# The Magellanic Stream and the density of coronal gas in the Galactic halo

## 1. Introduction

In current pictures of hierarchical galaxy formation, the initial collapse and continuing accretion of gas-rich fragments produces and maintains an extended halo of diffuse, hot gas surrounding the galaxy (White & Rees 1978; White & Frenk 1991). This gaseous halo fills the dark matter potential, and is roughly in hydrostatic equilibrium out to distances of order the virial radius. The inner, more dense regions cool through thermal brehmsstrahlung and slowly accrete into the central regions of galaxies. In the Milky Way, this scenario predicts gas at a temperature $`T_H10^6\mathrm{K}`$ at distances $`R\mathrm{}>50\mathrm{kpc}`$ from the Galactic center.

It is difficult to identify this gas directly from X-ray observations because of the difficulty in determining distances (Snowden 1998). Consequently, although it is clear that there is a diffuse background in the $`0.12.0`$-keV range, it is very difficult to determine how much of the emission is local (within a few hundred parsecs), from an extended halo or extragalactic in origin (Snowden 1998; Snowden et al. 1998). Although most of the emission at $`1/4`$-keV does arise locally (Snowden et al. 1998), most at $`3/4`$-keV does not. This component presumably contains emission originating in the Galactic halo and in extragalactic sources– however, the relative contributions are poorly constrained. Searches for extensive X-ray halos around local, late-type galaxies have also proved unsuccesful. Benson et al. (1999) examined archival ROSAT images of 3 nearby, massive spirals but detected no emission and established upper limits which are far below the predicted luminosities (White & Frenk 1991; Kauffman et al. 1993; Cole et al. 1994).

Given the difficulty of observing this gas directly, it it useful to infer its existence and properties indirectly. Some of the best evidence comes from the metal absorption lines associated with galaxies seen in quasar spectra (Bahcall & Spitzer 1999; Steidel 1998) and also seen in high-velocity clouds in the Milky Way (Sembach et al. 1999). The Magellanic Stream offers another potential probe of hot gas in the Milky Way halo. The Stream is a long HI filament, apparently trailing the Magellanic Clouds (Jones, Klemola & Lin 1994) and mostly confined to discrete clouds, which are very similar in properties to other high velocity clouds (Wakker & van Woerden 1997; Blitz et al. 1999). Because it will interact with ambient halo gas, its observable characteristics should constrain the properties of the diffuse medium.

Early on, Mathewson et al. (1977) proposed that the Magellanic Stream represents the turbulent wake of the Magellanic Clouds as they pass through a diffuse halo medium; however, Bregman (1979) identified a variety of observational and theoretical difficulties with this model and concluded that the tidal stripping model (Murai & Fujimoto 1980; Lin & Lynden-Bell 1982; Gardiner & Noguchi 1996, most recently) provides a better explanation. Moore & Davis (1994) modified the gas dynamic model to include stripping by an extended ionized disk and drag by a diffuse halo: their model matches the Stream kinematics well by incorporating drag from a diffuse gas distribution at $`50\mathrm{kpc}`$ that satisfies all known limits. However, the model remains controversial (e.g., Wakker & van Woerden 1997), so that inferences about halo gas properties are correspondingly uncertain.

In the present paper, we reconcile these competing views of Magellanic Stream formation and, in doing so, establish limits on the density of diffuse gas at the current distance of the Magellanic Clouds. In brief, we show that the motion of individual Stream clouds through ambient, ionized gas is dominated not by drag, but by strong heating from accretion. The accretion of ambient gas heats the cloud through thermalization of the bulk flow and through the ionic and electronic enthalpy of accreted gas. Weak radiative cooling leads to mass loss and cloud evaporation. Requiring cloud survival indicates that only the tidal stripping model for the Magellanic Stream is viable. Furthermore, the survival requirement places strong limits on the density of ionized gas in the halo. The constraint is roughly an order-of-magnitude lower than previously inferred. Discussion of the cloud-gas interaction and the survival constraint is presented in §2. The implications are examined in §3.

## 2. Limits on halo gas

The Magellanic Stream is concentrated primarily in a bead-like sequence of 6 discrete clouds at high Galactic latitude (Mathewson et al. 1977). The cloud MS IV is located near the ‘tip’ of the stream at $`\mathrm{}=80^o,b=70^o`$, roughly $`60^o`$ across the sky from the Magellanic Clouds (Cohen 1982). The mean HI column density $`N_H=6\times 10^{19}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ (Mathewson et al. 1977), which is intermediate between the denser clouds that lie close to the LMC and the more diffuse clouds at the very tip of the Stream. However, it is also rather centrally condensed with a peak column density of roughly $`1.3\times 10^{20}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ (Cohen 1982). The cloud has approximate HI mass $`M_c=4500(d/\mathrm{kpc})^2M_{}`$, radius $`R_c=15(d/\mathrm{kpc})\mathrm{pc}`$ and temperature $`T_c=10^4\mathrm{K}`$ as determined from the linewidths (Cohen 1982). Assuming a pure hydrogen cloud, the mass and radius give a mean number density $`n_c=0.27(50\mathrm{kpc}/d)\mathrm{cm}^3`$.

The kinematics and age of MS IV depend on the formation model. In the most recent tidal model (Gardiner & Noguchi 1996), the eccentrity of the Magellanic Clouds is relatively small, so that MS IV, having been tidally stripped at perigalacticon roughly $`1.5\mathrm{Gyr}`$ ago and following nearly the same orbit, would have a velocity of $`220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ at roughly $`50\mathrm{kpc}`$. In the gas drag model, Moore & Davis (1994) argue that the Stream was torn from the Magellanic Clouds during passage at $`65\mathrm{kpc}`$ through an extended, ionized portion of the Galactic disk roughly $`500\mathrm{Myr}`$ ago. From a momentum-conservation argument, they deduce an initial velocity of $`220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ after separation for MS IV. Additional drag from the ambient halo medium modifies the orbit to give the current radial velocity of $`140\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ with respect to the local standard of rest at a distance $`d20\mathrm{kpc}`$. The transverse velocity is unspecified but must be large ($`340\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$) because even a total velocity of $`300\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ implies that the orbital energy has diminished by $`10^{54}\mathrm{erg}`$ since separation. The dissipated energy heats the cloud, which has thermal energy $`E_c=3/2M_c/m_hkT_c10^{51}\mathrm{erg}`$ at $`20\mathrm{kpc}`$– roughly 0.1% of the input energy: the cloud must therefore evaporate. However, as the analysis below shows, if we adopt lower bounds on the velocity and age of MS IV, $`V_c=220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ and $`t=500\mathrm{Myr}`$, we obtain an upper limit on the gas density at $`50\mathrm{kpc}`$ which is lower than that required to give the drag in the Moore & Davis (1994) model.

In addition to the short evaporation timescale, it is difficult to accept the smaller distance to MS IV because, at $`50\mathrm{kpc}`$, the cloud temperature, mass and size put it approximately in virial equilibrium, which naturally explains its centrally condensed appearance. At $`20\mathrm{kpc}`$, the cloud should be unbound and rapidly expanding, unless confined by a strong external pressure.

The parameters of the halo gas at either distance are rather uncertain. Following current galaxy formation models (e.g., White & Frenk 1991), we assume that the gas is in quasi-hydrostatic equilibrium in the Galactic potential. The estimated temperature of the halo $`T_H=2.9\times 10^6\mathrm{K}`$ for an isothermal halo with rotation speed $`V_0=220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. This implies that the sound speed $`c_H=200\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. Halo gas at this distance may rotate with velocities on the order of $`1020\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ leading to a small reduction in its temperature or density. The rotation would have little influence on the Stream-gas interaction since gas rotation would be aligned with the disk while the Stream travels on a nearly polar orbit.

Previously, the density of halo gas has been estimated by Moore & Davis (1994) using a drag model to account for the kinematics of the Stream clouds. Matching the kinematics of the Stream requires a gas particle density $`n_H10^4\mathrm{cm}^3`$ at a distance of approximately $`50\mathrm{kpc}`$. As noted above, this approach neglects the energy input into the cloud as it snowplows though the halo medium<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1Although clouds have been modeled as blunt objects (e.g., Benjamin & Danly 1997), the boundary conditions are different. The no-slip and no-penetration boundary conditions are not applicable since the cloud is permeable. Magnetic fields do not prevent penetration and shear stress because of charge transfer.. As we will show below, heating dominates drag and cloud survival against evaporation sets a much stronger limit on the halo gas density. This argument is similar to that posed by Cowie & McKee (1976) in constraining the density of ionized gas in the intergalactic medium based on the timescale for conductive evaporation of neutral clouds.

### 2.1. Energy input and mass loss

In its rest frame, the total instantaneous internal energy of the cloud $`E_c=T+W`$, where $`T`$ is the total thermal energy and $`W`$ is the potential energy. The rate of change in energy is determined by energy input and loss:

$$\frac{dE_c}{dt}=\rho _Hv_HA(\frac{1}{2}v_H^2+\frac{5}{2}c_H^2)\mathrm{\Lambda }n_Hn_cV\dot{M}(\frac{1}{2}u^2+\frac{5}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }c^2)+\dot{W}.$$
(1)   
The first term on the right-hand side gives the energy input through the projected surface area $`A=\pi R_c^2`$ of the cloud’s leading edge from halo gas with density $`\rho _H`$, streaming velocity $`v_H`$ and sound speed $`c_H`$; the second term gives the inelastic cooling rate with reaction rate $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the volume $`V`$ at the cloud surface where halo gas at density $`n_H`$ mixes with cloud material at mean density $`n_c`$; the third term gives the cooling from cloud mass loss at surface velocity $`u`$ and change in enthalpy $`5\mathrm{\Delta }c^2/2`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }c^2`$ is the change in the square of the cloud sound speed; the last term gives the rate of change of the potential energy<sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2Since $`W=𝑑𝐫\rho \mathrm{\Phi }`$, $`\dot{W}=𝑑𝐫[\dot{\rho }\mathrm{\Phi }+\rho \dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}]`$. Generally, when the cloud loses mass, $`\dot{\rho }<0`$ and $`\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}>0`$ while $`\rho >0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }<0`$, so that $`\dot{W}>0`$.

In a steady state, $`\dot{E}_c0`$ (e.g., Cowie & McKee 1977). As we discuss below, the protons carry roughly 2/3 of the incident energy: all of the energy of bulk flow and half of the enthalpy, which is of the same order. However, at these energies ($`100\mathrm{eV}`$), proton collisions with cloud HI are dominated by charge transfer: inelastic losses are negligible<sup>3</sup><sup>3</sup>3Charge transfer at these relative velocities redistributes particle momentum and energy, rather than creating photons (Janev et al. 1987).. Therefore, neglecting $`\dot{W}`$ heating, we obtain the steady-state mass loss rate

$$\dot{M}=\frac{\rho _Hv_HA(\frac{1}{2}v_H^2+\frac{5}{2}c_H^2)}{\frac{1}{2}u^2+\frac{5}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }c^2}.$$
(2)   
The mass loss rate is equal to the accretion rate times the ratio of specific energy input to specific energy outflow. The outflow velocity $`uv_e`$, the surface escape velocity of the cloud in the tidal field. A typical cloud is loosely bound so that $`v_ev_{therm}`$, the thermal velocity of the cloud. The change in enthalpy is of the same order. For MS IV, this implies that the evaporated mass leaves the cloud with $`u10\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ and $`T2\times 10^4\mathrm{K}`$. Figure 1 shows the mass loss rate for various combinations of relative velocity and ambient gas density. For the minimum relative velocity $`v_H=220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ and age $`t=500\mathrm{Myr}`$ defined above, $`n_H<10^5\mathrm{cm}^3`$ in order for the cloud to survive.

Fig. 1  Cloud mass loss rates (upper panel) and corresponding lifetimes (lower panel) as a function of relative velocity for different halo densities. The horizontal line in the lower panel shows the $`500\mathrm{Myr}`$ cutoff. Lifetimes shorter than this are unlikely.

Mass loss is not spherically symmetric as in the evaporation of cold clouds embedded in a hot, diffuse medium (Cowie & Mckee 1977; Balbus & Mckee 1982; Draine & Giuliani 1984). Here the halo gas strongly heats the cloud at the leading edge causing outflow along this surface and ablation of material from the poles (Murali 1999); the interaction is analogous to that of comets with the solar wind, also referred to as a mass loaded flow (Biermann et al. 1967; Wallis & Ong 1975; Galeev et al. 1985). Since the flow of halo gas is roughly supersonic, a bow shock may form; however, the shock will be very weak and approximately at or interior to the leading edge of the cloud because of cooling from mass loading (Wallis & Ong 1975). Nevertheless, the morphology may be detectable through sensitive X-ray or EUV observations.

### 2.2. Accretion and drag

Accretion of mass and momentum has only a small effect on the cloud even though energy accretion is significant. The mass accretion rate

$$\dot{M}_{acc}=\rho _Hv_HA,$$
(3)   
while the momentum accretion rate

$$\dot{P}_{acc}=\rho _Hv_H^2A.$$
(4)   
Note that momentum transfer from accretion is equivalent to drag with drag coefficent $`C_D=2`$. At $`v_H=220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ and $`n_H=10^4\mathrm{cm}^3`$, the mass accretion rate $`\dot{M}=9.0\times 10^4M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$. For an accretion time of $`5\times 10^8\mathrm{yr}`$ and neglecting mass loss, the cloud accretes $`5\times 10^5M_{}`$– roughly 5% of its initial mass. Momentum transfer through accretion reduces the velocity by roughly $`10\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. For $`n_H<10^5\mathrm{cm}^3`$, changes in mass and momentum are entirely negligible.

### 2.3. Thermalization and cooling

Collisions between incident protons and electrons in the inflowing halo gas and target HI in the cloud thermalize the flow and lead to some excitation and radiative cooling. Estimates of the relevant rates can be obtained by considering the cross-sections or reaction rates for collisions between the incident and target particles given their densities and typical relative velocity. Because the halo gas is so diffuse, $`H^+e^{}`$ scattering is unimportant: $`HH^+`$ and $`He^{}`$ collisions dominate.

Momentum transfer through charge exchange between protons and neutral hydrogen atoms thermalizes the halo gas flow at the leading edge of the cloud. Recent plasma calculations by Krstić & Schultz (1998) give momentum transfer cross-sections $`\sigma _{mt}`$ at the appropriate energies using the standard method of partial wave expansions to determine scattering amplitudes (e.g., Landau & Lifschitz 1977). For relative velocities $`v_H200\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ or relative energies $`100\mathrm{eV}`$, $`\sigma _{mt}10^{15}10^{16}\mathrm{cm}^2`$. Thus the mean free path into the cloud $`\lambda =1/n_c\sigma _{mt}10^{16}\mathrm{cm}`$ for $`n_c0.25\mathrm{cm}^3`$.

Cooling does little to balance the energy input into the cloud. Janev et al. (1987) provides a compendium of thermal reaction rates $`\sigma v_{rel}`$ as a function of relative energy for excitation, ionization and recombination (inelastic processes) in a wide range of atomic, electronic and ionic collisions. Examining these rates shows that radiation arises purely from collisions between electrons in the inflowing halo gas and neutral hydrogen atoms in the cloud. For $`HH^+`$ collisions in a hydrogen plasma at $`T=10^4\mathrm{K}=1\mathrm{eV}`$ with $`v_H=200\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, the reaction rate for any inelastic excitation from ground-state is less than $`3\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{s}^1`$ (Janev et al. 1987, pp 115-136), which is entirely negligible. Thus, since the halo gas is so diffuse and energy transfer between electrons and protons is minimal, all the proton energy (roughly 2/3 of the total) in the bulk flow heats the cloud; only electron-neutral collisions can produce radiation.

For ground-state excitation and ionization by electrons under these conditions, reaction rates are below $`5\times 10^8\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{s}^1`$ (Janev pp. 18-31). Recombination rates are considerably lower: $`\sigma v_{rel}<10^{13}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{s}^1`$ (Janev pp. 32-33) and cannot be important even after thermalization to the outflow temperature of $`1\mathrm{eV}`$. Thus for densities of incident particles $`n_H10^4\mathrm{cm}^3`$ and target particles $`n_c0.25\mathrm{cm}^3`$ with mean relative velocity of order the electron thermal velocity $`v_e`$, which is given by the mean energy $`100\mathrm{eV}`$, the energy lost to inelastic processes

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }n_Hn_cV=n_HN_c\underset{i}{}\sigma v_{rel}_i\mathrm{h}\overline{\nu }A<10^{36}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1,$$
(5)   
where $`V=A\lambda `$ and $`N_c=n_c\lambda `$, the neutral column density in the mixing layer. The sum over $`i`$ includes the dominant processes: excitation from $`n=1n=2(s,p)`$, from $`n=1n=3`$ and ionization from $`n=1`$ (Janev et al. 1987, pp. 18-27) at a temperature of $`100\mathrm{eV}`$. We take $`\mathrm{h}\overline{\nu }=10\mathrm{eV}`$ and ignore electron cooling (which reduces the amount of radiation produced) over the mean-free path of the protons in the cloud; therefore the loss rate is an upper limit. After cooling, electrons drop to the thermal velocity of the outflowing gas; the combination of velocity and density are too low to permit any additional inelastic cooling. While the radiation rate is substantial, it is considerably lower than the total rate of energy input into the cloud, which is of order $`10^{38}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$. Although Weiner & Williams (1996) propose that H$`\alpha `$ from the leading edge of MS IV can be produced collisionally when $`n_H10^4\mathrm{cm}^3`$, the rate estimated here is considerably lower than measured. This in turn suggests that escaping UV photons from the Galactic disk produce the H$`\alpha `$ emission through ionization and recombination (Bland-Hawthorn & Maloney 1999) or possibly through fluorescence.

## 3. Evolution of halo gas

In current scenarios of galaxy formation, gas in galactic halos should cool interior to some radius $`r_c`$ which increases with time (e.g., White & Rees 1978; Mo & Miralda-Escudé 1996). For circular velocity $`V_0=220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, $`r_c250\mathrm{kpc}`$ at the current time. However, given the lack of evidence for cooling flows, it is expected that gas within $`r_c`$ is heated into a constant entropy core (Mo & Miralda-Escudé 1996; Pen 1999), so that, for $`r<r_c`$, the halo gas density

$$\rho _H(r)=\rho _H(r_c)\left[1\frac{4}{5}\mathrm{ln}(r/r_c)\right]^{3/2}.$$
(6)   
where $`\rho _H(r_c)=f_gV_0^2/4\pi Gr_c^2`$, and $`f_g`$ is the fraction of the total halo mass density in gas. If $`f_g`$ equals the Universal baryon fraction, then $`f_g0.05`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1`$ and $`f_g0.15`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.3`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ denotes the ratio of total mass density to closure density of the Universe. The constraint on the density derived here suggests that $`f_g\mathrm{}<5\times 10^3`$. Within the context of this density model, this discrepancy with the Universal fraction leads to the possibility that a considerable amount of gas has cooled and formed stars or dark matter (Mo & Miralda-Escudé 1996) or has been expelled by strong heating (e.g., Field & Perronod 1977; Pen 1999). Ultimately, however, it is not clear that this model properly describes the gas distribution in galactic halos.

## 4. Summary

We have re-examined the interaction of the Magellanic Stream with ambient gas at large distances in the Galactic halo. Our analysis shows that heating dominates over drag. Therefore, because of their high relative velocities, clouds are prone to evaporation if the ambient gas density is too large. In particular, the requirement that MS IV survives for $`500\mathrm{Myr}`$ at $`220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ imposes the limit on the density of halo gas at $`50\mathrm{kpc}`$: $`n_H<10^5\mathrm{cm}^3`$. This upper limit is roughly an order-of-magnitude lower than the density determined from the drag model of Moore & Davis (1994), and does not concur with current models of the gas distribution in galactic halos.

I am grateful to Mineo Kimura, Hiro Tawara, Predrag Krstić, Neal Katz, Gary Ferland and Ira Wasserman for discussion, numerous helpful suggestions and providing data. I am also indebted to the referee for very constructive criticism. This work was supported by NSERC.