1 / 77

Massive star feedback – from the first stars to the present

Massive star feedback – from the first stars to the present. Jorick Vink (Keele University). Outline. Why predict Mass-loss rates? (as a function of Z) Monte Carlo Method Results OB, B[e], LBV & WR winds Cosmological implications? Look into the Future. Why predict Mdot ?.

autumn-levine
Download Presentation

Massive star feedback – from the first stars to the present

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Massive star feedback – from the first stars to the present Jorick Vink (Keele University)

  2. Outline • Why predict Mass-loss rates? (as a function of Z) • Monte Carlo Method • Results OB, B[e], LBV & WR winds • Cosmological implications? • Look into the Future

  3. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM

  4. Massive star feedback NGC 3603

  5. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM

  6. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM • Stellar Evolution

  7. Evolution of a Massive Star B[e] O

  8. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM • Stellar Evolution • Explosions: SN, GRBs

  9. Progenitor for Collapsar model • Rapidly rotating • Hydrogen-free star (Wolf-Rayet star) • But…… Woosley (1993)

  10. Progenitor for Collapsar model • Rapidly rotating • Hydrogen-free star (Wolf-Rayet star) • But…… Stars have winds… Woosley (1993)

  11. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM • Stellar Evolution • Explosions: SN, GRBs • Final product: Neutron star, Black hole

  12. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM • Stellar Evolution • Explosions: SN, GRBs • Final product: Neutron star, Black hole • X-ray populations in galaxies

  13. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM • Stellar Evolution

  14. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM • Stellar Evolution • Stellar Spectra

  15. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM • Stellar Evolution • Stellar Spectra • Analyses of starbursts

  16. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM • Stellar Evolution • Stellar Spectra • Analyses of starbursts • Ionizing Fluxes

  17. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM • Stellar Evolution • Stellar Spectra

  18. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM • Stellar Evolution • Stellar Spectra • Stellar “Cosmology”

  19. From Scientific American

  20. The First Stars Credit: V. Bromm

  21. The Final products of Pop III stars (Heger et al. 2003)

  22. From Scientific American

  23. Why predict Mdot ? • Energy & Momentum input into ISM • Stellar Evolution • Stellar spectra • “Stellar cosmology”

  24. Observations of the first stars

  25. Goal: quantifying mass loss a function of Z (and z) What do we know at solar Z ?

  26. Radiation-driven wind by Lines Lucy & Solomon (1970) Castor, Abbott & Klein (1975) = CAK Wind STAR Fe dM/dt = f (Z, L, M, Teff)

  27. Radiation-driven wind by Lines Abbott & Lucy (1985) dM/dt = f (Z, L, M, Teff)

  28. Momentum problem in O star winds A systematic discrepancy

  29. Monte Carlo approach

  30. Approach: • Assume a velocity law • Compute model atmosphere, ionization stratification, level populations • Monte Carlo to compute radiative force

  31. Mass loss parameter study

  32. Monte Carlo Mass loss comparison (Vink et al. 2000) No systematic discrepancy anymore !

  33. Lamers et al. (1995) Crowther et al. (2006)

  34. Monte Carlo Mass-loss rates  dM/dt increases by factor 3-5 (Vink et al. 1999)

  35. HOT Fe IV low dM/dt high Vinf Low density COOL Fe III high dM/dt low Vinf High density The bi-stability Jump

  36. Stars should pass the bistable limit • During evolution from O  B • LBVs on timescales of years

  37. LBVs in the HRD Smith, Vink & de Koter (2004)

  38. The mass loss of LBVs Models Data Stahl et al. (2001) Vink & de Koter (2002)

  39. Stars should pass the bistable limit • During evolution from O  B • LBVs on timescales of years Implications for circumstellar medium (CSM) Mass-loss rate up ~ 2 wind velocity down ~ 2 CSM density variations ~ 4

  40. SN-CSM interaction  radio Weiler et al. (2002)

  41. Mass Loss Results from Radio SNe OB star? WR?

  42. SN 2001ig & 2003bg 2003bg 2001ig Soderberg et al. (2006) Ryder et al. (2004)

  43. Progenitors • AGB star • Binary WR system • WR star • LBV

  44. Progenitors • AGB star • Binary WR system • WR star • LBV Kotak & Vink (2006)

  45. Assumptions in line-force models • Stationary • One fluid • Spherical

  46. Polarimetry – from disks

  47. Depolarisation

  48. Asphericity in LBV: HR CAR (Davies, Oudmaijer & Vink 2005) SURVEY: asphericity found in 50%

  49. Variable polarization in AG CAR (Davies, Oudmaijer & Vink 2005)  RANDOM: CLUMPS!!

  50. Assumptions in line-force models • Stationary • One fluid • Spherical • Homogeneous, no clumps

More Related