic field orientation; or a precession-like motion induced by tidal interactions of multiple stellar companions and their circumstellar disks.

In summary, we may explain the short-time scale axis wandering observed in the HH 315 outflow by circumstellar disk precession. However, it is highly unlikely that the same mechanism is responsible for the large-scale axis wandering.

## 5 Summary

We observe, at high velocity and spatial resolution, the molecular gas surrounding several knots of the giant Herbig-Haro flow HH 315, from the young star PV Ceph. The observations were aimed at studying the interaction between the HH flow and the ambient gas. The data obtained include simultaneous observations, at the IRAM 30 m telescope, of the 12CO(1–0), 12CO(2–1), and 13CO(1–0), molecular lines. The three regions observed include: 1) an area surrounding two blueshifted knots (HH 315C and HH 315B) about 0.9 to 1.2 pc northwest of PV Ceph; 2) an area which includes the gas surrounding the outflow source, the HH 215 blueshifted optical knots $``$ 0.05 to 0.15 pc north of PV Ceph, and the collimated redshifted molecular gas south of PV Ceph; and 3) an area surrounding the redshifted optical knot HH 315E, about 0.9 pc southeast from the outflow source. The main points derived from our study can be summarized as follows:

1) We find that the blueshifted outflow gas in the region surrounding HH 315B and HH 315C has clearly been accelerated by bow shock entrainment of an episodic jet. The molecular outflow gas shows a spectacular bow-shock-shaped morphology, which has a width of about 0.4 pc at the slowest outflow velocities. The head of the CO outflow bow structure coincides with the position of the bow-shaped optical knot HH 315C. There is also blueshifted molecular outflow gas coincident with the optical knot HH 315B which exhibits a structure suggestive of a bow shock morphology. A bow-like structure coincident with each knot, and the fact that both the excitation temperature and the velocity of the outflow gas show peaks at the position of the head of each bow-like structure, are all consistent with an outflow formed by two different bow shocks. Each of these two bow shocks were formed by a different mass ejection episode, where HH 315C is the “leading jet head” of the HH 315 giant flow, and HH 315B is a shock formed by a subsequent mass ejection episode.

2) Near PV Ceph (within 0.3 pc), the observational data is highly suggestive of the coexistence of a wide-angle wind and a collimated (jet-like) wind. The blueshifted 13CO integrated emission shows a V-shaped morphology with an opening angle of $`90\mathrm{°}`$, which is coincident with an optical reflection nebula. The blueshifted 12CO has a fan-like morphology which fills the cavity delineated by the 13CO V-shape structure. We suggest that the 13CO traces the limb-brightened walls of a wide-angle wind-blown cavity. Along the axis of the wide-angle blueshifted 12CO outflow lie the previously detected optical knots HH 215. These small knots delineate the collimated component of the blueshifted wind north of PV Ceph.

3) We find that the redshifted molecular outflow lobe south of PV Ceph is most likely entrained by a variable jet with several internal working surfaces (bow shocks). The redshifted outflow has a collimated wiggling jet-like appearance, with an “average” north-south axis, which extends to about 0.3 pc south of PV Ceph. The momentum distribution is consistent with jet bow shock entrainment in an ambient medium with density decreasing with distance from the source. Also the velocity and temperature distribution of the molecular outflow gas are consistent with it being entrained by a jet with several internal bow shocks. We show that the same (bipolar) mass ejection episode responsible for the blueshifted HH 215 optical knots (north of PV Ceph) is also responsible for the entrainment of the redshifted outflow lobe. There has been no optical detection of the redshifted counter-jet of HH 215 because of the heavy extinction in the region south of PV Ceph.

4) We find that the wiggling observed in the redshifted CO outflow lobe near PV Ceph is most probably due to a time-varying ejection axis. Assuming the wiggling is due to precession of the outflow source, and a jet velocity of 200 km s-1, then the precession period is 680 yr. This is about a factor of 10 less than the precession period deduced from the large-scale optical HH flow. We may explain the short time-scale axis wandering observed in the redshifted molecular outflow lobe by precession induced by tidal interactions between (undetected) binary companions and a circumstellar disk. However, it is highly unlikely that the same mechanism is responsible for the large-scale axis wandering.

5) We do not detect any outflow emission in the region surrounding the HH 315E optical knot. The CO spectra in this region has a FWHM width of only $`1`$ km s-1, and shows no evidence of outflow-ambient gas interaction. It is puzzling to find such a narrow CO width in a region presumably affected by a stellar outflow. It is probable that all of the CO observed at the direction of HH 315E is in front of HH 315E (on the same line-of-sight), and that HH 315E is interacting mainly with atomic gas behind the molecular cloud.

We would like thank John Bally, and Charlie Lada for their helpful comments on this work. And we are grateful to the National Science Foundation for supporting this effort through grants AST 94-57456 and AST 97-21455.


format: text

text:
# A Nonconservative Earthquake Model of Self-Organized Criticality on a Random Graph

## Abstract

We numerically investigate the Olami-Feder-Christensen model on a quenched random graph. Contrary to the case of annealed random neighbors, we find that the quenched model exhibits self-organized criticality deep within the nonconservative regime. The probability distribution for avalanche size obeys finite size scaling, with universal critical exponents. In addition, a power law relation between the size and the duration of an avalanche exists. We propose that this may represent the correct mean-field limit of the model rather than the annealed random neighbor version.

PACS numbers: 05.65.+b, 45.70.Ht, 89.75.-k

The idea of self-organized criticality (SOC) was introduced as a possible explanation for the widespread occurrence in nature of long range correlations in space and time . The term refers to the intrinsic tendency of a large class of spatially extended dynamical systems to spontaneously organize into a dynamical critical state. In general, SOC systems are driven externally at a very slow rate and relax with bursts of activity, avalanches, on a very fast time scale. One signature of SOC is a scale free, e.g. power law, distribution of avalanche sizes. This is normally related to some long range spatial and temporal correlations within the system. Typical natural realizations of this phenomena include, among others, earthquakes, forest fires, and biological evolution (for reviews, see ).

A problem that has attracted a lot of attention, but is still poorly understood, is that of identifying fundamental mechanisms leading to SOC behavior. In particular, much effort has been directed at understanding how conservation of the transported quantity (e.g. sand) in the avalanche dynamics affects criticality . For instance, it is well known that the Abelian sandpile model , is subcritical if dissipation is introduced . On the other hand, nonconservative sandpile models which display criticality have since been introduced . Although both the analytical and numerical evidence in favor of criticality are quite convincing, the role played in these models by the non-conservative dynamics is not clear. In fact, dissipation is a dynamical variable and does not always occur.

A model, which in the context of SOC in nonconservative systems has played an important role, is the Olami-Feder-Christensen (OFC) model of earthquakes . In the OFC model a finite fraction, controlled by a fixed parameter $`\alpha `$, of the transported quantity is dissipated in each relaxation event. The presence of criticality in the non-conservative OFC model has been controversial since the very introduction of the model  and it is still debated . Recent numerical investigations, though, have shown that the OFC model on a square lattice displays scaling behavior, up to lattice sizes presently accessible by computer simulations . The avalanche size distribution is described by a power law, characterized by a universal exponent $`\tau 1.8`$, independent of the dissipation parameter. This distribution does not display finite size scaling, however.

To overcome the limitation of relying almost exclusively on computer simulation results, it has sometimes been useful to consider an annealed random neighbor (RN) version of the model , where each site interacts with randomly chosen sites instead of its nearest neighbors on the lattice. This considerably simplifies the problem. In the past, RN models have usually been considered as mean-field descriptions of their fixed lattice counterparts, since spatial correlations are absent. Analogous to other RN models, the RN OFC model can be solved analytically . It displays criticality only in the conservative case, where it becomes equivalent to a critical branching process. As soon as some dissipation is introduced the avalanches become localized, although the mean avalanche size diverges exponentially as dissipation tends to zero. The absence of criticality, together with the exponential divergence has cast some doubt on whether the OFC model on a fixed lattice is critical.

However, it is important to point out that the RN model may not describe the behavior of the OFC model on a fixed lattice in any dimension, and thus may not correspond to the mean field limit of the model. Usually, mean field behavior describes the high dimensional behavior of the system (e.g. the behavior above an upper critical dimension); this is not exactly the same limit as a model without any spatial correlations in it.

In fact, criticality in the OFC model on a lattice has been ascribed to a mechanism of partial synchronization . The system has a tendency to order into a periodic state  which is frustrated by the presence of inhomogeneities such as the boundaries. In addition, inhomogeneities induce partial synchronization of the elements of the system building up long range spatial correlations and thereby creating a critical state. The mechanism of synchronization requires an underlying spatial structure and therefore cannot operate in an annealed RN model, where each site is assigned new random neighbors at each update.

The main purpose of the present work is the investigation of the OFC model on a quenched random graph. This formulation, which can be handled numerically, is worth analyzing to see if it presents critical or non-critical behavior. Since the largest distance between two sites in the random graph grows only as a logarithm of the number of sites, it can be considered to be a high dimensional limit of a lattice model, and thus may describe the correct mean field limit. Contrary to the RN case, in a random graph the choice of neighbors is not annealed but quenched, so that spatial correlations can develop. Indeed, we show that the OFC model on a random graph displays criticality even in the nonconservative regime.

A random graph is defined as a set of $`N`$ sites connected at random by bonds. Two connected sites are denoted as “nearest-neighbor”. Formally, the random graph can be constructed by considering all $`N(N1)/2`$ possible bonds between sites and occupying a certain number of them with equal probability. A constraint of fixed connectivity can also be imposed by requiring that each site has the same number of neighbors, $`q`$. We have mainly concentrated on this latter situation but the first case will also be discussed. The model is then defined as follows. To each site of the graph is associated a real variable $`F_i`$, which initially takes some random value in the interval $`(0,F_{th})`$. All the forces are increased uniformly and simultaneously at the same speed, until one of them reaches the threshold value $`F_{th}`$ and becomes unstable $`(F_iF_{th})`$. The uniform driving is then stopped and an “earthquake” (or avalanche) starts:

$$F_iF_{th}\{\begin{array}{c}F_i0\hfill \\ F_{nn}F_{nn}+\alpha F_i\hfill \end{array}$$
(1)
where “nn” denotes the set of nearest-neighbor sites of $`i`$. The parameter $`\alpha `$ controls the level of conservation of the dynamics and, in the case of a graph with fixed connectivity $`q`$, it takes values between $`0`$ and $`1/q`$ ($`\alpha =1/q`$ corresponding to the conservative case). The toppling rule (1) can possibly create new unstable sites, producing a chain reaction. All sites that are above threshold at a given time step in the avalanche relax simultaneously according to (1) and the earthquake is over when there are no more unstable sites in the system ($`F_i<F_{th}`$, $`i`$). The uniform growth then starts again. The number of topplings during an earthquake defines its size, $`s`$, and we will be interested in the probability distribution $`P_N(s)`$. Another quantity of interest is the duration $`t`$ of an earthquake which will be identified with the number of time steps needed for the earthquake to finish.

We consider first a random graph where all sites have exactly the same number of nearest neighbors $`q`$. In this case, we have verified (both for $`q=4`$ and $`q=6`$) that the system organizes into a subcritical state. This is analogous to what happens in the OFC model on a lattice with periodic boundary conditions, where no critical behavior is observed . In order to observe scaling in the avalanche distribution, one has to introduce some inhomogeneities. In the lattice model this is generally achieved by considering open boundary conditions which imply that boundary sites have fewer neighbors and therefore cycle at a different frequency from bulk sites. This is an inhomogeneity with a diverging length scale in the thermodynamic limit. For the OFC model on a random graph, we have found that it suffices to consider just two sites in the system with coordination $`q1`$ . When either of these sites topple according to rule (1), an extra amount $`\alpha F_i`$ is simply lost by the system.

After a sufficiently long transient time, the system settles into a statistically stationary state. We have verified that the statistical properties of the system (e.g. the avalanche distribution) are independent of the actual realization of the random graph, as long as the coordination number $`q`$ is the same. As a point of comparison, in figure 1 we report the probability distribution of avalanche sizes for (a) the annealed RN model and (b) for the OFC model on a random graph for various system sizes $`N`$. The dynamical rule for the annealed RN model are formally similar to (1), where, instead of the nearest-neighbor sites on the graph, $`q`$ new random sites are chosen at each relaxing event. In both cases of fig. 1, the number of neighbors is $`q=4`$ and the parameter $`\alpha =0.10`$. It is clear that no scaling is present in the RN model as the cut-off in the avalanche size distribution does not grow with system size. On the contrary for the model on a random graph, the distribution scales with system size, which is indicative of a critical state. In fact, the largest avalanche roughly coincides with system size. It is important to underline that we are considering a situation far away from the conservative case (60% of the force in the toppling site is dissipated) and therefore one could expect that if a finite length scale related to conservation existed in the system it should appear for system sizes we have considered.

In order to characterize the critical behavior of the model, a finite size scaling (FSS) ansatz is used, i.e.

$$P_N(s)N^\beta f(s/N^D)$$
(2)
where $`f`$ is a suitable scaling function and $`\beta `$ and $`D`$ are critical exponents describing the scaling of the distribution function. In figure 2, a FSS collapse of $`P_N(s)`$ for different values of $`\alpha `$ and for different $`q`$ is shown. The distribution $`P_N(s)`$ satisfies the FSS hypothesis reasonably well, with universal critical coefficients. The critical exponent derived from the fit of fig. 2 are $`\beta 1.65`$ and $`D=1`$, independent of the dissipation parameter $`\alpha `$ and the coordination number of the graph $`q`$. The FSS hypothesis implies that, for asymptotically large $`N`$, $`P_N(s)s^\tau `$ and the value of the exponent is $`\tau =\beta /D1.65`$. Due to the numerical uncertainty on the estimate it is difficult to assert with certainty that $`\tau `$ is a novel exponent, different from the one for the conservative RN model ($`\tau =1.5`$) or the lattice model in two dimensions ($`\tau 1.8`$).

The OFC model on a lattice does not show ordinary FSS . Although the avalanche size distribution converges to a well-defined, universal power law, the cut-off in the distribution due to finite system sizes does not behave according to FSS . In particular, the apparent numerical value for the exponent $`D`$ determined through FSS would violate some exact bounds . In fact, in the non-conservative model each site can only discharge a finite number of times during an avalanche, which imposes $`D1`$ in eq. (2). In order to recover standard FSS in the two dimensional lattice model one has to consider earthquakes localized within subsystems of linear dimension small compared to the overall system size .

We have performed numerical simulations of the OFC model on a square two dimensional periodic lattice where just two sites have $`3`$ neighbors. We have verified that the avalanche size distribution scales with system size but, as for the OFC model with open boundary conditions, FSS appears to be violated in the cut-off region. The power law exponent of the distribution is consistent with the exponent of the OFC model with open boundary conditions, i.e. $`\tau 1.8`$. For the range of system sizes we could simulate, the critical behavior of the model on a lattice and on a random graph (with the same number of defects) appear to be different. In particular SOC on the quenched random graph appears to be described by ordinary FSS, consistent with a mean field limit.

We now discuss the time properties of the avalanches. In fig. 3 we report the average size of an avalanche stopping at time $`t`$, $`<s>_t`$, as a function of the rescaled time $`\stackrel{~}{t}=t+2`$ (as we are mainly interested at large values of $`t`$, the constant should be irrelevant). The curves for different system sizes overlap (deviations can be attributed to finite-size effects) and we observe that $`<s>_tt^\gamma `$, where $`\gamma 2.1`$, providing further evidence of criticality in the nonconservative system.

An interesting question (of difficult solution though) is whether the model becomes subcritical below a certain non-zero value $`\alpha _c`$ (for $`\alpha =0`$ the system is clearly not critical as sites do not interact). In our simulations we have found that for $`\alpha 0.10`$ and $`q=4`$ the model displays scaling behavior with universal critical exponents (see fig. 1 and 2). For lower values of $`\alpha `$ the analysis is more complicated as the extremely long transient times to stationarity prevent the investigation of large lattices. Nonetheless for very low values of $`\alpha `$ ($`\alpha 0.03`$) the cut-off in the avalanche distribution does not appear to vary systematically with system size (even for relatively small systems), suggesting that a non-zero $`\alpha _c`$ may exist.

We have also considered the OFC model on a random graph with variable local connectivity $`q_i`$. In this case, the toppling rule (1) must be modified to take into account that different sites have a different coordination number $`q_i`$. Each site consequently has a different $`\alpha _i`$, which we determined by requiring that the total fraction $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ of the force transferred from the unstable site to the nearest-neighbors sites is constant in the system, i.e. $`\alpha _i=\stackrel{~}{\alpha }/q_i`$. In particular, we have studied a graph with average connectivity $`<q_i>=4`$. We have found that there is no criticality in the system as the cut-off in the probability distribution does not scale with system size. In agreement with previous investigations , this result indicates that if the disorder is too strong (as for a completely random graph) the critical state is destroyed. On the other hand inhomogeneities are necessary to break the periodic state the system would otherwise reach. It is a difficult question to establish what is the maximum level of disorder that the system can sustain without loosing its critical properties.

In conclusion, in this paper we have investigated the OFC model on a quenched random graph. We have shown that the model is critical even in the nonconservative regime. This is in contrast to what happens in the annealed RN OFC model which displays criticality only in the conservative case. Contrary to the annealed case, a quenched random graph has an underlying spatial structure so that partial synchronization of the elements of the system can still occur. As a random graph can be regarded as a high dimensional limit of a regular lattice, we propose that this formulation represents the correct mean-field limit of the model rather than the annealed random neighbor version.

This work was supported by the EPSRC (UK), Grant No. GR/M10823/01 and Grant No. GR/R37357/01.