Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:37:06.353Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Relative Age Test of Pre-Main Sequence Evolutionary Models Based on the Young Quadruple System GG Tauri

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 May 2016

Russel J. White
Russel J. White*
Affiliation:
Department of Astronomy, University of Texas at Austin, R.L.M. Hall 15.308, Austin, TX 78731

Abstract

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.

The components of the young hierarchical quadruple GG Tau, which span a wide range in spectral type (K7 – M7.5), are used to test both evolutionary models and the temperature scale for very young, low mass stars under the assumption of coeval formation. Of the evolutionary models tested which extend into the substellar regime, those of Baraffe et al. yield the most consistent ages when combined with a temperature scale intermediate between that of dwarfs and giants. The Palla & Stahler and Siess et al. models are also capable of yielding a coeval age down to their lowest mass (0.1 M⊙). These latter two models, which extend to much higher masses than the Baraffe et al. models, agree reasonably well with the Baraffe et al. models at 1.0 M⊙ and thus could be combined to construct a set evolutionary models that extends from Substellar to several solar masses.

Type
XI. Young Binaries and Stellar Astrophysics
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 200: The Formation of Binary Stars , 2001 , pp. 464 - 467
Copyright
Copyright © Astronomical Society of the Pacific 2001 

References

Baraffe, I., Chabrier, G., Allard, F., & Hauschildt, P. H. 1998, A&A, 337, 403.Google Scholar
D'Antona, F. & Mazzitelli, I. 1997, Evolution of Low Mass Stars in Cool Stars in Clusters and Associations, ed. Pallavicini, R. & Micela, G., Mem. S. A. It., 68, 807.Google Scholar
Ghez, A. M., White, R. J., & Simon, M. 1997, ApJ, 490, 353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leggett, S. K., Allard, F., Berriman, G., Dahn, C. C., & Haushildt, P. H. 1996, ApJS, 104, 117.Google Scholar
Luhman, K. 1999, ApJ, 525, 466.Google Scholar
Palla, F., & Stahler, S. W. 1999, ApJ, 525, 772.Google Scholar
Perrin, G. et al. 1998, A&A, 331, 619.Google Scholar
Siess, L., Dufour, E., & Forestini, M. 2000, A&A, in press.Google Scholar
Simon, M., Dutry, A., & Guilloteau, S. 2000, A&A, accepted.Google Scholar
White, R. J., Ghez, A. M., Reid, I. N., & Schultz, G. 1999, ApJ, 520, 811.Google Scholar