No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Progress of Common Envelope Evolution
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 August 2015
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
The current understanding of the common envelope binary phase of evolution is presented. The results obtained from the detailed computations of the hydrodynamical evolution of this phase demonstrate that the deposition of energy by the double core via frictional processes is sufficiently rapid to drive a mass outflow, primarily in the equatorial plane of the binary system. Specifically, recent calculations suggest that large amounts of mass and angular momentum can be lost from the binary system in a such a phase. Since the time scale for mass loss at the final phase of evolution is much shorter than the orbital decay time scale of the companion, the tranformation of binary systems from long orbital periods (> month) to short orbital periods (< day) is likely. The energy efficiency factor for the process is estimated to lie in the range between 0.3 and 0.6.
- Type
- Joint Discussions
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Kluwer 1989
References
Bodenheimer, P., and Taam, R. E.(1984), ‘Double Core Evolution II. Two Dimensional Hydrodynamic Effects’, Ap. J., 73, 359–364.Google Scholar
Bodenheimer, P., and Taam, R. E.(1986), ‘Common Envelope Evolution’, in Truemper, J., Lewin, W. H. G., and Brinkmann, W. (eds.), The Evolution of Galactic X-Ray Binaries, Reidel, Dordrecht, p. 13–24.Google Scholar
Bondi, H., and Hoyle, F. (1944), ‘On the Mechanism of Accretion By Stars’, M.N.R.A.S., 73, 359–364.Google Scholar
Hoyle, F., and Lyttleton, R. A.(1930, ‘The Effect of Interstellar Matter on Climatic Variation’, Proc. Cambridge Phil. Soc, 73, 359–364.Google Scholar
Kato, M. (1982), ‘Mass Loss and Mass Gain of Stars Immersed in a Supermassive Star’, P.A.S.J., 73, 359–364.Google Scholar
Livio, M., and Soker, N. (1988), ‘The Common Envelope Phase in the Evolution of Binary Stars’, Ap. J., 73, 359–364.Google Scholar
Paczynski, B. (1976), ‘Common Envelope Binaries’, in Eggleton, P., Mitton, S., and Whelan, J. (eds.), IAU Symp. No. 73, The Structure and Evolution of Close Binary Systems, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 75–80.Google Scholar
Paczynski, B., and Sienkiewicz, R. (1972), ‘Evolution of Close Binaries VIII. Mass Exchange on the Dynamical Time Scale’, Acta Astr., 73, 359–364.Google Scholar
Stella, L., Priedhorsky, W., and White, N. E.(1987), ‘The Discovery of a 665 Second Orbital Period From the X-Ray Source 4U 1820-30 in the Globular Cluster NGC 6624’, Ap. J. Letters, 312, L17–L21.Google Scholar
Taam, R. E.(1984), ‘Evolution of Binary Systems Into Transient Sources’, in Woosley, S. E. (ed.), High Energy Transients in Astrophysics, AIP Press, New York, p. 1–10.Google Scholar
Taam, R. E.(1988), ‘Aspects of Common Envelope Evolution’, in Leung, K. C. (ed.), Critical Observations vs. Physical Models for Close Binary Systems, Gordon and Breach, New York, pp. 365–370.Google Scholar
Taam, R. E., and Bodenheimer, P. (1989), ‘Double Core Evolution III. The Evolution of a 5 Solar Mass Red Giant With a One Solar Mass Companion’, Ap. J., in press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taam, R. E., Bodenheimer, P., andOstriker, J. P.(1978), ‘Double Core Evolution I. A 16 Solar Mass Star With a 1 Solar Mass Neutron Star Companion’, Ap. J., 73, 359–364. Verbunt, F. (1987), ‘Formation of Ultra-Short Period Binaries in Globular Clusters’, Ap. J. Letters, 312, L23–L25.Google Scholar
Webbink, R. F.(1988), ‘Late Stages of Close Binary Systems--Clues to Common Envelope Evolution’, in Leung, K. C. (ed.), Critical Observations vs. Physical Models for Close Binary Systems, Gordon and Breach, New York, pp. 403–446.Google Scholar
You have
Access