4.6 Review

Reaching the boundary between stellar kinematic groups and very wide binaries The Washington double stars with the widest angular separations

Journal

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
Volume 507, Issue 1, Pages 251-U352

Publisher

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/200912596

Keywords

astronomical data bases: miscellaneous; binaries: general; binaries: visual; stars: kinematics

Funding

  1. Universidad Complutense de Madrid
  2. Comunidad Autonoma de Madrid
  3. Spanish Ministerio Educacion y Ciencia
  4. European Social Fund [AyA2005-02750, AyA2005-04286, AyA2005-24102-E, AyA2008-06423-C03-03, AyA2008-00695, PRICIT S-0505/ESP-0237, CSD2006-0070]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims. I look for and characterise very wide binaries and multiple systems with projected physical separations larger than s = 0.1 pc, which is generally believed to be a sharp upper limit to the distribution of wide binary semimajor axes. Methods. I investigated in detail 30 Washington double stars with angular separations of rho > 1000 arcsec. I discarded 23 of them as probably unbound systems based on discordant astrometry, photometry, spectral types, and radial velocities. The remaining seven systems were subject to a comprehensive data compilation and derivation (multi-wavelength photometry, heliocentric distance, multiplicity, age, mass, metallicity, membership in a young kinematic group). Results. Of the seven very wide systems, six have projected physical separations greater than the hypothetical cutoff at s = 0.1 pc and four have separations s > 0.2 pc. Although there are two systems in young kinematic groups (namely HD 136654 and BD+32 2572 in the Hyades Supercluster, and AU Mic and AT Mic AB in the beta Pictoris moving group), there is no clear prevalence of young systems (tau < 1 Ga) among these very wide binaries. Finally, I compare the binding energies of the seven systems with those of other weakly bound systems in the field.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available