Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: observed non - thermal line widths in molecular clouds ( mcs ) , where all star formation in the galaxy takes place , point to the presence of supersonic turbulence in such regions ( falgarone & philips 1990 ) . the properties of the turbulent medium , such as mach number and magnetic field strength , may determine the products of the star formation process . as an important source of heating within molecular clouds ( stone et al . 1998 , hereafter s98 ) , turbulent energy dissipation may also play a role . much effort has been directed toward numerically simulating turbulent media in order to better understand the link between turbulence and star formation ( see elmegreen & scalo 2004 , maclow & klessen 2004 , and mckee & ostriker 2007 and references therein ) .    as we have not yet identified the turbulent driving mechanism , there remain many unanswered questions about the evolution of molecular clouds . is the turbulence periodically re - energized , or does it simply decay away ? how much impact do magnetic fields have on the properties of the turbulence ? crutcher ( 1999 ) , using observations of zeeman splitting , found magnetic fields in some clouds strong enough that one can not safely neglect their effects . although it has been shown that magnetic fields do not appreciably lengthen the turbulent decay time ( s98 ; mac low 1999 ) , they do create anisotropy within the clouds ( e.g.  vestuto et al . 2003 , hereafter v03 ; esquivel et al . 2003 ) , which may have important observational and evolutionary consequences . for example , molecular clouds are often observed to be filamentary ( e.g.  mizuno et al . 1995 ; churchwell et al . 2004 ) .    in this paper , we will investigate the energy dissipation properties of supersonic hydrodynamic and mhd turbulence with a variety of magnetic field strengths using athena , a new higher - order godunov code . an important goal of this study is to investigate the effect of the assumed driving mechanism on the properties of the resulting turbulence , such as power spectra and intermittency indicators . our analysis utilizes data from high - resolution numerical simulations with twenty - five different parameter sets . in recent years , a variety of results have been reported on the properties of supersonic mhd turbulence , including energetics ( e.g.  s98 ; mac low 1999 ; ostriker et al . 2001 ) , power spectra ( e.g.  cho & lazarian 2003 , 2005 ; v03 ; padoan et al . 2007 , hereafter p07 ) , and probability distribution functions ( e.g.  padoan et al . 1997 ; passot & vazquez - semadeni 1998 ; ostriker et al .  2001 ; kowal et al .  2007 ; kritsuk et al . 2007 , hereafter k07 ) . where possible , we identify differences in our methods and results as compared to those of other groups . in a separate letter ( lemaster & stone 2008 , hereafter paper i ) , we have reported the results of an investigation of the variation of the probability distribution function ( pdf ) of density with mach number . our primary result in that paper was that the intermittent behavior of turbulence could be responsible for the large cloud - to - cloud variation in the observed star formation rate per solar mass . the primary tool available to investigate the properties of highly nonlinear , supersonic mhd turbulence is direct numerical simulation . to date , most results have been computed using a few numerical algorithms , such as zeus ( e.g.  s98 ; v03 ; mac low 1999 ; ostriker et al .  1999 ; ostriker et al . 2001 ) , the pencil code ( e.g.  haugen & brandenburg 2004 ) , the stagger code ( e.g.  p07 ) , and eno methods ( e.g.  cho & lazarian 2003 ) . there has been concern expressed in the literature that previous results may be strongly affected by numerical dissipation . thus , it is worth re - examining the problem with more accurate methods . this study represents one of the first applications of higher - order godunov methods to the study of supersonic mhd turbulence .    without knowing the driving mechanism , we are left with many possible methods of generating turbulence in simulations . the hope is that the choice of method for the simulated driving will have an insignificant effect on the results . federrath , klessen , & schmidt ( in prep . ) , however , have shown that compressive and solenoidal forcing produce dramatically different turbulent states . for some diagnostics , such as intermittency , the time - variability of the turbulent state is critical . even if an array of driving methods produce the same mean state , do the instantaneous states have the same distribution about the mean ? we will investigate the dependence on driving scale of various diagnostics , given our particular driving method , which is very similar to that employed by , e.g. , s98 and v03 .    for power spectra of simulated turbulence to be valuable , the resolution needs to be high enough that the driving and numerical dissipation scales are well separated , allowing the inertial range to be studied . when magnetic fields are taken into account , simulating turbulence at these resolutions can be prohibitively expensive . another goal of this study is to investigate whether properties of the power spectra and other diagnostics are converged at the numerical resolutions feasible at the moment , up to @xmath0 . we begin in  [ sec : methods ] by describing our numerical methods in detail . we proceed , in  [ sec : results ] , to present our results .  [ sec : satresults ] includes a convergence study and mach number scaling study of saturation amplitudes ,  [ sec : specresults ] includes a power spectrum analysis ,  [ sec : sonicresults ] analyzes the sonic scale in @xmath0 runs , and  [ sec : mittresults ] considers time - variability and temperature intermittency in the turbulence . finally , we summarize our results in  [ sec : concl ] and discuss the implications . the simulations we present were conducted up to a resolution of @xmath0 with the athena code ( gardiner & stone 2005 , 2008 ; stone et al .  2008 ; stone & gardiner 2008 ) on a three - dimensional cartesian grid of length @xmath1 with periodic boundary conditions . athena utilizes a higher - order godunov scheme which exactly conserves mass , momentum , and magnetic flux . we solve the equations of ideal isothermal mhd , @xmath2 @xmath3 and @xmath4 where @xmath5 and @xmath6 are the isothermal sound speed and pressure , respectively . because our method of driving the turbulence , described in the following paragraph , does not involve modifying the equations of mhd , we include no explicit forcing term here . we use an approximate nonlinear riemann solver ( hlld ; miyoshi & kusano 2005 ) for our mhd runs and an exact nonlinear riemann solver for our hydrodynamic runs . both our mhd and hydro simulations are integrated well past the turbulent saturation time using a directionally - unsplit van leer scheme ( stone & gardiner 2008 ) . further details of how we overcame the numerical difficulties associated with utilizing this method for turbulence can be found in appendix [ sec : godunov ] . we initialize a uniform , stationary ambient medium with density @xmath7 and magnetic field parallel to the @xmath8-axis whose amplitude @xmath9 is fixed by the value of @xmath10 . we then apply divergence - free velocity perturbations following a gaussian random distribution with a fourier power spectrum of the form @xmath11 for @xmath12 , where @xmath13 is the resolution and @xmath14 is the wavenumber of peak driving , in all but two of our runs . for the remaining two runs , with @xmath15 and @xmath16 at @xmath0 , we truncate the driving spectrum at @xmath17 . before applying the perturbations to the grid , we shift them such that no net momentum will be added and normalize them to give the desired energy injection rate , @xmath18 , or , in the decaying case , initial kinetic energy .    for our driven runs , we choose our energy injection rate to give the desired turbulent mach number , @xmath19 , in the saturated state . here , @xmath20^{1/2}$ ] is the 3d velocity dispersion of the gas and @xmath21 is the 1d velocity dispersion in a given direction . the method we use in this paper to compute the turbulent mach number differs from that used by some other groups ; we utilize a density - weighted velocity dispersion , @xmath22^{1/2}$ ] . note that , due to the zero net momentum of our turbulent medium , the second term on the rhs vanishes on the global scale . if we compare the mach number computed with and without density - weighting the velocity dispersion , we find that the two are fairly correlated , but that the time - average of the latter is @xmath23 larger than that of the former for driven strong - field mhd turbulence with , e.g. , @xmath16 and @xmath15 , or @xmath24 and @xmath25 . the comparison for the latter case is shown in figure [ fig : machmeth ] . we will use a density - weighted velocity dispersion for all but our sonic scale analysis .    to drive turbulence in our simulations , we inject energy before each time step , with a new realization of the power spectrum generated at intervals @xmath26 . this differs from that done in s98 and v03 , where the energy was injected only when a new realization of the spectrum was generated . ostriker et al . ( 1999 , 2001 ) and kowal et al . ( 2007 ) used different driving spectra than our own but still constrained their velocity perturbations to be divergence free . our method differs from that of k07 in that they approximate an isothermal equation of state using an adiabatic index of @xmath27 , drive their turbulence on very large scales using an acceleration that is fixed in time , and also allow a substantial fraction of the energy introduced by the forcing to be in compressional modes . p07 also used a fixed acceleration for turbulent driving . it is important to understand if these differences have any significant impact on the results .    for our decaying runs , we again begin with a uniform , stationary ambient medium but apply only one driving impulse to the velocity field , with a power spectrum of the same form as is used to initialize our driven runs . we then allow it to evolve undisturbed . we choose the turbulent kinetic energy applied to our medium so as to give the desired initial turbulent mach number . our decaying runs differ from those of sytine et al . ( 2000 ) , who used a different initial driving spectrum and allowed a compressible component in the initial perturbations . they used an adiabatic equation of state with @xmath28 , which we will use only for our decaying simulations . in this case , we solve the total energy equation , @xmath29 = 0,\ ] ] in addition to equations ( [ eq : mhdeqn1])([eq : mhdeqn3 ] ) , using the hllc riemann solver . here , @xmath30 with @xmath31 and @xmath32 , where @xmath33 is the internal energy density and @xmath34 is the ratio of specific heats . the numerical methods in athena conserve total energy exactly . we primarily investigate strong - field mhd turbulence with @xmath35 and hydrodynamic turbulence ( @xmath36 ) , although we present runs with @xmath37 ( moderate - field ) and @xmath38 ( weak - field ) as well . note that , due to a definition of @xmath39 in s98 and v03 that differs from ours by a factor of 2 , our @xmath35 results should be compared to their @xmath40 results , and similarly for other values of @xmath39 . the magnetic fields we use in our simulations correspond to physical values of @xmath41 , where @xmath42 is the temperature and @xmath43 is the number density of molecular hydrogen . our simulations are scale - free , allowing them to be scaled to any set of physical parameters using appropriate choices of @xmath44 , @xmath45 , and @xmath46 . utilizing the same values given in s98 , i.e. @xmath47 , @xmath48 , and @xmath49 , yields energy injection rates of up to @xmath50 , with a magnetic field strength @xmath51 for the strong - field case . figure [ fig : den1024p2a ] shows slices in mass density along the far faces of the computational domain for driven @xmath52 strong - field mhd turbulence with @xmath16 at @xmath0 . also included are magnetic field vectors in a slice normal to the y - axis near the bottom of the cube . due to the strong background magnetic field , the vectors are fairly well aligned . figure [ fig : den1024p2d ] also shows slices in density , but this time for @xmath53 hydrodynamic turbulence with the same driving scale and resolution . for both cases the structure seen is filamentary , with anisotropy in the scale of the structures in the strong - field case as a result of the field this is not to say , however , that the filaments are aligned with the magnetic field . in fact , some appear to be oriented perpendicular to the field . figures [ fig : col1024p2a ] and [ fig : col1024p2d ] show column density along the line of sight parallel to the z - axis for the same runs as in figures [ fig : den1024p2a ] and [ fig : den1024p2d ] , respectively . the projected filamentary structure is visible in these column density images . the column density contrast is higher for the strong - field than for the hydrodynamic case . we begin our quantitative analysis by studying the energy in fluctuations once our driven turbulence runs have reached saturation . since the method with which we drive our turbulence injects energy at a constant rate , at saturation the energy dissipation rate of the turbulence will , on average , equal the energy injection rate . at sufficiently high numerical resolution , the numerical dissipation will become negligible compared to the physically interesting sources of dissipation ( shocks ) , and the energy dissipation properties of the turbulence can given us insight into the heating within and evolution of molecular clouds . in this section , we will first determine the resolution at which the saturation energy has converged , i.e. reached a state such that further increasing the resolution has a negligible effect on the state , for turbulence evolved using athena and compare the turbulent decay rates to those presented in s98 computed using zeus . the kinetic energy associated with the fluctuations in our turbulent medium can be quantified by @xmath54 , where @xmath55 is the density and @xmath56 is the magnitude of the velocity . an integration for this and all similar quantities is performed over the entire domain . similarly , the energy in magnetic field perturbations is @xmath57 , where @xmath58 and @xmath9 are the magnitudes , respectively , of the magnetic field and its initial value . the total energy in perturbations is the sum of the energy in kinetic and magnetic field fluctuations , @xmath59 . to analyze the energy dissipation properties of the turbulence , we compute dissipation timescales using @xmath60 , normalizing them to the flow crossing time , @xmath61 , where @xmath62 is the wavelength of peak driving . we can partition the kinetic energy by breaking down the velocity into its solenoidal and compressive components . the solenoidal component is divergence - free , whereas the compressive component is curl - free . these can easily be computed using @xmath63 \hat{k}$ ] and @xmath64 \times \hat{k}$ ] , respectively . for simulations with comparable parameters ( i.e. @xmath24 and @xmath25 ) , these energies can be compared directly with the values given in s98 and v03 after accounting for the difference in definition of @xmath39 . we average our quantities over at least one dynamical time , often several , beginning after the turbulence has fully saturated .    to determine the rate of convergence of a given volume - integrated quantity , @xmath65 , we compute the percent error in the quantity at each resolution relative to the converged value . in the case where the quantity changes monotonically with resolution , we find the converged value by performing a three - parameter fit , @xmath66 , where @xmath13 is the resolution and @xmath67 is the value at that resolution . the results of this fit tell us ( 1 ) the converged value , @xmath68 , ( 2 ) the order of convergence , @xmath69 , and ( 3 ) the coefficient , @xmath70 , that determines the resolution at which our result has converged , i.e. when @xmath71 .      to determine the resolution at which our numerical dissipation has become small compared to shock dissipation , we analyze the properties of driven , supersonic hydrodynamic turbulence at resolutions from @xmath72 to @xmath73 . we study two sets of simulations with identical energy injection rate , @xmath25 , but differing driving scales . the set of runs with small - scale driving , @xmath24 , correspond to the hydrodynamic run in s98 , while the other set of runs are driven at twice the scale , @xmath74 . the properties of the @xmath73 run from each set can be found in table [ tab : hydro ] . we have not performed a convergence study of the @xmath16 runs due to the high level of time - variability ( discussed in  [ sec : varresults ] ) . cccccccrrr 8 & 1000 & 5.8 & 17 & 3.8 & 13 & 0.77 & @xmath75 &  &  + 4 & 1000 & 7.2 & 26 & 5.9 & 20 & 0.76 & @xmath76 & @xmath77 & @xmath78 + 4 & 375 & 5.3 & 14 & 3.1 & 11 & 0.78 & @xmath76 & @xmath77 & @xmath78 + 4 & 140 & 3.8 & 7.2 & 1.6 & 5.6 & 0.78 & @xmath76 & @xmath78 & @xmath78 + 4 & 40 & 2.6 & 3.3 & 0.7 & 2.6 & 0.84 & @xmath76 & @xmath79 & @xmath79 + 4 & 3.5 & 1.2 & 0.8 & 0.1 & 0.7 & 1.1 & @xmath75 & @xmath79 & @xmath79 + 2 & 500 & 7.0 & 25 & 5.5 & 19 & 0.7 & @xmath80 & @xmath78 & @xmath81 + 2 & 187.5 & 5.2 & 13 & 3.1 & 10 & 0.73 & @xmath82 & @xmath77 & @xmath81 + 2 & 70 & 3.7 & 6.9 & 1.6 & 5.4 & 0.74 & @xmath82 & @xmath78 & @xmath78 + 2 & 20 & 2.5 & 3.1 & 0.6 & 2.5 & 0.77 & @xmath76 & @xmath83 & @xmath83 + 2 & 1.75 & 1.2 & 0.7 & 0.1 & 0.6 & 0.99 & @xmath82 & @xmath81 & @xmath81    although both sets of runs are driven with energy injection rate @xmath25 , the larger driving scale of the @xmath74 set causes it to converge to @xmath84 , while the @xmath24 set converges to only @xmath85 . the former set reaches convergence by @xmath86 , with higher resolutions having a small scatter about the converged value . the latter set , on the other hand , converges monotonically at order @xmath87 for all resolutions analyzed , reaching within @xmath88 of the converged value by @xmath89 . the kinetic energy in fluctuations of the set with larger driving scale , @xmath74 , converges to a value of @xmath90 by @xmath86 and has some scatter about the converged value for higher resolutions . for the set with smaller driving scale , @xmath24 , the kinetic energy in fluctuations converges at order @xmath91 to only @xmath92 . the value at @xmath89 is within @xmath93 of the converged value , while at @xmath94 it is within a fraction of a percent . although we have an extremely low sampling rate for the fraction of the kinetic energy in solenoidal and compressive modes , they appear to be independent of driving scale . the solenoidal fraction converges to @xmath95 , decreasing with increasing resolution , while the compressive fraction converges to @xmath96 . the solenoidal fraction is within a fraction of a percent of the converged value by @xmath94 ; however , it varies by only a small amount down to low resolution . finally , the ratio of the energy dissipation timescale to the flow crossing time at the driving scale increases with resolution , to @xmath97 for the @xmath74 set and @xmath98 for the @xmath24 set , only a small difference . consistent with our previous results , the @xmath74 set converges at lower resolution than the @xmath24 set , @xmath86 and @xmath94 , respectively . the turbulence dissipates in less than a flow crossing time in all cases . although the converged mach number and saturation energies are higher for @xmath74 than for @xmath24 , the fraction of the energy in the solenoidal or compressive mode , as well as the ratio of the energy dissipation timescale to the flow crossing time at the driving scale , are relatively independent of the driving scale . while most of the quantities of interest converge between @xmath89 and @xmath94 for the @xmath24 hydrodynamic runs , convergence has already been reached for these quantities by @xmath86 for the @xmath74 runs . high resolutions are critical for separating the driving and dissipation scales in the power spectra far enough to study the inertial range ; however , quantities such as energy dissipation rate and turbulent mach number converge at resolutions which are more easily attainable . we now analyze driven , strong - field , supersonic mhd turbulence in the same manner as in the previous section . to determine the resolution at which our numerical dissipation becomes negligible , we study the convergence of two sets of mhd simulations with energy injection rate @xmath25 at resolutions from @xmath72 to @xmath73 . one set has @xmath24 , similar to the strong - field mhd run in s98 , while the other has @xmath74 . the properties of the @xmath73 run from each set can be found in table [ tab : mhd ] . again , we have not performed a convergence study of the @xmath16 runs due to the high level of time - variability ( discussed in  [ sec : varresults ] ) . cccccccccrrr 2.0 & 8 & 1000 & 5.3 & 14 & 2.1 & 12 & 5.8 & 0.83 & @xmath75 &  &  + 0.2 & 8 & 1000 & 5.1 & 13 & 1.6 & 11 & 8.6 & 0.89 & @xmath75 &  &  + 0.02 & 8 & 1000 & 5.4 & 15 & 1.5 & 13 & 8.2 & 1.0 & @xmath75 &  &  + 0.02 & 4 & 1000 & 6.8 & 23 & 2.3 & 21 & 13 & 0.98 & @xmath75 & @xmath77 & @xmath78 + 0.02 & 4 & 375 & 5.2 & 14 & 1.1 & 13 & 6.4 & 1.1 & @xmath75 & @xmath79 & @xmath78 + 0.02 & 4 & 140 & 3.8 & 7.3 & 0.5 & 6.7 & 3.1 & 1.1 & @xmath99 & @xmath78 & @xmath79 + 0.02 & 4 & 40 & 2.7 & 3.6 & 0.2 & 3.4 & 1.4 & 1.3 & @xmath75 & @xmath83 & @xmath83 + 0.02 & 4 & 3.5 & 1.3 & 0.8 & 0.04 & 0.8 & 0.3 & 1.7 & @xmath75 & @xmath78 & @xmath78 + 0.02 & 2 & 500 & 7.0 & 24 & 2.2 & 22 & 11 & 0.98 & @xmath80 & @xmath81 & @xmath100 + 0.02 & 2 & 187.5 & 5.0 & 13 & 1.2 & 11 & 5.9 & 0.99 & @xmath99 & @xmath78 & @xmath78 + 0.02 & 2 & 70 & 3.7 & 6.8 & 0.6 & 6.3 & 2.9 & 1.0 & @xmath99 & @xmath81 & @xmath100 + 0.02 & 2 & 20 & 2.5 & 3.1 & 0.2 & 2.9 & 1.3 & 1.1 & @xmath82 & @xmath83 & @xmath81 + 0.02 & 2 & 1.75 & 1.2 & 0.8 & 0.06 & 0.7 & 0.4 & 1.6 & @xmath101 & @xmath102 & @xmath103    as in the hydrodynamic case , the @xmath74 mhd runs converge to a higher mach number , @xmath104 , than the @xmath24 runs ( @xmath105 ) . the former is converged by @xmath94 , while the latter converges at @xmath106 order , only reaching convergence at @xmath73 . the total energy in fluctuations converges at nearly @xmath106 order to @xmath107 for @xmath74 , shown in figure [ fig : mpert4res ] . while convergence has definitely been reached by @xmath73 , the @xmath94 value is less than @xmath93 from the converged value . for @xmath24 , on the other hand , convergence is not reached until @xmath73 , where @xmath108 . convergence is at nearly @xmath106 order for this case as well .    for the energy in magnetic field perturbations , convergence is reached at @xmath73 for both the @xmath74 and @xmath24 cases . convergence is approached at roughly 0.7 order for both cases . the fraction of the total energy ( magnetic plus kinetic ) in magnetic field fluctuations increases with resolution , reaching @xmath109 at @xmath73 . when driven at @xmath74 , the kinetic energy in fluctuations converges to @xmath110 by around @xmath94 , while at @xmath24 it converges at order 0.9 to @xmath111 by @xmath73 . the fraction of the kinetic energy fluctuations in solenoidal modes increases with resolution for both the @xmath74 and @xmath24 cases , converging to @xmath112 . the fraction in compressive modes , on the other hand , decreases with resolution to @xmath113 . convergence for these quantities is not reached until @xmath73 . finally , the ratio of the dissipation timescale to the flow crossing time at the driving scale converges to @xmath114 by @xmath94 for @xmath74 , while for @xmath24 it converges to @xmath115 by @xmath73 . even with a strong magnetic field , the turbulence dissipates in a flow crossing time .    just as in the hydrodynamic case , the increased driving scale caused a higher turbulent mach number and energy at saturation for the @xmath74 than for the @xmath24 case . the fraction of the kinetic energy in solenoidal or compressive modes , however , was independent of driving scale , just as before . the ratio of the dissipation timescale to flow crossing time was also relatively independent of the driving scale . convergence for strong - field mhd turbulence was reached at higher resolutions , typically @xmath73 , than for hydrodynamic turbulence . because we performed a convergence study using the same turbulence parameters as in s98 , we can directly compare our high - resolution results to those published therein . for driven strong - field mhd turbulence with @xmath24 , we find at @xmath94 that our total energy in fluctuations at saturation is only @xmath116 higher than that found in s98 , due to the lower level of numerical dissipation at this resolution in athena than in zeus . for intermediate- and weak - field mhd , our energies are @xmath117 and @xmath116 higher , respectively . it is likely that neither our results nor the s98 results have converged by this resolution , however .    at @xmath73 , there is no obvious difference between the total energy in fluctuations for our strong - field mhd simulation and the s98 result . the values from these two codes converge , even though they utilize completely different numerical methods . the ratio of magnetic to kinetic energy fluctuations , however , is different for the two codes , yielding ratios of dissipation timescale to flow crossing time that differ more substantially . at @xmath94 , this ratio is @xmath118 greater for our strong - field mhd run than that presented in s98 . for intermediate- and weak - field mhd , our ratios are both @xmath119 greater . in all cases , the ratio of timescales remains below unity .    for our driven hydro run at @xmath94 with @xmath24 , we find that our total energy in fluctuations at saturation is also only @xmath116 higher than that found in s98 . although our result has converged by this resolution , the zeus result may not yet be converged . the ratio of dissipation timescale to flow crossing time in this case is @xmath119 greater than that found in s98 , but is still below unity . although it has been suggested in the literature that the rapid decay of supersonic turbulence is due to excessive numerical dissipation in zeus , these results , computed with a higher - order godunov scheme , do not support that conclusion .      to investigate the effect of the turbulent mach number on energies and dissipation rates in the turbulence , we now analyze two series of five driven , supersonic hydrodynamic turbulence simulations at @xmath73 . one series is driven at @xmath74 , while the other is driven at a larger scale of @xmath16 . the energy injection rates of the latter series , the same that we use in paper i , are half that of the former series , giving roughly equal mach numbers to the corresponding pairs . these mach numbers all fall within the range @xmath120 . the properties of these runs can be found in table [ tab : hydro ] . the kinetic energy in each series of runs spans 1.5 orders of magnitude . we find a power law relationship between the kinetic energy and energy injection rate , i.e. @xmath121^{-1/2 } ( { \ensuremath{\dot{e}/\bar{\rho}l^2c_s^3}})^{0.62}.\ ] ] the relationship between the kinetic energy and mach number is , of course , exactly @xmath122 since our mach numbers are computed from the _ density - weighted _ velocity dispersion and there is no net momentum associated with the turbulent medium as a whole . we find for our driving method that we can estimate the mach number that will result from a given energy injection rate using @xmath123^{-1/4 } ( { \ensuremath{\dot{e}/\bar{\rho}l^2c_s^3}})^{0.31}.\ ] ] while this equation gives an indication of how the dissipation scales with mach number , the exact relations will only apply to our unique driving method .    for the runs driven at @xmath74 , the fraction of the kinetic energy in compressive modes varies by only a fraction of a percent among the runs with @xmath124 . these runs have @xmath96 . the fraction drops off only slightly for the @xmath125 run , but then drops substantially , to @xmath126 , for the @xmath127 run . for the runs driven at @xmath16 , the fraction for the @xmath53 and @xmath128 runs is also @xmath96 , while the @xmath129 and @xmath130 runs have a bit larger and smaller fractions , respectively . once again , the fraction for the @xmath127 run is substantially smaller , @xmath131 . it appears as though the fraction of the energy in compressive modes remains roughly the same except when the turbulence is only mildly supersonic , where the fraction is much lower .    the ratio of the dissipation timescale to the flow crossing time at the driving scale remains below unity for all except the @xmath127 run at @xmath74 . while the ratio for the runs at @xmath74 with @xmath132 does nt vary much , when we increase the driving scale to @xmath16 the value does change with mach number . the ratio for the @xmath74 runs is always larger for a given mach number than is the ratio for the @xmath16 runs . finally , we analyze two series of five driven , supersonic , strong - field mhd turbulence simulations at @xmath73 to determine the effect of the turbulent mach number on the energies and dissipation rates . as before , one series is the same @xmath16 set of runs used in paper i , while the other is driven at @xmath74 with twice the energy injection rate , yielding pairs of simulations of roughly the same mach number within the range @xmath133 . the properties of these runs can be found in table [ tab : mhd ] .    as in the hydro case , the kinetic energy in each strong - field mhd series spans nearly 1.5 orders of magnitude . the total energy in fluctuations , which also includes the energy in magnetic field perturbations , increases by an even larger amount from the lowest to highest mach number runs . the power law relationship between the mach number and energy injection rate is @xmath134^{-1/4 } ( { \ensuremath{\dot{e}/\bar{\rho}l^2c_s^3}})^{0.30},\ ] ] which leads to a slightly narrower range of mach numbers than does the relation for pure hydro . again , although this gives an indication of how energy dissipation scales with mach number , the exact relationship is unique to our driving method . the fraction of the kinetic energy in compressive modes for strong - field mhd is much less than for hydro . when @xmath16 , the fractions increase monotonically with mach number , from only @xmath135 for @xmath136 to @xmath137 for @xmath138 . when @xmath74 , however , the values are much less predictable . in this case , the @xmath128 and @xmath127 runs have nearly identical values when @xmath16 , whereas for hydro the fraction at low mach number was substantially smaller than the values for higher mach numbers .    the ratio of the dissipation timescale to the flow crossing time at the driving scale decreases with mach number . while the values for high mach number are below unity , the low mach number values become as large as @xmath139 . the values for the highest mach numbers are roughly the same for both driving scales , but for the smaller driving scale they increase more quickly . the mach number has a strong influence on the dissipation rate of the turbulence , but even for @xmath140 the dissipation timescale does not exceed twice the flow crossing time . we next consider turbulent velocity power spectra . we compute the power spectrum ( ps ) of the velocity , @xmath141 , as well as that of its compressive and solenoidal components , @xmath142 and @xmath143 , respectively , in the same way as was done in v03 for the psd of the specific kinetic energy and its components . to generate the spherically - integrated compensated power spectra that we will present , we average @xmath144 within spherical shells and multiply by the volume within the shell , @xmath145 , to find @xmath146 , where @xmath147 .    to determine the degree of anisotropy in mhd turbulence , we will also analyze cylindrically - integrated power spectra . we generate these spectra by averaging @xmath148 over cylindrical shells whose axes are oriented along the mean magnetic field direction . this yields @xmath149 , where @xmath150 is parallel to the mean magnetic field and @xmath151 is in the plane normal to the field . the majority of the power spectra we present in our figures are compensated  divided by a power law to produce plots where the inertial range is very roughly horizontal , making small deviations from a power law easier to see . for each of our driven turbulence runs , we compute power spectra from many snapshots taken at regular intervals , averaging them together to minimize the effects of rare events . with the exception of the @xmath0 runs , we average over at least 69 snapshots spanning at least 4.6 dynamical times . while we averaged over 2.7 dynamical times for the @xmath0 hydro run , the mhd case is not sufficiently time - averaged . sytine et al .  ( 2000 ) presented the power spectra of decaying , subsonic , adiabatic hydrodynamic turbulence at a range of resolutions . these power spectra demonstrate the formation of a feature known as the bottleneck effect . energy cascades down from larger scales but can not easily be dissipated , causing a build - up of small - scale power . we begin by verifying that athena can reproduce the bottleneck . these are the only set of adiabatic runs we will consider . the initial velocity perturbations in these decaying runs have the same form of power spectrum as in our driven runs with @xmath74 and are normalized to give an initial turbulent mach number of @xmath152 . after this impulse is given to the initially uniform ambient medium , it is allowed to evolve undisturbed until @xmath153 . figure [ fig : hdcpwr1k4res ] shows the uncompensated velocity power spectrum at this time for runs with resolutions from @xmath94 to @xmath0 . as expected , this plot appears very similar to figure 11 of sytine et al . since athena was designed to have low numerical dissipation , the bottleneck is strong in our simulations of mildly - compressible ( subsonic ) turbulence .    analyzing the compressive and solenoidal components of the velocity separately , we find that the bottleneck appears quite strong in the ps of the latter while apparently absent in that of the former . this is not surprising as shocks directly couple large and small scales , allowing the compressive energy to bypass the turbulent cascade and be immediately dissipated . the absence of the bottleneck in the compressive component agrees with the results of porter et al . ( 1999 ) for mach 1 driven , adiabatic hydro turbulence . at the very highest wavenumbers in our simulations , the power in the compressive component flattens out . although this could be an artifact of the code related to its treatment of shocks , one should be wary of putting too much stock in the high-@xmath154 region of any power spectrum as effects such as aliasing ( introduced in the calculation of the power spectrum , not the fluid dynamics ) could substantially alter the power in that region ( see , e.g. , press et al . 1992 for a more detailed discussion ) . next we consider driven supersonic ( isothermal ) hydrodynamic turbulence . we compute velocity power spectra for runs with @xmath16 to maximize the separation between the driving and dissipative scales . to obtain a slightly higher turbulent mach number , @xmath155 , than before , we use an energy injection rate of @xmath15 . these are the same runs from the mach number scaling analysis of  [ sec : hydmachsatresults ] . figure [ fig : hpwr1k2res ] shows our compensated time - averaged velocity power spectrum for resolutions of @xmath94 through @xmath0 . to align the dissipative range for simulations with different resolutions , we express wavenumber as a fraction of the nyquist value , @xmath156 for a simulation with resolution @xmath157 . at low resolution we see no inertial range , but by @xmath0 we have separated the driving and dissipative scales enough that we may be just starting to see an inertial range . there is a small range , @xmath158 , where we see roughly a @xmath159 power law , but we are still using a small amount of forcing up through @xmath17 so the slope in this range may be affected . we find a much longer power law range over @xmath160 , @xmath161 . although it may be argued that a slope this shallow must be due to a bottleneck , the range of scales with steeper slope is far too limited to conclude this definitively from our data . a higher resolution would be required to determine if this is actually the case . figures [ fig : hpwr1s2res ] and [ fig : hpwr1c2res ] show power spectra of the solenoidal and compressive components of velocity , respectively . for the solenoidal component , we find power laws @xmath162 and @xmath163 over the ranges @xmath158 and @xmath160 , respectively . for the compressive component , however , we find only @xmath164 over the range @xmath165 . in two independent @xmath73 simulations that use different random perturbations to seed and drive the turbulence , we find the slopes of the compressive component to agree with each other as well as that of the @xmath0 simulation to within a percent , suggesting that the length of our time - averaging is sufficient . the ratio of power in the compressive and solenoidal components of velocity is much higher than for subsonic turbulence , having the effect of slightly washing out the shallow feature in the velocity spectrum in the supersonic case . when comparing hydro turbulence with @xmath24 , we find more power at high wavenumbers for turbulence evolved using athena than using zeus . although it was stated in v03 that the bottleneck would not affect finite difference codes , plotting the compensated power spectrum shows some evidence of blending of the driving peak with a secondary bump or shallowing of the spectrum ( much less prominent than in our own ) . if this is indeed a bottleneck , this difference likely results from the greater numerical dissipation in zeus than in athena . analyzing driven strong - field mhd turbulence with @xmath16 and an energy injection rate of @xmath15 , shown in figure [ fig : mpwr1k2res ] , we again find no inertial range at low resolution . in this @xmath155 run , the velocity power spectrum is dominated by the solenoidal component , resulting in a substantial shallowing of the spectrum that is apparent in the higher - resolution runs . at @xmath73 , the slope of the spectrum over the interval @xmath166 is only slightly steeper than @xmath167 for the velocity and its solenoidal ( figure [ fig : mpwr1s2res ] ) component . we find spectral slopes in two independent @xmath73 simulations ( whose power spectra were averaged together to give that plotted in the figures ) that agree to within a few percent , suggesting that our time - averaging to obtain a reliable spectral slope .    although we do not have a sufficiently long time - average to find a robust fit to the slope of the @xmath0 run , the slopes appear to be very similar . as before , the slope we have found is much shallower than is typically predicted predicted for the inertial range , while being steeper than that presented in k07 as the bottleneck spectral slope . we note that in the mhd case , the range over which we find a power law seems to increase with resolution , which one would not expect if the feature was due to numerical dissipation ( bottleneck ) . it has been argued by k07 that the quantity @xmath168 should have an inertial range power law of @xmath169 even for supersonic turbulence , but we see over a wide range of wavenumbers a @xmath170 law ( figure [ fig : mpwr1u2res ] ) . kurien et al .  ( 2004 ) have shown for subsonic turbulence that , while the @xmath169 law is appropriate when the energy timescale dominates over the helicity timescale , a @xmath170 law is expected when the helicity timescale is non - negligible compared to the energy timescale , even when the relative helicity may seem insignificant . this should be investigated as a possible cause of the bottleneck effect in supersonic turbulence .    over the range @xmath171 , the compressive component ( figure [ fig : mpwr1c2res ] ) of the @xmath73 run follows a power law @xmath172 . for @xmath0 run , the power spectrum appears to smoothly change slope , indicating that it is not a power law , but a longer time - average might change the shape . the power spectrum of the magnetic field at @xmath73 follows the power law @xmath173 over the range @xmath174 . at @xmath0 , the slope appears very similar , but with extra noise at the smaller wavenumbers due to the short time - average used . for all resolutions studied , the uncompensated power approaches a constant , non - zero value at the highest wavenumbers . this produces a very prominent upturn in the compensated spectra . a direct comparison for strong - field mhd with @xmath24 shows more power at high wavenumber from athena than from zeus for the velocity and its compressive and solenoidal components , just as was true for the hydro case . if the shallowing of our velocity spectrum is due to the bottleneck effect , then what appeared to be inertial range when v03 was published is likely affected by the bottleneck as well . figure [ fig : mpwrspec2d ] shows our cylindrically - integrated power spectra at @xmath73 . we find anisotropy in the power spectrum of magnetic field perturbations as well as the velocity and its solenoidal component . there is more power perpendicular to the mean magnetic field at a given wavenumber than parallel to it . parallel to the mean field , the power law is roughly @xmath175 , similar to that of the purely hydrodynamic case . perpendicular to the field , however , the slope is much more shallow , roughly @xmath170 . we find the power spectrum of the compressive component of velocity to be nearly isotropic , in contradiction to what was found in v03 . the velocity power spectrum of _ subsonic _ turbulence results from a conservative cascade of energy from large to small scales through interactions local in fourier space . it is commonly believed that the velocity spectrum of supersonic turbulence , because it too is a power law , must also result from such a cascade . it is commonly known , however , that the power spectrum of a discontinuity , or an ensemble of shocks as in burgers turbulence , also have velocity spectra that follow a power law , @xmath159 . in figure [ fig : blastcomprimh ] , we confirm that the compressive component of velocity in our @xmath94 supersonic , strong - field mhd turbulence run with @xmath16 has a spectrum similar to that of velocity in an mhd blast wave that was initially spherical . this calls into question the long - held assumption that the power spectrum seen in supersonic turbulence results from an energy cascade facilitated by interactions local in fourier space . it would seem that other diagnostics , such as structure functions , are necessary in order to determine the cause of the power law spectrum , either a fourier - space cascade as in incompressible turbulence , or an ensemble of shocks as in burgers turbulence .    to get a clearer idea of which features in our power spectra are representative of the turbulence and which were introduced in the post - processing , we compare power spectra computed by multiple methods . our control spectrum will be computed as were the others presented in this section  averaged over the cells within a shell and then multiplied by the volume of the shell , @xmath145 , which we will refer to as `` shell - averaged '' for the remainder of this section . our comparison will be to another commonly used method ( e.g.  p07 ) , where the power is simply summed over the cells falling within the shell ( `` shell - summed '' ) . these methods differ due to the discretization of the grid , i.e. because the fourier - space volume occupied by the cells within a bin is not , in general , equal to the volume of the perfectly spherical shell that the bin represents . while the bins in our control spectrum are centered on integer values of @xmath176 , those in the alternative spectrum instead run _ between _ integer values . we use the time - averaged power spectrum of the driven strong - field mhd turbulence run at @xmath73 for our comparison , although the effect should be independent of the run being analyzed . when overplotting the spectra produced by these two methods ( see figure [ fig : psmethod ] ) , the most obvious difference is at low @xmath154 . although the shell - averaged spectrum is relatively smooth in the range @xmath177 , the other has a jagged shape over this same range resulting from its sensitivity to the number of cells falling within a bin , making the `` slope '' of the power spectrum in this region much less obvious . if we compare the shell - summed spectrum to one computed by the same method but with the bins shifted by half a bin width ( aligning these bins with our own ) , we find that shape of the spectrum at low @xmath154 changes considerably . if , on the other hand , we take the shell - averaged spectrum and compare it to one computed in the same manner but with bins shifted to align with those typically used in the shell - summed method , we see that , although the power in each bin does change , the shape and slope of the spectrum change very little . while neither method is right or wrong , we advise caution when choosing a binning method for power spectra ; differences in slope computed by different means are not necessarily indicative of different turbulent states . although molecular clouds have supersonic velocity dispersions on large scales , as one looks to smaller and smaller scales , turbulent compressions will become progressively weaker , at some point becoming subsonic . the length scale at which the rms velocity dispersion is equal to the sound speed is referred to as the sonic scale ( mckee & ostriker 2007 ) . we now investigate how the velocity dispersion varies on spatial scales larger than the sonic scale , where shocks are most important . this scaling can be determined observationally in the form of linewidth - size relations using many different methods . for example , brunt ( 2003 ) used principal component analysis ( pca ) to determine the linewidth - size relation within individual clouds .    to determine the velocity dispersion at a given length scale , @xmath178 , where @xmath179 and @xmath180 is an integer , we divide our computational domain along each axis into @xmath181 sections , yielding @xmath182 sub - volumes . we compute the velocity dispersion in each sub - volume and then average over all sub - volumes at that scale . because crossing the sonic scale represents a change in the physics dominating the flow , i.e. waves steeping to form shocks , for this analysis only we will compute the velocity dispersion without mass - weighting , i.e. @xmath20^{1/2}$ ] , where @xmath183^{1/2}$ ] . figure [ fig : sonichyd ] shows the velocity dispersion versus length scale for the @xmath0 , @xmath184 driven hydrodynamic turbulence run with @xmath16 . since driving may affect the scaling relation , we truncate our driving spectrum at @xmath17 , where the driving has already dropped to only @xmath88 of the peak level , and consider only this and smaller scales . fitting to the data points falling between the sonic scale and the driving cutoff , a factor of eight in length , we find a clear power law of the form @xmath185 . this scaling index falls well within the range of indices found observationally by brunt ( 2003 ) . shown in figure [ fig : sonicmhd ] is the velocity dispersion versus length scale for the @xmath0 , @xmath184 driven strong - field mhd turbulence run with @xmath16 . this time , over the range of scales where the flow is supersonic , we find that the slope is not a power law . unlike in hydrodynamic turbulence , the sonic scale is not the only scale at which the dominant physics changes . in fact , we would expect the multiple wave families of mhd to lead to multiple transitions , and for strong fields , these transitions are widely separated . for example , parallel to the magnetic field , slow waves will travel at the sound speed , whereas fast waves will travel at the alfvn speed . perpendicular to the field , however , the slow waves will have zero velocity and the fast waves will travel with a speed @xmath186 . this is complicated further by the fact that the parallel and perpendicular directions are defined relative to the _ local _ magnetic field , not the mean field . as a result , we have no reason to expect a uniform power law between the sonic scale and driving cutoff . it is not clear to what extent this result is affected by dissipation .      up to this point we have averaged quantities from multiple snapshots in order to minimize the effect of rare events on our results . our final set of diagnostics will instead be an analysis of the time - variability and temperature intermittency of the turbulent gas . we begin by analyzing the time - variability of some of the quantities we analyzed in  [ sec : satresults ] . for our hydrodynamic runs with the smallest driving scale , @xmath24 , we find the time - variability of the saturation energy to be only half a percent at both @xmath94 and @xmath73 . time - variability of less than a percent agrees with the results in s98 even though they drove their turbulence impulsively . the time - variability quoted in k07 , however , is much higher . the k07 runs were driven at a much larger driving scale than our own . to investigate if this could be the reason for the discrepancy , we will also analyze the time - variability of our runs with larger driving scales . when we increase the driving scale to @xmath74 , we find the time - variability of the energy to be a full percent at both @xmath94 and @xmath73 . as both the driving scale and mach number are varied here as compared to the run we discussed above , this could be due to either . when we increase the driving scale further , to @xmath16 , without changing the mach number , we find the time - variability increases yet again , coming to @xmath93 at @xmath94 and approaching @xmath187 at @xmath73 . it would seem that the driving scale chosen has a significant impact on the time - variability of the energy . the values we find here are still less than that shown in the k07 figure , however .    for strong - field mhd , we again find time - variability of about half a percent for the @xmath24 runs . increasing the driving scale to @xmath74 decreases the time - variability at @xmath94 but increases it a small amount at @xmath73 . increasing the driving scale further , to @xmath16 , yields time - variability of @xmath188 at @xmath94 and @xmath187 at @xmath73 , comparable to the hydro runs .    when we compare the time - variability of the energy among hydro runs at @xmath73 with varied mach number that are driven at @xmath74 , we find that the relation is non - monotonic . with @xmath16 , however , we do see a monotonic relationship , with the time - variability increasing with mach number . for our strong - field mhd runs , we again find non - monotonicity at @xmath74 , while the time - variability increases with mach number at @xmath16 , with the exception of the lowest mach number run .      a feature of turbulence that may have a strong influence on star formation is intermittency , dissipation that is highly localized in space and time ( mckee & ostriker 2007 ) . although such dissipation does not require shocks , it is worthwhile to study the shock contribution in supersonic turbulence . were we not assuming an isothermal equation of state , energy dissipation in these regions would lead to local heating and thus increased temperatures , which would be evident in observations . therefore , to study intermittency due to shocks , we analyze the maximum heating rate per unit mass , @xmath189 , a surrogate for temperature .    since we expect the maximum heating rate , @xmath190 , to be strongly influenced by rare events , such as the interaction of multiple shocks , we consider the time - variability of this quantity . due to the discretization of the grid , however , we would expect a component of the time - variability to be due to grid - scale fluctuations . therefore , instead of considering @xmath190 directly , we consider the statistics of the high-@xmath191 tail of the pdf of the heating rate per unit mass . for each simulation that we consider , we compute the heating rate per unit mass , @xmath191 , in each cell over many snapshots . considering only the cells in each snapshot that compose the @xmath88 of material ( by mass or volume ) with the highest cell - averaged @xmath191 , we compute the mean value . following the time - variability of this value should allow us to ignore meaningless grid - scale fluctuations while studying the intermittency due to shocks . for driven hydrodynamic turbulence at @xmath73 , we find the low mach number runs driven at @xmath74 to have less than @xmath88 variability in the peak temperature , while the higher mach number runs with this same driving scale can have variability as large as @xmath93 but without a monotonic dependence on mach number . at the larger driving scale @xmath16 , however , the variability in the peak temperature always exceeds @xmath88 and can be as high as @xmath187 . it would seem that this , like the time - variability of the saturation energies , increases with driving scale . for our runs , the variability of the peak temperature as measured by the top @xmath88 of the volume never exceeds that from the top @xmath88 of the mass by more than a tiny amount . as we have very few data dumps with which to calculate the statistics , however , the quantitative behavior may not be robust . we find that , in @xmath73 strong - field mhd turbulence driven at @xmath16 , the variability of the peak temperature can be as large as @xmath192 . when driven at @xmath74 , however , the variability always decreases , never exceeding @xmath188 . the variability measured by the top @xmath88 of mass is typically larger than that from the top @xmath88 of volume , but there does not appear to be a strong dependence on mach number . more often than not , the variability in the strong - field mhd runs are larger than in the hydro runs at the same mach number . again , however , these statistics are computed from very few data dumps , making them subject to large errors . figure [ fig : mmitt4 ] shows the time - evolution of the peak temperature in the @xmath74 strong - field mhd run with @xmath25 , for which we have better than typical statistics , compared to the @xmath16 run with @xmath15 . the saturation energies and dissipation timescales we find support the conclusion of s98 that supersonic turbulence dissipates rapidly even in the presence of magnetic fields . the results of our godunov code agree with zeus , an operator - split method that relies on artificial viscosity to capture shocks , but reach convergence at slightly lower resolutions . at @xmath73 the difference in the total energy in fluctuations between athena and zeus for strong - field mhd is very small , indicating that these two codes converge to similar turbulent states at sufficiently high resolution . the convergence resolution of our simulations depends both on the driving scale and the presence of a magnetic field . while hydro turbulence driven at @xmath74 converges by @xmath86 , strong - field mhd turbulence driven at @xmath24 does not converge until @xmath73 . although very high resolutions are needed to capture the inertial range of the turbulence , lower resolutions are often adequate for studying the energy dissipation characteristics of the turbulence as well as other volume - integrated quantities .    at high mach number , the ratio of the dissipation timescale to the flow crossing time at the driving scale increases with increasing magnetic field strength ; however , it does not exceed unity even for strong - field mhd turbulence . this ratio is independent of driving scale . the fractions of the kinetic energy in solenoidal and compressive modes are also independent of driving scale , with the compressive fraction generally being more than twice as high for hydrodynamic than for strong - field mhd turbulence .    our spherically - integrated velocity power spectra for decaying , subsonic hydrodynamic turbulence show evidence of the bottleneck effect in the velocity power spectrum , consistent with the findings of sytine et al . we find more power at high wavenumber in our driven , supersonic hydro and mhd turbulence simulations than was found by v03 , but it is unclear , particularly in the mhd case , whether or not this is due to a bottleneck . resolutions exceeding @xmath0 will be necessary to draw firm conclusions about the slope of the inertial range . the cylindrically - averaged velocity power spectrum for driven mhd turbulence is very anisotropic ; it has a slope that approximates that of the hydrodynamic case parallel to the magnetic field , while perpendicular to the field it is much more shallow . the compressive component of velocity has an isotropic power spectrum , contrary to what was found in v03 . we find the compressive component of velocity in driven , supersonic mhd turbulence to have a power spectrum that is difficult to distinguish from the velocity spectrum of an initially - spherical mhd blast wave . this calls into question the long - held assumption that supersonic turbulence power spectra result from an energy cascade facilitated by interactions local in fourier space . the analysis of structure functions may be useful in determining the source of the power law spectrum in supersonic turbulence , either a fourier - space cascade as in incompressible turbulence , or an ensemble of shocks as in burgers turbulence .    for hydrodynamic turbulence , we find a power law scaling of the velocity dispersion with spatial scale , @xmath193 , for scales where the velocity dispersion is supersonic . however , we find no such power law for strong - field mhd turbulence , where the sonic scale is not the only scale of interest . in this case , we find that the velocity dispersion drops off more rapidly than a power law as one approaches smaller scales . we see time - variability in the saturation energies comparable to that of the equivalent runs in s98 despite the impulsive driving employed therein . our time - variability increases when we apply our turbulent driving at larger scales , but remains lower than that shown in k07 even with @xmath16 . it is possible that the acceleration - based driving method of k07 is responsible for the difference . at this large driving scale , the time - variability increases with mach number for both hydro and strong - field mhd . the method used to drive the turbulence appears to have a substantial impact on the resulting turbulent state . further investigation should be conducted to determine how much of the increase in time - variability with driving scale is due to the limited range of scales over which an inverse cascade can occur . if the level of time - variability is determined to be a result of simulation setup and not representative of the physical system we are trying to simulate , better diagnostics or simulation methods need to be developed in order to quantify intermittency in turbulent media . although we have very poor statistics in our temperature intermittency analysis , it appears that this , too , increases with driving scale . considering the difference that the driving method makes on the results , it may be more realistic to study decaying turbulence instead of driving it arbitrarily .    for identical turbulent data cubes , we find that the post - processing methods chosen significantly influence the results . the turbulent mach number changes by @xmath23 depending on the method used in its computation . the means of computing the power spectrum also has a strong influence on the power at wavenumbers overlapping with the inertial range . when comparing results published by different groups , one should keep in mind that this , as well as the code , driving method , and initial conditions , can affect the quantities being compared . although the saturation energies and energy dissipation characteristics of the turbulence converge at resolutions within our current computational capabilities , the power spectra appear to require much higher resolutions to provide valuable information . also considering that turbulent power spectra can be approximated by non - turbulent phenomena , it would seem that , for the time being , our focus should be on other diagnostics . in conducting these numerical simulations , we have made many simplifications in order to make the problem more tractable . these assumptions , however , may prove to significantly impact the results . future studies should consider non - ideal mhd in order to model low - ionization molecular clouds , a non - isothermal equation of state in order to study heating and cooling , and self - gravity in order to follow the collapse of the bound clumps that form in the turbulent medium . we thank eve ostriker for very productive discussion and tom gardiner for his invaluable assistance in bringing athena up to the task of successfully simulating supersonic turbulence . we would also like to thank alexei kritsuk , cristoph federrath , and alex lazarian for their feedback . simulations were performed on the ibm blue gene at princeton and on computational facilities supported by nsf grants ast-0216105 and ast-0722479 . the calculations presented in this paper were conducted using athena , a directionally - unsplit , higher - order godunov code . this code exactly conserves mass , momentum , and magnetic flux , as well as energy when assuming an adiabatic equation of state . the code captures shocks well and has a low level of numerical dissipation . although the full details of the algorithms and implementation can be found in the literature ( gardiner & stone 2005 , 2008 ; stone et al . 2008 ; stone & gardiner 2008 ) , we will briefly summarize here , noting any modifications made to the algorithms in order to successfully run the challenging problem of high mach number turbulence .    the integration algorithm used in our calculations is a simple predictor - corrector scheme based on the muscl - hancock scheme of van leer ( 2006 ) , combined with the constrained transport method of evans & hawley ( 1998 ) to enforce the divergence - free constraint on the magnetic field ( i.e. the vl+ct algorithm described in detail in stone & gardiner 2008 ) . we find the additional diffusion associated with this scheme as compared to our ctu+ct algorithm ( described in detail in stone et al . 2008 ) to make it more robust to the strong rarefactions that arise in a highly turbulent medium . although the algorithm is formally only second - order accurate , we use third order ( piecewise parabolic ) spatial reconstruction , finding it to provide more accurate solutions in test problems due to smaller truncation error .    for our isothermal hydrodynamics runs , we found there to be strong rarefactions within the turbulent medium for which an approximate riemann solver simply was not accurate enough , necessitating the use of an exact nonlinear riemann solver . for adiabatic hydrodynamics as well as isothermal and adiabatic mhd , we were able to use approximate nonlinear riemann solvers , namely hllc for the hydro case and hlld for mhd , more details about which can be found in stone et al . although we used our own adaptation of the adiabatic hlld solver of miyoshi & kusano ( 2005 ) for our isothermal mhd runs , we found it to produce turbulent states extremely similar to those from the isothermal hlld solver of mignone ( 2007 ) . although these riemann solvers are positive definite in 1d , it is not guaranteed that they will be so in multidimensions . in fact , we found that , under extreme conditions , the net mass flux out of a cell in our isothermal 3d turbulent medium occasionally exceeded the cell s initial mass . in the rare circumstance that this occurred , we recomputed the fluxes of all variables through all interfaces bordering such cells using first - order reconstruction . in our mach 7 strong - field mhd run at @xmath73 that uses @xmath16 , this affected only a fraction @xmath194 of the fluxes computed in the corrector step of the integrator . dropping to first order introduced enough diffusion in the immediate vicinity to keep the cell - averaged density positive , while having a negligible effect on the overall system . adding diffusion in this manner instead of enforcing a density floor maintains exact conservation . brunt , c.m . 2003 , apj 584 , 293 cho , j. & lazarian , a. 2003 , mnras 345 , 325 cho , j. & lazarian , a. 2005 , thcfd 19 , 127 churchwell , e. et al . 2004 , apjs 154 , 322 crutcher , r.m . 1999 , apj 520 , 706 elmegreen , b.g . & scalo , j. 2004 , araa 42 , 211 esquivel , a. , lazarian , a. , & pogosyan , d. 2003 , mnras 342 , 325 evans , c.r . & hawley , j.f . 1988 , apj 322 , 659 falgarone , e. , & philips , t.g . 1990 , apj 359 , 344 federrath , c. , klessen , r.s . , & schmidt , w. 2008 , in prep . gardiner , t.a . & stone , j.m . 2005 , jcoph 205 , 509 gardiner , t.a . & stone , j.m . 2008 , jcoph 227 , 4123 haugen , n.e.l . & brandenburg , a. 2004 , phrve 70 , 026405 kowal , g. , lazarian , a. , & beresnyak , a. 2007 , apj 658 , 423 kritsuk , a.g . , norman , m.l . , padoan , p. , & wagner , r. 2007 , apj 665 , 416 ( k07 ) kurien , s. , taylor , m.a . , & matsumoto , t. 2004 , phrve 69 , 066313 lemaster , m.n . & stone , j.m . 2008 , apjl 682 , l97 ( paper i ) mac low , m .- m . 1999 , apj 524 , 169 mac low , m .- & klessen , r.s . 2004 , rvmp 76 , 125 mckee , c.f . & ostriker , e.c . 2007 , araa 45 , 565 mignone , a. 2007 , jcoph 225 , 1427 miyoshi , t. & kusano , k. 2005 , jcoph 315 , 344 mizuno , a. , onishi , t. , yonekura , y. , nagahama , t. , ogawa , h. , & fukui , y. 1995 , apj 445 , l161 ostriker , e.c . , gammie , c.f . , & stone , j.m . 1999 , apj 513 , 259 ostriker , e.c . , stone , j.m . , & gammie , c.f . 2001 , apj 546 , 980 padoan , p. , jones , b.j.t . , & nordlund , a.p . 1997 , apj 474 , 730 padoan , p. , nordlund , a. , kritsuk , a.g . , norman , m.l . , & li , p.s . 2007 , apj 661 , 972 ( p07 ) passot , t. & vazquez - semadeni , e. 1998 , phrve , 58 , 4501 porter , d. , pouquet , a. , sytine , i. , & woodward , p. 1999 , phya 263 , 263 press , w.h . , flannery , b.r . , teukolsky , s.a . , & vetterling , w.t . 1992 , numerical recipes in c ( 2nd ed . ; cambridge : cambridge university press ) stone , j.m . , & gardiner , t.a . 2008 , newa , in press stone , j.m . , ostriker , e.c . , & gammie , c.f . 1998 , apj 508 , l99 ( s98 ) stone , j.m . , gardiner , t.a . , teuben , p. , hawley , j.f . , & simon , j. 2008 , apjs , in press ( arxiv0804.0402 ) sytine , i.v . , porter , d.h . , woodward , p.r . , hodson , s.w . , & winkler , k .- h . 2000 , jcoph 158 , 225 van leer , b. 2006 , comm . phys . 1 , 192 vestuto , j.g . , ostriker , e.c . , & stone , j.m . 2003 , apj 590 , 858 ( v03 )
Abstract:

Answer: we study energy dissipation and heating by supersonic mhd turbulence in molecular clouds using athena , a new higher - order godunov code . we analyze the dependence of the saturation amplitude , energy dissipation characteristics , power spectra , sonic scaling , and indicators of intermittency in the turbulence on factors such as the magnetic field strength , driving scale , energy injection rate , and numerical resolution . while convergence in the energies is reached at moderate resolutions , we find that the power spectra require much higher resolutions that are difficult to obtain . in a @xmath0 hydro run , we find a power law relationship between the velocity dispersion and the spatial scale on which it is measured , while for an mhd run at the same resolution we find no such power law . the time - variability and temperature intermittency in the turbulence both show a dependence on the driving scale , indicating that numerically driving turbulence by an arbitrary mechanism may not allow a realistic representation of these properties . we also note similar features in the power spectrum of the compressive component of velocity for supersonic mhd turbulence as in the velocity spectrum of an initially - spherical mhd blast wave , implying that the power law form does not rule out shocks , rather than a turbulent cascade , playing a significant role in the regulation of energy transfer between spatial scales .