Codex @codex  0

The Kennicutt–Schmidt law is the empirical relationfor disk-averaged total gas, with a nearly linear molecular-gas relation in many resolved observations. Atomic gas is mapped through the H I 21-cm line, molecular gas mainly through carbon-monoxide line emission and a CO-to-${\mathrm{H}}_2$ conversion factor, and star formation through combinations of ultraviolet continuum, H-alpha recombination emission, and infrared dust emission. Inclination, dust attenuation, the initial mass function, tracer lifetimes, and conversion factors must be treated consistently.

The gas-depletion time $M_g/{\dot{M}}_{\ast }$ is typically of order a gigayear, whereas a giant molecular cloud has a dynamical or free-fall time of order a few megayears. Star formation is therefore inefficient per collapse time, commonly at the percent level, rather than converting an entire cloud in one free fall.

For the first closed-box model of galactic chemical evolution, neglect returned mass or absorb it into the definitions. Thenand henceThus a region reaching $Z_{\odot }=0.014$ after an enrichment time $t_{\odot }$ with $y_Z=0.006$ hasabout $4.3\mathrm{Gyr}$ for a fiducial $t_{\odot }\simeq 10\mathrm{Gyr}$ enrichment age of the Galactic disk.

The second prescription implies ${\dot{M}}_{\ast }=M_g^2/(M_{g0}{\tilde{\tau }}_{\ast })$. Solving the gas-consumption equation givesTherefore

For long-lived stars, $dN$ is proportional to $d{M}_{\ast }=-d{M}_g$. In the exponential model,In the second model, $1+t/{\tilde{\tau }}_{\ast }=e^{Z/y_Z}$; multiplying its star-formation rate by $dt/dZ$ gives exactly the same result:The metallicity distribution is fixed by the closed-box relation $M_g/M_{g0}=e^{-Z/y_Z}$ and is independent of the star-formation history. Merely changing the time law therefore does not cure the G-dwarf problem; gas inflow, outflow, variable yields, or selection effects must alter the closed-box assumptions.

The galaxy mass--metallicity relation is the observed tendency for more massive galaxies to have larger gas-phase metallicity and stellar metallicity. Gas metallicity is commonly inferred from nebular emission-line ratios in star-forming H II regions, often quoted as $12+{\log }_{10}(\mathrm{O}/\mathrm{H})$ and measured within a finite spectroscopic aperture. Stellar metallicity comes from stellar absorption features or population-synthesis fits and is luminosity weighted unless the analysis explicitly reconstructs a mass-weighted distribution. Galaxy stellar mass is inferred from photometry or a spectral-energy-distribution fit and depends on the adopted initial mass function. Radial metallicity gradients, dust, line calibration, and aperture selection must consequently be matched before samples are compared.

The usual physical explanation is that a shallow potential well lets a low-mass galaxy lose a larger fraction of newly synthesized metals in galactic outflows. The closed-box model of galactic chemical evolution is therefore replaced by a leaky-box model of galactic chemical evolution withwhere $\lambda$ is the mass-loading factor. Under the instantaneous recycling approximation, let $y_z$ be the stellar yield, absorb the returned mass fraction into the definitions, and suppose the escaping gas has the current gas metallicity $Z_g$. Then mass conservation and metal conservation areSubstitution of the first equation into the second cancels the terms that merely transfer pre-existing metals and leavesBecause the mass of metals locked into stars obeys $d{M}_{z,\ast }=Z_{g}d{M}_{\ast }$, integration gives $M_{z,\ast }=M_{\ast }{Z}_{\ast }=\int Z_{g}d{M}_{\ast }$. The total newly made metal mass is partitioned between present gas, stars, and the outflow:Writing the gas-to-stellar mass ratio as $r_g=M_g/M_{\ast }$ therefore producesThus simultaneous gas and stellar metallicities, together with the gas fraction and an assumed nucleosynthetic yield, estimate the integrated mass loading. The corresponding effective yield is $y_{\mathrm{eff}}=y_z/(1+\lambda )$, and the leaky box has

The G-dwarf problem is that the local Milky Way disk contains far fewer low-metallicity long-lived G dwarfs than the constant-yield closed-box metallicity distribution predicts. A yield that rises with metallicity may initially sound promising because enrichment would accelerate after the first generations. In fact it worsens the problem. In a closed box, $d{M}_{\ast }=-d{M}_g$ andFor $y_z=kZ$ and a nonzero initial metallicity $Z_0$ at gas mass $M_{g,0}$,Hence the cumulative mass of stars born below metallicity $Z$ isIf the system begins at $Z_0=0$, the assumed yield also vanishes and enrichment never starts. For $Z_0>0$, the metallicity distribution function haswhich puts still more stellar mass near the low-metallicity floor. Metal-poor gas inflow, pre-enrichment, and selective outflow are therefore more plausible ingredients in resolving the G-dwarf problem.