
Cambridge Large Two 3
essential parameters can be calculated over concentric circles to
obtain the radially averaged profiles of the essential parameters.
On the other hand, if the structure had elongated, an average
would have to be performed over successive ellipses (with a
fixed aspect ratio and position angle). From the line fitting
using pyspeckit code, we obtain the column density map of
ammonia emission in the L1517B core, which is shown in
the left panel of Fig. 2. Using this distribution, we obtain
the radially averaged profile of column density in the core.
Here, we would also like to point out that, we consider the
peak position of the dust continuum emission as the centre of
the core. This is because the peak of dust and the peak of H
2
column density match well in this core (Megías et al. 2023).
And for converting the angular scale into the physical distance
on the plane of the sky, we take 159 pc distance of the L1517B
core (Galli et al. 2019). Right panel of Fig. 2represents the
radially averaged column density profile. From this figure, it
indicates that the peak column density of NH
3
is
∼
10
15
cm
–2
and decreases towards the outer edge. We also note that the
distance where the column density decreases by a factor of 2
of its peak value is at radius ∼0.016 pc.
4.2 Spectral properties across the core
In Fig. 3, we show the spectra of NH
3
(1,1) and (2,2) lines
towards different positions inside the core. For example, we
show the spectra towards the dust peak position. Similarly, we
also plot the spectra towards the peaks of NH
3
(1,1) and (2,2)
emissions. Here, it is interesting to note that the blue-skewed
profile that is observed in the (1,1) spectra is not due to the col-
lapse (Myers et al. 1996) or any other cloud dynamics (Evans
1999), rather it is the intrinsic closely separated lines caused
by the hyperfine splitting. Here, we would like to point out
that all the calibrated data and the pyspeckit results are obtained
from the original data. No hanning smoothing has been per-
formed in the entire analysis except for these spectra in Fig. 3.
As a simple matter of making the spectra more visible, we use
the CASA viewer task to smooth the spectra in Fig. 3.
Now, we discuss the Left panel of Fig. 4, where we show
the velocity field across the region. From this figure, it appears
that there is an indication of overall velocity gradient from
north-east to south-west direction. This might be caused due
to the rotational motion of the core. However, the exact pat-
tern is more complex than a continuous increase or decrease
in velocity of equal magnitude. Velocity gradient across the
core was noticed in the earlier single-dish observations with
the NH
3
(1,1) and N
2
H
+
(1-0) lines where the fields of view
were larger than our study (Goodman et al. 1993; Tafalla et
al. 2004a; Chitsazzadeh 2014). Right panel of Fig. 4shows the
overplot of the local velocity gradient and velocity field across
the region. Here, in the color plot we subtract the systematic
velocity of the core (+ 5.79 km sec
–1
) from the velocity field.
Now, in order to measure the overall velocity gradient, we
first calculate the velocity gradient at each position and finally
obtain the overall gradient in this region. Detailed discussion
regarding the calculation of local and overall velocity gradient
is mentioned in Appendix 1. From the analysis, we obtain the
overall velocity gradient,
ψ∼
1.10 km sec
–1
pc
–1
and direction,
θˆ
ψ∼
127
◦
west of north. This value is similar to the earlier
single-dish observations studied by Goodman et al. 1993 and
Tafalla et al. 2004a, where the measured values were 1.52 and
1.10 km sec
–1
pc
–1
respectively. However, this value is one
order smaller than the L1544 core, where the value is
∼
9.0
km sec
–1
pc
–1
based on the interferometric (VLA) observations
of NH3(1,1) and (2,2) lines (Crapsi et al. 2007).
If there is a strict continuous velocity gradient of equal magni-
tude across the region, it is possible to conclude strongly that
the region is rotating. However, in our region, both visually
and in terms of the magnitude of the overall velocity gradient,
it appears to be a rotation, despite not meeting the strict criteria
of smooth and continuous velocity variation. It is also true
that there are many challenges associated with the analysis and
fitting of real astronomical data. Consequently, obtaining a
smooth variation of velocity across the region is extremely
difficult. Therefore, in the following, we calculate the ratio of
rotational energy to gravitational potential energy, assuming
that the velocity gradient is the cause of rotation. This enables
us to gain a rough understanding of the role of rotation in this
region if the overall velocity gradient is caused by the rotation.
The parameter
β
, which is the ratio of the rotational energy
to the gravitational energy (Goodman et al. 1993) is defined
by the formula:
β=
1
2Iω2
qGM2
R
=1
2
p
q
ω2R3
GM (1)
Here, Iis the moment of inertia,
ω
is the angular velocity,
Gis the gravitational constant, Mis the mass, Ris the radius of
the core, pand qare unit-less numbers, which vary depending
on the geometry and the density profile of the system (Kauff-
mann, Pillai, and Goldsmith 2013). The value of (
p
q
) is 0.66 for
a constant density sphere. However, when the density profile
varies as r
–2
with fixed Mand R, this value is 0.22, which is
one third of the earlier one (see Appendix 2). From the fitting
of observed continuum emission, Tafalla et al. (2004a) showed
that the number density of this core is not constant rather fol-
lows a power law: n(r) =
n0
1+( r
r0)2.5
. Here, ris the radial distance,
n
0
= 2.2
×
10
5
cm
–3
and r
0
= 35.00
′′
or 0.027 pc. Since we
are only analyzing the central 0.025 pc region inside the core,
we consider
p
q
= 0.66 for our analysis, which will not lead to
a significant difference in the result. Likewise, we consider
only the enclosed mass within the radius of 0.025 pc. From
the work of Benson and Myers 1989, the mass of the core
is
∼
0.50
M⊙
, where it was assumed a radius of
∼
0.068 pc
(assuming 159 pc distance) based on the observation of NH
3
(1,1) line. Now, according to the power-law of density (r
–2.5
),
the mass enclosed in a radius of 0.025 pc is
∼
0.30
M⊙
. Fur-
thermore, the value of
ω
is obtained from
ψ
after considering
the inclination angle (i) of
ω
to the line-of-sight. However,
for a single measurement, we have not taken into account this
statistical correction. This correction factor is small and will