Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:11:34.235Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evolution Diagnostics in Interacting Binaries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

Jorge Sahade
Jorge Sahade*
Affiliation:
FCAG, UNLP, C.C. 677, 1900 La Plata IAR, C.C. 5, 1894 Villa Elisa Member of the Carrera del Investigador Científico, CONICET, Argentina

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.

Through the analysis and interpretation of observational material, particularly on the part of Otto Struve and his collaborators, the structure of an interacting binary is depicted (cf. Sahade and Wood 1978) as formed by a) the two stellar components; b) a gaseous stream from the less massive and more evolved component of the system towards the companion; c) a circumstellar gaseous envelope –designated as “ring” or “disk” depending on the density of the material; d) a circumbinary gaseous envelope that surrounds the whole system and is normally in expansion, as suggested by the conventional, ground–based observations.

The evolution of interacting binaries involves the effect of matter outflow and transfer in at least a stage of rapid mass loss and a stage of slow mass loss. As a result, the evolution of the components appreciably departs from the evolution of single stars and produces very bizarre objects which find no counterparts among non-binaries. Both the observational and the computational results suggest that the amount of mass involved in the process of mass outflow must be a large percentage of the total mass of the evolving component. It seems, therefore, reasonable to expect to find evidence, in evolved systems, for processed material from the interior of the mass-losing component.

Type
Part II. Mass-Losing Stars in Different Stages of Evolution
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 108: Atmospherics Diagnostics of Stellar Evolution: Chemical Peculiarity, Mass Loss, and Explosion , 1988 , pp. 199 - 205
Copyright
Copyright © Springer-Verlag 1988

References

Aydin, C., Brandi, E., Engin, S., Ferrer, O.E., Hack, M., Sahade, J., Solivella, G. and Yilmaz, N. 1987, Astron. Astrophys. in press.Google Scholar
Bahýl, V. 1982, in Be Stars, IAU Symp. № 98, eds. Jaschek, M. and Groth, H.G. (Dordrecht: Reidel), p. 205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balachandran, S., Lambert, D.L., Tomkin, J. and Parthasarathy, M. 1986, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 212, 479 Google Scholar
Batten, A.H. and Sahade, J. 1973, Pub. Astron. Soc. Pacific 85, 599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bidelman, W.P. 1950, Astrophys. J. 111, 333.Google Scholar
Böhm-Vitense, E. 1981, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrphys. 12, 295 Google Scholar
Boyarchuk, A.A. 1960, Soviet Astron. A.J. 3, 748.Google Scholar
Danziger, I.J., Wallerstein, G. and Bohm-Vitense, E. 1967, Astrophys. J. 150, 239.Google Scholar
Delgrado, A.J. and Thomas, H.C. 1981, Astron. Astrophys. 96, 142.Google Scholar
Greenstein, J.L. 1940, Astrophys. J. 54, 229.Google Scholar
Hack, M. and Job, F. 1965, Zs. f. Astrophys. 62, 203.Google Scholar
Hack, M. and Passinetti, L. 1963, Contr, Oss. Astron. Milano-Merate, N° 215.Google Scholar
Hall, D.S. 1969, Bull. American Astron. Soc. 1, 345.Google Scholar
Hoffleit, D. and Jaschek, C.. 1982, The Bright Star Catalogue (Yale U. Obs.)Google Scholar
Hutchings, J.B. 1975, Pub. Astron. Soc. Pacific 81, 245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klinglesmith, D.A. 1971, Hydrogen Line Blanketel Model Stellar Atmospheres, NASA SP-3065.Google Scholar
Koch, R.H. 1972, Pub. Astron. Soc. Pacific 84, 5.Google Scholar
Leushin, V.V. and Snezhko, L.I. 1980, Soviet Astron. J. Lett. 6, 94 Google Scholar
Leushin, V.V., Nevskii, M.Yu. and Snezhko, L.I. 1979, Bull. Spec. Astrophys. Obs. N. Caucasus 11, 34 Google Scholar
Leushin, V.V., Nevski, M.Yu. and Snezhko, L.I. and Sokolov, V.V. 1977, Bull. Spec. Astrophys. Obs. N. Caucasus 9, 1 Google Scholar
McCluskey, G.E. Jr. and Sahade, J. 1987, in Exploring the Universe with the IUE Satellite, ed. Kondo, Y. (Dordrecht: Reidel), p. 427.Google Scholar
Parthasarathy, M., Lambert, D.L. and Tomkin, T. 1983, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 203, 1063.Google Scholar
Peters, G.J. and Polidan, R.S. 1984, Astrophys. J. 283 283745Google Scholar
Plavec, M.J. 1983, Astrophys. J. 272, 296.Google Scholar
Plavec, M.J. and Dobias, J.J. 1983, Astrophys. J. 272, 296 Google Scholar
Plavec, M.J., Dobias, J.J., Etzel, P.B. and Weiland, J.L. 1984, in Future of UV Astronomy Based on Six Years of IUE Research, NASA CP-2349, eds. Mead, J.M., Chapman, R.D. and Kondo, Y. p. 420.Google Scholar
Sahade, J. 1986, in New Insights in Astronomy, ESA SP-263, p. 267.Google Scholar
Sahade, J. 1987a, Comments on Astrophys. 12, 13.Google Scholar
Sahade, J. 1987b, J. Space Astron. Research, in press.Google Scholar
Sahade, J. and Albano, J. 1970, Astrophys. J. 162, 905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sahade, J. and Wood, P.B. 1978, Interacting Binary Stars (Pergamon Press), p. 40.Google Scholar
Schönberner, D. and Drilling, J.S. 1984, Astrophys. J. 276, 229.Google Scholar
Struve, O. and Zebergs, V. 1961, Astrophys. J. 134, 161 Google Scholar
Walborn, N.R. 1972, Astrophys. J. Letters 176, L119.Google Scholar
Wallerstein, G., Greene, T.G. and Tomley, L.J. 1967, Astrophys. J. 150, 245.Google Scholar