arxiv: v3 [astro-ph.ga] 25 Sep 2014

Transcription

1 Astronomy & Astrohysics manuscrit no. PIP 86 arxiv c ESO 214 Setember 26, 214 arxiv: v3 [astro-h.ga] 25 Se 214 Planck intermediate results. XX. Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence Planck Collaboration: P. A. R. Ade 71, N. Aghanim 5, D. Alina 76,9, M. I. R. Alves 5, G. Aniano 5, C. Armitage-Calan 74, M. Arnaud 61, D. Arzoumanian 5, M. Ashdown 58,5, F. Atrio-Barandela, J. Aumont 5, C. Baccigalui 7, A. J. Banday 76,9, R. B. Barreiro 55, E. Battaner 77,78, K. Benabed 51,75, A. Benoit-Lévy 22,51,75, J.-P. Bernard 76,9, M. Bersanelli 31,44, P. Bielewicz 76,9,7, J. R. Bond 8, J. Borrill 12,72, F. R. Bouchet 51,75, F. Boulanger 5, A. Bracco 5, C. Burigana 43,29, J.-F. Cardoso 62,1,51, A. Catalano 63,6, A. Chamballu 61,13,5, H. C. Chiang 25,6, P. R. Christensen 68,34, S. Colombi 51,75, L. P. L. Colombo 21,56, C. Combet 63, F. Couchot 59, A. Coulais 6, B. P. Crill 56,69, A. Curto 5,55, F. Cuttaia 43, L. Danese 7, R. D. Davies 57, R. J. Davis 57, P. de Bernardis 3, A. de Rosa 43, G. de Zotti 4,7, J. Delabrouille 1, C. Dickinson 57, J. M. Diego 55, S. Donzelli 44, O. Doré 56,, M. Dousis 5, X. Duac 36, G. Efstathiou 53, T. A. Enßlin 66, H. K. Eriksen 54, E. Falgarone 6, L. Fanciullo 5, K. Ferrière 76,9, F. Finelli 43,45, O. Forni 76,9, M. Frailis 42, A. A. Fraisse 25, E. Franceschi 43, S. Galeotta 42, K. Ganga 1, T. Ghosh 5, M. Giard 76,9, Y. Giraud-Héraud 1, J. González-Nuevo 55,7, K. M. Górski 56,79, A. Gregorio 32,42,47, A. Gruuso 43, V. Guillet 5, F. K. Hansen 54, D. L. Harrison 53,58, G. Helou, C. Hernández-Monteagudo 11,66, S. R. Hildebrandt, E. Hivon 51,75, M. Hobson 5, W. A. Holmes 56, A. Hornstru 14, K. M. Huffenberger 23, A. H. Jaffe 48, T. R. Jaffe 76,9, W. C. Jones 25, M. Juvela, E. Keihänen, R. Keskitalo 12, T. S. Kisner 65, R. Kneissl 35,7, J. Knoche 66, M. Kunz 15,5,2, H. Kurki-Suonio,38, G. Lagache 5, J.-M. Lamarre 6, A. Lasenby 5,58, C. R. Lawrence 56, R. Leonardi 36, F. Levrier 6, M. Liguori 28, P. B. Lilje 54, M. Linden-Vørnle 14, M. Lóez-Caniego 55, P. M. Lubin 26, J. F. Macías-Pérez 63, D. Maino 31,44, N. Mandolesi 43,4,29, M. Maris 42, D. J. Marshall 61, P. G. Martin 8, E. Martínez-González 55, S. Masi 3, S. Matarrese 28, P. Mazzotta 33, A. Melchiorri 3,46, L. Mendes 36, A. Mennella 31,44, M. Migliaccio 53,58, M.-A. Miville-Deschênes 5,8, A. Moneti 51, L. Montier 76,9, G. Morgante 43, D. Mortlock 48, D. Munshi 71, J. A. Murhy 67, P. Naselsky 68,34, F. Nati 3, P. Natoli 29,3,43, C. B. Netterfield 18, F. Noviello 57, D. Novikov 48, I. Novikov 68, C. A. Oxborrow 14, L. Pagano 3,46, F. Pajot 5, D. Paoletti 43,45, F. Pasian 42, V.-M. Pelkonen 49, O. Perdereau 59, L. Perotto 63, F. Perrotta 7, F. Piacentini 3, M. Piat 1, D. Pietrobon 56, S. Plaszczynski 59, E. Pointecouteau 76,9, G. Polenta 3,41, L. Poa 52, G. W. Pratt 61, S. Prunet 51,75, J.-L. Puget 5, J. P. Rachen 19,66, M. Reinecke 66, M. Remazeilles 57,5,1, C. Renault 63, S. Ricciardi 43, T. Riller 66, I. Ristorcelli 76,9, G. Rocha 56,, C. Rosset 1, G. Roudier 1,6,56, B. Rusholme 49, M. Sandri 43, D. Scott 2, J. D. Soler 5, L. D. Sencer 71, V. Stolyarov 5,58,73, R. Stomor 1, R. Sudiwala 71, D. Sutton 53,58, A.-S. Suur-Uski,38, J.-F. Sygnet 51, J. A. Tauber 37, L. Terenzi 43, L. Toffolatti 17,55, M. Tomasi 31,44, M. Tristram 59, M. Tucci 15,59, G. Umana 39, L. Valenziano 43, J. Valiviita,38, B. Van Tent 64, P. Vielva 55, F. Villa 43, L. A. Wade 56, B. D. Wandelt 51,75,27, and A. Zonca 26 (Affiliations can be found after the references) Received...; acceted... ABSTRACT Polarized emission observed by Planck HFI at 353 GHz towards a samle of nearby fields is resented, focusing on the statistics of olarization fractions and angles ψ. The olarization fractions and column densities in these nearby fields are reresentative of the range of values obtained over the whole sky. We find that: (i) the largest olarization fractions are reached in the most diffuse fields; (ii) the maximum olarization fraction max decreases with column density N H in the more oaque fields with N H > 21 cm 2 ; and (iii) the olarization fraction along a given line of sight is correlated with the local satial coherence of the olarization angle. These observations are comared to olarized emission mas comuted in simulations of anisotroic magnetohydrodynamical (MHD) turbulence in which we assume a uniform intrinsic olarization fraction of the dust grains. We find that an estimate of this arameter may be recovered from the maximum olarization fraction max in diffuse regions where the magnetic field is ordered on large scales and erendicular to the line of sight. This emhasizes the imact of anisotroies of the magnetic field on the emerging olarization signal. The decrease of the olarization fraction with column density in nearby molecular clouds is well reroduced in the simulations, indicating that it is essentially due to the turbulent structure of the magnetic field: an accumulation of variously olarized structures along the line of sight leads to such an anti-correlation. In the simulations, olarization fractions are also found to anti-correlate with the angle disersion function S. However, the disersion of the olarization angle for a given olarization fraction is found to be larger in the simulations than in the observations, suggesting a shortcoming in the hysical content of these numerical models. In summary, we find that the turbulent structure of the magnetic field is able to reroduce the main statistical roerties of the dust olarization as observed in a variety of nearby clouds, dense cores excluded, and that the large-scale field orientation with resect to the line of sight lays a major role in the quantitative analysis of these statistical roerties. Key words. ISM: general, dust, magnetic fields, clouds Infrared: ISM Submillimetre: ISM Methods: observational, numerical, statistical 1. Introduction Planck 1 (Tauber et al. 2, Planck Collaboration I 211) is the third generation sace-mission aimed at maing the 1 Planck (htt:// is a roject of the Euroean Sace Agency (ESA) with instruments rovided by two scientific consortia funded by ESA member states (in articular the lead countries France and Italy), with contributions from NASA (USA) and anisotroies of the cosmic microwave background (CMB). With its unrecedented sensitivity and large sectral coverage (nine channels from 3 GHz to 857 GHz) it has rovided exquisite mas of that relic radiation (Planck Collaboration I 214). With its olarimetric caabilities u to 353 GHz, Planck will also rotelescoe reflectors rovided by a collaboration between ESA and a scientific consortium led and funded by Denmark.

2 2 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence Polaris Flare Ohiuchus Taurus Ara Chamaeleon-Musca Orion Perseus Pavo Pisces Microscoium log ( τ 353 ) Fig. 1. Locations of the selected nearby fields. The background ma reresents otical deth τ 353 at 353 GHz on a logarithmic scale, at 5 resolution (Planck Collaboration XI 214). The ma uses a Mollweide rojection in Galactic coordinates, with (l, b) = (, ) at the centre. vide clues on the hysics of the early Universe, by measuring the CMB olarization. However, dominant foreground emission is also artially olarized, masking the rimordial signal. In the range of the High Frequency Instrument (HFI, Lamarre et al. 2), from GHz to 857 GHz, the main contribution to the observed radiation, besides oint sources, is thermal emission from dust grains. The angular momenta of asherical and sinning grains tend to align with the local magnetic field, although the details of how this alignment roceeds are still the subject of study : see for instance Andersson (212) for a review on observational constraints regarding grain alignment with resect to current dust models. Submillimetre thermal dust emission is therefore olarized and reresents a owerful tool to study interstellar magnetic fields and dust roerties. Ideally, we would like to know where in interstellar clouds, and with what efficiency the dust emission and extinction is olarized. This would allow us to use olarization data to infer the satial structure of the magnetic field. There is an extensive literature on this toic based on observations of starlight olarization, which have been interreted from two different viewoints, i.e., grain alignement and magnetic field structure, without achieving a clear understanding of the resective roles of these rocesses in accounting for variations of olarization across the sky. A number of aers (e.g., Pereyra & Magalhães 27, Alves et al. 28, Marchwinski et al. 212) use the data to infer the magnetic field strength using the Chandreskar-Fermi method (Chandrasekhar & Fermi 1953). Other aers focus on the observed decrease of olarization fraction with N H to interret the data as a decrease of the dust alignment efficiency in dense clouds (Lazarian et al. 1997, Whittet et al. 28, Chaman et al. 211). Magnetohydrodynamical (MHD) simulations rovide a theoretical framework to consider both asects in the interretation of olarization datasets. Ostriker et al. (21) were among the first to resent simulated olarization mas from MHD simulations, for comarison with data and to study the field structure beyond the simle Chandrasekhar-Fermi method. Falceta- Gonçalves et al. (28) used a similar technique to study the effect of the Alfvénic Mach number, while Pelkonen et al. (29) added to this aroach the modelling of the alignment rocess by radiative torques (Hoang & Lazarian 28). Planck has maed the olarized dust emission with great sensitivity and resolution (Planck Collaboration Int. XIX 214), allowing us to characterize satial variations of dust olarization and comare data with MHD simulations with unrecedented statistics. This aer is the second in a series of four dealing with a first resentation of the Planck olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust. The other three are the following: Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214) describes the olarized dust emission at 353 GHz as seen by Planck over the whole sky and shows in articular that the maximum olarization fraction max at a given total gas column density N H decreases as N H increases, and that there is an anti-correlation between olarization fractions and angle disersion functions S, an effect which has also been seen with starlight olarization data (Hatano et al. 213). Planck Collaboration Int. XXI (214) comares olarized thermal emission from dust at 353 GHz to olarization in extinction in the visible towards a samle of stars. Finally,

3 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence 3 Table 1. Locations and roerties of the selected fields: Galactic longitudes l and latitudes b of the centre of the fields; estimates of distances, masses and ages, where available; average and maximum column densities at 15 resolution; fraction f 22 of the ixels with N H > 22 cm 2 ; and fraction f 21 of the ixels with N H < 21 cm 2. These fields are the same as several of those listed in Table 1 of Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214). l b Distance a Mass b Age c N H max (N H ) f 22 f 21 Field [ ] [ ] [c] [M ] [Myr] [ 21 cm 2 ] [ 21 cm 2 ] [%] [%] Polaris Flare Taurus Orion > Chamaeleon-Musca > Ohiuchus > Microscoium Pisces Perseus Ara Pavo a Estimates of distances are from Elias (1978) for Taurus, Zagury et al. (1999) for Polaris Flare, de Zeeuw et al. (1999) for Ohiuchus, Whittet et al. (1997) for Chamaeleon-Musca, and Draine (211) for Orion. b Estimates of masses are from Ungerechts & Thaddeus (1987) for Taurus, Loren (1989) for Ohiuchus, Luhman (28) for Chamaeleon-Musca, and Draine (211) for Orion. c Estimates of ages are from Palla & Stahler (22) for Taurus, Wilking et al. (28) for Ohiuchus, Luhman (28) for Chamaeleon-Musca, and Bally (28) for Orion. Planck Collaboration Int. XXII (214) discusses the variation of olarized thermal emission from dust with frequency, from 7 to 353 GHz. Both Planck Collaboration Int. XXI (214) and Planck Collaboration Int. XXII (214) aim at roviding constraints for models of interstellar dust. In this aer, we use Planck olarization data at 353 GHz to resent statistics of olarization fractions and angles in nearby interstellar clouds seen outside the Galactic lane. We then comare the Planck results with simulated observations of olarized thermal dust emission at 353 GHz built from a three-dimensional MHD simulation of the formation of a molecular cloud within colliding flows (Hennebelle et al. 28). In these simulated observations, we work under the assumtion that the otical roerties and the intrinsic olarization fraction of dust grains are constant. At this stage we do not aim at testing models of grain alignment. In this icture, it is exected that the olarization fraction should be maximal when the magnetic field is in the lane of the sky and should, in this case, yield valuable information on the intrinsic olarization fraction. That is why we first focus on the decrease of the maximum value of, rather than its mean or median values, with increasing column density. We then consider the correlation between olarization fractions and local measures of the disersion in olarization angles, as it is exected that larger angular disersions should lower the observed olarization fraction. The aer is organized as follow. Section 2 describes the Planck data used and the statistics drawn from them in the selected regions. Section 3 resents simulated olarized emission observations based on an MHD simulation of interstellar turbulence and comares their statistical roerties with those found towards similar fields in the Planck data. Conclusions are given in Sect. 4. Aendix A resents sulementary figures, and Aendix B details the derivation of the equations yielding the Stokes arameters for dust emission. 2. Planck observations of olarized dust emission 2.1. Planck all-sky data ost-rocessing The data rocessing of Planck HFI is resented in Planck Collaboration VI (214), Planck Collaboration VII (214), Planck Collaboration VIII (214), Planck Collaboration IX (214), and Planck Collaboration X (214). The secifics of the data rocessing in terms of olarization are given in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214). We use the same Planck data set as that resented in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214), i.e., full 5-survey HFI mission data for Stokes I, Q, and U at 353 GHz (which is the Planck channel offering the best signalto-noise ratio for dust olarization) from the DR3 internal data release. Bandass mismatch between individual elements of a air of olarization sensitive bolometers (PSBs) is corrected using in-flight measurements for the dust emission but not for the negligible CO J=3 2 emission (Planck Collaboration IX 214). From the total intensity ma we subtract the offset I offset = 887 MJy sr 1 to set the Galactic zero level at 353 GHz (Planck Collaboration XI 214). Note that this value includes the cosmic infrared background (CIB) monoole and is slightly different from the one given in Planck Collaboration XI (214), as the mas are not the same (full mission vs. nominal mission). We do not correct for zodiacal light emission, nor for the residual diole identified by Planck Collaboration XI (214) at 353 GHz. CMB and CIB fluctuations are ignored, since the regions selected in this study are outside the CMB-CIB mask described in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214), so the olarized emission there is dominated by the dust. The Planck olarization and intensity data that we use in this analysis have been generated in exactly the same manner as the data ublicly released in March 213 and described in Planck Collaboration I (214) and associated aers. Note, however, that the ublicly available data include only temerature mas based on the first two surveys. Planck Collaboration XVI (214) shows the very good consistency of cosmological models derived from intensity only with olarization data at small scales (high CMB multioles). However, as detailed in

4 4 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence Planck Collaboration VI (214) (see their Fig. 27), the 213 olarization data are known to be affected by systematic effects at low multioles which were not yet fully corrected, and thus these data were not used for cosmology 2. We have been careful to check that the Galactic science results in this aer are robust with resect to these systematics 3. We focus in this aer on the olarization fractions and the olarization angles ψ derived from the Stokes I, Q, and U mas obtained by Planck at 353 GHz and at an angular resolution of 15. In the absence of noise, and ψ are defined by and = Q2 + U 2, (1) I ψ = 1 atan (U, Q). (2) 2 Note that ψ is here defined in the HEALPix 4 convention (Górski et al. 25), which means that angles are counted ositively clockwise from the north-south direction. Working in that convention instead of the IAU one, which is anti-clockwise (Planck Collaboration Int. XXI 214), has however no imact on the results resented here. Additionally, since we work on ratios of Stokes arameters, no colour correction is necessary. When (ossibly correlated) noise affects the Stokes arameters, the olarization fraction comuted directly using Eq. 1 is biased. We call this one the naïve estimator of, but various methods have been devised to correct for the bias (Montier et al. 214a), and their resective efficiencies are comared in Montier et al. (214b). Among them is the modified asymtotic (MAS) estimator introduced by Plaszczynski et al. (213), which is comuted from the naive estimator and the noise covariance matrix ertaining to Q and U. Another estimator of the olarization fraction and angle is the Bayesian estimator described in Montier et al. (214a) and Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214), which has the advantage of taking into account the full noise covariance matrix in I, Q and U, and also taking into account the uncertainty on the zero-level offset for I. In the rest of this aer, excet where noted, the mas of olarization fraction and olarization angle ψ at 353 GHz refer to these Bayesian estimators. The Bayesian method also rovides mas of the olarization fraction and angle uncertainties, σ and σ ψ. For the total hydrogen column density ma N H, we use a conversion from the otical deth at 353 GHz, τ 353, derived from Planck Collaboration XI (214): for N H 2 21 cm 2, the dust oacity is aroximately constant, with σ 353 = τ 353 /N H 26 cm 2. We are aware that this conversion is crude, with ossible variations in dust oacity of the order of 2% to 25%, but our findings do not critically deend on that calibration. All of the mas used in this study have a HEALPix resolution N side =. 2 The full mission mas for intensity as well as for olarization will be made ublicly available in the fall of The error-bars we quote include uncertainties associated with residual systematics as estimated by reeating the analysis on different subsets of the data. We have also checked our data analysis on the latest version of the mas available to the consortium to check that the results we find are consistent within the error-bars quoted in this aer. 4 htt://healix.jl.nasa.gov See in articular the latest version of the HEALPix rimer, available at htt://healix.jl. nasa.gov/df/intro.df Overview of the statistics of olarized emission in various fields We have selected ten regions, each in size, that are highlighted in Fig. 1 and whose locations are given in Table 1. These are the same as some of the individual regions mentioned in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214). All of these fields are outside the Galactic lane and robe nearby interstellar material, but they exhibit very different hysical conditions, from the diffuse, turbulent ISM with little to no star-forming activity (Polaris Flare), to self-gravitating, star-forming clouds (Orion). They also differ in terms of olarized emission. Some diffuse regions have high olarization fractions (e.g., Pavo), while some have low olarization fractions (e.g., Polaris Flare). This variety of conditions in terms of olarization fraction and gas content is emhasized in Fig. 2, which shows the distribution of and N H in these regions, comared with the large-scale distribution shown in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214). The latter is reresented by its uer and lower enveloes, comuted from the 1% and 99.99% ercentiles of the distribution within each bin in column density. All the enveloes of two-dimensional distribution functions shown in this aer are comuted in this fashion. Note that to facilitate the comarison with Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214), Fig. 2 uses mas at 1 resolution. In the rest of the aer, as already stated, we use 15 resolution mas. It aears that for column densities between a few times 2 cm 2 and a few times 22 cm 2, the selected fields robe most of the range of olarization fractions observed over the whole sky in this range of column densities. The diffuse Polaris Flare field shows low olarization, while high olarization fractions are reached at similar column densities in the Chamaeleon- Musca comlex, which, being closer to the Galactic lane, is threaded by the large-scale Galactic magnetic field. Another notable feature of Fig. 2 is the fact that in regions with the largest column densities (Taurus, Orion, and Ohiuchus) the maximum olarization fraction decreases with increasing N H, and that the sloes are comarable to the large-scale trend. In the following, we erform statistical analyses of the olarization data in these nearby fields by simly selecting HEALPix ixels whose centres fall within the region of interest, directly from the large-scale mas. Only ixels for which /σ > 3 are retained. This threshold is a reasonable value above which the olarization signal-to-noise ratio is roerly estimated (Montier et al. 214b). Note that some of the fields in Table 1 are quite diffuse (e.g., Pavo), so that the dynamic range in column densities is too small to exhibit a significant relationshi between max and N H. These diffuse fields are therefore discarded in the later analysis. We also build local mas of olarized emission using gnomic rojections of the HEALPix mas. These are shown in the middle row anels of Fig. 3 for the Ohiuchus and Chamaeleon- Musca fields. Similar figures for all other fields are given in Aendix A. On all these mas, which share the same scale, we show the olarization fractions at 353 GHz (colour scale) overlaid with contours of the total gas density and bars of constant length giving the orientation of the aarent rojection of the magnetic field on the lane of the sky. These are built by rotating the 353 GHz olarization bars by 9 so as to recover the average magnetic field orientation in the lane of the sky. In the rest of the aer, we will refer to the rotated olarization bars as the magnetic orientation bars. Note that although they are lotted once every few ixels only, to imrove visibility, each of these bars reresents the orientation at the given ixel. In other words,

5 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence Maximum olarization fraction N H [cm 2 ] Polaris Flare Taurus Chamaeleon-Musca Microscoium Pisces N H [cm 2 ] Ohiuchus Pavo Ara Perseus Orion Fig. 2. Two-dimensional distribution functions of olarization fraction and column density N H in the fields highlighted in Fig. 1. To: Polaris Flare (magenta), Taurus (red), Chamaeleon-Musca (black), Microscoium (blue), and Pisces (green). Bottom: Ohiuchus (magenta), Pavo (red), Ara (black), Perseus (blue), and Orion (green). On both anels, the solid red lines show the uer and lower enveloes (see text) of the large-scale distribution of and N H, clied below N H = 2 2 cm 2, while the dashed red lines corresond to = and the maximum value =.198 (i.e., 19.8%) quoted in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214). beyond the 15 smoothing erformed on the Stokes mas, no further averaging is done to lot the orientation bars on Fig. 3 and similar lots. The large-scale structure of the Galactic magnetic field aears clearly (see e.g., the to art of the Chamaeleon-Musca field, Fig. 3). There is also a strong correlation between the coherence of the olarization orientation and the level of olarization fraction, in the sense that more ordered regions have higher olarization fractions. This feature, which is already seen at 1 resolution in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214), is discussed later on in Sect A final qualitative asect of these mas is that regions with higher column densities tend to be less olarized than their surroundings. An examle of this effect can be seen in the Chamaeleon-Musca field (Fig. 3, center right anel) near (l, b) = (31, 9 ), where %, while it is surrounded by more diffuse material with 15%. A future aer (Planck Collaboration Int ) will discuss in more detail the structure of the olarized thermal emission with resect to the morhology of the clouds themselves. We give in Table 2 the maximum olarization fractions max in all the selected fields. Note that for the most diffuse fields Microscoium, Pisces, Perseus, Ara, and Pavo, the quoted values should be taken with caution, since most ixels in these regions have N H 21 cm 2, which corresonds roughly to I MJy sr 1, and therefore the effect of the (uncertain) zero-level offset on the olarization fraction may not be negligible. In the less diffuse fields, the values of max are noticeably larger than those found in the same fields at 1 resolution in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214) 5, which shows the strong effect of satial resolution on olarization measurements. The uncertainties σ max on the maximum olarization fractions, listed in Table 2, are derived from the various sources of uncertainty involved. First, the noise roerties on the Stokes arameters I, Q, and U in each ixel are described in the data by the noise covariance matrices, which are inut in the Bayesian method of Montier et al. (214a) and Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214), and lead to a ma of the uncertainty σ on the olarization fraction. This includes the 68 MJy sr 1 uncertainty on the zero-level offset. We then comute the difference σ max, between the maximum olarization fractions found in the mas of σ and + σ. Second, there is a art of the uncertainty related to the method used to debias the data (Montier et al. 214a). We have comuted the standard deviation σ max,d of the maximum olarization fractions obtained in each field when using the naïve Q2 + U 2 /I, modified asymtotic (MAS, Plaszczynski et al. 213) and Bayesian estimators of. Third, we have comuted the standard deviation σ max,s of the maximum olarization fractions obtained in each field when considering subsets of the data, namely half-ring mas (one half of each stable ointing eriod) and detector set mas (one half of the detectors). The final uncertainty quoted in Table 2 is then given by the quadratic sum σ 2 max = σ 2 max, + σ 2 max,d + σ2 max,s/2 (3) It should be noted that the last contribution is usually the dominant one in the selected fields, and that the uncertainty related to the debiasing method is much smaller than the other two Polarization fraction vs. column density We show the distributions of and N H for the Ohiuchus and Chamaeleon-Musca fields in Fig. 4 and for all other fields in Aendix A. The decrease in maximum olarization fraction max at higher column densities is aarent for all fields, above a given threshold in N H that deends on the field and is of the order of 21 to 3 21 cm 2, corresonding to visual extinctions A V to 1.7, for the fields that are not too diffuse (Polaris Flare, Taurus, Orion, Chamaeleon-Musca, and Ohiuchus). Below this threshold, the olarization fraction may be related to the background more than to the clouds themselves. To quantify the decrease in maximum olarization fraction max with increasing N H, we consider the uer enveloe of the distribution of and N H, comuted as described in Sect. 2.2, and fit this curve with a function max = m log ( N H /cm 2) +c, restricted 5 See their Table 1, which also lists extrema, mean and median values for, as well as median values for ψ.

6 6 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence log ( I 353 /MJy sr 1 ) log ( I 353 /MJy sr 1 ) b [ ] l [ ] b [ ] l [ ] S(δ = ) [ ] S(δ = ) [ ] Fig. 3. Mas of the Ohiuchus and Chamaeleon-Musca fields. Left: Ohiuchus field. Right: Chamaeleon-Musca field. To: Total intensity at 353 GHz. Middle: Polarization fraction, column density N H (contours in units of 21 cm 2 ), and magnetic orientation (bars, see text). Bottom: Angle disersion function S with lag δ = (see Sect. 2.5) with contours and bars identical to the middle row. In all mas, the 15 beam is shown in the lower-left corner.

7 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence 7 Table 2. Polarization statistics in the selected fields: absolute maximum olarization fraction at 15 resolution; linear fit arameters m and c to the decrease of max with log ( N H /cm 2), with fitting range indicated; and linear fit arameters of the log() vs. log (S) correlation. See text for the derivation of the listed uncertainties. The figures given here are for a signal-to-noise threshold /σ > 3. Field max max = m log ( N H /cm 2) + c N H range log (S) = m log() + c m c [ 21 cm 2 ] m c Polaris Flare ± ± ± ± 8 5 ±.17 Taurus ± ± ± ± 9.31 ±.11 Orion ± ± 3 ± ±.11 5 ±.13 Chamaeleon-Musca..19 ± ± 3 3. ± ± 3.39 ± 2 Ohiuchus ± ± ± ± 5.3 ± 4 Microscoium ± 5 1 ± 7.38 ± 7 Pisces ±.11 7 ±.13 1 ±.12 Perseus ± 9 6 ± 9.37 ± 6 Ara ± 3 8 ± 7.15 ± 6 Pavo ±.18 7 ± 5.57 ± 3 to a range of column densities that deends on the field considered (see Table 2). Note that we erform this fit for the above five fields only, for which there is a large enough dynamic range in column density. Results of these fits are shown as solid black lines on each anel of Fig. 4, and values of the sloes m and intercets c are listed in Table 2. Uncertainties on these arameters are derived in the same way as for the maximum olarization fractions max in the revious section. The sloes m range between 68 for Orion and.14 for Taurus, and regions exhibiting stronger column density eaks (e.g., Orion) tend to have shallower sloes than more diffuse molecular clouds (e.g., Polaris Flare). As mentioned before, the ixels selected for lotting Fig. 4 and erforming the fits are those for which the olarization signal-to-noise ratio is /σ > 3. We have checked that modifying this threshold does not change our results, as can be seen in Fig. 5, which shows the same as the to anel of Fig. 4 but with a signal-to-noise ratio threshold /σ >. The effect of that stricter selection is to remove oints below the original lower enveloe, but leaves the uer enveloe unchanged. Consequently, both the absolute maximum olarization fraction max and the sloe of the decrease of max at the high end of column densities are quite robust Polarization angle coherence vs. olarization fraction We show in the bottom row anels of Fig. 3 the mas of the angle disersion functions S for the Ohiuchus and Chamaeleon- Musca fields. Similar mas for all other fields are shown in Aendix A. We recall that this function, defined in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214), is S(r, δ) = 1 N N [ ψ (r) ψ (r + δi ) ]2, (4) i=1 where the sum extends over ixels whose distances from the central ixel r are between δ/2 and 3δ/2. Here they are comuted at a lag δ =, comarable to the size of the beam s FWHM. One can readily see filamentary structures that corresond to regions where the olarization angle is less ordered or where it changes abrutly. These filaments are already noted at 1 resolution in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214) over several degrees. These regions of large angular disersions corresond to max =.129 log(n H /cm 2 ) +2.9 max = N H [cm 2 ] max =.134 log(n H /cm 2 ) +3. max = N H [cm 2 ] Fig. 4. Two-dimensional distribution function of olarization fraction and column density N H. To: Ohiuchus field. Bottom: Chamaeleon-Musca field. The distribution functions are resented in logarithmic colour scale and include only oints for which /σ > 3. The dashed red lines corresond to the absolute maximum olarization fractions max and the solid red curves show the uer and lower enveloes of as functions of N H. The solid black line is a linear fit max = m log ( N H /cm 2) +c to the decrease of the maximum olarization fraction with column density at the high end of N H (see Table 2 for the fitting ranges and fit arameters).

8 8 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence max =.129 log(n H /cm 2 ) +2.9 max = N H [cm 2 ] Fig. 5. Same as the to anel of Fig. 4, but using only ixels for which /σ >. regions of low olarization fraction, as can be seen for instance by comaring the middle and bottom row anels of Fig. 3. When increasing the value of the lag δ, we obtain mas of S such as that resented in Fig. 6 for the Ohiuchus field at δ = 34 (aroximately twice the FWHM). It aears that the overall value of S increases with lag, as already noted in Hildebrand et al. (29) and Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214). However, since S has an uer limit of 9, this means that the anti-correlation with (see below) will flatten out at large lags. Note however that a comletely random samle yields S = π/ (Planck Collaboration Int. XIX 214). Values larger than this are few, but they do exist, as can be seen on the mas of S in Figs. 3 and 6. They may be linked to shar boundaries between two well-ordered regions: for instance, the angle disersion function at the interface between two half-lanes with orthogonal magnetic orientations is S = π/ To confirm the visual imression that the satial coherence of the olarization angle is anti-correlated with the olarization fraction, we show the distribution function of these two quantities for the Ohiuchus and Chamaeleon-Musca fields in Figs. 7 and 8, resectively, and for all other fields in Aendix A. The large-scale anti-correlation seen in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214) at 1 resolution and δ = 3 is also resent when using a lag close to the beam size. With δ = 1. 7, we find it to be log (S) =.75 log 6, where S is measured in degrees. Since in this case the ratio δ/fwhm is the same as for our higher resolution mas (FWHM = 15 and δ = ), we comare the anti-correlations found in the selected fields to this law. Note that the sloe.75 is similar to the value 34 quoted in Planck Collaboration Int. XIX (214), but the intercet is larger ( 6 vs..54). This oints to a global increase of S at larger δ/fwhm values, which we interret as a decorrelation of olarization angles at larger lags. The distributions of and S in the various fields considered show an anti-correlation very similar to the large-scale trend, with sloes and intercets of the fits through the data oints that are very close to the large-scale fit values. When increasing the lag at the same resolution, however, S increases and the anticorrelation with flattens out, as can be seen in Fig. 9. The linear fits log (S) = m log + c for the individual fields are listed in Table 2. The uncertainties on the arameters m and c are the quadratic sums of uncertainties obtained in three ways: (i) by erforming the linear regression using the three estimators of, i.e., the naïve, MAS and Bayesian ones; (ii) by using halfring mas and detector set mas; (iii) via a Monte-Carlo simulation using the mas of olarization fraction uncertainty σ and angle disersion function uncertainty σ S (Planck Collaboration Int. XIX 214) Fig. 6. Ma of S for the Ohiuchus field comuted at δ = 34. Contours are the same as in the ma at δ = (bottom left anel of Fig. 3) S(δ =34 ) [ ] S(δ = ) [ ] -1 1 log(s/ ) =.92log() Fig. 7. Two-dimensional distribution function of S and olarization fraction for the Ohiuchus field. The angle disersion function S is comuted at a lag δ =. Only ixels for which /σ > 3 are retained. The dashed grey line is the large-scale fit (with FWHM = 1 and δ = 1. 7) log (S) =.75 log () 6, the solid black line shows the mean S for each bin in (the bin size is log() = 8) and the dashed black line is a linear fit of that curve in log-log sace, restricted to bins in which contain at least 1% of the total number of oints (so about 15 oints er bin).

9 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence 9 S(δ = ) [ ] -1 1 log(s/ ) =.94log() Fig. 8. Same as Fig. 7, but for the Chamaeleon-Musca field. S(δ =34 ) [ ] -1 1 log(s/ ) = 5log() Fig. 9. Same as Fig. 7, but for a lag δ = Simulations of olarized emission 3.1. Simulations of MHD turbulence We aim to comare the observed olarization statistics in the selected fields to redictions built on the results of a numerical simulation of MHD turbulence. This simulation is described in detail in Hennebelle et al. (28) 6. It follows the formation of clums of dense and cold gas (cold neutral medium, CNM) out of magnetized warm neutral atomic gas (warm neutral medium, WNM) in an oen box of 5 c on each side, without reaching the stage when cold cores of column density larger than 2 22 cm 2 form. The simulation cube initially contains a uniform distribution of WNM with density n H = 1 cm 3 and temerature T = 8 K, and two converging flows of that same gas are injected from oosing faces along the x axis with a velocity V x 4 km s 1 relative to each other. Satial modulations of the velocity are imosed on the incoming flows, with amlitudes relative to the mean flow of about unity and a eriodicity of about c. Periodic boundary conditions are alied on the remaining four faces. The total mass contained in the cube continu- 6 It was erformed with the RAMSES code (Teyssier 22, Fromang et al. 26), whose adative mesh refinement caabilities allow for a locally high satial samling. It is freely available via the STARFORMAT roject, htt://starformat.obsm.fr/. To be recise, it is the Fiducial run under the tab Colliding flow simulation. ously increases with time. The magnetic field s initial direction is along that of the incoming flows, and its intensity is about 5 µg, consistent with observational values at these densities (Crutcher et al. 2). There is therefore a large-scale anisotroic comonent of the magnetic field throughout the simulation, as well as a turbulent comonent linked to the velocity erturbations imosed on the converging flows. These flows collide near the midlane, where the combined effects of cooling and self-gravity eventually lead to the formation of dense (n H > cm 3 ) clums of cold gas (T of the order of 5 K) (Hennebelle & Audit 27). To follow that condensation, the grid is adatively refined, with an effective (maximum) resolution of 5 c. In this aer, we select a cubic subset (18 c 18 c 18 c) of the density and magnetic field in the simulation snashot timed at t =.9 Myr, which corresonds to an evolved state of the simulation, given the crossing time t c 2.4 Myr. The structures resent in the simulation are due to the collision of the incoming flows and not to a ure gravitational collase, since the initial free-fall time is t ff 44 Myr. However, some of the densest structures (n H > 4 cm 3 ) may have had time to collase. The chosen subset is located near the midlane, so that the influence of boundary conditions is minimal. It contains aroximately 32 M of gas; its hysical roerties are listed in Table 3, and the distribution functions of total gas density n H and magnetic field comonents B x, B y, B z are shown in Figs. and 11, resectively. The standard deviations are very similar for all three magnetic field comonents, but only the x comonent has a significant mean value, which shows that the mean magnetic field within the cube is aroximatively aligned with the x axis, that is with the incoming flows. We would like to stress here that the MHD simulations we use for comarison with the Planck olarization data do not faithfully reroduce the whole range of densities and column densities sanned by the cloud samle of Table 1, i.e., from diffuse molecular clouds (Polaris Flare) to massive star-forming clouds (Orion). However, as shown in Table 1, only a few ercent of the ixels (at most 5.4% in Orion) have column densities larger than 22 cm 2 in these fields, the regions of star formation filling only a small fraction of the area in each field. The MHD simulations with their broad range of densities (Fig. ) and column densities reaching 7 N H = 22 cm 2 are therefore reresentative of the dynamics of the bulk of the gas. Together with their anisotroy, due to the large-scale magnetic field ervading the cube, these simulations are articularly well suited to analyse the olarization roerties of nearby molecular clouds immersed in their low density and large-scale environment. To comute simulated olarization fractions, the local gas density n H and magnetic field comonents B x, B y, B z are extracted from the simulation and interolated on a regular grid at the next-to-highest satial resolution available, so that ixel sizes are aroximately x =.1 c. These cubes are used in the following section to build simulated olarized emission mas. However, they are first rotated around the y axis, as sketched out in Fig. 13, to exlore the full range of ossible angles between the mean magnetic field and the line of sight, and therefore to test the effects of the large-scale magnetic field s anisotroy. The viewing angle α introduced in Fig. 13 is such that the mean magnetic field is aroximately in the lane of the sky for α =, and along the line of sight for α = 9. 7 This value is comuted over the whole range of viewing angles α.

10 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence Fig.. Distribution function of the total gas density n H in the selected subset of the simulation, with cell sizes.1 c.1 c.1 c. The solid red line shows the mean value n H = 17 cm 3 and the solid blue line the median value n med H = 2 cm 3. Fig. 12. Distribution functions of the total gas column density N H in the selected subset of the simulation, using viewing angles α = (red) and α = 9 (blue). These distribution functions are comuted after convolution with the 15 beam. Fig. 11. Distribution functions of the comonents of the magnetic field, B x (blue), B y (green), and B z (red), in the selected subset of the simulation, with cell sizes.1 c.1 c.1 c. Table 3. Physical roerties of the subset of the simulation. These values corresond to α = (see text and Fig. 13). F F min(f) max(f) σ(f) N H [ 21 cm 2 ] n H [cm 3 ] B x [µg] B y [µg] B z [µg] Simulated Planck observations We build simulated Stokes I, Q, and U mas by integrating along the line of sight (z in Fig. 13) through the rotated simulation cube, following the method in Wardle & Königl (199), Fiege & Pudritz (2), Pelkonen et al. (29), and Padovani et al. (212). Because of a number of inconsistencies in the literature, we give the correct derivation in Aendix B, drawing on the works of Lee & Draine (1985) and Wardle & Königl (199). Fig. 13. Sketch of the rotation of the simulation subset. This results in: I = S ν e τ ν Q = U = ( [1 cos 2 γ 2 )] dτ ν ; (5) 3 S ν e τ ν cos (2φ) cos 2 γ dτ ν ; (6) S ν e τ ν sin (2φ) cos 2 γ dτ ν. (7) Here is a olarization fraction arameter related to the intrinsic olarization fraction (see Eq. 8 and Aendix B), γ is the angle that the local magnetic field makes with the lane of the sky, and φ is the local olarization angle in the HEALPix convention. This angle differs by 9 from the angle χ of the lane of the sky rojection of the magnetic field, as defined in Fig. 14, and should not be confused with the actual olarization angle ψ.

11 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence 11 These angles are equal (φ = ψ) only for a uniform magnetic field along the line of sight. Note that the corrective term in Eq. 5 is incorrectly written in Fiege & Pudritz (2), Gonçalves et al. (25), Pelkonen et al. (29), and Padovani et al. (212), with /2 instead of. The hyotheses made here, besides the absence of background radiation, are that = is uniform, that the source function S ν = B ν (T d ) is that of a blackbody with an assumed uniform dust temerature T d = 18 K, and that since we are working at 353 GHz the otical deth is simly given by dτ ν = σ 353 n H dz. We use the value σ 353 = 26 cm 2 (see Sect. 2.1), and n H is the total gas density in the simulation. Given the maximum gas column density in the simulation subset comuted over all ossible viewing angles α, N H,max = 22 cm 2, the maximum otical deth at 353 GHz using this conversion factor is τ max = 1.9 4, so we may safely neglect otical deth effects and take e τ ν = 1 in the I, Q, and U integrals. We are aware (Planck Collaboration XI 214) that the oacity actually varies with N H, but the variation is at most a factor of 3 from the value assumed here, so the otical deth is in any case much lower than unity. Moreover, the choice of the conversion factor has no imact on the simulated mas of olarization fractions and angles, rovided that a constant value is assumed along each line of sight. B Plane of the sky (x, y) y γ B Line of sight z Fig. 14. Definition of angles. Here the line of sight is along the z axis (see Fig. 13), γ is the angle the magnetic field B makes with the lane of the sky, φ is the local olarization angle, and χ is the osition angle of the lane of the sky rojection B, both in the HEALPix convention, so counted ositively clockwise from the north-south direction, while the IAU convention is anticlockwise (Planck Collaboration Int. XIX 214). We note that the dense cores that exist in our simulated cube are only weakly shielded from the ambient UV radiation field. Indeed, the mean column density through the cube is about 21 cm 2 (corresonding to A V ), which is comarable to the values in the simulation of Pelkonen et al. (29), but over a much larger volume (18 c box comared to less than 1 c); the bulk of the gas is therefore more fragmented and radiation enetrates more easily (Levrier et al. 212). That is why we take a uniform arameter. The mas of Stokes arameters are laced at a distance of D = c and convolved with a circular 15 FWHM Gaussian beam (corresonding to a hysical size 4 c). The resulting field of view is a little less than across, which is comarable to the selected Planck fields, and small enough that searate smoothing of Stokes I, Q, and U is not an issue (see Aendix A of Planck Collaboration Int. XIX 214). Mas of olarization fractions and angles are then built from these convolved x B χ φ Stokes arameter mas using Eqs. 1 2 for consistency with the Planck data. Let us stress that ψ is defined in the HEALPix convention, which means that it is counted ositively clockwise from the north-south direction, and not in the IAU convention (anti-clockwise). Figure 15 (middle row) shows the mas of olarization fraction and magnetic orientation in these simulated observations, when integrating along the mean magnetic field (α = 9 ), and erendicular to it (α = ). The large-scale comonent of the magnetic field is clearly visible in several regions, for instance in the lower right corner of the α = case: it leads to longrange coherence in the olarization angle, which correlates with the highest olarization fractions and lowest column densities. Conversely, when integrating along the direction of the largescale field (α = 9, right column), is on average much lower, and no such long-range ordering of χ is visible, although some local correlations are resent. These effects are exected from the vectorial nature of the olarization: with the magnetic field more or less aligned with the line of sight, only its transverse fluctuations lead to a signal in olarization, and these fluctuations are isotroic in the lane of the sky, so they cancel out in the integration (along the line of sight and also through beam dilution). This correlation between and satial coherence of the olarization angle is discussed later on (Sect. 3.4). Statistics of simulated mas of the olarization fraction (maximum, mean and standard deviation) are shown as a function of the viewing angle α in Fig.. We find the maximum olarization fraction to be max.14 1 (deending on the viewing angle α). On some lines of sight, in the most tenuous arts of the ma integrated erendicularly to the large-scale B (e.g., in the lower right corner of the ma in the α = case), max almost reaches the theoretical maximum value ossible, which is the intrinsic olarization fraction, i = 1, (8) 3 obtained when the medium is homogeneous and the magnetic field is uniform and arallel to the lane of the sky (γ = ). Fig. emhasizes the imortance of the magnetic field geometry on the measured max, as that value varies by about 4% over the range of viewing angles Polarization fraction vs. column density We show in Fig. 17 the joint distribution function of olarization fractions and total gas column densities N H in the simulated observations when integrating along both directions used in Fig. 15, and in the intermediate case α = 45. The most striking feature of the lots in Fig. 17 is the different behaviour at low column densities N H < 2 cm 2. Along these lines of sight, the density is essentially uniform, with n H of about 2 cm 3, so the comuted olarization is entirely due to magnetic field geometry; when we integrate with α = the mean magnetic field is almost in the lane of the sky, γ, and olarized emission is at its highest, while when we integrate with α = 9, then the ordered field is almost along the line of sight, so γ 9 and no olarized emission aears. In fact, for each value of α, olarization fractions observed towards the most diffuse lines of sight are well reroduced by the formula for a homogeneous medium, easily derived from Eqs. 5 7, = cos 2 α ( 1 cos 2 α 2 ) (9) 3

12 12 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence (N H /cm 2 ) log (N H /cm 2 ) log b l [ ] b l [ ] S(δ = ) [ ] S(δ = ) [ ] Fig. 15. Simulated Planck mas. To: Total gas column density. Middle: Polarization fraction and angle, with contours being the column density at values indicated in units of 21 cm 2, and the bars indicate magnetic orientation. Bottom: Angle disersion function at lag δ =, with the same contours and bars as in the middle row. Left: viewing angle α =. Right: viewing angle α = 9. In each row, the same colour scale is used. In the lower left corner of each lot (yellow circle) is the 15 FWHM beam.

13 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence 13 max α [ ] Fig.. Statistics of olarization fractions in the simulated Planck observations as a function of viewing angle α (see Fig. 13). The solid blue line shows max, the solid black line shows the mean, and the solid green line shows the value of for the most diffuse lines of sight in the ma. The dashed black line marks the olarization fraction arameter and the dashed green line gives the theoretical olarization fraction in the case where the density and magnetic field are homogeneous and the latter makes an angle α with the lane of the sky (see text). The grey region shows the ±1σ sread around the mean. as can be seen in Fig.. We may therefore only derive the olarization fraction arameter from the maximum observed value max if the angle between the magnetic field and the lane of the sky is known, which is a strong assumtion. The second striking feature of Fig. 17 is the decrease of the maximum olarization fraction with increasing column density, as observed in the data. The same linear fit yields sloes max / log ( N H /cm 2) that san values from 25 (for α = 8 ) to.15 (for α = 15 ), the latter being comarable to those found in the data for the selected fields. For a global comarison between simulations and observations, we show in Fig. 18 the distribution of and N H for all the simulated fields, with their uer and lower enveloes, together with the enveloe for the selected sky fields. Linear fits to the distributions uer enveloes are erformed, restricted to a common range of column densities 2 21 cm 2 < N H < 2 22 cm 2. They yield similar values in terms of both sloes (m =.9 for simulations, comared to m =.113 for the selected fields) and intercets (c = 2.52 for simulations, comared to c = 2.59 for the selected fields). Note that the rile attern in the density lot at low N H is due to the samling in viewing angles α, and is a signature of the decrease of with viewing angle for the most diffuse lines of sight, as already noted in Fig Polarization angle coherence vs. olarization fraction The angle disersion function S is comuted from the simulated ψ mas, using a lag δ =, as we did for the data. We first note that the mean angle disersion function is larger when the large-scale magnetic field is oriented along the line of sight, with S 12 for α = and S 2 for α = 9, a result that is consistent with the findings of Falceta-Gonçalves et al. (28). Mas of S (for the α = and α = 9 cases) can be seen in the lower row anels of Fig. 15, exhibiting filamentary atterns similar to those found in observations. These filaments of high S α = α =45 α =9 max =11 max =.12log(N H /cm 2 ) N H [cm 2 ] max = 6log(N H /cm 2 ) + max = N H [cm 2 ] max = 4log(N H /cm 2 ) +.9 max = N H [cm 2 ] Fig. 17. Two-dimensional distribution functions of olarization fractions and logarithmic column densities in the simulated Planck observations. To: viewing angle α =. Middle: viewing angle α = 45. Bottom: viewing angle α = 9. The dashed red horizontal lines and the solid red and black lines are the same as in Fig. 4. The fits to the uer enveloes are erformed for N H > 21 cm 2. also corresond to regions where the olarization angle rotates on small scales, and are correlated with regions of low olarization fraction (comare with the middle row anels of Fig. 15). This anti-correlation is clearly seen in distribution functions of log() and log (S), as shown in Fig. 19 for the α = case. A linear fit log (S) = m log() + c to the mean log (S) er bin of log() is erformed, restricted to bins which contain at least

14 14 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence max =.9 log(n H /cm 2 ) max =.113 log(n H /cm 2 ) N H [cm 2 ] Fig. 18. Comarison between the distributions of the olarization fractions and logarithmic column densities in the simulations (colour scale, all viewing angles combined, with uer and lower enveloes in solid red lines) and those of the observations in the selected fields (solid black lines). Note that the latter are restricted to N H > 21 cm 2. Dashed lines are linear fits of the form max = m log ( N H /cm 2) + c on the distributions uer enveloes, restricted to a common range of column densities 2 21 cm 2 < N H < 2 22 cm 2. 1% of the total number of oints and limited to < to avoid the most diffuse lines of sight. The sloe and intercet of the anti-correlation observed in the data are fairly well reroduced (m = ±.3 and c = 2 ±.34 over the range of α, comared to m =.75 and c = 6 in observations) with steeer sloes for viewing angles α and shallower sloes for viewing angles α 9 (see Fig. 2). However, since the sloes in simulations are generally steeer than what is observed, but with very similar intercets at = 1, the angle disersion function S in simulations is globally higher than in observations for a given olarization fraction. Fig. 2. Sloes m (to) and intercets c (bottom) of the linear fits log (S) = m log () + c to the distribution of log () and log (S) in the simulated observations, as a function of viewing angle α. The lag is δ =. The dashed blue lines indicate the values for the large-scale fit resented in Sect. 2.5, the dashed red lines reresent the average sloe and intercet over the range of α, and the grey areas indicate ±1σ around the mean, with the standard deviation σ comuted statistically over all angles. S(δ = ) [ ] -1 1 log(s/ ) = 3log() Fig. 19. Two-dimensional distribution function of log () and log (S) in the simulated observations for δ = and α =. The solid black curve reresents the evolution of the mean log (S) er bin of log(). A linear fit log (S) = m log () + c is erformed, restricted to bins in log() that contain at least 1% of the total number of oints. This fit is shown as the dashed black line. The dashed grey line is the large-scale fit resented in Sect This result suggests that, in the simulations, the angle disersion function is too large for a given olarization fraction, i.e., that the magnetic field is too tangled. Since the hysical rocesses one can think of to reduce the field s tangling (e.g., larger field intensity with resect to turbulence or artial ion-neutral decouling) would also affect, we roose that this difference comes from the lack of ower in the low frequency modes of the simulated turbulence, as illustrated by the fact that the ower sectra of the velocity and magnetic field comonents flatten out at small wavenumber k. In reality, molecular clouds are organized in a self-similar structure over a broad range of scales and that is therefore not roerly reroduced in the simulations we used. In short, the large-scale fluctuations of the magnetic field are closer to random in simulations than in reality Statistics on the magnetic field fluctuations in the simulations We investigate here the ossible causes of the variations in the olarization fraction and the disersion of the olarization angle S in the simulations, i.e., what are the resective roles of the field tangling and the orientation of the large-scale field in the variations of and S. To quantify these roles, we comute the average and disersion along the line of sight of both cos 2 γ and

15 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence 15 n H cos 2 γ 1.8 α = sinχ.5 nh α = n H cos 2 γ α = sinχ.5 nh α = Fig. 21. Distribution functions of olarization fraction and density-weighted mean of cos 2 γ (γ is the angle of the magnetic field with resect to the lane of the sky, see Fig. 14) along the line of sight z in the simulation cube. To: viewing angle α =. Bottom: viewing angle α = 9. The solid black lines show the mean values er bin of. Fig. 22. Distribution functions of olarization fraction and density-weighted mean of sin χ (χ is the osition angle of the rojection of the magnetic field in the lane of the sky, see Fig. 14) along the line of sight z in the simulation cube. To: viewing angle α =. Bottom: viewing angle α = 9. The solid black lines show the mean values er bin of. sin χ (see Fig. 14 for the definition of angles). These quantities are comuted for different viewing angles. In the following, we write the magnetic field as B = B + B, where B is the largescale ordered field and B is the fluctuating art of B. The role of the average values of the angles γ and χ along the line of sight is illustrated in Figs. 21 and 22. First, the role of the large-scale field B is clear: the largest values of are obtained when B is viewed in the lane of the sky (α ). The largest values are obtained when the average of cos 2 γ along the line of sight stays close to unity. In that case, the field erturbations are such that they kee the field close to the lane of the sky, on average, hence the large. The same effect is visible in the to anel of Fig. 22 where the largest olarization fractions are obtained for average values of χ close to 9. However, even in this configuration (α = ), small values of are obtained. The fraction of low values is clearly larger when the large-scale field is viewed along the line of sight (α = 9 ). The remarkable feature visible in Fig. 21 (bottom anel) is the roortionality of max with the average of cos 2 γ: the smaller this average, the closer γ is to 9, therefore the closer the field is aligned with the line of sight, and the smaller the resulting value of max. One also sees in Fig. 21 that cos 2 γ reaches much smaller values when B is along the line of sight (bottom anel), roducing lower values of than in the case where B is in the lane of the sky (to anel). We note, interestingly, that the same effect is not visible in Fig. 22, which dislays the line of sight average of sin χ versus : there is no such uer value of that would scale with the average of sin χ because this fluctuation of the field direction is measured in the lane of the sky and does not affect the maximal olarization fraction that can be obtained. Instead, when B is along the line of sight for instance, the scatter of sin χ along the line of sight is the largest and the resulting values of are low. Figure 23 also illustrates the effect of the field tangling: the larger the disersion of cos 2 γ along the line of sight (and the larger the scatter of this disersion), the smaller is. Obviously, when the line of sight is dominated by the large-scale field, the scatter is the lowest. Figure shows the joint distribution of the average of cos 2 γ and S, where one recognizes the role of the large-scale field when α = : the lowest values of S are obtained when γ stays close to, meaning that the field is more or less in the lane of the sky. Clearly, the largest values of S are obtained when the influence of the large-scale field is minimized (α = 9, bottom anel).

16 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence n H ) σ Z (cos 2 γ α = n H cos 2 γ 1.8 α = S[ ] n H ) σ Z (cos 2 γ α =9 n H cos 2 γ Fig. 23. Distribution functions of olarization fraction and density-weighted standard deviation of cos 2 γ along the line of sight z in the simulation cube. To: viewing angle α =. Bottom: viewing angle α = 9. The solid black lines show the mean values er bin of. 4. Conclusions To summarize, the maximum olarization fraction max observed towards the samle of nearby fields selected in this study is reached in the most diffuse fields. The large-scale decrease of max with increasing N H is seen in the individual fields considered here, as soon as N H > 21 cm 2. This trend is fairly well reroduced by numerical simulations of anisotroic MHD turbulence, even assuming uniform dust temeratures and grain alignment efficiencies in the gas weakly shielded from the UV radiation. The olarization of thermal dust emission observed by Planck towards these regions is essentially related to the geometry of the magnetic field and in articular to its orientation at large scales with resect to the line of sight. We do not discuss the evolution of olarization fractions at large column densities N H > 3 22 cm 2, for which the MHD simulation considered is not suitable. It is clear, however, that additional rocesses must be at work to achieve the change of sloe in the max vs. log ( N H /cm 2) relation observed towards the most oaque lines of sight. This change is robably related to variations in the roerties of dust alignment, as ointed out by Soler et al. (213). We also find that olarization fractions observed by Planck towards these nearby regions correlate well with the local coherence of the olarization angle, which is measured using the angle disersion function S. This correlation is also found in simulations, S[ ] α =9 Fig.. Distribution functions of angle disersion function S (δ = ) and density-weighted mean of cos 2 γ in the simulation cube. To: viewing angle α =. Bottom: viewing angle α = 9. The solid black lines show the mean values er bin of S. with sloes that are very close to observational values. In simulations, however, values of S for a given olarization fraction are globally too high comared to observations, which oints to a ossible limitation of the secific MHD simulation used. Acknowledgements. The develoment of Planck has been suorted by: ESA; CNES and CNRS/INSU-IN2P3-INP (France); ASI, CNR, and INAF (Italy); NASA and DoE (USA); STFC and UKSA (UK); CSIC, MICINN, JA and RES (Sain); Tekes, AoF and CSC (Finland); DLR and MPG (Germany); CSA (Canada); DTU Sace (Denmark); SER/SSO (Switzerland); RCN (Norway); SFI (Ireland); FCT/MCTES (Portugal); and PRACE (EU). A descrition of the Planck Collaboration and a list of its members, including the technical or scientific activities in which they have been involved, can be found at htt:// roject=lanck&age=planck_collaboration. Some of the results in this aer have been derived using the HEALPix ackage. The authors would like to thank Charles Beichman for his careful reading of the manuscrit and useful comments. The research leading to these results has received funding from the Euroean Research Council under the Euroean Union s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/27-213) / ERC grant agreement n References Alves, F. O., Franco, G. A. P., & Girart, J. M. 28, A&A, 486, L13 Andersson, B.-G. 212, ArXiv e-rints Bally, J. 28, Overview of the Orion Comlex, ed. B. Reiurth (Astronomical Society of the Pacific), 459 Chandrasekhar, S. & Fermi, E. 1953, AJ, 118, 113 Chaman, N. L., Goldsmith, P. F., Pineda, J. L., et al. 211, AJ, 741, 21

17 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence 17 Crutcher, R. M., Wandelt, B., Heiles, C., Falgarone, E., & Troland, T. H. 2, AJ, 725, 466 de Zeeuw, P. T., Hoogerwerf, R., de Bruijne, J. H. J., Brown, A. G. A., & Blaauw, A. 1999, AJ, 117, 354 Draine, B. T. 211, Physics of the Interstellar and Intergalactic Medium (Princeton University Press) Draine, B. T. & Fraisse, A. A. 29, AJ, 696, 1 Elias, J. H. 1978, AJ, 2, 857 Falceta-Gonçalves, D., Lazarian, A., & Kowal, G. 28, AJ, 679, 537 Fiege, J. D. & Pudritz, R. E. 2, AJ, 544, 83 Fromang, S., Hennebelle, P., & Teyssier, R. 26, A&A, 457, 371 Gonçalves, J., Galli, D., & Walmsley, M. 25, A&A, 43, 979 Górski, K. M., Hivon, E., Banday, A. J., et al. 25, AJ, 622, 759 Hatano, H., Nishiyama, S., Kurita, M., et al. 213, AJ, 145, 5 Hennebelle, P. & Audit, E. 27, A&A, 465, 431 Hennebelle, P., Banerjee, R., Vázquez-Semadeni, E., Klessen, R. S., & Audit, E. 28, A&A, 486, L43 Hildebrand, R. H., Kirby, L., Dotson, J. L., Houde, M., & Vaillancourt, J. E. 29, AJ, 696, 567 Hoang, T. & Lazarian, A. 28, MNRAS, 388, 117 Lamarre, J., Puget, J., Ade, P. A. R., et al. 2, A&A, 52, A9 Lazarian, A., Goodman, A. A., & Myers, P. C. 1997, AJ, 49, 273 Lee, H. M. & Draine, B. T. 1985, AJ, 29, 211 Levrier, F., Le Petit, F., Hennebelle, P., et al. 212, A&A, 544, A22 Loren, R. B. 1989, AJ, 338, 92 Luhman, K. L. 28, Chamaeleon, ed. B. Reiurth (Astronomical Society of the Pacific), 9 Marchwinski, R. C., Pavel, M. D., & Clemens, D. P. 212, AJ, 755, 13 Martin, P. G. 1972, MNRAS, 159, 179 Martin, P. G. 1974, AJ, 187, 461 Martin, P. G. 1975, AJ, 22, 393 Montier, L., Plaszczynski, S., Levrier, F., et al. 214a, A&A, submitted Montier, L., Plaszczynski, S., Levrier, F., et al. 214b, A&A, submitted Ostriker, E. C., Stone, J. M., & Gammie, C. F. 21, AJ, 546, 98 Padovani, M., Brinch, C., Girart, J. M., et al. 212, A&A, 543, A Palla, F. & Stahler, S. W. 22, AJ, 581, 1194 Pelkonen, V.-M., Juvela, M., & Padoan, P. 29, A&A, 52, 833 Pereyra, A. & Magalhães, A. M. 27, AJ, 662, 14 Planck Collaboration I. 211, A&A, 536, A1 Planck Collaboration I. 214, A&A, in ress, arxiv: Planck Collaboration VI. 214, A&A, in ress, arxiv: Planck Collaboration VII. 214, A&A, in ress, arxiv: Planck Collaboration VIII. 214, A&A, in ress, arxiv: Planck Collaboration IX. 214, A&A, in ress, arxiv: Planck Collaboration X. 214, A&A, in ress, arxiv: Planck Collaboration XI. 214, A&A, in ress, arxiv: Planck Collaboration XVI. 214, A&A, in ress, arxiv: Planck Collaboration Int Planck Collaboration Int. XIX. 214, A&A, submitted, arxiv: Planck Collaboration Int. XXI. 214, A&A, submitted, arxiv: Planck Collaboration Int. XXII. 214, A&A, submitted, arxiv: Plaszczynski, S., Montier, L., Levrier, F., & Tristram, M. 213, ArXiv e-rints Soler, J. D., Hennebelle, P., Martin, P. G., et al. 213, AJ, 774, 128 Tauber, J. A., Mandolesi, N., Puget, J., et al. 2, A&A, 52, A1 Teyssier, R. 22, A&A, 385, 337 Ungerechts, H. & Thaddeus, P. 1987, AJS, 63, 645 Wardle, M. & Königl, A. 199, AJ, 362, 12 Whittet, D. C. B., Hough, J. H., Lazarian, A., & Hoang, T. 28, AJ, 674, 34 Whittet, D. C. B., Prusti, T., Franco, G. A. P., et al. 1997, A&A, 327, 1194 Wilking, B. A., Gagné, M., & Allen, L. E. 28, Star Formation in the ρ Ohiuchi Molecular Cloud, ed. B. Reiurth (Astronomical Society of the Pacific), 351 Zagury, F., Boulanger, F., & Banchet, V. 1999, A&A, 352, APC, AstroParticule et Cosmologie, Université Paris Diderot, CNRS/IN2P3, CEA/lrfu, Observatoire de Paris, Sorbonne Paris Cité,, rue Alice Domon et Léonie Duquet, 7525 Paris Cedex 13, France 2 African Institute for Mathematical Sciences, 6-8 Melrose Road, Muizenberg, Cae Town, South Africa 3 Agenzia Saziale Italiana Science Data Center, Via del Politecnico snc, 133, Roma, Italy 4 Agenzia Saziale Italiana, Viale Liegi 26, Roma, Italy 5 Astrohysics Grou, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, J J Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 HE, U.K. 6 Astrohysics & Cosmology Research Unit, School of Mathematics, Statistics & Comuter Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville Camus, Private Bag X541, Durban 4, South Africa 7 Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array, ALMA Santiago Central Offices, Alonso de Cordova 37, Vitacura, Casilla , Santiago, Chile 8 CITA, University of Toronto, 6 St. George St., Toronto, ON M5S 3H8, Canada 9 CNRS, IRAP, 9 Av. colonel Roche, BP 44346, F-328 Toulouse cedex 4, France California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, U.S.A. 11 Centro de Estudios de Física del Cosmos de Aragón (CEFCA), Plaza San Juan, 1, lanta 2, E-441, Teruel, Sain 12 Comutational Cosmology Center, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, U.S.A. 13 DSM/Irfu/SPP, CEA-Saclay, F Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France 14 DTU Sace, National Sace Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Elektrovej 327, DK-28 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark 15 Déartement de Physique Théorique, Université de Genève,, Quai E. Ansermet,1211 Genève 4, Switzerland Deartamento de Física Fundamental, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Salamanca, 378 Salamanca, Sain 17 Deartamento de Física, Universidad de Oviedo, Avda. Calvo Sotelo s/n, Oviedo, Sain 18 Deartment of Astronomy and Astrohysics, University of Toronto, 5 Saint George Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada 19 Deartment of Astrohysics/IMAPP, Radboud University Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9, 65 GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands 2 Deartment of Physics & Astronomy, University of British Columbia, 62 Agricultural Road, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 21 Deartment of Physics and Astronomy, Dana and David Dornsife College of Letter, Arts and Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 989, U.S.A. 22 Deartment of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, U.K. 23 Deartment of Physics, Florida State University, Keen Physics Building, 77 Chieftan Way, Tallahassee, Florida, U.S.A. Deartment of Physics, Gustaf Hällströmin katu 2a, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland 25 Deartment of Physics, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, U.S.A. 26 Deartment of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A.

18 18 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence 27 Deartment of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana- Chamaign, 11 West Green Street, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A. 28 Diartimento di Fisica e Astronomia G. Galilei, Università degli Studi di Padova, via Marzolo 8, Padova, Italy 29 Diartimento di Fisica e Scienze della Terra, Università di Ferrara, Via Saragat 1, Ferrara, Italy 3 Diartimento di Fisica, Università La Saienza, P. le A. Moro 2, Roma, Italy 31 Diartimento di Fisica, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria,, Milano, Italy 32 Diartimento di Fisica, Università degli Studi di Trieste, via A. Valerio 2, Trieste, Italy 33 Diartimento di Fisica, Università di Roma Tor Vergata, Via della Ricerca Scientifica, 1, Roma, Italy 34 Discovery Center, Niels Bohr Institute, Blegdamsvej 17, Coenhagen, Denmark 35 Euroean Southern Observatory, ESO Vitacura, Alonso de Cordova 37, Vitacura, Casilla 191, Santiago, Chile 36 Euroean Sace Agency, ESAC, Planck Science Office, Camino bajo del Castillo, s/n, Urbanización Villafranca del Castillo, Villanueva de la Cañada, Madrid, Sain 37 Euroean Sace Agency, ESTEC, Kelerlaan 1, 221 AZ Noordwijk, The Netherlands 38 Helsinki Institute of Physics, Gustaf Hällströmin katu 2, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland 39 INAF - Osservatorio Astrofisico di Catania, Via S. Sofia 78, Catania, Italy 4 INAF - Osservatorio Astronomico di Padova, Vicolo dell Osservatorio 5, Padova, Italy 41 INAF - Osservatorio Astronomico di Roma, via di Frascati 33, Monte Porzio Catone, Italy 42 INAF - Osservatorio Astronomico di Trieste, Via G.B. Tieolo 11, Trieste, Italy 43 INAF/IASF Bologna, Via Gobetti 1, Bologna, Italy 44 INAF/IASF Milano, Via E. Bassini 15, Milano, Italy 45 INFN, Sezione di Bologna, Via Irnerio 46, I-4126, Bologna, Italy 46 INFN, Sezione di Roma 1, Università di Roma Saienza, Piazzale Aldo Moro 2, 185, Roma, Italy 47 INFN/National Institute for Nuclear Physics, Via Valerio 2, I Trieste, Italy 48 Imerial College London, Astrohysics grou, Blackett Laboratory, Prince Consort Road, London, SW7 2AZ, U.K. 49 Infrared Processing and Analysis Center, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, U.S.A. 5 Institut d Astrohysique Satiale, CNRS (UMR8617) Université Paris-Sud 11, Bâtiment 121, Orsay, France 51 Institut d Astrohysique de Paris, CNRS (UMR795), 98 bis Boulevard Arago, F-7514, Paris, France 52 Institute for Sace Sciences, Bucharest-Magurale, Romania 53 Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 HA, U.K. 54 Institute of Theoretical Astrohysics, University of Oslo, Blindern, Oslo, Norway 55 Instituto de Física de Cantabria (CSIC-Universidad de Cantabria), Avda. de los Castros s/n, Santander, Sain 56 Jet Proulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 48 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, California, U.S.A. 57 Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrohysics, Alan Turing Building, School of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, U.K. 58 Kavli Institute for Cosmology Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge, CB3 HA, U.K. 59 LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France 6 LERMA, CNRS, Observatoire de Paris, 61 Avenue de l Observatoire, Paris, France 61 Laboratoire AIM, IRFU/Service d Astrohysique - CEA/DSM - CNRS - Université Paris Diderot, Bât. 79, CEA-Saclay, F Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France 62 Laboratoire Traitement et Communication de l Information, CNRS (UMR 5141) and Télécom ParisTech, 46 rue Barrault F Paris Cedex 13, France 63 Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Joseh Fourier Grenoble I, CNRS/IN2P3, Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, 53 rue des Martyrs, 3826 Grenoble cedex, France 64 Laboratoire de Physique Théorique, Université Paris-Sud 11 & CNRS, Bâtiment 2, 9145 Orsay, France 65 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, U.S.A. 66 Max-Planck-Institut für Astrohysik, Karl-Schwarzschild-Str. 1, Garching, Germany 67 National University of Ireland, Deartment of Exerimental Physics, Maynooth, Co. Kildare, Ireland 68 Niels Bohr Institute, Blegdamsvej 17, Coenhagen, Denmark 69 Observational Cosmology, Mail Sto , California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, 91125, U.S.A. 7 SISSA, Astrohysics Sector, via Bonomea 265, 34136, Trieste, Italy 71 School of Physics and Astronomy, Cardiff University, Queens Buildings, The Parade, Cardiff, CF 3AA, U.K. 72 Sace Sciences Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California, U.S.A. 73 Secial Astrohysical Observatory, Russian Academy of Sciences, Nizhnij Arkhyz, Zelenchukskiy region, Karachai-

19 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence 19 Cherkessian Reublic, 3697, Russia 74 Sub-Deartment of Astrohysics, University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH, U.K. 75 UPMC Univ Paris 6, UMR795, 98 bis Boulevard Arago, F-7514, Paris, France 76 Université de Toulouse, UPS-OMP, IRAP, F-328 Toulouse cedex 4, France 77 University of Granada, Deartamento de Física Teórica y del Cosmos, Facultad de Ciencias, Granada, Sain 78 University of Granada, Instituto Carlos I de Física Teórica y Comutacional, Granada, Sain 79 Warsaw University Observatory, Aleje Ujazdowskie 4, -478 Warszawa, Poland log ( I 353 /MJy sr 1 ) Aendix A: Extra figures In the main body of the aer, we showed mas and lots for the Chamaeleon-Musca and Ohiuchus fields. In this aendix we show similar figures for the remaining eight fields, in the same order as in Tables 1 and 2. We first show mas similar to Fig. 3 (Figs. A.1 to A.8), then distribution functions of and N H similar to Fig. 4 (Figs. A.9 to A.), and finally distribution functions of S (δ = ) and similar to Fig. 7 (Figs. A.17 to A.). b [ ] l [ ] S(δ = ) [ ] Fig. A.1. Same as Fig. 3, but for the Polaris Flare field. To: Total intensity at 353 GHz. Middle: Polarization fraction, column density N H (contours in units of 21 cm 2 ), and magnetic orientation (bars). Bottom: Angle disersion function S with lag δ = (see Sect. 2.5) with contours and bars identical to the middle row. Note that contours values are different from those of Fig. 3.

20 2 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence b [ ] l [ ] log ( I 353 /MJy sr 1 ) b l [ ] log ( I 353 /MJy sr 1 ) S(δ = ) [ ] S(δ = ) [ ] Fig. A.2. Same as Fig. 3, but for the Taurus field. Fig. A.3. Same as Fig. 3, but for the Orion field.

21 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence log ( I 353 /MJy sr 1 ) log ( I 353 /MJy sr 1 ) b l [ ] b [ ] l [ ] S(δ = ) [ ] S(δ = ) [ ] Fig. A.4. Same as Fig. 3, but for the Microscoium field. Fig. A.5. Same as Fig. 3, but for the Pisces field.

22 22 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence log ( I 353 /MJy sr 1 ) log ( I 353 /MJy sr 1 ) b [ ] l [ ] b l [ ] S(δ = ) [ ] S(δ = ) [ ] Fig. A.6. Same as Fig. 3, but for the Perseus field. Fig. A.7. Same as Fig. 3, but for the Ara field.

23 Planck Collaboration: Comarison of olarized thermal emission from Galactic dust with simulations of MHD turbulence b l [ ] log ( I 353 /MJy sr 1 ) S(δ = ) [ ] max =.114 log(n H /cm 2 ) +2.5 max = N H [cm 2 ] Fig. A.9. Same as Fig. 4, but for the Polaris Flare field. Twodimensional distribution function of olarization fraction and column density N H. The distribution function is resented in logarithmic colour scale and includes only oints for which /σ > 3. The dashed red line corresonds to the absolute maximum olarization fraction max and the solid red curves show the uer and lower enveloes of as functions of N H. The solid black line is a linear fit max = m log ( N H /cm 2) + c to the decrease of the maximum olarization fraction with column density at the high end of N H (see Table 2 for the fitting ranges and fit arameters) max =.14 log(n H /cm 2 ) +3.2 max = N H [cm 2 ] Fig. A.. Same as Fig. 4, but for the Taurus field. Fig. A.8. Same as Fig. 3, but for the Pavo field.