Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-12T21:48:47.205Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

New Ages For Old Clusters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 August 2015

I.N. Reid*
Affiliation:
Palomar Observatory 105-24, Caltech, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A major result of the Hipparcos mission is the availability of accurate parallaxes for a much-increased sample of nearby subdwarfs. On the basis of those data, both Reid (1997-R97) and Gratton et al (1997-G97) have used main-sequence fitting techniques to obtain new estimates of globular cluster distances, deriving significantly larger moduli (by 0.15 to 0.3 mag) for extreme, metal-poor clusters such as M92 and M15. These re-calibrations are not solely the result of the revised parallax data - both D’Antona, Caloi & Mazzitelli (1997 - DCM) and Reid show that similar results can be derived from pre-Hipparcos subdwarf data if the calibrations are not tied exclusively to HD 103095. The longer distance scale leads to a brighter inferred turnoff, and, combined with the latest models (DCM), ages of only 11 to 13 Gyrs - substantially younger than the 16±2 Gyrs proposed by Bolte & Hogan (1992).

Recently, Pont et al (1997) have suggested that these revised distances reflect systematic bias in the calibration, notably underestimation of subdwarf abundances. Their distance modulus for M92 ( (m-M)0=14.68) is closer to the Bolte/Hogan value (14.65 mag) than those derived byG97 (14.82 mag) or Reid (14.93 mag). While we believe that Pont et al overestimate the bias, particularly, where high-resolution spectroscopic analyses are concerned (G97, Reid, preprint), there is no question that significant uncertainties remain in the cluster distance calibration. Colours,rather than luminosities, are particularly vulnerable, and a mismatch of 0.01 in (B-V) translates to δ(m — M)0 ~ 0.05 mag.

Type
II. Joint Discussions
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer 1998

References

Bolte, M. & Hogan, C. (1992) Conflict over the age of the Universe, Nature, 376, 399402 Google Scholar
D’Antona, F., Caloi, V. & Mazzitelli, I. (1997) The Universe and globular clusters, ApJ, 477, 519534 Google Scholar
Gratton, R.G., Fusi Pecci, F., Carretta, E., Clementini, G., Corsi, C.E., & Lattanzi, M. (1997), Ages of globular clusters from Hipparcos parallaxes of local subdwarfs ApJ, in pressGoogle Scholar
Pont, F., Mayor, M., Turon, C., Vandenberg, D.A. (1997) Hipparcos subdwarfs and globular cluster ages, Astr. Ap., in pressGoogle Scholar
Reid, I.N. (1997) Younger and Brighter, AJ, 114, pp. 161179 Google Scholar