4.6 Review

THE HIGH ANGULAR RESOLUTION MULTIPLICITY OF MASSIVE STARS

期刊

ASTRONOMICAL JOURNAL
卷 137, 期 2, 页码 3358-3377

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-6256/137/2/3358

关键词

binaries: general; binaries: visual; stars: early-type; stars: individual (iota Ori, delta Ori, delta Sco); techniques: interferometric

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present the results of a speckle interferometric survey of Galactic massive stars that complements and expands upon a similar survey made over a decade ago. The speckle observations were made with the Kitt Peak National Observatory and Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory 4 m telescopes and USNO speckle camera, and they are sensitive to the detection of binaries in the angular separation regime between 0.'' 03 and 5 '' with relatively bright companions (Delta V < 3). We report on the discovery of companions to 14 OB stars. In total we resolved companions of 41 of 385 O-stars (11%), 4 of 37 Wolf-Rayet stars (11%), and 89 of 139 B-stars (64%; an enriched visual binary sample that we selected for future orbital determinations). We made a statistical analysis of the binary frequency among the subsample that are listed in the Galactic O Star Catalog by compiling published data on other visual companions detected through adaptive optics studies and/or noted in the Washington Double Star Catalog and by collecting published information on radial velocities and spectroscopic binaries. We find that the binary frequency is much higher among O-stars in clusters and associations compared to the numbers for field and runaway O-stars, consistent with predictions for the ejection processes for runaway stars. We present a first orbit for the O-star delta Orionis; a linear solution of the close, apparently optical, companion of the Ostar. Orionis; and an improved orbit of the Be star delta Scorpii. Finally, we list astrometric data for another 249 resolved and 221 unresolved targets that are lower mass stars that we observed for various other science programs.

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

4.6
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