706

~-----------------------------------lETTERSTQNATUR£ ----------------~N~A~
Tu~R~E~v
~o~L~
-~3t~6~
22~A~u~o~u~
sT~
t9~
ss

Fig. l Real-time display of four scanning

channels on a TV monitor (geometric distor-
tions making the rings non circular are due to
the monitor itself) . Each channel has been
exposed 500 s. 21 channels insured a complete
coverage of the field (clockwise from upper left
are channel l, 6, ll and 16). The brighter inter-
ference rings are due to geo-coronal Ha
emission (the innnermost one on channel I)
and OH 6,569 A night-sky line (the second one
from centre on channel 1). The Ha emission
of the SMC-LMC bridge appears as a faint ring
surrounding to two bright rings of airglow on
channel I . Then one can see the diameter of
the interference rings increasing while the inter-
ferometer is scanning from channel! to 21. The
Ha emission of the bridge appears as a large
faint ring together with a small central spot on
channel 6, a small central ring on channel 11,
and the second ring on channel 16 (where OH
is the central ring) . The bright circular edge on
each image is due to the less selective trans-
mission on the edge of the interference filter.

checked the wavelengths of the geo-coronal Ha emission and

the OH night-sky line. The wavelength accuracy found for both
lines is better than 0.05 A (2 km s- 1 in radial velocity). The
precision, indicated by the dispersion of the measured points,
is about the same. The diameters of the Ha interference rings
from the object indicate an heliocentric radial velocity of 160 km
s- 1 ± 5 km s- 1 all over the observed field (note that the rough
value given by us in Courtes et ae
was underestimated) . Our
final result is in very good agreement with the average H 1
velocities found by McGee and Newton 8 and by Mathewson
(personal communication) 9 in the same area. Furthermore, they
generally found several components (3-4) with velocities rang-
ing from 140 to 200 km s- 1 and halfwidths around 20 km s- 1,
which is consistent with the broadening observed for the Ha
emission. In some cases, our profile also appears to contain
multiple velocity components but the signal-to-noise ratio
remains too low to allow individual ones to be distinguished
with certainty for their separations are near our spectral
resolution.
It is clear, from the Doppler shift, that we are observing Ha
emission associated with the HI bridge between the SMC and
LMC and that the large cloud of hots tars observed in ultraviolet
light by the VWFC on board Spacelab 1 ionizes this bridge.
We thank our engineer Andre Fort for helpful assistance
during the observations, and our technician Patrice Joulie who
designed the focal reducer.
Received 25 March; accepted 18 June 1985.
I. Mathewson, D. S. & Ford, V. L. IA U Symp. No. 108, 125-136 (1 984).
2. Johnson, P. G., Meabum, J. & Osman, A.M. I. Mon : N ot. R. astr. Snc. 198,985-989 (1982).
3. Courtes, G., Viton, M., Sivan, J.P., Decher, R. & Gary, A. Science 225, 179- 180 ( 1984).
4. Boulesteix , J., Georgelin, Y. , Marcelin, M. & Monnet, G . S.P.l.E. Conj: lnstrum. A.~tr. V
445,37-41 ( 1983).
5. Hode, P. W. & Wright, F. W. The Small Magellanic Cloud (Un iversi ty of Washingto n Press,
1977).
6. Marce1in , M., Boulesteix, J. & George1in, Y. P. Astr. A strophys. 128, 140-147 (1983).
7. Chamberlain. J. W. Physics of the Aurora and Airglow, 571 (Acad emi c, New Yo rk, 1961 ).
8. McGee, R. X. & Newton. Lynetle, M. Proc. astr. Soc. Austr. 4, 308-3 J8 (1 982).
The Sun's motion perpendicular to the
galactic plane
John N. Bahcall* & Safi Bahcallt
* I_nstitute for Advanced Study, and t Princeton High School,
Pnnceton, New Jersey 08540, USA
The period and amplitude of the Sun's motion perpendicular to
the galactic plane are important parameters in some explanations
of the terrestrial mass extinctions and cratering records 1- 5 • Here
we have calculated the range of periods and vertical excursions
that are consistent with the distributions of tracer stars in the
Galaxy and have also evaluated the probable phase jitter in the
solar period. We find acceptable half-periods for the vertical
oscillation that range from 26 to 37 Myr (including the range of
periods that have been inferred from the terrestrial records on
mass extinctions and on cratering), maximum heights above the
plane from 49 .to 93 pc, and an average phase jitter per half-period
of the order of 6-9%. The largest uncertainty in all these calcula-
tions is caused by the unknown distribution of the unseen mass
that must be postulated to explain the distribution of observed
stars6-7 • For all the models we consider, the most recent passage
of the Sun through the galactic plane occurred in the past 3 Myr
provided only that the present position of the Sun is between 0
and 20 pc above the plane. We extend the argument of Thaddeus
and Chanan8 to show that the apparent periodicity in the mass
extinction and cratering records cannot be caused by an population
of objects (observed or unobserved) that contributes a major frac-
tion of the total mass density at the solar vicinity.
We have calculated the time, t, that it takes the Sun to reach
a height, z, above the galactic plane from the formula:
dx
f
z
t- (l)
- o 2(E- op(x))t/2
where E is the total energy per unit mass of the Sun's vertical

© 1985 Nature Publishing Group

~NA~TU~R=E~v~o=L~.~3~16~2~2~A~U~G~u~sT~19~s~s------------------LETTERSTQNATUR£--------------------------------------7~o7

motion and tp is the potential energy per unit mass. The major
uncertainty in evaluating equation ( 1) arises from the distribu-
tion of the unseen matter that is inferred to exist at the solar
vicinitl· 7 • We have bracketed the allowed solar motion by using
the potential tp calculated for two extreme Galaxy models, All di sk J
-Z~~x- - -. · j
labelled here as the ISM and the all-disk models. In the ISM 1

model, the unseen material is squashed towards the galactic - .,_ ZmaK
Proportionar--·-~1
------

Zm ax.......... .._
plane to the maximum extent allowed by the analysis of the
distribution of F dwarfs and of K giants; the postulated distribu-
tion is similar to that observed for ordinary interstellar material
(hence the name). In the all-disk model, the unseen material
has the largest exponential scale height (0.7 kpc) above the plane
that is consistent with the observed rotation velocity of the
galaxy near the solar position. In the all disk model, all of the
unobserved material near the Sun is by construction in a flattened z(pc)
disk; there is no appreciable amount of unobserved material in
a spherical halo. We also consider a more conventional model, Fig. 1 The potential divided by 27TGp(O)z 2 shown for the three
the proportional model, in which the distribution of unseen numerical models.
material with a given velocity dispersion is proportional to the
distribution of observed material, with the same velocity disper- model), 26.5 ± 1 Myr (ISM model), and 36 ± 1 Myr (all-disk
sion, the constant of proportionality being independent of veloc- model). The uncertainty due to the assumed current velocity
ity dispersion. The proportional model has approximately equal and height above the plane is small compared with the difference
amounts of unobserved and observed material. The particular between the values calculated with different distributions of the
parameters we use for these models are given in Table 5 of ref. unseen material. For the most likely current parameters of the
7, rows 1 (proportional model), 10 (ISM model), and 12 (all solar motion, the maximum height above the plane reached by
disk model). For all three models, the potential was derived by the Sun, Zmax• is: 70 pc (proportional model), 58 pc (ISM model),
solving self-consistently the Poisson and the Vlasov equations and 81 pc (all-disk model). The time since the last passage
with realistic models for the Galaxy (typically 15 observed through the galactic plane is < 3 Myr in all the cases considered,
components) . provided that the Sun's current position is between 0 and 20 pc
Table 1 shows our results for the calculated half-periods and above the plane. The potential energy is currently much less
maximum heights above the plane of the solar vertical motion. than the kinetic energy for the solar vertical motion, so that the
For each of the models, we also list the time since the Sun last time since last passage is approximately the present height above
passed through the glactic plane. The characteristics of the the plane divided by the current velocity.
calculated solar motion depend on the vertical velocity, vp«sen" The problem of the solar vertical motion has usually been
and height above the plane, Zpresent· We give results for the range treated analytically by assuming 8 •14 that the potential for the
of values that are consistent with the available observational vertical motion is quadratic in the height above the plane. In
results 9 - 11 , that is Vpresent = 6-8 km s- 1 and zgresent = 0-30 pc. The this approximation, the vertical motion is described by the
most likely values are considered to be 9 - 1 7 km s- 1 and 4 pc, equation for a simple harmonic oscillator. We show in Fig. 1
respectively, although some determinations 12 ' 13 suggest that the the potential, divided by 27TGp(O)z 2, that was computed numeri-
Sun is 20-30 pc above the plane. The Sun's position with respect cally for each of the galactic models we have discussed. Sig-
to the galactic plane could be determined more accurately using nificant depatures from the harmonic approximation are present
modern surveys of H 1 and CO. beyond about 40 pc. Innanen et al.' 5 have evaluated numerically
The half-periods we calculate are: 31.5 ± 1 Myr (proportional the solar motion in a simple galaxy model that includes depar-
tures from harmonicity.
How much of an error does the conventional assumption of
Table 1 The Sun's vertical oscillation a harmonic oscillator potential cause? The harmonic oscillator
period differs from the exact half-period by 15% (4 Myr) for
Half- Last the ISM model, by 9% (3 Myr) for the proportional model, and
Ptotat (z = 0) vp-.sent period passage Zm ax
Zprese nt by 6% (2 Myr) for the all-disk model. The error in the maximum
Model ( M 0 pc- 3 ) (kms- 1 ) (pc) (Myr) (Myr) (pc)
height above the plane implied by the harmonic oscillator poten-
Proportional 0.21 7 0 31.4 0.0 70.0 tial is, for the same three cases, 11, 6 and 4%.
7 4 31.4 0.6 70.1 The harmonic oscillator approximation can be used with
7 10 31.4 1.4 70.9 relatively small errors in the computation of the fractional
7 20 31.6 2.7 73.4
7 30 31.8 3.9 77.4
amount of time the Sun spends in any specified height range,
7 40 32.1 5.0 82.6 once the period and maximum height above the plane have been
8 4 32.0 0.5 81.2 calculated from the exact potential. We have evaluated numeri-
6 4 30.8 0.6 59.3 cally the fraction of time that the Sun spends in various height
26.5 0.0 57.8
intervals using the potentials shown in Fig. 1 for the three
ISM 0.33 7 0
7 4 26.5 0.6 58.0 illustrative galaxy models and have compared the results with
7 10 26.6 1.4 59.0 the analytical formula 14 that applies in the case of a harmonic
7 20 26.9 2.7 62.5 oscillator. Adopting the exact values of the half-period, P 112
7 30 27 .5 3.8 67 .9 and of Zmax• we find that the curve of elapsed times is described
7 40 28.1 4.8 74.6 to an accuracy of 3% by the harmonic oscillator relation:
8 4 27.5 0.5 68.0 t(z)/ pl/2 =-!.arcsin (z/ Zmax)·
6 4 25 .6 0.6 48.6 Some explanations 5 attribute the apparent periodicities in the
All disk 0.15 7 0 36.1 0.0 81.1 extinction data to phenomena occurring at the apex of the solar
7 10 36.1 1.4 81.8 vertical motion. These explanations are unlikely to be correct
7 20 36.2 2.7 83 .9 because they would require an extinction event that lasts a time
7 30 36.3 4.0 87.2 t::.T to occur all within 7pc x (t::.T/Myr) of Zmax·
7 40 36.4 5.2 91.6 How much phase jitter would one expect in the times at which
8 4 36.5 0.5 93 .6 the Sun crosses the galactic plane? We model the (unspecified)
6 4 35.7 0.6 69.0
process that causes stars to have velocity dispersions that

© 1985 Nature Publishing Group

~~------------------------------------LETTERSTQNATUR£----------------~N~A~Tu~R~E~vo~L~-~31~6~2~2~A~U~G~us~T~I~9~s5
70 8
increase with age by calculating simulated orbits in which a
model star receives a vertical kick in velocity, l>v, of random
sign every half period. Solar type stars have 16 a z-velocity
dispersion of the order of 20 km s- 1 after 5,000 Myr (the solar
age), indicating that the Sun currently has an unusually small
velocity perpendicular to the plane for a star of its age. To model
what happens to typical solar-type stars, we adopt l>v"'
20 km s- 1/ (solar age/ P112 ) 112 "' 1.6 km s- 1 • For anharmonic
potentials like those shown in Fig. 1, the phase jitter per half-
period, !lc/>, can be estimated analytically to be of the order of
112
!lcf> "' 0.28vP
____ 112 n
-"!..::.__
Zanh
where Zanh represents approximately the anharmonicity of the
potential in the relation cf>(z)ocz 2 /[1+(z/zanh)] and n is the
number of elapsed half-periods. In deriving equation (3), we
have assumed that Zmax « Zanh and l>v « Vpresent· For an elapsed
time of 250 Myr, !lcf> "'0.8 kms- 1 P11 2 / Zanh· Values for Zanh can
be estimated from Fig. 1; the half-periods, P 112 , are listed in
Table 1. For a harmonic potential, the phase jitter per half-period
is zero if the velocity kick always occurs when the Sun crosses
the galactic plane; the jitter decreases like 1/ n 112 if the kicks
occur with equal probability between 0 and 40 pc.
We have carried out a series of Monte-Carlo simulations of
the solar vertical motion including random kicks that are given
with either a uniform probability between 0 and 40 pc or always
in the plane. The results are shown in Table 2. The Monte-Carlo
Table 2 Expected phase jitter for solar period from vertical kicks
in velocity
Location
of kick !lcf>
Model (pc) (median)
Proportional 0.0 O.o35
0-40 0.045
ISM 0.0 O.o7
0-40 O.o7
0.0 o.oz
All disk
0-40 0.03
simulations are in good agreement with the analytical estimate
given in equation (3). The typical phase jitter after 250 Myr is
in the range 0.03-0.07 per half-period, depending on the Galaxy
potential that is adopted.
The vertical oscillation period is also changed by the epicyclic
motion of the Sun in the plane of the galaxy. Let the half-
amplitude of the epicyclic motion be Xmax and let h be the
exponential scale length of the disk density in the plane. The
average period is only slightly affected by the epicyclic motion,
Period (Xmax)"' Period( X max= O) X [ 1+ ~~~~ J
The average correction due to the epicyclic motion is < 1% for
typical values 11 ' 17 of h(3.5 kpc) and Xmax (0.5 kpc). However,
for times short compared with the period ("' 160 Myr) of the
solar epicyclic motion in the plane of the Galaxy, there is also
a sinusoidal correction to the vertical oscillation period of ampli-
tude Xmax/2h. This correction could, in principle, be taken into
account in making comparisons with observational data pro-
vided that the phase of the Sun in its epicyclic motion is not
changed drastically during the time under consideration. On the
other hand, the simplest (and most conservative) procedure is
to ignore, when comparing with observations, the dependence
of the period on the solar position in the galactic plane and to
compute the total expected phase jitter by combining quadrat-
ically the previously computed jitter in the vertical motion (see
Table 2) with an apparent phase jitter from the epicyclic motion
in the plane. In this case, the expected r.m.s. phase jitter arising
from the motion in the plane is Xmax/2 312 h "'5%, comparable
with the phase jitter caused by vertical kicks in velocity.
The combined calculated phase jitter per vertical half-period
is in the range 6-9% for all the models we have considered.
This calculated phase jitter is smaller than the observed jitter
in the biological and cratering data.
Finally, we note that inte·ractions with the unseen material
cannot have induced the approximately periodic features that
are inferred 1- 4 from the extinction and cratering data. This
conclusion follows from the work of Thaddeus and Chanan8 ,
who showed that molecular clouds are not sufficiently concen-
trated towards the plane of the Galaxy to cause a strong prefer-
ence for interactions at small heights. The unseen material
(2) cannot be more concentrated towards the plane than are
molecular clouds. The maximum concentration of the unseen
material towards the galactic plane that is consistent with the
observations of F dwarfs and K giants is represented by the
ISM model 6 - 7 , in which the unseen material has an exponential
scale height which is like that of the molecular clouds ( corre-
sponding to a velocity dispersion of 4km s- 1 ). Even in this
extreme model, the maximum height above the plane reached
by the Sun (49 pc) is about equal to the height (45 pc) at which
the density of unseen material drops to e- 1 of its value in the
plane. The Sun encounters unseen material everywhere in its
orbit, with only a moderate preference for interactions in the
galactic plane.
All the observed components of the Galaxy that constitute
major fractions of the mass density in the solar vicinity have
scale heights that are comparable with or larger than the
maximum heights, zmax. for the Sun listed in Table 1. If some-
thing associated with passages through the galactic plane is
causing periodic mass extinctions and cratering, then whatever
it is cannot constitute a large fraction of the mass density, either
observed or unobserved.
We thankS. Casertano, F. Dyson, D. Gilden, P. Hut, T. Piran,
Quartiles W. Shuter, S. Tremaine and J. Villumsen for valuable comments.
±0.02 This work was supported in part by NSF grant PHY-8217352.
±0.03
Received 22 April; accepted 26 June 1985.
±O.o35
±0.04 I. Raup, D. M. & Sepkoski, J. J. Proc. natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 81, 801-805 (1984).
±0.01 2. Fischer, A. G. & Arthur, M.A. Soc. Econ. Paleont. Miner., Spec. Pub/. 25, 19-50 (1977).
3. Alvarez, W. & Muller, R. A. Nature 308,718-720 (1984).
±0.02 4. Rampino, M. R. & Stohers, R. B. Nature 308, 709-712 (1984).
5. Schwartz, R. D. & James, P. B. Nature 308,712-713 (1984).
6. Bahcall, J. N. Astrophys. J. 276, 169-181 (1984).
7. Bahcall, J. N. Astrophys. J. 287, 926-944 (1984).
8. Thaddeus, P. & Chanan, G. A. Nature 314, 73-74 (1985).
9. Delhaye, J. in Galactic Structure (eds Blaauw, A. & Schmidt, M.) 61-84 (University of
Chicago Press, 1965).
10. Gum, C. S., Kerr, F. J. & Westerhout, G. Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc. 121, 132-149 (1960).
11. Mihalas, D. & Binney, J. Galactic Astronomy: Structure and Kinematics, 277-281 (Freeman,
San Francisco, 1981).
12. de Vaucouleurs, G. & Malik, G. Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc. 142, 387-395 (1980).
13. Stenholm, B. Astr. Astrophys. 39,307-318 (1975).
14. Chandrasekhar, S. Principles of Stellar Dynamics, 190 (University of Chicago Press, 1942).
15. Innanen, K. A., Patrick, A. T. & Duley, W. W. Astrophys. Space Sci. 57, 511-515 (1978).
16. Wielen, R. Astr. Astrophys. 60, 263-275 (1977).
17. Bahcall, J. N. & Soniera, R. M. Astrophys. J. 44, 73-110 (1980).
(3)
Increased concentration and
vertical distribution of
carbon dioxide in the stratosphere
W. Bischof*, R. Borcherst, P. Fabiant & B. C. Kriigert
*Department of Meteorology, University of Stockholm,
S-10691 Stockholm, Sweden
t Max-Planck-Institut fiir Aeronomie,
D-34ll Katlenburg-Lindau, FRO
Although many measurements of the abundance of C0 2 in the
troposphere have been made, knowledge of its stratospheric abund-
ances and variability is sparse. Here we report mid-latitude vertical
profiles of C0 2 , up to 35 km, measured in 1979, 1982 and 1984
by analysing cryogenically collected balloon samples supplemented
by air samples taken aboard aircraft. C0 2 mixing ratios are not
constant with altitude but rather decrease by -7 p.p.m.v. (parts
per 106 by volume) from the tropopause to the mid-stratosphere.
© 1985 Nature Publishing Group