AST3002F Literature Review

Interstellar Dust Grain Alignment

Chloe Sole, SLXCHL001

June 4, 2017

Introduction
The interstellar medium (ISM)
is the name given to the very
low density matter which oc-
cupies the space between stars
and galaxies. When the ISM
gravitationally collapses it even-
tually forms stars. The con-
stituents of the ISM are 99%
gases and the remaining 1% is
dust. Dust grains in space
are typically assumed to be-
ing conglomerations of silicates,
graphite and polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons, [1].
Focusing on the dust portion
of the ISM we see some interest-
ing observations of alignment in
the dust grains. This alignment
that we see causes a polarization
in the light which we receive on
earth, [2].
Figure 1: Figure showing the polarization (P) as being de-
pendent on extinction (A ) and being bounded by equation Background and
1. This figure is in the optical/near infrared ranges of wave- Theory
lengths, [1].
In 1949 interstellar polarization
was discovered by W. A. Hiltner and J. S. Hall, [3]. Polarization of light refers to how the light
we receive from the universe is aligned. Hiltner recognised straight away that it was due to the
dichroic extinction of starlight due to magnetically aligned dust grains, [3]. Dichroic extinction
refers to having different absorption coefficients for light polarized in different directions. As per
usual we expect that for each type of extinction there is the complementary emission. In this case
the polarized emission was predicted by Stein in 1966.

1
 Serkowski and others compared the level
of polarization (P%) with the column den-
sity of dust (A ), refer to figure 1. This com-
parison showed that the level of polarization
is bounded, by the line defined by equation
1, (Kim, Martin 1994).

P/A < 3% mag 1 (1)

The distribution we see in figure 1
differs so widely below the boundary
due to different environments. De-
spite this wherever we look in the uni-
verse the upper envelope of the distri-
bution is universally constant (Serkowski
1975).

We are also able deduce the connection

between the magnetic fields in the universe
and the polarization we measure by compar-
ing the vector orientation of the polarization
and of synchrotron radiation. Synchrotron
radiation is known to be perpendicular to Figure 2: Image of NGC 891 showing the polar-
the projected magnetic field therefore we can ization orientation vectors in blue as being perpen-
deduce that the polarization is in line with dicular to the synchrotron radiation (yellow bars)
the projected magnetic field, refer to figure implying that the magnetic flied lines are parallel
2. This comes from the fact that our ob- to the polarization, [1].
served polarization orientation vectors are
perpendicular to the synchrotron radiation in the observed area. This deduction has been con-
firmed multiple times by many different observations over the years. The relationship between the
polarization and the magnetic field indicates that the process by which the grains are aligned is
linked to the magnetic field in some way and that the orientation of the grains with respect to the
magnetic field causes the polarization of the light, refer to figure 3.

The presence of this magnetic field was shown to having a significant affect on the earliest
phases of star formation, (2009 by Crutcher, Hakobian & Troland). Knowing the simple relation
between the polarization orientation and the magnetic fields provides a handy tool for analyzing
star forming regions and their magnetic fields easily.

The first theory to attempt at explaining grain alignment with the magnetic field was proposed
by Spitzer and Tukey in 1949, ................, and required the grains to be ferromagnetic. The pro-
posed mechanism for alignment was the equivalence of how a compass needle aligns itself with the
Earths magnetic field. However this was proven incorrect as with grains with temperatures typical
of the ISM, the interstellar magnetic fields needed to be significantly greater. Since that first theory,
there have been many amendments and enhancements to accommodate other different affects, such
as alignment of elongated dust grains with the systematic flow of particles.

For dust grains to be aligned to create significant interstellar polarization two conditions must
be met - grains must have their angular momentum vectors aligned in space and the angular
momentum vectors of the grains must be aligned with a main grain axis (internal alignment), [1].
Understandably we need the processes which drive the randomization of grain orientation to have

2
a significantly smaller affect than the processes driving alignment. These processes are not well
observationally constrained and so we resort to purely theory.
Theory implies that out of all possible
processes which drive randomization - for
large grains in a neutral gas - randomiza-
tion is dominated by collisions between gas
molecules and the grains. For alignment
the processes are dominated by relaxation
through the Barnet effect (Purcell 1979)
and nuclear relaxation (Lazarian & Draine
1999).

The Barnett effect refers to the ac-

Figure 3: Schematic indicating how unpolarized
light which moves through a region of space in
which dust grains are aligned to a magnetic field
exit the region polarized, [2].
quisition of a magnetic moment for an
uncharged body when its spun on its
axis. This magnetization occurs due
to the energy difference of an electron
spin being parallel or anti-parallel to the
grains rotational axis. This difference
is proportional to the angular velocity
of the grain, which is larger for smaller
grains.

Figure 4: Diagram showing how the angular momentum axis (J) precesses around the external
magnetic field (B), Larmor Precession. Because the alignment torque (F) is perpendicular to J,
the precession of the grain results in the average value of F approaching zero as J approaches B (0
and are stationary points), [1].

Radiative grain alignment finds its roots in the asymmetry of the extinction cross-sections of
a irregular dust grain. Consequently the grain experiences torques which drives an increases in

3

Figure 5: The extinction curve of the Milky Way,
the solid black line being the galactic average.
The distinct sharp bump around 2175 A can be
attributed to the dust grain population. Because
this bump is so small we understand this as an
indication of how the dust grain size of the dust
population is bounded into two discrete popula-
tions, [4].
Figure 6: The wavelength dependent polarization curve for a) the UV/Optical and b) the far
infrared millimeter wavelength ranges, [1].
4
angular momentum. This increased spin-
ning, due to the torques, results in the ac-
quisition of an internal magnetization. This
spinning magnetized grain, in the presence of
an external magnetic field, precesses around
the external magnetic field direction, refer to
figure 4.
Observations
The polarization of starlight which we see,
allows us to infer physical constraints on the
dust grains, such as grain size. The gen-
eral grain size distribution can be estimated
from the UV-Optical extinction curve, fig-
ure 5, and the emission curve in the mid-
infrared and the far infrared, figure . From
these curves the resulting modeled grain size
distribution consists of large grains (around
0.01-1 m) and very small grains (of around
0.001- 0.01 m). Grains smaller than 0.05
micrometers are typically unaligned. We can
also infer constraints on the alignment dis-
tribution from the wavelength dependent po-
larization curve, figure 6a. We can see that
the smaller grains are typically unaligned
and that the grain alignment is directly re-
lated to the extinction in the visual wave-
length ranges. These conclusions can be reached by fitting the wavelength dependent polarization
curve to the Serkowski relation, equation 2.
2 (
p() = pmax eKln max /)
(2)

Where pmax is the maximum amount of polarization at wavelength max and K representing
the width of the curve. K being relatively small indicates that a limited number of grains contribute
to the polarization (smaller grains do not contribute to the polarization as they are not aligned).
K is fitted for each line of sight once again indicating that the distribution of polarization differs
with environments.

From looking at the far infrared millimeter wave polarization spectrum, figure 6b, we can see
that there is a noticeable dip in the polarization around the middle (100 350m) Vaillancourt
indicated that this cannot be described by a single dust grain population (Vaillancourt et al. 2002).
His preferred model is one where the two populations differ in temperature and the warmer dust
is better aligned (Vaillancourt et al. 2008).

Figure 7: Table indicating where observations have been tested against theoretical grain alignment
mechanisms. Green plus signs indicate agreement between theory and observation, red minus signs
indicate a contradiction and gray boxes indicate that the results were inconclusive, [1].

In figure 7 we can see a table comparing observations to the main consequential theories on
the grain alignment mechanism. The theories included in the table are Davis-Greenstein (DG),
Superparamagnetism, Suprathermal, Mechanical and Radiative-alignment torque (RAT) theory.

The DG theory for alignment was the first theory of consequence after the first attempt at
explaining grain alignment was made by Spitzer and Tukey in 1949. In DG the mechanism wherein
the loss of the magnetization energy aligns the spin axis of the grain with the external magnetic
field. This theory relied on paramagnetic alignment which increases in efficiency with decreasing
grain size. The DG theory failed to include ferromagnetic sub-grains or grains with much higher
energies than the local energy. Hence Superparamagnetism and Suprathermal were added as a
correction to the DG theory to ensure ferromagnetic grain and high energy grain inclusion. The
Superparamagnetism correction relies on the grains having a stronger magnetic susceptibility de-
spite this not being the typical case for dust grains in the ISM.

5
 The mechanical theory claims that the continual systematic movement of particles past a dust
grain results in the grain experiencing many torques forcing it to align its spin axis perpendicular
to the movement of the particles. This theory considers alignment being independent of magnetic
fields and being purely due to the local flow of particles. This theory has been essentially entirely
contradicted by observation.

Radiative alignment torque theory relies on relaxation via the Barnett effect and further align-
ment by continual radiative torques due to Larmor precession, figure 4.

It has been shown by a number of people that the efficiency of paramagnetic alignment in-
creases with decreasing grain size. RAT is currently the most preferred explanation because it has
been the most consistent with observation, refer to figure 7. RAT becomes less effective at small
grain sizes and for sufficiently small grains paramagnetic alignment becomes the dominant process.
Despite this the theory which relies on paramagnetic alignment as the mechanism for alignment
(DG) remains incomplete for very small grains as it ignores Barnett magnetization.

Now if we focus on the temperature dependent observations of the dust grain alignment. Based
on the fundamental thermodynamic arguments it has been shown that with thermal energy, angular
momenta can only become aligned via paramagnetic alignment if the gas population has a different
temperature to the dust population.

What we observe is that the temperature of the gas population is typically higher and more
varied as a function of opacity than the dust grain population. However reaching extinction of
5-10mag, models indicate that the temperatures of the gas and dust populations should equalize.
Hence at large opacities paramagnetic alignment fails. If paramagnetic alignment was the dominant
process for alignment then we should not see alignment at large opacities where your temperatures
are equal. Observations have contradicted this and hence support the radiative alignment torque
theory over paramagnetism. These observations agree with RAT is our dominant process for the
grain alignment mechanism.

Conclusions
From observation, figure 7, we can clearly see that RAT theory for the grain alignment mechanism
more accurately describes what we observe. Despite this paramagnetism (DG) is still taught as one
of the primary mechanisms for alignment as it may be the dominant process for the smaller grains.

From our temperature-dependent observations we can conclude that, in overall, paramagnetism

cannot be the dominant process for grain alignment and that our observations are, again, best
described by RAT.

References
[1] A. Lazarian B-G Andersson and John E. Vaillancourt. Interstellar dust grain alignment. Annual
Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics.

[2] B-G Andersson. Dust grain alignment in the interstellar medium., 2017.

[3] Hiltner WA. Science 109:165, 1949b.

[4] Caltech. Dust in active galactic nuclei - a. li., 2017.