Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T04:55:33.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Binary Star Formation Simulations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2012

C. J. Clarke
C. J. Clarke*
Affiliation:
Institute of Astronomy, Madingley Rd, Cambridge, U.K., CB3 OHA email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

Binary stars provide an excellent calibration of the success or otherwise of star formation simulations, since the reproduction of their statistical properties can be challenging. Here, I summarise the direction that the field has taken in recent years, with an emphasis on binary formation in the cluster context, and discuss which observational diagnostics are most ripe for meaningful theoretical comparison. I focus on two issues: the prediction of binary mass ratio distributions and the formation of the widest binaries in dissolving clusters, showing how in the latter case the incidence of ultra-wide pairs constrains the typical membership number of natal clusters to be of order a hundred. I end by drawing attention to recent works that include magnetic fields and which will set the direction of future research in this area.

Keywords

stars: formationhydrodynamicsstellar dynamics
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 7 , Symposium S282: From Interacting Binaries to Exoplanets: Essential Modeling Tools , July 2011 , pp. 409 - 416
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2012

References

Artymowicz, P. 1983, AcA, 33, 223Google Scholar
Bate, M. 2000, MNRAS, 314, 33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bate, M. 2009a, MNRAS, 392, 590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bate, M. 2009b, MNRAS, 393, 1362Google Scholar
Bate, M. & Bonnell, I. 1997, MNRAS, 288, 1060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bate, M., Bonnell, I., & Bromm, V. 2002a, MNRAS, 332, L65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bate, M., Bonnell, I., & Bromm, V. 2002b, MNRAS, 336, 705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bate, M., Bonnell, I., & Bromm, V. 2003, MNRAS, 339, 577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bate, M., Bonnell, I., & Price, N. 1995, MNRAS, 277, 362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergfors, C. et al. , 2010, A&A, 520, 54Google Scholar
Boss, A. & Bodenheimer, P. 1979, ApJ, 234, 289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, C. 1996, MNRAS, 282, 353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crutcher, R. 1999, ApJ, 520, 706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delgado-Donate, E., Clarke, C., Bate, M., & Hodgkin, S. 2004a, MNRAS, 347, 759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delgado-Donate, E., Clarke, C., Bate, M., & Hodgkin, S. 2004b, MNRAS, 351, 617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duquennoy, A. & Mayor, M. 1991, A&A, 248, 485Google Scholar
Federath, C., Banerjee, R., Clark, P. & Klessen, R. 2010, ApJ, 713, 269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, D. & Marcy, G. 1992, ApJ, 396, 178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, A., Benson, P., Fuller, G., & Myers, P. 1993, ApJ, 406, 528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, J. & Hut, P. 1993, ApJ, 403, 271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, S., Whitworth, A. & Ward-Thompson, D. 2004a, A&A, 414, 633Google Scholar
Goodwin, S., Whitworth, A. & Ward-Thompson, D. 2004a, A&A, 423, 169Google Scholar
Goodwin, S., Whitworth, A. & Ward-Thompson, D. 2006, A&A, 452, 487Google Scholar
Hanawa, T., Ochi, Y., & Ando, K. 2010, ApJ, 708, 485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hennebelle, P. & Teyssier, R. 2008, A&A, 477, 25Google Scholar
Jiang, Y. & Tremaine, S. 2009, MNRAS, 401, 977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konopacky, Q. et al. , 2010, ApJ, 711, 1087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kouwenhoven, M., Goodwin, S., Parker, R., Davies, M., Malmberg, D., & Kroupa, P. 2010, MNRAS, 404, 1835Google Scholar
Krumholz, M., McKee, C., & Klein, R. 2004, ApJ, 611, 399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lada, E. A., DePoy, D., Evans, N., & Gatley, I. 1991, ApJ, 371, 171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, N., Dhital, S., Kraus, A., Stassun, K., & West, A. 2011, arXiv1101.0630Google Scholar
Lubow, S. & Artymowicz, P. 2000, Protostars & Planets IV, Univ. Arizona Press, 731Google Scholar
Mazeh, T., Goldberg, D., Duquennoy, A., & Mayor, M. 1992, ApJ, 401, 265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moeckel, N. & Bate, M. 2010, MNRAS, 404, 721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ochi, Y., Sugimoto, K., & Hanawa, T., 2005, ApJ, 623, 922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Offner, S., Klein, R., McKee, C., & Krumholz, M. 2009, ApJ, 703, 131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, D. & Bate, M. 2009, MNRAS, 398, 33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raghavan, D. et al. , 2010, ApJS, 190, 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reggiani, M. & Meyer, M. 2011, ApJ, 738, 60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scally, A., Clarke, C. & McCaughrean, M. 1999, MNRAS, 306, 253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegler, N., Close, L., Cruz, K., Martin, E., & Reid, N. 2005, ApJ, 621, 1023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thies, I. & Kroupa, P. 2007, ApJ, 671, 767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Val-Borro, M., Gahm, G., Stempels, H., & Pepinski, A. 2011, MNRAS, 413, 2679CrossRefGoogle Scholar