Search

Context. Sensitive radio continuum data could remove the difference between the number of known supernova remnants (SNRs) in the Galaxy compared to that expected, but due to confusion in the Galactic plane, faint SNRs can be challenging to distinguish from brighter HII regions and filamentary radio emission. Aims. We wish to exploit new SARAO MeerKAT 1.3 GHz Galactic Plane Survey (SMGPS) radio continuum data, which covers $251\deg \le l \le 358\deg$ and $2\deg \le l \le 61\deg$ at $|b|\le 1.5\deg$, to search for SNR candidates in the Milky Way disk. Methods. We also use MIR data from the Spitzer GLIMPSE, Spitzer MIPSGAL, and WISE surveys to help identify SNR candidates. The identified SNR candidate are sources of extended radio continuum emission that lack MIR counterparts, are not known as HII regions in the WISE Catalog of Galactic HII Regions, and are not known previously as SNRs Results. We locate 237 new Galactic SNR candidates in the SMGPS data. We also identify and confirm the expected radio morphology for 201 objects listed in the literature as being SNRs and 130 previously-identified SNR candidates. The known and candidate SNRs have similar spatial distributions and angular sizes. Conclusions. The SMGPS data allowed us to identify a large population of SNR candidates that can be confirmed as true SNRs using radio polarization measurements or by deriving radio spectral indices. If the 237 candidates are confirmed as true SNRs, it would approximately double the number of known Galactic SNRs in the survey area, alleviating much of the difference between the known and expected populations., Comment: Accepted by A&A. Images and FITS files of each source can be found here: https://doi.org/10.48479/0n8c-5q84

Whether any OB stars form in isolation is a question central to theories of massive star formation. To address this, we search for tiny, sparse clusters around 210 field OB stars from the Runaways and Isolated O-Type Star Spectroscopic Survey of the SMC (RIOTS4), using friends-of-friends (FOF) and nearest neighbors (NN) algorithms. We also stack the target fields to evaluate the presence of an aggregate density enhancement. Using several statistical tests, we compare these observations with three random-field datasets, and we also compare the known runaways to non-runaways. We find that the local environments of non-runaways show higher aggregate central densities than for runaways, implying the presence of some "tips-of-iceberg" (TIB) clusters. We find that the frequency of these tiny clusters is low, $\sim 4-5\%$ of our sample. This fraction is much lower than some previous estimates, but is consistent with field OB stars being almost entirely runaway and walkaway stars. The lack of TIB clusters implies that such objects either evaporate on short timescales, or do not form, implying a higher cluster lower-mass limit and consistent with a relationship between maximum stellar mass ($m_{\rm max}$) and the mass of the cluster ($M_{\rm cl}$). On the other hand, we also cannot rule out that some OB stars may form in highly isolated conditions. Our results set strong constraints on the formation of massive stars in relative isolation., Comment: 24 pages, 13 figures, Accepted to ApJ

The aim of this analysis was to determine whether or not the given error bars truly represented the dispersion of values in a historical compilation of two cosmological parameters: the amplitude of mass fluctuations ($\sigma_8$) and Hubble's constant ($H_0$) parameters in the standard cosmological model. For this analysis, a chi-squared test was executed on a compiled list of past measurements. It was found through analysis of the chi-squared ($\chi^2$) values of the data that for $\sigma_8$ (60 data points measured between 1993 and 2019 and $\chi^2$ between 182.4 and 189.0) the associated probability Q is extremely low, with $Q = 1.6 \times 10^{-15}$ for the weighted average and $Q = 8.8 \times 10^{-15}$ for the best linear fit of the data. This was also the case for the $\chi^2$ values of $H_0$ (163 data points measured between 1976 and 2019 and $\chi^2$ between 480.1 and 575.7), where $Q = 1.8 \times 10^{-33}$ for the linear fit of the data and $Q = 1.0 \times 10^{-47}$ for the weighted average of the data. The general conclusion was that the statistical error bars associated with the observed parameter measurements have been underestimated or the systematic errors were not properly taken into account in at least 20\% of the measurements. The~fact that the underestimation of error bars for $H_0$ is so common might explain the apparent 4.4$\sigma$ discrepancy formally known today as the Hubble tension., Comment: 21 pages, 5 figures, published in Universe, special issue 5th anniversary