4.7 Article

Multi-gigayear White Dwarf Cooling Delays from Clustering-enhanced Gravitational Sedimentation

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 902, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb5a5

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [PHY-1748958, ACI-1663688, ACI-1548562]
  2. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation [GBMF5076]
  3. NASA through Hubble Fellowship - Space Telescope Science Institute [HST-HF2-51382.001-A, NAS5-26555]
  4. A.F. Morrison Fellowship in Lick Observatory

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cooling white dwarfs (WDs) can yield accurate ages when theoretical cooling models fully account for the physics of the dense plasma of WD interiors. We use MESA to investigate cooling models for a set of massive and ultramassive WDs (0.9-1.3 M-circle dot) for which previous models have failed to match kinematic age indicators based on Gaia DR2. We find that the WDs in this population can be explained as C/O cores experiencing unexpectedly rapid Ne-22 sedimentation in the strongly liquid interior just prior to crystallization. We propose that this rapid sedimentation is due to the formation of solid clusters of Ne-22 in the liquid C/O background plasma. We show that these heavier solid clusters sink faster than individual Ne-22 ions and enhance the sedimentation heating rate enough to dramatically slow WD cooling. MESAmodels including our prescription for cluster formation and sedimentation experience cooling delays of 4 Gyr on the WDQ branch, alleviating tension between cooling ages and kinematic ages. This same model then predicts cooling delays coinciding with crystallization of 6 Gyr or more in lower-mass WDs (0.6-0.8 M-circle dot). Such delays are compatible with, and perhaps required by, observations of WD populations in the local 100 pc WD sample and the open cluster NGC 6791. These results motivate new investigations of the physics of strongly coupled C/O/Ne plasma mixtures in the strongly liquid state near crystallization and tests through comparisons with observed WD cooling.

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

4.7
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