4.6 Article

ON THE CARBON-TO-OXYGEN RATIO MEASUREMENT IN NEARBY SUN-LIKE STARS: IMPLICATIONS FOR PLANET FORMATION AND THE DETERMINATION OF STELLAR ABUNDANCES

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL LETTERS
卷 747, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/2041-8205/747/2/L27

关键词

brown dwarfs; planets and satellites: composition; stars: abundances; stars: carbon

资金

  1. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent high-resolution spectroscopic analysis of nearby FGK stars suggests that a high C/O ratio of greater than 0.8, or even 1.0, is relatively common. Two published catalogs find C/O > 0.8 in 25%-30% of systems, and C/O > 1.0 in similar to 6%-10%. It has been suggested that in protoplanetary disks with C/O > 0.8 that the condensation pathways to refractory solids will differ from what occurred in our solar system, where C/O = 0.55. The carbon-rich disks are calculated to make carbon-dominated rocky planets, rather than oxygen-dominated ones. Here we suggest that the derived stellar C/O ratios are overestimated. One constraint on the frequency of high C/O is the relative paucity of carbon dwarf stars (10(-3)-10(-5)) found in large samples of low-mass stars. We suggest reasons for this overestimation, including a high C/O ratio for the solar atmosphere model used for differential abundance analysis, the treatment of a Ni blend that affects the O abundance, and limitations of one-dimensional LTE stellar atmosphere models. Furthermore, from the estimated errors on the measured stellar C/O ratios, we find that the significance of the high C/O tail is weakened, with a true measured fraction of C/O > 0.8 in 10%-15% of stars, and C/O > 1.0 in 1%-5%, although these are still likely overestimates. We suggest that infrared T-dwarf spectra could show how common high C/O is in the stellar neighborhood, as the chemistry and spectra of such objects would differ compared to those with solar-like abundances. While possible at C/O > 0.8, we expect that carbon-dominated rocky planets are rarer than others have suggested.

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