4.5 Article

Period spacings of gravity modes in rapidly rotating magnetic stars I. Axisymmetric fossil field with poloidal and toroidal components

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 627, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935462

关键词

asteroseismology; waves; stars: magnetic field; stars: oscillations; stars: rotation

资金

  1. European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union [647383: SPIRE, 670519: MAMSIE]
  2. CNES PLATO grant at CEA/DAp

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Context. Stellar magnetic fields are often invoked to explain the missing transport of angular momentum observed in models of stellar interiors. However, the properties of an internal magnetic field and the consequences of its presence on stellar evolution are largely unknown. Aims. We study the effect of an axisymmetric internal magnetic field on the frequency of gravity modes in rapidly rotating stars to check whether gravity modes can be used to detect and probe such a field. Methods. Rotation is taken into account using the traditional approximation of rotation and the effect of the magnetic field is computed using a perturbative approach. As a proof of concept, we compute frequency shifts due to a mixed (i.e. with both poloidal and toroidal components) fossil magnetic field for a representative model of a known magnetic, rapidly rotating, slowly pulsating B-type star: HD 43317. Results. We find that frequency shifts induced by the magnetic field scale with the square of its amplitude. A magnetic field with a near-core strength of the order of 150 kG (which is consistent with the observed surface field strength of the order of 1 kG) leads to signatures that are detectable in period spacings for high-radial-order gravity modes. Conclusions. The predicted frequency shifts can be used to constrain internal magnetic fields and offer the potential for a significant step forward in our interpretation of the observed structure of gravity-mode period spacing patterns in rapidly rotating stars.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据