Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T20:29:28.054Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Role of Binarity in the Evolution of Peculiar Red Giants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

R.D. McClure
R.D. McClure*
Affiliation:
Dominion Astrophysical Observatory, National Research Council, Canada

Extract

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.

There are several types of Peculiar Red Giants (PRG's) which have enhanced s-process elements and/or carbon, but which cannot be explained by mixing during helium shell-flashing in the late stages of Asymptotic Giant Branch (AGB) evolution. These are the Ball, CH, sgCH, and the hotter R-type carbon stars. All these PRG's have absolute magnitudes which range down to zero and fainter. The Ball stars (Bidelman & Keenan 1951) are G-K giants whose spectra have strong CN and CH bands, and in extreme cases bands of C2 become noticeable. In addition they have strong lines of s-process elements such as Ball and SrII. The CH stars (Keenan 1942) are Population II equivalents of the Ball stars, and show similar spectral features, but with weaker metal lines, and usually stronger carbon bands. Bond (1974) introduced a new class of late F and G stars named the CH subgiants, which he suggests are fainter than the classical CH and Ball stars. They appear to be of mixed population (Luck & Bond 1982), and they are probably subgiants which will eventually evolve up the giant branch to become classical CH and Ball stars. The R-type carbon stars, at least the hotter (R0-R4) ones, differ from many of the other peculiar red giants in that they do not show enhanced s-process element abundances. The R stars have strong carbon bands, but relative to the N-type carbon stars they have less blue and ultraviolet absorption in their spectra. They range in absolute magnitude from near zero, similar to the Ball stars, up to several magnitudes brighter than this.

Type
3. Evolution of Peculiar Red Giant Stars
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 106: Evolution of Peculiar Red Giant Stars , 1989 , pp. 196 - 204
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

References

Bessell, M.S., Wood, P.R., & Lloyd Evans, T. (1983). Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc, 202, 59.Google Scholar
Bidelman, W.P., & Keenaii, P.C. (1951). Astrophys. J., 114, 473.Google Scholar
Boffin, H.M.J., & Jorissen, A. (1988). preprint.Google Scholar
Böhm-Vitense, E., Nemec, J.M., & Proffitt, C. (1984). Astrophys. J., 278, 726.Google Scholar
Bond, H.E. (1974). Astrophys. J., 194, 95.Google Scholar
Bond, H.E. (1984). Future of Ultraviolet Astronomy based on Six Years of I.U.E. Research, N.A.S.A. Conf. Pubi. No. 2349, p. 289.Google Scholar
Catchple, R.M., Robertson, B.S.C., & Warren, P.R. (1977). Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc, 181. 391.Google Scholar
Culver, R.B., & Ianna, P.A. (1976). Pubi. Astron. Soc. Pacific, 88, 41.Google Scholar
Culver, R.B., & Ianna, P.A. (1980). Pubi. Astron. Soc. Pacific, 22, 829.Google Scholar
Culver, R.B., Ianna, P.A., & Franz, O.G. (1977). Pubi. Astron. Soc. Pacific, 89, 397.Google Scholar
Dominy, J.F. (1984). Astrophys. J. Suppl., 55, 27.Google Scholar
Eggen, O.J. (1972). Mon. Not. Roy. Aston. Soc, 159, 403.Google Scholar
Griffin, R.F. (1983). Observatory, 103, 273.Google Scholar
Griffin, R.F. (1984a). Observatory, 104, 6.Google Scholar
Griffin, R.F. (1984b). Observatory, 104, 268.Google Scholar
Griffin, R.F. (1985a). Observatory, 105, 9.Google Scholar
Griffin, R.F. (1985b). Observatory, 105, 128.Google Scholar
Griffin, R.F. (1985c). In Interacting Binaries, ed. Eggleton, P.P. & Pringle, J.E., p. 1. Dordrecht: Reidel. Google Scholar
Griffin, R.F. (1986a). Observatory, 106, 35.Google Scholar
Griffin, R.F. (1986b). Observatory, 106, 108.Google Scholar
Griffin, R.F. (1988a). Observatory, 108, 17.Google Scholar
Griffin, R.F. (1988b). Observatory, 108, 90.Google Scholar
Jorissen, A., & Mayor, M. (1988). Astron. Astrophys., 198, 187.Google Scholar
Keenan, P.C. (1942). Astrophys. J., 96, 101.Google Scholar
Kruszewski, A. (1966). Adv. Astron. Astrophys., 4, 233.Google Scholar
Lloyd Evans, T. (1984), Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc, 208, 447.Google Scholar
Luck, R.E., & Bond, H.E. (1982). Astrophys. J., 259, 792.Google Scholar
McClure, R.D. (1979). Mem. Soc. Astron. Italiano, 59, 15.Google Scholar
McClure, R.D. (1983). Astrophys. J., 268, 264.Google Scholar
McClure, R.D. (1984a). Pubi. Astron. Soc. Pacific, 96, 117.Google Scholar
McClure, R.D. (1984a). Astrophys. J. (Letters), 280, L31Google Scholar
McClure, R.D., Fletcher, J.M., Grundmann, W.A., & Richardson, E.H. (1985). In I.A.U. Colloq. No. 88, Stellar Radial Velocities, ed. Philip, A.G.D., & Latham, D.W., p. 49, Schenectady: L. Davis Press.Google Scholar
McClure, R.D., Fletcher, J.M., & Nemec, J.M. (1980). Astrophys. J. (Letters)., 238, L35.Google Scholar
McClure, R.D., Forrester, W.T., & Gibson, J. (1974). Astrophys. J., 189, 409.Google Scholar
McClure, R.D., & Norris, J. (1977). Astrophys. J. (Letters), 217, L101.Google Scholar
Piotrowski, S.L. (1964). Acta Astron., 14, 251.Google Scholar
Shu, F.H., & Lubow, S.H. (1981). Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 19., 277.Google Scholar
Smith, V.V., & Lambert, D.L. (1988). Astrophys. J. in press.Google Scholar
Suntzeff, N.B., & Smith, V.V. (1988). Astron. J., 93, 359.Google Scholar
Webbink, R.F. (1986). In Critical Observations versus Physical Models for Close Binary Systems (Proc. Beijing Colloq. on Close Binary Systems), ed. Leung, K.-C., & Zhai, D.S., in press, New York: Gordon & Breach.Google Scholar
Williams, P.M. (1975). Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc, 170, 343.Google Scholar
Zahn, J.P. (1977). Astron. Astrophys., 57, 383.Google Scholar