Effective viscosity from cloud–cloud collisions in 3D global smoothed particle hydrodynamics simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analytic estimates of the viscous time-scale due to cloud–cloud collisions have been as high as thousands of Gyr. Consequently, cloud collisions are widely ignored as a source of viscosity in galactic discs. However, capturing the hydrodynamics of discs in simple analytic models is a challenge, because of both the wide dynamic range and the importance of 2D and 3D effects. To test the validity of analytic models, we present estimates for the viscous time-scale that are measured from 3D smoothed particle hydrodynamics simulations of disc formation and evolution. We have deliberately removed uncertainties associated with star formation and feedback, thereby enabling us to place lower bounds on the time-scale for this process. We also contrast collapse simulations with results from simulations of initially stable discs and examine the impact of numerical parameters and assumptions on our work, to constrain possible systematics in our estimates. We find that cloud-collision viscous time-scales are in the range of 0.6–16 Gyr, considerably shorter than previously estimated. This large discrepancy can be understood in terms of how the efficiency of collisions is included in the analytical estimates. We find that the viscous time-scale only depends weakly on the number of clouds formed, and so while the viscous time-scale will increase with increasing resolution, this effect is too weak to alter our conclusions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".